Although few people know the term "utopia", many are familiarized with the concept. After all, it's what all politicians promise us: assured jobs, better education, fair salaries, more safety, in short, castles in the air.

Utopia is the ideal state; each citizen produces the most and receives the corresponding share; everything is evenly distributed, so there is neither poverty nor reason for crime; and since it's necessary that everyone contributes, employment and education are assured. Sounds good, right? But most philosophers agree that utopias don't go beyond the idea, they're impossible to carry out in reality. Why?

Let's start by seeing how a utopian society is formed; to do so, I will use simulation games as a base. These games, usually for personal computers, consist in taking charge of certain place and making it progress, from an intricate anthill to a vast planet. I'm not talking about videogames where you press a button and shoot down ships, these require thinking. For example, if you take command of a military base, you must keep in mind factors such as ammunition, provisions, armament, soldiers, positions, etc. For this essay, I'll limit myself to one where you fund and rule a medieval town. I've never gone beyond the second level, but it'll do.

First of all, resources, it seems a lie that in the twentieth century we're still expecting manna from heaven. At the start of the game you have a determined quantity of wood to build houses. It is important the rate of consumption does not surpass that of recovery; otherwise, the raw material will run out. One of the largest lakes in Mexico is drying up because of water waste. This is the first rule to build a utopia, to be moderate in our expenses, for nothing lasts forever.

The most important thing for a utopia to sustain itself is: contribution, everyone must cooperate in order to go forward. In the game, the villagers need food, so somebody must produce it. To obtain bread you need: a farmer, to sow and reap wheat; a miller, to grind it into flour; and a baker, to turn it into bread. Each character carries out its assigned task, and the whole town will have bread to eat. We're not as committed in real life; we can't give a hundred percent, or even seem to try. To avoid all the troublesome paperwork, many police officers take bribes; and there are teachers who just sit back on their desks while the students read the lesson, instead of actually teaching (I'm grateful I've never had teachers like those, no matter how much I gripe about homework). I won't ignore the fact that the government is greatly responsible for these sorts of problems, it is supposed to make sure that conditions are proper for each worker. In the game, it makes no sense to assign a miller while there is no wheat yet, much less a baker. If leaders pay no attention to workers, material or salary, then we mustn't be surprised by so many strikes and protests. Another contribution made by citizens is the income tax, as necessary as they're despised. Greater part of the responsibility here lies in the hands of the government, the rest of us just have to pay and that's it. In the game, taxes are easy, you just have to see how much you're charging. Low taxes keep people happy, and if you're moderate with the money, there will always be plenty. For real taxes you must consider many other factors: what, how and who will you charge. It's totally unfair to create new taxes when so many people are exempted from payment. We must also take note of what our money is being spent on. Thousands are starving, and millions are wasted on mediocrity!

Up to this point, it all seems a matter of administration, but the real obstacle for reaching a utopian society is human nature. We are not programs or algorithms at a user's mercy; we're people with ideas, feelings and, above all, our own free will. We want to choose by ourselves, we dislike being told what to do, even if it's in our benefit. In order for us to be willing to obey, someone has to force us, the same way parents are severe with their children. "Eat all your spinach or you won't get up from the table" or "You can't have candy because it's bad for you". The kids may cry, but it's for their own good. Sometimes it will be necessary to use force, but at a certain measure. Mussolini ruled with an iron glove, a spiked one. Patrollers inspired fear, and there were continuous executions. Some people lived well, it's true, but you could not have an opinion about the government, and all forms of expression were restricted. Such a way of ruling is impractical, repression is too obvious and rebellion will not wait. Mussolini might have had the best intentions at first, but power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. As I said before, a little force and severity is healthy. We need someone to make us eat our vegetables, ever the yucky ones.

The second aspect of humanity, and obstacle for the perfect society, is our inability to become satisfied. No matter how great our positions, we always want something better. Actually, ambition is a useful virtue, as long as it doesn't become greed, for it has pushed mankind into countless discoveries. To keep us from aspiring more, they must make us believe there is nothing more. One way to do this is to put an ornate screen before our eyes. During his youth, the man who would become Buddha was surrounded by richness and bliss; his father did all he could to keep him from seeing sadness, sickness or old age. When the young prince discovered what lied beyond the castle walls, his spiritual quest commenced. And if you wish for an occidental example, think of Eden. That garden provided everything, the only condition was not to eat from the tree of knowledge. Knowledge, that's the key word, while the true facts are ignored, the utopia will prevail. In Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World", the populace is kept under control through the administering of drugs, which give a feeling of satisfaction, false and perpetual; add this to the infinite quantity of subliminal messages being continuously transmitted, saying how well everything is and how happy we must be of being what we are. We're not drugged in real life, but publicity is a form of brainwash. Good thing politicians are too idiotic to make good commercials.

Sincerely, I believe utopias are possible. We must begin by realizing that one person cannot handle everything, it has to be several people working together; and since we all have a different concept of perfection, a little yielding is required in order to reach the most beneficial and productive agreements. If we find leaders that truly know how to handle things, and are not seduced by tyranny, it wouldn't be so bad to give up a few minor liberties so we can live better. What matters is not to abandon our basic rights. Also, as citizens we must contribute fairly, not subsist as parasites, expecting our share and doing nothing else. And while it's true that each person has an opinion and all must be heard, we can't expect all suggestions to be put into practice. That's because one of the characteristics of a utopia is harmony, each note plays at the proper moment. If everything is heard at once the result is cacophony, in society it will be anarchy.

As long as we don't mature and keep acting spoiled, worlds of peace and abundance will remain a fantasy. But for the moment, I must confess that I find this reigning chaos a lot more pleasant and, above all, inspiring.

León Manuel Real Esponda