![]() ![]() If it was possible to have a utopian world, then the world will be a better place to live in, people would be able to respect and value others despite their minor differences. In 2011, if it were “possible,” would you base a society on Utopian ideals? Yes? No? Raphael Hythloday’s approach to the attainment of a utopian society is sound with a limited population growth rate and countries that have abundant resources, however the situation on the ground is different, resources are limited and need to be optimally utilized this cannot be possible with Raphael Hythloday approach. It is common to get a large part of the population poor and resources centered on a small group. Class (that is measured by how much one has) influences major decisions in these countries. Business in all sectors of the economy is enhanced however, the economy creates a high competition in resources as people seek to win the limited resources, the result is some people gaining at the expense of others.Īs much as the system by Thomas More can be seen in, some economies like China and the United States, some vices are seen to be associated with the system the system encourages selfishness that results in corruption, secondly, the distribution of wealth is not uniform and the economy can favor small groups. The system does not limit the citizens to the amount of wealth that they can accumulate and gives them a level playing ground for wealth creation. Thomas More supports the idea of a capitalist system of governance. Thomas More has criticized the concerns brought about by Raphael Hythloday he thinks that the world cannot attain utopianism with centralized control of resources. They are meant to encourage a vicious cycle of poverty (More and Clarence 1-3) Explain in detail why you agree with Hythloday or side with Thomas More The inefficiency limits the level of economy in the country in this era of limited resources, these systems are not good for a country more so in the developing and less developed countries. Production is seen as not geared to profit-making and thus the adopted methods of production are in most cases, not the most efficient. They may look at the interest of a few at the expense of the masses. Sometimes, and it has happened most often, the actors in the government make some decisions for their interests. There are no classes and the government is seen to choose the direction that the masses will go. From this angle, it is a good approach aimed at ensuring that the national cake is shared among the entire population. They aim at having equal distribution of wealth and do not recognize individual wealth accumulation. The approach with law gives him the arguing point of why the same cannot be implemented across the board.Īccording to Raphael Hythloday, the government should take the central role of activities in their countries the underlying ideology is the distribution of wealth. He noted the role that domestic laws play in creating an equal society in legislative matters he observes that the breakthrough got us only possible since the government has taken the ownership of constitutional power. ![]() The writer argues that if this were the angle taken then the world would be utopian.Ī culture of a country determines the value and ideologies they hold when the government assumes the role of controlling the economy then people are likely to accept the culture and solve differences in culture and social rivalry among them. The writer feels that the nature of human beings is likely to exploit and accumulate wealth for themselves at the expense of others the government should be the sole owner of property and people taken as laborers at the same level. Raphael Hythloday, in books one and two was of the view that the government and the state operate within an economy for the benefit of the societies, they are given power and authority to dictate the distribution of resources among communities.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |