|>> || |
Post-scarcity is a mode of economic production (or rather, a descriptor for a class of means of production), just like hunter-gatherer or agriculture are. Of course, if you don't participate in a means of production, you don't reap it's benefits -- but that doesn't mean the broader civilization isn't post-scarcity, or that it necessarily has the component of inequality. It could have inequality via some mechanism, but I don't think it's required to, and I think it would have a strong selective pressure against it for a few reasons.
For one thing, post-scarcity is different from all previous economic modes, which don't have abundance as a feature (primarily -- you could argue that 'abundance' or rather 'ignorance of scarcity' was the mode pre-hunter/gatherer, but that's more semantical.) In a closed ecological system where there are different societies at different means of production, all vying for the same resources, in general those with the most powerful means of production will take control of the resources, and take over those with more primitive means. So we can say that the most potent means of production will always win, even if it has reasons to keep utilizing weaker means (mainly because of how it enables hierarchical organization.) But in any ecological system where there is a means of production that is superabundant, it will completely disrupt the system of values which the other systems are dependent on. It also disrupts the systems that enable social stratification, like knowledge imbalance and centralization (if your productive technology is based on molecular nanofabs, it doesn't matter if you're on the central homeworld or a far flung colony, whether you're a mainstream elitist or an outlying eccentric, you would have access to the same material goods.) This seems counter-intuitive to us because of how different it is from the way society has operated for most of history, but I'm arguing that those historical features are largely symptoms of scarcity.
Think about it this way -- with stone age humans, it didn't matter how close you were to the other tribes, or how long you had been inhabiting the nearby caves. Everything you needed was around you in the natural environment, in amounts greater than your tribe could ever expend, and the only specialized things you needed were things your tribe already had the knowledge to construct on their own. It wouldn't matter how long you had settled in an area, because you carried your dwellings on your back and simply moved on as the animals moved and the weather changed. In the future, we'll have more in common with that lifestyle than what we know now. Energy and matter are ambiently around us all in space in levels beyond human comprehension, and with AIs and molecular manufacturing, every individual would have the productive capacity of the entire species in miniaturized form, so wherever we wander, we would be able to bring the same benefits with us. One needing to be 'provided' with benefits is a feature of centralized, industrialized production. In the past, as in the future, the means of production will be necessarily re-invested in the individual.
Now, I'm not saying that there wouldn't be some exceptions to this. Sure, there will probably be the planet of the Luddites, but crucially, no one will be forced to live like a Luddite just because of their circumstances, because technology will have finally taken away the imbalance of power that technology first introduced to human societies in the first place.
Realistically, also, we won't be colonizing space as biological humans. Consider the scenario where we colonize the galaxy using sentient Von Neumann probes which improve themselves with each generation via simple natural selection mechanisms (those probes which aren't destroyed by the rigors of space-travel are obviously those that configure themselves most effectively, and are able to pass on those configurations) -- converting all matter and energy into sentient probes along the way in a full blown Universal Paperclips type scenario. In such a civilization, the most central and oldest colony worlds would also be the most primitive and depleted of resources, whereas the outer rim would always be the most advanced and vibrant. Just another scenario to consider the ways in which post-scarcity civilization is counter-intuitively quite unlike our modern civilization.