Fiction:PGPS/Post-Scarcity Peace Theory

Post-Scarcity Peace Theory by Milo Vannier

Despite the fall in popularity of post-scarcity theory among human states in the late 2790's, there were some who still pondered the possibility that humanity might one day live in a utopia free from war and material possessions. As liberalism's last stronghold in Maximist France, French Bunsen was home to the prestigious Dioginese Club, a collection of would-be philosophers, writers, and academics. The young and eccentric Milo Vannier, a regular at the club, was one such unlikely philosopher. In 2802––perhaps reacting against the outbreak of the Great Xonexian Schism––he made an unusual case for post-scarcity not only as an economic system, but a political one.

Post-Scarcity Peace Theory
The economic virtues of post-scarcity have been argued up and down through the ages, but rarely have its political ramifications been examined. It is often vilified by its detractors as a necessarily weak system, boasting none of the advantages of free trade and forcing the state to shoulder all of the responsibilities of production, even in those areas where it would be better off importing from elsewhere. Replication––they point out––costs a given amount of energy, and that cost might be higher in some cases than conventional means of production. Andasium is a perfect example of such a good. It is cheap to harvest as it occurs naturally but expensive to replicate. Therefore, they conclude that refusing to import andasium from andasium-producing countries or to harvest it naturally is post-scarcity economics' biggest flaw. Across hundreds of industries and material needs, opting for self-sustainability dooms the state to economic poverty, forcing it to use more energy than would otherwise be efficient.

However, I disagree that this is a weakness of post-scarcity; it is actually one of its greatest strengths due to its impact on the political sphere. States which have their resources stretched so thinly will spend it on basic needs, such as national infrastructure, and will understandably not waste it on such unnecessary things as offensive military forces. Compared to the costs of maintaining their infrastructure and production, the costs of displacing these resources in order to go to war with another state would be too high. If given the choice, post-scarcity states will always choose peace for this reason.

Furthermore, post-scarcity states have far fewer incentive to go to war than materialistic nations. Given that they are entirely self-sustaining, they have no foreign interests which need enforcing by means of military strength. They cannot be bullied or threatened into a conflict and are far less likely to become entangled in conflicts beyond their borders.

Post-scarcity economics does not result in strong states, and that is exactly what the Gigaquadrant needs. Strong states are responsible for wars, poverty, inequality, extortion, among many other types of suffering. By the laws of economics, post-scarcity forces states to focus inwards in order to meet their needs, giving them little energy with which to abuse other states. Inside the state, it is the most humanitarian system we can conceive of, resulting in exact equality and the antiquation of currency, greed, poverty, and material conflicts. Outside the state, it results in stability between post-scarcity states, the kind that this universe so desperately needs.