Something interesting... - A website I came across.

Amateur Philosopher · 2001-09-13 13:07:55

There's a website that deals with the issue of Martian politics in a rather interesting way...

Essentially, the folks involved in this are roleplaying as a Martian government. It's a game, but it's worth looking at, I think...

Adrian · 2001-09-13 16:40:51

I can't reach that website at the moment although I should say that it's not a new idea. I know that John Carter McKnight had an idea for a Mars Settlement Simulation.

I haven't actually seen any RPG Mars Settlement in action although I am unconvinced as to how useful it would be.

What I think would be valuable to discuss is the possible form of a Martian constitution, if only to provoke thoughtful debate. In that spirit, I'm going to start up some new threads in this forum dealing with Kim Stanley Robinson's Martian Constitution - I'm not going to write them out, but provide a summary of them. I think it should be interesting...

quasar777 · 2002-05-05 19:43:08

if we want to have a stable govt in space (moon,mars,etc.) we need to have the UN involved. situations like this is exactly why the UN was formed.

Omer Joel · 2002-05-06 03:55:47

The UN? the UN is not a government but a loose organization composed of a vast array of nations which often have conflicting interests. The UN has a very limited authority over individual governments and does not seem to have the ability to coordinate an entire Mars colonization proccess by its own, unless individual member nations agree between themselves to cooperate in this matter.

Ares · 2002-06-15 23:55:23

Private citizens do not need the UN to do anything with the possible exception of redressing greivances against them by member nations. The UN only has any power because the member nations give it power, and then only limited. In turn, the nations only have what power the people give them.

If a group of private citizens were to land on Mars tommorrow, what would any Earth government or the UN be able to do about it. Their only recourse would be to send their own people up to compete.

This of course assumes that all governments don't gang up against it to prevent any support or supply arrangement the group may need. A situation I find unlikely, the group would most likely be able to entice some third world country to play host to the lunch complex/support center.

A.J.Armitage · 2002-06-21 12:05:47

if we want to have a stable govt in space (moon,mars,etc.) we need to have the UN involved. situations like this is exactly why the UN was formed.

What end can possibly be served by bureaucratizing space? Giving the UN power over space is the worst thing you can possibly do.

Aetius · 2002-06-22 19:40:06

I believe the acronym I'm thinking of is...UNOMA. :angry:

Kim Stanley Robinson fans will understand.

Runnerbrax · 2003-08-08 09:24:37

I read the book and I have to dissagree, that was a horrible idea.

el scorcho · 2003-08-09 21:52:21

Don't even get me started on the UN. As far as I'm concerned, they're an absolutely worthless organization.

I agree that there ought to be a Martian government and it should be a global authority...but it shouldn't have too much authority. By that I mean it should have power to print money, raise armies, collect (reasonable amounts of) taxes, and construct internal improvements, but shouldn't have a large amount of lawmaking clout. If you start having a single global entity making laws on Mars that affect people from all over the Earth who have differing viewpoints on everything, you'll start having global civil wars and we don't want that to happen on Mars. Let the individual colonies make their own laws and elect delegates to a Martian Global Congress that settles disputes and supervises trade and so forth.

Just an idea.

Algol · 2003-08-10 03:23:06

Why would we need that? Each individual colony having its own political structure and a global congress (a la UN) to resolve trade disputes etc, wuld in my opion lead to far more beaurocracy and a far greater possibility of civil war. There arent going to be a great number of people on mars for a very long time and i seriously doubt we would want to commit to a course that would represent a step back in terms of democracy and a waste of valuable manpower.

The best course would obviously be a global democracy of some sort, as in one government. Let people get on with their lives and a colonising a new world without commiting themselves to a backward form of government.

Why are people so keen to be a law unto themselves as soon as they leave this planet, what is everybody running away from?

prometheusunbound · 2003-08-11 11:26:48

Why are people so keen to be a law unto themselves as soon as they leave this planet, what is everybody running away from?

Because it is the great appeal of the lack of government up there that is most likely be the driving factor to colonizing space. If exiles/crackpots will flee to Iowa and start states unto themselves, were do the nationalists of Taiwan go with a china with nukes? I believe Taiwan would quickly colonize space in the wake of an nuclear exchange. Remember, Russia jumped into the space race after losing 30-40% of her population to germany and interanal mass murders, so an nuke war wouldn't automatically destroy any chance of such an launch.

Don't even get me started on the UN. As far as I'm concerned, they're an absolutely worthless organization.

What are the alternatives?

space_psibrain · 2003-08-15 18:49:22

Situations like the colonization of Mars was not why the UN was formed. The UN was formed to try and maintain peace in the world, and try to give a semblance of equality after World War II, when america had basically become the ruling power of the world.

In the beginning of the martian colonizartion process, one would probably at first have city states, each with their own charters or what not. Probably these colonies would be corporate in nature to exploit resources or whatnot, so I really don't see the need for some large UN intervention...eventually Mars will become its own world politically and globally, but that will not occur until there is a critical mass of people there.

Speaking of a Martian Government, why print money at all? By then everything will probably be electronically handled, with everyone having an ID card that also serves as a credit/debit card, or even an ID chip. And do you truly want to envision the spectre of a war in space? Death on such a large scale...humanity continues to...never mind.

And about the laws on such on Mars, they will obviously be different than those of earth, not only because of the differeing peoples, but because it is a frontier environment. IN a frontier environment, much more is tolerated, or has that aspect of the frontier factor been forgotten?

The UN is a defunct organization that exists to give an expression of the international sentiment of some nations in the world today. It, by itself, has almost no power other than what it is given. If there truly is to be a global government, the UN must be scrapped, and a new organization begun. I do not believe that the UN should be given control over Mars or whatnot, perhaps simply have COPUOS pass a few general restrictions on the no-man lands of space itself, but leave the colonies free to govern themselves

Cobra Commander · 2003-08-22 20:55:10

The UN was formed to try and maintain peace in the world, and try to give a semblance of equality after World War II, when america had basically become the ruling power of the world.

And we would all do well to remember how well these countries were treated by America. That seems lost amongst the cries of Imperialism and aggression we've been hearing lately. Sorry, had to get out of my system...

Speaking of a Martian Government, why print money at all? By then everything will probably be electronically handled, with everyone having an ID card that also serves as a credit/debit card, or even an ID chip.

I, for one, would want to live on the frontier for the express purpose of avoiding the kind of government presence that results in ID chips and electronic banking. It certainly can't be as free as the American frontier was, but if we create a "complete" government apparatus right from the start it defeats the whole point in going to build a new society. Give me a bit of disorder and discomfort any day.

And do you truly want to envision the spectre of a war in space? Death on such a large scale...humanity continues to...never mind.

I have found that some members of the Mars Society are prone to mixing ridiculous flights of fancy amongst their reasoned beliefs. Namely the idea that war can somehow be avoided on Mars indefinitely. Certainly it makes no sense for people living in pressure domes to attack one another but humanity has frequently demonstrated its capacity for stupidity and violence. This is not going to change with the sorroundings. If we go to Mars some will die there, this cannot be avoided by any social engineering or government structure. Perhaps the history of Man on Mars will be better than that of Man on Earth, but at times it will be bloody. War is unfortunate and terrible for those who experience it, but it is sometimes necessary and will always be with us. Particularly if we want the new Mars to be free.

No UN beyond LEO!

Josh Cryer · 2003-08-23 07:27:05

Early settlers (if we can call them that) would probably be living under stringent guidelines (much like A.J.'s military-styled colony, or any NASA-style missions where strict guidelines are to be met) and so on, so they would have no reason to war. And each subsequent colony would be similar, with varying degrees of freedom.

Later on, when we start getting the fancy technology I've talked about, real colonization can begin, and I think war would have very little reason to occur other than individual groups doing something other groups don't like. Most war is about economics; about resources (don't let anyone kid themselves, war is rarely truely about helping the downtrodden, it's about protecting your own ass, and hopefully getting something out of it in the process- of course it doesn't always work out that way). So war in Josh's techno-society would probably only occur when cultures clash. Say Mars becomes New Mecca. Or New Zion or something. Say it becomes both for each respective culture. Can you imagine the problems we'd potentially have?

Personally, I don't want to see some world government. But if it comes to that (and it probably will unless humans get their act together and start thinking for themselves), I would like it to be some form of decentralized direct democracy. No top level government.

Palomar · 2003-08-23 07:29:34

I have found that some members of the Mars Society are prone to mixing ridiculous flights of fancy amongst their reasoned beliefs. Namely the idea that war can somehow be avoided on Mars indefinitely. Certainly it makes no sense for people living in pressure domes to attack one another but humanity has frequently demonstrated its capacity for stupidity and violence. This is not going to change with the sorroundings. If we go to Mars some will die there, this cannot be avoided by any social engineering or government structure. Perhaps the history of Man on Mars will be better than that of Man on Earth, but at times it will be bloody. War is unfortunate and terrible for those who experience it, but it is sometimes necessary and will always be with us. Particularly if we want the new Mars to be free.
No UN beyond LEO!

*WHAT will Marsians have wars over?

What precisely?

I can foresee (unfortunately) the POSSIBILITY of war, once and IF (-- *if* -- ) Mars is ever terraformed to a significant degree, i.e. disputes over property rights, water usage, etc. A few of these disputes could erupt into war (hopefully on a very small scale, if ever...and hopefully never). Wars are usually provoked by property, resources or religion. Can we learn?

Are there issues of human nature involved? Certainly. But as I've gotten on in life, I can't help being under the very strong impression that mankind often sets himself up for self-fulfilling (constructive -or- destructive in scope) prophecies. Mankind is also very good at talking himself into believing "yadda yadda" must be so, will always be, we -can't- change it, so "get used to it." We can't change some things...or we won't? There's a big difference.

I get a kick out of a few people who've shown up here, wondering if the first 1 or 2 Marsian settlements/colonies (with perhaps 200 people total living in them, if that many people) will be riddled with Al Capone-style gangsters, complete with blazing pistols and crime sprees. Hello? What's wrong with this picture?

Cooperation will be key to survival in a little bubble surrounding by nonbreathable air, no native vegetation to eat, no animals roaming around to hunt, and no extra-colony/settlement water resouces.

There are no gun and ammunition manufacturers on Mars. If guns aren't sent to Mars and people not allowed to take them, then there won't be guns on Mars. Makeshift weapons and even knives -- of course, these are possibilities (the more personal and less cowardly way of being a criminal, which in itself might be a good deterrant).

If we do go to Mars, I'd sure like for people to go with a "we CAN do better/be better" attitude. If we're going to repeat -- and justify repetition -- of the same old borish, stupid behaviors on Earth (including trashing the place and creating all sorts of toxins, pollution, etc.), why bother? Just stay here.

My 2 cents' worth.

Much of what mankind is is what he's talked himself into being ("oh poor pathetic us, we can't help ourselves, it all 'just is', blah blah blah" -- bullsh*t). We DO have the capacity for being change.

I propose a motto for Marsian settlements and eventual colonies: "Let's shape up or not bother shipping out."

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2003-08-23 07:30:49

BTW, Commander, I hope you weren't referring to me when you said that there are some who think, ?war can somehow be avoided on Mars indefinitely.? I have stated a very plausible scenario where Red's could take over Mars and cause an intersteller war.

One can always take reasonable steps to avoiding war. It's just that in some situations, humans show an inate inablity to reason.

clark · 2003-08-23 10:05:07

What is crime? Where does it come from? Why do people commit crimes in the first place?

Crime, put simply, is to wrong another. To hurt another. That's all crime in a nutshell.

So in a sense, crime, in the most general of explanations, will be part of the human condition. Afterall, we need only reflect on our own personal lives to realize that we often mistakes others intentions as crime, when no such intention actually exsisted.

In a more specified sense though, our concepts of punishment and what really constutites a punishable crime will change. They've been changing for time memorial.

will 200 people in a colony on Mars go to war? Will they need super state supervision? No. Don't be absurd. It is a fantasy to believe otherwise. Why?

Becuase, by and large, those 200 colonists, or any of the colonists for that matter, will in a place of their choosing. They WANT to be there. They made life altering decisions to be there. Think of it like going to the Circus, you know what it costs up front, right? You have a reasonable expectation of what's going to be under that tent, right? Elephants and clowns, people flying from the rafters, held up by magic and gasps...

So to our future space colonists, whatever their creed.

Now, where things get tricky, and it all goes to hell in a hand basket is after those 200 colonists. Who comes afterwards?

You get a prize if you said, "their children of course!".

Why do things get bad then though?

Becuase that's where everybody else suddenly becomes overly concerned with everyone else. You don't worry about Frank, but you do worry about what Frank is teaching his kids, and whether or not Frank's kid is teaching your kid the same thing.

That's only the tip of the ice berg though. The real problem occurs when those children grow up.

All of those who look to the stars and say, "I want to go there. I want to live there." You are making a personal choice for yourself. A life choice. Nothing wrong with that, I applaude you.

The same conditions you so willingly accept though may also be just as quickly rejected by your children. Imagine the situation then, where now you populate an enclosed environment with people who may not really want to be there. Anf for a variety of reasons, they may be trapped there, with no real means to change their environment, ever.

Anyone who has tried to escape the clutches of a small town or a life in one locale may understand what I am saying here. If not, the story should be familiar.

Now, after that comes the fact that those who go tolive in space will more than likely have something to do there. They have a reason to be there. A job. It took effort and resources to get these people there.

A child gets a majoc ticket to the destination. It is a personal decision that brings them to this place or time, regardless of weheter or not the time and place have anything for them to do.

So what?

Well, these are the underlying factors for all crime (aside from basic neurological psychosis). Eventually, this little formula gets bigger- multiplied by the number of our species.

We've been involved in some darwinan social evolution for the last few thousands of years trying to get to an equilibrium. We're still not there, and we may never be. But we're going to have to get better to make civilizations in space.

We're going to have to do more about personal opportunity, as well as personal responsibility.

War though, is a result, the group equivilent of "after school, 3 'o clock." All war though is a crime. Sanctioned crime, just like state santioned murder, but a crime.

We will have war as long as people accept that it is okay to hurt others.

I never believed in the man, but I still believe in the message.

Byron · 2003-08-23 14:35:54

That's only the tip of the ice berg though. The real problem occurs when those children grow up.
All of those who look to the stars and say, "I want to go there. I want to live there." You are making a personal choice for yourself. A life choice. Nothing wrong with that, I applaude you.
The same conditions you so willingly accept though may also be just as quickly rejected by your children. Imagine the situation then, where now you populate an enclosed environment with people who may not really want to be there. Anf for a variety of reasons, they may be trapped there, with no real means to change their environment, ever.

Bingo, clark...you've hit on one of the themes in my novel-in-progress..lol.

The initial stages of exploring and settling Mars will be centered around science, as well overcoming the tremendous obstacles to living in an alien environment. There won't be enough people early on to require anything more than informal councils and the like, with "Momma Earth" pretty much running the show (as they're the ones to be paying for these early missions / settlements...lol)

It's much later on down the line, when the Martian population gets into the thousands and tens of thousands, with a generation of Martian-born children coming of age, when some form of Martian self-government will probably come into existence, and the biggest problems, as clark has suggested, will between the "first generation" settlers and their offspring, who will surely have ideas of their own of how to run things They may be much more socialist in their thinking compared to their libertarian parents, for example. Or they may chafe at the restrictive ways of their elders (think: don't touch that, don't go here, no going outside without a buddy, etc, etc.)

"War" as we see it today probably won't happen on Mars, simply because of the expense....is expensive as war is here on Earth, it would be astronomically (excuse the pun) more so on Mars. Instead, you might see economic / trade conflicts between competing settlements (like the two major Martian population centers portrayed in my novel,) or terrorist-style sabotage attacks by the disenfranchised (which would be pretty easy...just punch a hole in the dome, cut off the heat to the crops, that sort of thing.)

For the above reasons, it would behoove future settlers to ensure that everyone enjoys more or less an equal standard of living, based on mutual respect for one another, and individual settlements should have as much self-autonomy as possible, like KSR's diverse spectrum of various settlers in his Mars trio.

But who knows...perhaps the momentous act of settling a whole new world will cause people to cast off their old, primative ways for something better...otherwise, as Cindy mentioned, why even bother going, if we're just going to bring all of our problems with us?

I guess you could say that Mars will be the ultimate test of "Can we really do better?"

B

prometheusunbound · 2003-08-23 15:37:18

War is a singular struggle for survival between;

1. Establishments withen a nation

2. Radically different Establishments that threaten each other to a mortal degree-morso if one threatens to replace one another. Invasion, attack and the like, the reason for doing so can be extremly weak as some reasons are more psychological than most.

It is not very often we see a war of pure agression occur, were there is no compelling psyhological/economic motive to fight.

Privately, I believe the only way to end war is to destroy all of humanity, wipe out all his exsitance. Also, I would much rather see more nations stronger even if they do not support the USA in any ways.

clark · 2003-08-23 17:29:00

Our inheritance wears heavier than any earthly pull. -Mars-an proverb. :;):

Josh Cryer · 2003-08-23 18:17:25

clark, what is one groups crime is another groups justice. Especially if both groups participate in some level of human depreciation (and even then, what is one groups hurt is another groups tradition). Equality hardly exists in current society.

Consider this, we're on Mars and two groups are living there, they have different ideologies, but all in all they're able to coexist peacefully. They have relatively high level technology, so they really don't have any worries execept the health problems related to Mg. A small sect in one of the groups has a grudge against another group leader, perhaps because of some swindleing he did, or perhaps because he's more open minded and doesn't see a problem with cultural mixing, whatever, just assume that the grudge is based upon trivialities. The small sect kills the group leader (even if it's accidental in a fit of rage), and this creates a small sect within that group which has a grudge against the sect in the other group. Eventually it's not a conflict between just two people, but a conflict between two large groups, with few reasonable voices in both because both groups are affected adversely by each death (this is becoming an economic thing, when you consider the low populations and the value of a human). Religious conflicts are always a possiblity.

clark · 2003-08-23 19:19:02

Josh:

clark, what is one groups crime is another groups justice.

Me:

We will have war as long as people accept that it is okay to hurt others.

Call it what you will, but any form of justice predicated on the cause of harm to another is wrong. It is the basis by which all wrongs are inevitably perpetrated from.

One man's justice is anothers call for vengance.

Conflicts are possible becuase we accept at some point, we rationalize at some point, we justify at some point, that it is acceptable and legitamte to hurt another individual.

Context provides the rationale, the 'cause' for an 'effect'.

Two wrongs do not make a right. Or do they?

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2001-09-13 13:07:55

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#2 2001-09-13 16:40:51

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#3 2002-05-05 19:43:08

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#4 2002-05-06 03:55:47

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#5 2002-06-15 23:55:23

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#6 2002-06-21 12:05:47

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#7 2002-06-22 19:40:06

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#8 2003-08-08 09:24:37

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#9 2003-08-09 21:52:21

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#10 2003-08-10 03:23:06

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#11 2003-08-11 11:26:48

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#12 2003-08-15 18:49:22

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#13 2003-08-22 20:55:10

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#14 2003-08-23 07:27:05

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#15 2003-08-23 07:29:34

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#16 2003-08-23 07:30:49

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#17 2003-08-23 10:05:07

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#18 2003-08-23 14:35:54

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#19 2003-08-23 15:37:18

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#20 2003-08-23 17:29:00

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#21 2003-08-23 18:17:25

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

#22 2003-08-23 19:19:02

Re: Something interesting... - A website I came across.

Board footer