[Moonbase-discuss] Re: NASA & privateers

[Zach Bowen]

--- JonAlexandr@aol.com wrote:
>
> Jon:  Maybe you're right.  Maybe.  I keep my own
> online ranting to a minimum. 
>  However, politics is surely interwoven into the
> whole process of getting 
> into space.  I don't think it can be avoided. 
> Science and engineering itself 
> may be neutral, but ideology provides the fuel and
> direction.  I think it's 
> healthy to be aware -- and make others aware -- of
> one's politics.

I think you are only partially right on this point. 
Certainly, as things now stand, politics is a part of
space flight.  However, I don't think that this is a
necessity, as you imply.  The privatization of the sky
and sea has made this planet accessible to those with
no government ties.  Anyone with the money and the
interest can travel to virtually any point on the
globe by air land or sea. The point of putting private
launch vehicles into orbit is to extend this freedom
of movement into space.  You mentioned in an earlier
e-mail that you thought the grand goal of the space
program was to get human beings comfortable living in
space.  How are we, as a species, to achieve this, if
the only people allowed to fly are NASA trained
astronauts?  If you truly want to see human beings
living comfortably in space, then you must allow for
private interest, otherwise the skies will always be
the private playground of a select few, instead of the
next frontier for the human race as a whole.

> In the 1970s F.M. Esfandiary (a heavily discredited
> visionary accused of 
> murder) coined the term "upwinger" for those who
> felt that they were beyond 
> the ordinary political spectrum defined by "left"
> and "right."  While I think 
> that there's some value to the idea, I got the
> distinct impression that most 
> "upwingers" tended to be 'right-wingers with rocket
> packs,' or Heinlein acoly
> tes.  The 'movement' has since been superseded by
> young "posthumanists" -- 
> and my criticism I think remains valid.
> 
> Maybe I've been more sensitive to this issue because
> I am most comfortable on 
> the (traditional) political left.  And maybe those
> who are on the political 
> right are blind to their own biases and think that
> their politics is 
> 'transparent' to the main goal of getting into
> space.  I don't think it's 
> that simple.  --Jon

Have to disagree with you here too.  I would
definitely consider myself more at home with the
political left as well, but politics has a time and a
place, and I recognize the need for other aspects of
society.  Granted, I wouldn't want to see something
like welfare be privatized.  The HMO movement in the
health care industry sickens me.  There are definitely
places where industry has no business being.  However,
I think space is an area where we can all benefit from
private interest.  Government is slow and plodding. 
Great if you want stability in your affairs.  However,
the big G makes a terrible pioneer, and that is what
we truly need in space.  Pioneers.  People with
vision, who are willing to take risks to succeed. 
Government is notoriously adverse to risk taking, but
that is what is required for progress.  Private
railways made this country accessible to the masses. 
Private airlines did the same for the globe.  Private
rockets are our means to bring humanity into space.

-Zach


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Listen to your Yahoo! Mail messages from any phone.
http://phone.yahoo.com