New Mars Forums

The Constitution and the Bill Of Rights will ensure that no one can legally 'throw you off a cliff'. One of the main reasons I never want Mars to be too politically independent of Earth is because there are so many people who want to re-establish global, dystopian, 'scientific' hard socialism there under a seemingly harmless guise. No way. Ever read George Orwell's "Animal Farm"?

The pigs who are simply 'more equal' than everyone else will just live on Mars instead of here.

That would indeed be sweet. Imagine if that device COULD be incorporated into a spacecraft. I'd love to own a cargo ship capable of hauling 100,000 tons to Mars regularly...and get paid quite nicely for its use!

Yeah, but the violent video games help train the next generation of soldiers. Modern warfare is becoming more and more just like them.

I'd rather live in this society than any other. Global consumerist capitalism has its flaws, but it's still the best game in town, in my opinion.

Actually, I would beg to differ about Chomsky. He just lacks the directness to just say it. Scientists may work very well in an 'anarchist' environment...but the skewing effects caused by the type of people attracted to performing scientific research has a major impact on the success or failure of the system.

I would not deign to argue for or against the existence of the 'selfish gene'. However, someone is arguing that human nature is so malleable that a society which rejects large-scale hierarchy can exist long-term. This is an extraordinary claim, and requires extraordinary evidence...other than the brief existence of the wartime anti-Franco resistance regime in Spain.

All successful societies have elements of socialism...even the supposedly 'capitalist' United States of America. I just don't personally believe that an 'anarchist' society (by any label) like the one so outlined can survive in the long run. If it can...more power to you.

I am very skeptical that any Mars-oriented group will be able to enlist the aid of 'mainstream' environmentalist groups. The very idea of settling Mars is the antithesis of everything most environmental activists stand for. The Mars Society is also unlikely to get positive press coverage from the Left-dominated mass media outlets in the USA or anywhere else. The world's space programs, for the most part, are simply extensions of the military-industrial complex. Regardless of how much you or someone else might gush over the Sierra Club (or other group with similar aims), I have a gut feeling that the people who lead these groups will never think of Mars the way you do. I believe that any serious attempt to win their approval will either lead them to demand changes to the Mars Society's goals which many members might disapprove of, or will simply attract more unwanted attention from the aforementioned hostile elements of the 'Earth First' movement.

"Earth defender" sounds very poetic at face value. But since we're talking about Earth's living things, is it fair to apply that blanket label to groups like Earth Liberation Front (whose preferred weapon is arson)? Environmental lawyers who will rob thousands of logging industry workers of employment, to save an 'endangered' owl or frog? I don't think it is.

Supporting legislation to help ensure clean air and water is just good government. But a lot of this talk about preserving 'biodiversity' seems like a way of achieving radical Green aims through seemingly harmless regulation. Look at the staggering amounts of money the states in the western USA spend fighting lawsuits from these groups.

I share Zubrin's views regarding the urgency of becoming a two-planet species. The misanthropes who hold so much sway within the radical wing of the environmental movement will stop at nothing to end human spaceflight. Establishing a successful colony on Mars will bring the deathblow to the dream they dare not voice: The dream of an impoverished, miserable, 'sustainable' human future. A lot of their prattle about how indigenous peoples lived in 'harmony' with nature seems like a thinly veiled endorsement of discredited 18th century notions about the "Noble Savage". Stone Age barbarians lived in 'harmony' with their surroundings only because they lacked the means to do otherwise in the long term.

McKay is off-base in his assertions, in my opinion. I'm a bit more pessimistic. If we don't start working for a permanent human presence on Mars now, our species could lose the opportunity. We are only one large-scale bioterror attack or nuclear exchange away from a new Dark Age. Too much is at stake.

Cobra Commander, I agree with you about self-defense weapons being allowed to the colonists if they feel they need them. I just don't think guns should be brought in. Too many risks. I have a sword and dagger collection in my house, and trust me...any one of them would be enough for my protection. 

Crime will happen on Mars for the same reasons it happens on Earth. Because humans are innately filled with greed and hatred and bloodlust. If a superior educational system was the key to eliminating crime, wealthy and well-educated criminals wouldn't exist in the numbers they do. It is a failed paradigm of the 1960's that fell by the wayside long ago.

I just believe that while crime will be a long time coming to Mars (because of the demands of the Martian environment), it will come. I think it is unrealistic to believe that you can socially engineer crime out of existence, and people should be able to defend themselves. Terran powers (nations, corporations, et cetera) may seek to destroy Martian colonies without any warning, and may not care about settling the place themselves.

Those who disagree can make a weapon-free, military-free colony of their own. Personally, I'd rather be safe than sorry.

But no guns for individuals in the dome cities, I still say.

I couldn't agree more.

Hoagland is a crank, in my opinion. However, the Cydonia "Face" nonsense keeps Mars in the public consciousness. This shadow-trick seizes the collective imagination in a way that ALH84001 never did.

How many moviegoers didn't enjoy watching "Total Recall"? If just one kid is inspired by Hoagland's paranoid fantasies to devote her life to studying Mars, he will have done humanity a service.

If there is such a thing as an afterlife for Mars activists, Percival Lowell must be there, waiting for him amongst the vast red expanse.

"Sorry, Dick. Don't feel bad. I thought I saw canals made by a dying civilization..."

Well, if NASA decides that ordering the astronauts to keep their pants on is too much to ask...it would be a product-placement triumph of interplanetary proportions for "Trojans", wouldn't it?

I'm torn about the whole celibacy-for-the-duration thing. The most skilled people for the job may have psychological difficulties coping with such a prolonged period without sexual intimacy. Personally, I'd make sure that both crew members of BOTH genders used birth control during the mission.

As I posted earlier, I have no problem with prohibiting ordinary citizens from carrying firearms on Mars. Was your statement affirming support for gun control a misreading of my position, a statement to the effect that security forces on Mars shouldn't carry guns, or simply an off-topic note of interest?

I share your optimism that crime and war will be greatly reduced on Mars. I still wouldn't trust ALL my neighbors, though, depending on who they are. First World nations may not fight each other, but eventually they won't be the only ones on Mars. China is certainly not a democracy. But within 100 years, their massive industrial complex might make them far more powerful than all the NATO countries combined.

Let's hope you're right, and bloodshed doesn't get in the way of an era of peaceful Martian economic expansion.

Good points about the value of plundering. Actually, I was thinking more about the costly life support hardware...but your point is equally valid. 

Enough to kill a human inside an EVA suit within twelve minutes, or so I read. That's pretty nasty. Maybe a Mini-Magnetospheric Plasma Propulsion (M2P2) 'bubble' could provide adequate protection.