Abstract

It has often been argued that Thomas More’s Utopia is fundamentally concerned with outlining and theoretically justifying an ideal model of society and not with determining what would be the practical steps required for its establishment in the real world. Even if we were to accept this widespread interpretation, I consider that it is possible to recognize in the text indications that suggest two different and even opposing paths along which the political construction of Utopia could take place. The first, and strictly speaking, the only one that the work is trying to put forward, is individual, elitist, coercive, and top-down. The second that, for its part, seems to be presented rather with the intention of preventing it from coming to fruition is hence, on the contrary, collective, popular, insurrectionary and from below. The present article tries, first, to show how and through what arguments these two models of action are presented in More’s work, taking note, in addition, of the important difficulties involved in the one which it intends to propose. After this, two historical realizations immediately after Utopia was published that illustrate them are developed. Finally, the present article tries to establish what relationship these two paths have with each other according to the work’s approach and, also, suggest what alternative relationship they could maintain if a different point of view was attempted.