by Daniel Gauss

In the twentieth century, there were policy initiatives in the United States that went beyond incremental reform and which could justifiably be called “utopian.” Three of these initiatives stand out: Franklin D. Roosevelt’s proposal of a “Second Bill of Rights,” Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Great Society” and Richard Nixon’s effort to establish a type of Universal Basic Income (UBI).

If we take a close look at these three initiatives, and what happened with each one, we can see why “progressive” utopian programs are no longer being proposed, and why there is now space for conservative “restorative” ideals.

Each of the three initiatives above was calculated to extend political, social and economic rights to previously excluded groups, and sought to shift the government toward greater responsibility for its citizens’ well‑being. Each initiative failed to reach its full potential because of a combination of political resistance, economic pressures, institutional limitations and changes in public attitude.

In the spirit of John Gray’s Black Mass (2007), I would also like to investigate whether MAGA might be considered a utopian movement, but in the opposite direction. FDR, LBJ and Nixon were interested in forward-looking utopian projects calculated to expand social rights and economic benefits. MAGA seems to represent a backward-looking utopian project: the belief that America can be “restored” to an idealized past through governmental action. Read more »