Substantive on Look to Windward

I found Andrew’s substantive on Look to Windward to be though provoking and raised two important points for me. One was that the novel is unique in providing us with a post-scarcity society and the second was that the Culture is not conflict immune. To me, these statements raise questions on the nature of conflict. One may say that because the Culture is a post-conflict society, their impetus for war is not based on economic causes. My answer to this is twofold. For one, the Culture might be driven into conflict by a society plagued by scarcity and requires resources. My second statement is that although scarcity has been eradicated by the Culture, base desires have not. Humans have a tendency to want what they cannot have, and although most demands have been meet, this does not ensure satisfaction. There is a reason why our society is plagued by phenomena such as “conspicuous consumption” and “affluenza,” and that is that many humans simply want more. Thus I doubt there is such a thing as a post-scarcity society. Yes, perhaps a general level of wellbeing can conceivably be obtained, but as humanity expands it will come into contact to new kinds of goods. Wars have been fought over oil and opium, why not Romulan ale and dilithium crystals? My other feelings on conflict are that even if an enemy is not an existential threat, they may be a threat to one’s ideology or position. If the Culture were conquered by a civilization that viewed synthetics as unprivileged citizens, it would threaten not only the power of the Minds, but the ideological basis of equality in the Culture’s culture.
One thing that intrigued me about the culture was there tolerance for various forms of alien life. Citizens of the Culture seemed blasé and nonchalant about non-human species within their society. Where there was intolerance and conflict was with groups that did not vibe with the egalitarian beliefs of the culture. This I found very interesting… that an advanced society discriminated not on appearance, but on values and culture. Although it was refreshing to see so many sentient groups come together, it was disheartening to think that discrimination does not become extinct but evolves. In America, for example, discrimination seems to jump from group to group: women African Americans homosexuals, illegal immigrants. This is not to deny the existence of racism or sexism, but one cannot deny that such issues have moved out of the limelight in the face of other forms of intolerance. Perhaps one day we can live in a world where the only intolerance is of those who willingly hate and negatively discriminate against others.