"...wherever he went on Earth he saw people free of want, sickness, fear, mind-numbing toil of body or brain, free to live as they chose." (p. 463)
Now that does not sound too bad for a start. While reading, we tend to dismiss this utopian background because Poul Anderson's narrative does. Anderson focuses on individuals who are dissatisfied and there are indeed reasons for dissatisfaction if only because the author has plotted his novel like that. First, mankind needs to retain collective control of its destiny. Secondly, freedoms should include the freedom to travel, explore and live off Earth. Not everyone will want to do this but, if it is technologically possible, then it should be an option.
However, in a technologically advanced society, freedoms should not include the freedoms to employ others who are obliged to work in order to survive, to own the properties in which other live or to enjoy comparative wealth surrounded by comparative poverty. Some kinds of freedom can be consigned to history.
6 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
And I emphatically disagree with your last paragraph, because it amounts to advocating using state coercion by one faction to impose on others what the coercers think is good. There is nothing wrong with Person A hiring Person B to do work that A sees B is willing to do for am agreed on salary. And there will always be differences in comparative wealth because people are different from each other in abilities, talents, inclinations, accidents of circumstances, etc. Attempts to "iron out" such differences can only end in tyranny.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
I don't mean that states should prohibit certain kinds of economic and financial arrangements, just that such arrangements will become redundant when there is so much wealth that no one is economically obliged to work for someone else to make ends meet.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
That clarifies what you meant and I can now agree with you. But, even in the post scarcity economy we see in the last part of THE BOAT OF A MILLION YEARS, we see people buying or selling land. So some kinds of economic activity are likely to last.
Ad astra! Sean
“Scarcity” is relative, and therefore eternal. And many ‘goods’ are positional, which means competition for them will always be zero-sum.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Yes, "scarcity" is relative. And, even in a post scarcity economy, I think people will compete for status and political influence and power. These are "positional goods," as you said.
Ad astra! Sean
Exactly.
Post a Comment