Thomas Moore's idea of what i guess could be called a very basic form of an economy was one that would have led to a more connected form of trade and a more established idea of market. The only way to get this sort of market system set up in such a way is to have a monotheistic belief structure. His views are very christian based, as i will get into shortly, and with christianity is a firmer grip of control. With other cultures, such as the spartan one, having a polytheistic belief system, they have more of a variety in ways that their gods view practices such as bartering and market. When you have a main church control the masses, they have a big influence over any type of monitary exchange or exchange of goods.

 

Thomas Moore also let his monotheistic views influence his views toward women. As Jose said, equality is something that is not to far fetched and just as plato said, its not a question of if they should be allowed to, it is a question that if they are conditioned the same way, would they not be able to. Moore feels they are different and should not be considered the same level as that of a man.

 

However, in the system of slaves, he always makes it clear that any married person, if they be an adulterer or adultress, would become a slave and not allowed to marry again. I can only imagine that this was held true to both genders alike, but i am sure that a woman would suffer this punishment more often than a man would. Just like with every system of control, there has been corruption.I am willing to bet that if a man and a married woman were caught doin a lil neckin', the woman would be the one to be enslaved, not so much the man, from the attitude that i took from reading his writings.

 

With Marriages like that of Thomas Moore's, would they not already be considered slaves? In the eyes such that of the spartans it was an honor, which in today's terminology i would say compliment, for you to think of another man as worthy enough to sleep with your wife or let him "seed" her.

 

So with that, in one, your enslaving your own human desires to basically avoid becoming an actual slave, and with the spartan ideals, your basically letting honor set the standards of living. It all comes down to setting the rules of the game. I see with the spartan ideals, you have less of an issue with coveting your neighbor's wife, or ever have to worry about the spaghetti monster in the sky breathing down your neck about what your thinking, wanna do, or have done, which is pretty much all the same in a monotheistic god's eyes. It all comes down to the whether or not you can function as a society without having some one in a church telling you that their being told by that man in the sky that you should do what they tell you to do.

 

Either way, religious or not, the majority of human kind has the ability to decifer what is right from that that is wrong. This is usually impletemented from birth into what your folks or whoever raised you. If the idea could be set that you should always look for the better of the commonwealth (going toward the idea of marxism just a bit) you wont have these things that tear people/relationships/communities/utopias apart.

 

So with all of that said, aside from his basic ideas of economy which were alright for being the 16th century, I think Moore's utopia was a very un-evolved set of standards to live by and I'm glad he was be-headed, I really am.