Would space exploration would be very supportive in a Socialist society?

Lets starts with the basics. We would not be at this level of space exploration without the space race between the United States and the USSR. Also we would not be at this level of particle physics without the cold war either.

In the future, where this is no major competition between states to go to Moon again or go to Mars? Do you think a Socialist state will have the will power to explore the Solar System? (Men to Mars and beyond. Like we imaged 40 years ago.) Will it scale back space exploration and focus on issues on Earth? (Just space probes and telescopes. Where we are heading.)

Well, the reason it isn't done so much today is because there isn't profit in it, in either financial or political capital. In a system where profit isn't the motive we'd doubtlessly engage in more space exploration and other important ventures that aren't necessarily profitable.

^^ I think the op makes an excellent point, but I also think from the perspective of human enrichment, given that we have a finite amount of resources to spend on science, are particle physics and sending dogs into orbit really what we should be spending our resources on? How about spending it to eradicate malaria, to guarantee clean drinking in abundance water for everybody, to implement sustainable urban architecture, to have a trans-continental airplane that doesn't produce so much CO2, to eliminate cockroaches, to promise an airconditioner in every house, to have safe, clean, fusion based power plants, or to cure cancer? I think the fact that we waste so much of our scientific resources on nuking each other and having "my space flight is longer than yours" contests, rather than these scientific developments that make human life more comfortable, enjoyable and meaningful, is an indictment of the kind of scientific progress that is valued in our current society.

Emphasis mine, because that doesn't seem like a very good idea ... sure, they're disease vectors, but they serve as a food source to several species of small reptiles and carnivorous insects ... and they're scavengers, feeding on decaying plants and animals ...

Space exploration and exploitation would be necessary in a socialist society. We're pretty low on rare earth metals down here on Earth, so we'll need to get more from somewhere. If we really got the whole space mining thing down, we could even get regular metals from asteroids and planetoids instead of from ecologically sensitive areas on Earth.

I don't think roaches are a very important disease vector - there is the asthma controversy, but this is far from conclusive.

The problem is that most of these fuckers are not native to their habitat, and humans have been instrumental in their proliferation. The so-called "American cockroach" for example is African in origin, and quite rare outside of the major cities in Africa, yet they are found now everywhere. In Japan roaches were once considered desirable, because a house that has them was equated to being wealthy. Arguably now they are the single most despised organism in Japan. As for being a food source to other organisms, they are only so because these other organisms have also had to adapt to an anthropogenic environment. There is little reason to believe they will be as abundant when humans go extinct - more likely than not they will return to their role as obscure, rare detrivores who do what they do very well, quite like the coelacanth.

It will be, if said society wants to survive.

the space reich of a million years

bro you are crazy

anyways, the important stuff we do with space can be done cheaper and smarter, so yeah i would be ok with continuing space programs especially for their atmospheric research component. i don't know if sending people to mars will be in our lifetime.

basically post-capitalist space research would be cool but basically space exploration is something you probably shouldn't worry your pretty little head about. (plus it is a continuation of the frontier theory of american exceptionalism)

I don't think it's really relevant to talk about space exploration on the basis of resource acquisition and exploitation; the idea that limited resources here on Earth create a necessity to go into the stars is wholly imagined and fabricated. We've already reached a level of technological development whereat resource consumption is a non-issue. Energy is renewable and there are sources which are, for all intents and purposes and within the context of billions of years, inexhaustable. Socialist construction in the (near) future will absolutely necessarily include the mass collection and utilization of solar, wind, and agriculturally acquired energy sources which are clean, safe, and endless. Food can be indefinitely reproduced so long as agriculture is maintained in a rational and productive manner, which is already completed for most of the world- that is, enough is already produced to feed the whole population of the earth; the issues there are distribution and private ownership of the means of production and the operation of agriculture, production and distribution for profit. In terms of non-renewable resources such as iron, coal, etc., these things are mostly recyclable and can be re-purposed and managed rationally even assuming that we will at no point in technological development be able to fabricate them synthetically. At a certain level of human development, human reproduction will slow until birth and death rates very nearly equalize; overpopulation, like the "resource anxiety scare", are manufactured issues propagated for purposes either political or material. This is to say, as a generality, we have on Earth everything which we need as a species to continue indefinitely to live in a civilized and modern way if resources are utilized rationally and allocated in order to fit real material needs (which, at present, they predominantly are not).

When we speak of space travel we should be speaking of the search for answers to grand scientific questions and our ongoing struggle as a species to understand and participate in the massive universe we find ourselves inhabiting: to break free from our imposed microcosm (that is, Earth and its immediate surroundings) and to experience the non-terrestrial phenomenal world- that is, the overwhelming majority of it. Socialist societies necessarily should, once stability has been achieved and material needs have been met on Earth, begin enthusiastic exploration of non-terrestrial space beginning with the immediate solar system and, when technology permits, beyond. People should hold in their hearts a dire longing to reach out towards the stars and embrace the full breadth of life and existence which cannot be achieved on Earth alone. Though our immediate material conditions demand preoccupation with earthly matters and the social progress and uplifting of humanity to a social structure which excludes exploitation and poverty, we must not allow ourselves to become overly "terrestrio-centric" and forget about what lies beyond our own atmosphere, which accounts for 99.999999999999999999999999999999%(repeating) of all existence.

???

If a manned mission to mars isn't at least in the planning stages in the next 50-60 years, something must have gone terribly wrong.

'Our lifetime' is a highly subjective measurement. During the twentieth century, average life expectency nearly doubled. Genetic engineering, and nanotechnology could, theoretically, radically extend human life expectency even further, perhaps indefinitely. On the negative side; there's also the possibility of a existential catastrophe, such as nuclear war, or an extremely virulent pathogen, natural, or otherwise. Then there are you're natural catastrophes like impact by an asteroid, or, on a lower order of probability, a gamma ray burster.

No, it isn't. It's the logical course of action for a Stage Zero civilization (On the Kardashev scale.) fumbling towards becoming a Stage One civilization. Or, more importantly; a civilization that doesn't want to be incinerated when our sun enters the red giant stage. Although; admittedly, we have five billion years to prepare for this eventuality. However, one of the aforementioned calamities will assuredly happen sooner. If the human race does not leave this solar system, then human extinction is inevitable.

As the technology improves, so will space exploration. Socialism will not impede space exploration. It has nothing to do with competition, after all, the ISS was a collaborative effort.

Note #3 on this thread offers a very plausible and powerful rationale why socialism could impede space exploration.
Add to that its prohibition against pursuit of profit, and one has two very strong right and left hooks agin' it.

I don't see why this has to impede space exploration. And while I do understand the bias towards biology in many aspects, I really don't fully see why physics is always thrown under the bus for not being very "useful". Science doesn't work that way. Its not about people looking for useful things all the time and finding them that way, often science is about learning a lot of seemingly useless (outside of the academic sense) things and then combining them into something very useful. X-rays were discovered by accident and without fully understanding the medical applications. And graph theory far removed from anything in biology is today showing applications for cancer diagnosis. So things don't always go down the easy route, but we should explore every route to make sure that we aren't missing something. Also isn't education by its very virtue part of enriching human existence?

The claim is not that physics is not useful. The claim is that socialism is PLEDGED to eliminate human want, misery, ect. How can it justify diverting of resources from eliminating poverty, feeding all, eliminating fossil fuels ect ect. to put people into space? How does it justify theoretical progress ahead of actual, concrete and visible progress?

I think that it should be better that we focus our "energy" to fixing our earth there is no point of space travel we are never going to be so advanced that we are going to travel to distant space.
My voice goes: Fix earth we are going to die one day soon or later

and even if we get so "advanced" to travel so far in space what do you think us "normal people"-working class,unimportant people,... are going to stay on earth rich and affective people are going to fly away to another planet and they are going to watch us how we are going to die.

Can someone explain what this is all about?

you fucking crazy, get out of here w/this fucking silly sci-fi bullshit.

Because as I mentioned in my previous post. Science doesn't work that way. You investigate all angles and then you find things which help the human population. That's how you alleviate human misery with scientific progress from everywhere. You don't know what you'll find, but you know that you will find nothing if you don't look.

Yes, and this isn't a wrong goal, but space exploration as it is, doesn't consume a whole lot of resources. I don't see how it is holding back progress in other sectors. If you want to cut it off completely fine, but make sure you cut art and music as well and theater, and linguistics. Because progress in those doesn't eliminate the problems that are plaguing us. Why not just cut education in the 'useless' disciplines as well. Why does anyone need to read Shakespeare? How about only instruct people in what they'll be needed in? Determine everyone's career from age 12.

Do you see what's wrong here? Socialism and later communism are supposed to be about abundance. We are preaching the wrong gospel here if we say that we are going to cut what we don't like. There are a lot of things which aren't too important to me, but I think we should strive to keep because they are important to others. I don't watch sports much, but I don't want to get rid of competitive sports on television. Just because I don't see the value in something doesn't mean its an excuse to cut it. Abundance means abundance. With socialism we will produce more effectively and thus have more people who will be able to do investigative/artistic/academic work. And that's a good thing. That's where I want society to go.


Which is why we implement socialism first. And moreover why we take care of our planet.

[FONT=Arial] [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana][FONT=Arial]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Franz Fanonipants

you fucking crazy, get out of here w/this fucking silly sci-fi bullshit.

---

[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial]It isn’t bullshit. Nor is it Science Fiction. Presently, there are no known examples of a Type On civilization on the Kardashev scale, (Which isn’t to say there aren’t any.) however, I did not definitively claim that thereare, or that the human race will absolutely, necessarily, become a Type One civilization, or that it is even possible for the human race to become a Type One civilization, although I do have an opinion on the matter.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial]In approximately 5 billion years earth’s sun will go into the red giant stage and the planet earth will become inhospitable to life. That is a fact. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial]It is also a fact that based on formulas based on astronomical observations that, unless preemptive action is taken, an asteroid of sufficient size to wipe out the human race, as it stands, today, will impact the earth before the sun goes into the red giant stage.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial]It is also a fact that there are presently more than enough nuclear weapons to annihilate the human race. The United States alone, has more than enough nuclear weapons to exterminate the human species. Nuclear conflict in the future is, unfortunately, a very real possibility. During the Cuban Missile Crisis the superpowers came within a hairs’ breadth of a nuclear war which would have, very likely, resulted in human extinction. This could easily happen again. The proliferation of nuclear weapons, combined with the increasing scarcity of natural resources, such as fossil fuels, combined with political instability fueled by economic turmoil, and anthropogenic climate change only make this eventuality more likely. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial]Biological weapons pose a similar existential threat to our species. The Soviet Union, during the height of it’s biological weapons program, cultivated Smallpox, Anthrax, Hemorrhagic Fevers like Marburg, and Ebola, and other similarly deadly pathogens, in sufficient quantity to threaten the species. Of these Smallpox is the most frightening. While it is believed that Russia and the United States possess the last remaining samples (Which should have been destroyed years ago.) the deficiencies in security in facilities in the former Soviet Union leave open the distinct possibility that other States, or Non-State Actors, may have, or come into posession of, Smallpox, from which it would be possible to grow a sufficient supply to infect every man, woman and child. Through genetic engineering it is presently possible to alter pathogens to maximize virulence and lethality. Based on current technologies, and trends, it is a virtual certainty that it will soon become possible to create completely new pathogens.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial]In summation; as I said before, if the human species does not escape this solar system, human extinction is guaranteed. There’s no other way to see it. [/FONT]

[QUOTE]Sure. That could be a valid argument.
But its also valid to question why the community ought to be diverting resources from building, say bullet trains ("taking care of our planet"), instead to build spaceships.
The OP was wondering whether socialism would impede space exploration.



And here is the best reason why socialism might impede space exploration- it doesn't happen until socialism is actually achieved :laugh: