Imagined by Thomas More as a place situated on the southen hemisphere, this Utopia(Not-place) is a model of a republic conducted by people for the service of community. Surely such an administrative organization could have only be put on a far away realm, for the action and time of More's writing of Utopia is in the XVI-th century (1516). Especially if one's to think that England in which he lived was confronted with a tyranny, and most of the people faced poverty and starvation.
A character arrives from far away, called Raphael Nonsenso,with the knowledge of this system of organization that offers a relief for poverty and manages to include every member of society to work for the community, thus ensuring that all have something to do, a trade, and that everybody gets his/her share of food and whatever things they found necessary. This republic doens't care much for individual interest, money have no intrinsic value, they're kept only to be used in time of war-to hire mercenaries from other countries. The social life seems one to encourage intellectual growth and continuous learning. But if one's to look deeper it will find that all this learning and growing isn't done for the individual, because the individual is merely an instrument of society. Although there is a community which seem to act as a regulator for behavior, ensuring that everyone behaves properly, it seem that in their world too this proper behavior is dictated by the King, Mayor, District controller, House responsible and so on, until everybody is fitted into the mould of a good Utopian.
It seems no place in which women are regarded as equal to men, or in which they regard the ill or mentally deficient more humanly(for they amuse themselves at their behavior). There's no place for individuality, for private thought, private time, everything has to be done with the purpose of making some good to the community. They have a justice system that seems to be efficient: if one does any wrong it is sent to slavery and has to put up with the toughest jobs and if that person shows signs of repent he/she can be granted a pardon and receive their freedom back. Although a freedom is used to express a stat in which you are free to do any good from which the community might benefit, it isn't actually a freedom of action as we might consider it, it is merely a way in which the person fits the mould.
An idea of happiness is used there that encompass a state of health, psychological well being and a continuous use for one's intelligence. The community might seem willing to take care of everyone, but when people get old or they are very ill, the priest offers them an alternative- euthanasia- to relieve their suffering. If one chooses this alternative that person is viewed with great esteem by others, because he/she knew when to part with this world. Considering that all behavior is done under the eye of everyone else, I think that this practice might have been a common norm rather than an actual choice.
Although this imaginary republic might have solved many problems which seem unsolvable-like poverty, starvation, unemployment- the sense of no private life compels me to think it might not be the perfect society for me, or one in which I'd feel happy or free. In a way even in Utopia important issue are taken care of by a handful of people, just like in our days. It might appear at a first glance that there might be more transparency there than here, because the leaders can't retain fortunes for their private interest, I'm well too aware that even if fortune might seem a good incentive to loose morality in order to obtain it, when you can dictate a way of behavior for an entire society- that to me seems to surpass the power fortune might give- you have the incentive to propagate a certain code which cannot be attacked because everyone presumes it's for the good of community.
The ideas which can be debated are numerous, and I might make some mistakes trying to put them out here without a proper consideration, but they do need to be discussed. Hopefully I'll get the chance to do that.