Socialism and Mars

[Tatarin]

I thought about this question some days ago, and maybe I missed a point or two.

Imagine the following future situation:

In 2050, the United States decides, after a decade of exploration, to establish a permanent base on the planet Mars to step up the level of exploration and knowledge ("what's the easiest way to study a planet than to actually be there?").

Another decade goes by, and the base grows. The base has a population of about 100 people - each with their own assignment (biology, chemistry, physics, water & food, greenhouse etc). Here we have something of a community - everything is free in that everybody depends on each other.

And here comes the question - would the people on Mars begin to realize the situation they're in? Would they realize that there would be no need for business to exist on Mars, or that it would only hinder the work of the scientists?

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10, 2007 05:05 am
And here comes the question - would the people on Mars begin to realize the situation they're in? Would they realize that there would be no need for business to exist on Mars, or that it would only hinder the work of the scientists?
Probably. But at the point where there is a single, small human community on Mars, there is nothing to stop anyone else from setting up a second or third community somewhere else on the planet. A hundred people cannot control a whole planet. Therefore, their decisions won't matter all that much.

Things will only start to get interesting if the human population grows to the point where we have a full-sized society.

Also, I detect a strong hint of Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars Trilogy in your post. I love those books. :)

But I find it highly unlikely that the United States or any other capitalist organization will ever initiate large-scale space exploration with human crews. There is no profit to be made in space (yes, there are raw materials, but it is cheaper to get them from the Earth). Humanity needs socialism in order to expand beyond the boundaries of Earth. Indeed, look at space exploration in the past - it was started by the Soviet Union, and the only reason the Americans did it was because they wanted to compete with the Soviets.

[Dr Mindbender]

i think someone has been playing too much 'Red Faction'. ;) :lol:

Seriously though, the US gov and NASA arent stupid, I think anyone they send over there, certainly for the next couple of centuries are going to be carefully groomed to ensure theyre definitely redneck patriot jackasses that arent going to start causing trouble. Maybe after the 2nd or 3rd generation of martians are born there, they might start to think for themselves but theres not going to be a 'martian revolution' in our lifetime!

:lol:

[AGITprop]

i think were quite close to sending people to mars. If you look at the rate our technology is evolving, its exponential! Within the next 50 years i believe there will be people living, if not permanently, than at least temporarily on Mars. The thing is, we have to act here first to make sure that corporations don't exploit the red planet for their personal gain. You never know, we could discover many uses on the red planet, and especially because there is water, we could use it for something.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10, 2007 11:51 pm
i think were quite close to sending people to mars. If you look at the rate our technology is evolving, its exponential! Within the next 50 years i believe there will be people living, if not permanently, than at least temporarily on Mars. The thing is, we have to act here first to make sure that corporations don't exploit the red planet for their personal gain. You never know, we could discover many uses on the red planet, and especially because there is water, we could use it for something.
we're close to sending people there, but theres a big difference between a landing and full blown colonisation. In order to do that, it will require sending the full infrastructure and right now i dont think even America has the money to commit to the logistical challenge that would entail, to put it in perspective i remember reading somewhere that just getting a man on the surface would cost in the order of half a trillion dollars. I think the theory behind a mars base is terraforming first, or the process of making a non-life supporting planet life supporting. They reckong that by releasing the same greenhouse gases into the mars atmosphere that are heating the Earth, the same effect will happen, melting the ice reserves beneath the surface which will allow vegetation to grow locally, in turn producing oxygen and thus solving the problem regarding getting life supporting essentials there. Unfortunately this will take in the order of several centuries. A permanent moon settlement will have to be dealt with first.

BTW this thread needs to be moved to science and technology.

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10, 2007 03:05 am
I thought about this question some days ago, and maybe I missed a point or two.

Imagine the following future situation:

In 2050, the United States decides, after a decade of exploration, to establish a permanent base on the planet Mars to step up the level of exploration and knowledge ("what's the easiest way to study a planet than to actually be there?").

Another decade goes by, and the base grows. The base has a population of about 100 people - each with their own assignment (biology, chemistry, physics, water & food, greenhouse etc). Here we have something of a community - everything is free in that everybody depends on each other.

And here comes the question - would the people on Mars begin to realize the situation they're in? Would they realize that there would be no need for business to exist on Mars, or that it would only hinder the work of the scientists?
Isn't that much like the actual bases in Antartida?

Luís Henrique

[AGITprop]

Originally posted by Ulster Socialist+October 11, 2007 12:24 am--> (Ulster Socialist @ October 11, 2007 12:24 am)
[email protected] 10, 2007 11:51 pm
i think were quite close to sending people to mars. If you look at the rate our technology is evolving, its exponential! Within the next 50 years i believe there will be people living, if not permanently, than at least temporarily on Mars. The thing is, we have to act here first to make sure that corporations don't exploit the red planet for their personal gain. You never know, we could discover many uses on the red planet, and especially because there is water, we could use it for something.
we're close to sending people there, but theres a big difference between a landing and full blown colonisation. In order to do that, it will require sending the full infrastructure and right now i dont think even America has the money to commit to the logistical challenge that would entail, to put it in perspective i remember reading somewhere that just getting a man on the surface would cost in the order of half a trillion dollars. I think the theory behind a mars base is terraforming first, or the process of making a non-life supporting planet life supporting. They reckong that by releasing the same greenhouse gases into the mars atmosphere that are heating the Earth, the same effect will happen, melting the ice reserves beneath the surface which will allow vegetation to grow locally, in turn producing oxygen and thus solving the problem regarding getting life supporting essentials there. Unfortunately this will take in the order of several centuries. A permanent moon settlement will have to be dealt with first.

BTW this thread needs to be moved to science and technology. [/b]
in regards to terraforming;

i dont belive that it is possible to produce enough gas on Mars for it to turn into a habitable planet.

I seem to remember that in Final Recall with Arnold they managed to do it. im sure the secret lies in the script. :P

[Tatarin]

But at the point where there is a single, small human community on Mars, there is nothing to stop anyone else from setting up a second or third community somewhere else on the planet.

Indeed - but only if that other nation has the resources to go there. I would assume that the first 50 or so years, only one or perhaps two nations would be able to do so, or eventually unions like the EU.


Also, I detect a strong hint of Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars Trilogy in your post.

Well, actually no. I saw a documentary, called the Mars Underground, and it was about two guys who drew up a complete plan on how to go to Mars with "reasonable expenses". Although they do mention the Mars Trilogy as they start to talk of colonization.


Indeed, look at space exploration in the past - it was started by the Soviet Union, and the only reason the Americans did it was because they wanted to compete with the Soviets.

I do suspect that the Soviet Union wanted a bit of a "show" for the west.


i think someone has been playing too much 'Red Faction'.

:D . I played it once - too linear for my taste. But I am interested in space exploration.


Seriously though, the US gov and NASA arent stupid, I think anyone they send over there, certainly for the next couple of centuries are going to be carefully groomed to ensure theyre definitely redneck patriot jackasses that arent going to start causing trouble.

That would be quite an irony - as they would have to stay there for around a year before they can go back, as it one of the only options for a "short" trip (6 months just to go there, ~360 days in order for the earth to get close, 6 more months back). They'll return as aliens :D .


If you look at the rate our technology is evolving, its exponential! Within the next 50 years i believe there will be people living, if not permanently, than at least temporarily on Mars.

True - but this will also require a strong capitalist economy, and it must also be some point in going there. Even if there is some kind of "oil" on Mars, it also depends on the rate of successfully transporting it to earth etc. You must be absolutely certain that business will go up and only up for such an enterprise.


The thing is, we have to act here first to make sure that corporations don't exploit the red planet for their personal gain.

I agree.


Isn't that much like the actual bases in Antar[c]ti[c]a?

Not quite. Antarctica can still be reached within a day, and probably faster if needed. But it would take any government 6 months to reach Mars, thus the kind of isolation would be much more higher and serious, not to mention the amound of money that they would have to spend to send something each month, like supplies and such.


i dont belive that it is possible to produce enough gas on Mars for it to turn into a habitable planet.

We are already in the process of "gassing" our own planet towards death, but Mars would require these greenhouse gasses to trap sunlight in it's athmosphere. Mars is also just half the size the earth is...