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

extinction happens nerd shut up

I suppose MarxSchmarx simply doesn't like cockroaches, because they spread diseases (apparently) so he wants to eliminate them.

But as CanisLupus pointed out, this may not be a good idea.

And I think I'm on his side, the attempt to eradicate flies, rats, muisquitors, and sparrows in China under Mao was one of the main reasons for the Great Famine. To quote wikipedia:

The lesson to be learned here: don't mess with the ecological balance!

Eloquent as ever.

Socialism is fundamentally humanistic. It is predicated on a sense of injustice, a moral outrage at the oppression and exploitation of ones' fellow man. As the continued existence of mankind is predicated on expansion into the cosmos, then the only philosophically consistent Socialist position should be one strongly in favor of space exploration.

Limiting ourselves to one single planet in this enormous and marvellous universe is what makes you the crazy one here.

It's not a question knowledge, since we can't predict the future all that well. It's a question of where we want to head as a species. Expansion or extinction.

Why not? Because you think most people in a post-capitalist society would share your stunted vision of humanity's destination?

Maybe for some proponents of space colonisation that is the case, but since neither I nor any of the non-restricted members of this site see it in that way this statement of yours is irrelevant poisoning-the-well crap.

Extinction happens all the time because none of the species that go extinct had the capability to realise the situation they were in. Humans are different, so why not take advantage of that?

But of course, you could simply dismiss us as "nerds" again, since that's apparently easier for you than actually thinking.

I think space exploration would thrive under socialism, and why wouldn't it? The only reason it doesn't thrive now is because there (so far) isn't profit in it, and our governments can more than afford all our space endeavors now, only they waste this money on military defense. We can afford to make and launch all the planned probes that we have been putting off right now, under capitalism. These things will only be easier to accomplish under socialism.

you're a silly, racist son of a *****.

humanity has no capacity to avoid its extinction. you need to stop reading science fiction and start doing actual science. you g.d. lame.

You obviously think if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. Why are you taking pages from the neo-conservative playbook anyway?

Care to back that up with anything more substantial than a bald assertion?

The two aren't mutually exclusive, you miserable shit.

because humanity is a terrestrial species physically tied to existence on only one planet. anything else is total slavering fantasy.

Physically tied? That's funny, I remember something about men going to the Moon a few times once.

Living on extraterrestrial bodies is a matter of establishing habitation capable of comfortably sustaining human life with locally available (in relative terms) energy and materials. The basics are there - water, metals, silicates, carbon, and hydrocarbons in the colder parts, all much more of it than on Earth.

The volume of interplanetary space is many orders of magnitude larger than that of the Earth, but half the energy cost of getting into space in the first place is involved in getting off the Earth's surface, so there's a direct material incentive to industrialise high Earth orbit to reduce costs. Once up in space, how much energy you spend is dependant on your capabilities and how fast you want to go with that. So automated vessels carrying stuff like minerals/ores would drive the development of relatively cheap, long-range and reliable engines. Meanwhile, human impatience can drive development of the state of the art.

So unless you're saying that we've discovered everything there is to know about building stuff, living in and traveling around space, a proposition I find dubious, then I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

My real qualm isn't so much with basic science, (although I do wonder), but rather that astronomy and space exploration are enormously expensive among the sciences, and the inordinate share of the science budget they will get at least for the next 1000 years are poorly justified. The justification that we should pursue them "for the sake of knowledge" or the "enrichment of education", ignores the fact that the funds used to purchase even a single instrument of the calibre required to do modern cosmology could hire, or provide a more than decent stipend for, hundreds of mathematicians, beetle taxonomists and geochemists.

And while the need to colonize other planets stars whatever is fine, it just doesn't strike me as pressing a priority as the other things that have been brought up.

No, but why should we not take steps to work against it to our capacity? I suppose you think we have no stake one way or another in nuclear war, either.

Space colonization, though an unrealized hypothetical, way down the line, has no intrinsic relationship to American manifest destiny ideology, aside from your po-mo hand-waving.

I don't see too many indigenous peoples in the asteroid belt. :rolleyes: I know its fashionable to pick on the Chomsky fan, but we certainly throw anything but left shit-talk style out with the bathwater half the time.

I don't see why a members' status on the forum is relevent.

Reported for sexist language. Don't bring your idiotic ideas into scientific discussions. Also, don't diss scifi. Ever.

Space exploration and colonisation are expensive, for sure, but look what has been achieved so far with a tiny fraction of the budget spent on miltary crap; there's no need to assume that increasing the slice of the pie for space efforts would necessarily entail a smaller slice for social and development projects.

I don't think those who complain about the amounts spent on space science and development understand the scale of military spending worldwide - with over half a trillion spent in 2010 by the United States alone, and more than a trillion spent by the US since 2001. Without the ludicrous military expenditures, there's no good financial reason why we could not have the best space program ever as well as a global effort to lift millions out of misery.

A global program of space exploration and colonisation for the long term would be a peaceable outlet for the world's technical and scientific genius, leaving a legacy that our descendants can justifiably be proud of, rather than tossing more talent, lives and materials on the pyres of war and militarism.

Well you won't find any disagreement from me that a world without militaries could spend all those resources on something much more productive.

Please stop posting, your making yourself look stupid, as you are clearly incabable of having a calm, rational discussion, devoid of anti-intellectual prejudices.