Utopianism and social change: Materialism, conflict and pluralism

Abstract

This article discusses criticisms that utopia and utopianism undermine social change. It outlines two types of utopia, future and current. It argues against claims that utopianism is idealist and steps aside from material and conflictual dimensions of society and so undermines change, proposing that utopias are material and conflictual and contribute to change. Against liberal and pluralist criticisms that utopianism is end-ist and totalitarian and terminates diversity and change, it argues that utopianism can encompass liberal and pluralist dimensions and be dynamic rather than static. It is proposed that criticisms create false conflations and dichotomies. Critical perspectives, rather than being rejected, are answered on their own terms. Utopianism, it is argued, is part of change, materially, now and in the future.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 24 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.