You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
There have been many a thought on how to warm mars and to create a thicker atmosphere but the loss rate via solar wind means a constant replacement of it as its the lack of a substantial magetic field that is the issue to allow it to stick around.
That makes sense. Thanks!
I suppose one could make the same argument for those on Earth (ごめんなさい、 天皇陛下!), but what exactly would be the point of a ceremonial Emperor of Mars?
I was watching a documentary on colonising Mars earlier today in which someone discussed taking the methods we use on Earth for global warming and using them on Mars to modify the environment. It's an interesting idea and certainly better than nuking the planet as Musk suggested, but I'm wondering if the colonists would have the wherewithal to cease (or at least significantly curb) such practices once they are no longer necessary. We seem to be having that issue here on Earth.
All that being said, I have absolutely no background in geology or environmental studies, so if someone wants to refute my argument or propose something more efficient, please do. I'm here to learn just as much as I am to spout off on what little I really know about the Mars project.
I cannot agree more with SpaceNut's comment that 'Mars will be self ruled only when they no longer owe any one on Earth any debt and are self sufficient.' At the same time, I worry that the source of the funding will demand a greater say in how things are run than they ought to. I understand that colonising Mars will be costly and people forking out the dough would like some return on their investment, but really it would be helpful if their donations/contributions/whatever were done in the name of philanthropy and not national or corporate interest.
Please no militarisation/no nukes/etc. on Mars. There's no need for it.
Initially, I was in favour of something like Esperanto, but after reading some of the comments in this thread, maybe not so much now. English would be the obvious answer, but as others have noted, it comes with a sense of parochialism. That being said, trying to invent a new language would be a waste of time when there will be more important things to focus on for first-gen Martians. It's not without its faults, but I think English would be best and most efficient. In time, no doubt, it will evolve into something like Martian English.
Now, with all that being said, one shouldn't be discouraged from speaking their native Earth language in a non-official environment.
In terms of a Martian political system, what's really needed is for Mars to develop its own style of governance in order to fully flourish. Every system of government tried on Earth has had its flaws. Of course, it likely would on Mars too since we're populating Mars with Earthlings who come with such baggage, but a more concerted effort to break free from past mistakes would help Mars in the long run. This would also mean the scientific community (on Earth) standing up to politicians/national governments and saying something to the effect that regardless of how much money a nation pours into a Mars mission, their ability to influence events on Mars will always be equal. That sounds a bit utopian, but why not use the opportunity to have Mars run better than Earth?
On a related note, while I'm religious, I do think it's imperative for religious leaders and organisations (including cults) on Earth to steer clear of trying to manipulate Mars missions for their own ends.
In the end, Mars should be for all of humanity not just the wealthy or the most vocal or best connected.
I agree with Ian about avoiding subunits and with Louis about the potential positive effects of having a single planetary currency. Much as the Europeans were allegedly trying to do when they came to America, people on Mars should adopt some sort of economy (and political life) that eschews the garbage of Earth, inasmuch as that would be possible.
Particularly in the early days when Mars is underpopulated, it would be beneficial to have something akin to ancient Greek democracy (excluding its reliance on slavery, of course) where everyone has an equal say in how things ought to be run. If I'm one of only 100 people in a group for anything, for example, I'd like to think that my opinion would be heard since I have a vested interest in maintaining the survival of that group of 100.
Pages: 1