Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

tahanson43206 · 2022-01-15 10:58:06

Recently (early 2022) Mars_B4_Moon brought a topic from 2002 back into view.

I read the topic from the top, and realized the NewMars members of the time argued around the problem, but (as I read it anyway) never resolved anything.

The human race has experimented with Rule of Law, but it has FAR more experience with Rule by Force, and indeed, as I look out at the world of 2022, I ** think ** I am seeing more than half the population living in Rule by Force regimes.

There are no humans on Mars in 2022, but the chances of humans on Mars are far greater in 2022 than they were in 2002.

There are strong arguments to be made FOR Rule by Force .... it is much more efficient in use of resources.

There ** may ** be arguments to be made for Rule of Law, but like Rule of Law itself, they will be weak and messy.

Rule of Law depends upon the entire population following rules agreed upon by a simple majority.

If half the population (ie, 49%) does not agree with the decisions (laws) of the 51%, then they have a choice of disregarding the 51% or grudgingly going along until the moment arrives when ** they ** have the 51%.

A transition back to Rule by Force is ** always ** available to a disgruntled 49%.

How these realities will play out on Mars will soon become more than an academic exercise.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2022-01-15 11:07:04

When Hong Kong was transferred back to China, the mainland Chinese made an agreement with the British to allow the Hong Kong population to live with their system (inherited from the British) for (I believe) 50 years. Subsequently, well short of the 50 years, the government of mainland China found it expedient to discard the 50 year agreement, and to eliminate the "One Country, Two Systems" concept.

I bring this up because an American politician named Marjory Taylor Greene has proposed (what I interpret as) a "One Country/Two Systems) concept for the United States.

With modern digital electronics, it might be possible to actually implement that idea with a population of 300,000,000 (or so) in a land area stretching across a continent.

I'm bringing this idea into focus today, to see if anyone currently subscribed to the NewMars forum might like to think (and post) about how such a system might work.

There might be some aspects of the system that are shared, such as national defense.

There would be plenty of others that would be separated, such as health care, retirement savings, abortion policy and many more.

Persons living in one of these systems would have no claim on persons living in the other.

At the very least, considered (or even poorly thought out) posts in this topic ** should ** be of interest to scholars as well as members.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2022-01-15 14:31:01

Laws are words on paper that if you do not agree with it or just simply do not want to follow whom made the law, people will do just what they want to do unless forced to do otherwise. This includes nations that feel the same way...its just paper...

tahanson43206 · 2022-01-15 14:57:34

For SpaceNut re Post #3

Thank you for contributing to this new topic!

Your post captures the problem we (humans) are facing, both on Earth, and in the greater Cosmos.

Any nation functions (if it functions at all) because the majority of the citizens accept whatever "words on paper" have been agreed upon.

We have seen (in the United States and probably elsewhere) the consequence of mass disregard for those "words on paper".

Thanks again for giving this topic a boost!

It remains to be seen whether humans can build a successful community on Mars, using nothing more than "words on paper" to define the guidelines for how each citizen will treat another citizen, or a visitor from Earth, or a visitor from anywhere.

(th)

kbd512 · 2022-01-15 17:39:22

tahanson43206,

All rule is rule by force. As SpaceNut noted, scribbling something on a piece of paper does not assure that anyone else will comply. That is why Police are collectively called "Law Enforcement". If people in society simply agreed to a set of acceptable behaviors, which they can never do and have never done in the past, then Police would be superfluous and we wouldn't need to waste any tax money on the Police or Judiciary or Prison Systems. Criminals will always be with us. Basically, predatory behavior is never going away, so long as we are human. Humans are animals and nearly all animals exhibit predatory behavior to survive, at some level. Even insects eat plants or other insects.

If most people agree that they want to live in what those of us in the west call a "civilized society", where "rule of law" holds precedent for redress of grievances, then they form Police / Judiciary / Prison governance structures and agree to submit to the authority of those they elect to represent them and arbitrate any grievances against fellow citizens or the government itself.

So long as the people trust that what their government does is both effective and in their best interests, then this is the best system of governance that we have come up with. Problems arise when there is mistrust between "the people" and "the government representatives". All governments have a long and bloody history of being undermined or subverted by both people who mistrust the government and people within government abusing their power, which fosters mistrust between the people and the government. This is a feature of representative government. You will not have 100% agreement at all times, but the activity of the government and the people must stay within the bounds of accepted behavior, or you will eventually have a revolution or your society will devolve into chaos and dictatorship.

tahanson43206 · 2022-01-15 18:10:45

For kbd512 re #5

Thank you for your contribution to this topic ....

You have, like SpaceNut, added elements of perspective that ** should ** (hopefully) stimulate thoughtful reply by members of the forum.

The project at hand is to try to come up with a way of living together that allows human beings to thrive and prosper, without doing damage to each other, and instead contributing to the personal growth and achievement of each individual.

As this topic progresses, I hope to see presentation of points of view reflecting deep study of human history, and of the human psyche.

It is too much to hope that every post will be thoughtful, but I would appreciate everyone making an effort.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2022-02-03 10:58:29

For SpaceNut re Genghis Khan

I searched the archive to see if anyone had mentioned this remarkable gent, but FluxBB found no instances.

If you have a moment, please see if you have better luck.

In working with the 20 year old posts in the NewMars archive, I sometimes find the program halted on a message that contains substantial thought. Most of the time that is not the case (of course), since the forum chugs along at about the same pace over the years.

Recently, a member brought up examples of ancient leaders in the context of discussion about possible government for Mars.

Today, I opened a magazine that shows up here now and then, and the History section contained an article about Genghis Kahn.

Now, aside from the remarkable capabilities that this son of an outcast family demonstrated, his ability to rule millions of people with only a small army is the focus of the article. Admittedly his army was superior to any other force of his time, but I am hoping the article will reveal how this gent ruled ** without ** using force.

SearchTerm:Genghis Khan
SearchTerm:Khan Genghis

(th)

kbd512 · 2022-02-03 11:27:34

tahanson43206,

You should come up with more search results by typing in "Genghis Khan" instead of "Genghis Kahn".

tahanson43206 · 2022-02-03 12:24:09

For kbd512 re #8 ... thanks for the correction .... Khan Academy is spelled Khan as well, so I've been spelling ** that ** name wrong as well. Glad to have ** that ** particular continuing error identified.

The article was right next to the keyboard when I made the error.

I've corrected the post.

(th)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-03-21 10:24:33

Thye military war stuff I try to put into a general Political thread or maybe the Space Force topic, however sometimes use the search function I stumble into a thread I wasn't looking for

I had posted an update on the Spaceforce Topic to which Terraformer replied

Terraformer wrote:

Haha called it. The first uniformed service that operates manned spacecraft is going to be the space equivalent of the coast guard, not air force or navy, because that's what is actually needed in the plausible near and mid futures. Primarily to keep traffic in line, secondarily for rescue missions (an atmospheric capable NTR vessel could execute quite large orbital changes to reach stranded spaceships).

Times are now in flux, political pressure with a joint Europe-Russian 'ExoMars' mission getting cancelled due to the Ukraine War.

Some interesting older political threads here

Martian Exports
http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=7132

Government on Mars - ...what are the options?
http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=197

kbd512 · 2022-03-21 12:10:43

All I want to know is when we should expect to see our first group of "Zero-G Spacetroopers".

louis · 2022-03-21 14:06:55

You started with a one country, 13 systems (at the time mostly theocratic in tone) approach and you now have a one country 50 systems set-up.

I've never heard Marjory Taylor propose anything that could be construed as a one country/2 systems approach. I suspect you may be unable to provide a link to any comments that justify that conclusion. But I might be wrong.

I would comment that the USA has gone far down the totalitarian road with widespread censorship (including with respect to evidence of corrupt practice by the current President and his son), corrupt election practices, a bogus election for the Presidency, unequal application of the law (Antifa allowed to attack their perceived enemies in public, whereas people peacefully and lawfully protesting the election steal have been incarcerated without trial for over a year), persecution of dissidents (e.g. removal of attorney accreditation for people involved in cases challenging corrupt electoral practices), and failure by the Supreme Court to even hear a case about electoral malpractice brought by seven states of the Union.

tahanson43206 wrote:

When Hong Kong was transferred back to China, the mainland Chinese made an agreement with the British to allow the Hong Kong population to live with their system (inherited from the British) for (I believe) 50 years. Subsequently, well short of the 50 years, the government of mainland China found it expedient to discard the 50 year agreement, and to eliminate the "One Country, Two Systems" concept.
I bring this up because an American politician named Marjory Taylor Greene has proposed (what I interpret as) a "One Country/Two Systems) concept for the United States.
With modern digital electronics, it might be possible to actually implement that idea with a population of 300,000,000 (or so) in a land area stretching across a continent.
I'm bringing this idea into focus today, to see if anyone currently subscribed to the NewMars forum might like to think (and post) about how such a system might work.
There might be some aspects of the system that are shared, such as national defense.
There would be plenty of others that would be separated, such as health care, retirement savings, abortion policy and many more.
Persons living in one of these systems would have no claim on persons living in the other.
At the very least, considered (or even poorly thought out) posts in this topic ** should ** be of interest to scholars as well as members.
(th)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-04-19 13:46:17

UN tries again with outer-space peace treaty
https://www.deccanherald.com/internatio … 99721.html

Can space stay peaceful during tension on Earth?
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/can-space-st … n-on-earth

UK, US urged to impose travel bans on British lawyers accused of being ' enablers ' for Russian oligarchs
https://www.businessinsider.com/uk-us-l … ers-2022-4

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-05-12 02:50:49

UK blames Russia for satellite internet hack at start of war
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-61396331

Russia hacked an American satellite company one hour before the Ukraine invasion
https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/0 … -invasion/

UK, EU, US formally blame Russia for Viasat satellite hack before Ukraine invasion
https://www.cyberscoop.com/viasat-hack- … s-ukraine/

older discussions
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=1250&p=2

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2022-05-12 02:52:30)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-08-10 05:04:32

US Space Force tests robot dogs to patrol Cape Canaveral

https://www.space.com/space-force-robot … -canaveral

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-09-13 10:25:07

Biden Administration Seeks Global Ban on Anti-Satellite Weapons

https://gizmodo.com/biden-administratio … 1849526521

'Collective religious narcissism': How young Indonesian Muslims flex their faith on social media
https://phys.org/news/2022-09-religious … slims.html

Biden honors 9/11 victims, vows commitment to thwart terror
https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us/202 … 90468.html

General in charge of Afghanistan withdrawal says Biden was warned Kabul would fall when troops left
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl … -left.html

and with the silly season of US Mid Term elections, America also turns inward?

Biden says not all Republicans are Trumpists. But that position has limits
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr … has-limits

Tim Scott slams Biden's 'polarizing' MAGA speech, says he failed to unify country
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/poli … polarizing

FBI search of Mar-a-Lago

Trump likened the search to the 1970s Watergate scandal and made allegations that it was politically motivated to stop him from running for president in 2024.

Later, courts made public a heavily redacted version of the affidavit explaining the FBI's goals in this search and a detailed list of what the FBI seized

https://web.archive.org/web/20220826220 … annotated/

,

The Department of Justice released a version of the document it used to convince a judge to issue a warrant to seize documents from former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence. The affidavit, which a judge ordered the Justice Department to release, lays out why the FBI felt there was probable cause that crimes had been committed.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220905110 … ments.html

What the F.B.I. Seized From Mar-a-Lago, Illustrated

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2022-09-13 13:10:12)

tahanson43206 · 2023-03-26 16:45:30

This post is about Space Law, which is a subset of "Rule by Law"

https://www.yahoo.com/news/owns-moon-sp … 25109.html

Space Law has been in discussion since Sputnik, at least and very likely before.

The Conversation
Who owns the moon? A space lawyer answers
182
Frans von der Dunk, Professor of Space Law, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Sun, March 26, 2023 at 10:12 AM EDT
Edwin E. 'Buzz' Aldrin Jr. poses for a photograph beside the U.S. flag deployed on the moon during the Apollo 11 mission on July 20, 1969.
Edwin E. 'Buzz' Aldrin Jr. poses for a photograph beside the U.S. flag deployed on the moon during the Apollo 11 mission on July 20, 1969. Neil A. Armstrong/NASA/AP Photo
Most likely, this is the best-known picture of a flag ever taken: Buzz Aldrin standing next to the first U.S. flag planted on the Moon. For those who knew their world history, it also rang some alarm bells. Only less than a century ago, back on Earth, planting a national flag in another part of the world still amounted to claiming that territory for the fatherland. Did the Stars and Stripes on the moon signify the establishment of an American colony?
When people hear for the first time that I am a lawyer practicing and teaching something called “space law,” the question they ask most frequently, often with a big smile or a twinkle in the eye, is: “So tell me, who owns the moon?”
Of course, claiming new national territories had been very much a European habit, applied to non-European parts of the world. In particular the Portuguese, the Spanish, the Dutch, the French and the English created huge colonial empires. But while their attitude was very Europe-centric, the legal notion that planting a flag was an act of establishing sovereignty quickly stuck and became accepted worldwide as part and parcel of the law of nations.
Obviously, the astronauts had more important things on their mind than contemplating the legal meaning and consequences of that planted flag, but luckily the issue had been taken care of prior to the mission. Since the beginning of the space race the United States knew that for many people around the world the sight of a U.S. flag on the Moon would raise major political issues. Any suggestion that the moon might become, legally speaking, part of U.S. backwaters might fuel such concerns, and possibly give rise to international disputes harmful to both the U.S. space program and U.S. interests as a whole.
By 1969, decolonization may have destroyed any notion that non-European parts of the world, though populated, were not civilized and thus justifiably made subject to European sovereignty – however, there was not a single person living on the moon; even life itself was absent.
Still, the simple answer to the question of whether Armstrong and Aldrin by way of their small ceremony did transform the moon, or at least a major part thereof, into U.S. territory turns out to be “no.” They, nor NASA, nor the U.S. government intended the U.S. flag to have that effect.
The first outer space treaty
Most importantly, that answer was enshrined in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, to which both the United States and the Soviet Union as well as all other space-faring nations, had become a party. Both superpowers agreed that “colonization” on Earth had been responsible for tremendous human suffering and many armed conflicts that had raged over the last centuries. They were determined not to repeat that mistake of the old European colonial powers when it came to decide on the legal status of the moon; at least the possibility of a “land grab” in outer space giving rise to another world war was to be avoided. By that token, the moon became something of a “global commons” legally accessible to all countries – two years prior to the first actual manned moon landing.
So, the U.S. flag was not a manifestation of claiming sovereignty, but of honoring the U.S. taxpayers and engineers who made Armstrong, Aldrin, and third astronaut Michael Collins’ mission possible. The two men carried a plaque that they “came in peace for all mankind,” and of course Neil’s famous words echoed the same sentiment: his “small step for man” was not a “giant leap” for the United States, but “for mankind.” Furthermore, the United States and NASA lived up to their commitment by sharing the moon rocks and other samples of soil from the lunar surface with the rest of the world, whether by giving them away to foreign governments or by allowing scientists from all over the globe to access them for scientific analysis and discussion. In the midst of the Cold War, this even included scientists from the Soviet Union.
Case closed, no need for space lawyers anymore then? No need for me to prepare University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s space law students for further discussions and disputes on the lunar law, right?
No space lawyers needed?
Not so fast. While the legal status of the Moon as a “global commons” accessible to all countries on peaceful missions did not meet any substantial resistance or challenge, the Outer Space Treaty left further details unsettled. Contrary to the very optimistic assumptions made at the time, so far humankind has not returned to the moon since 1972, making lunar land rights largely theoretical.
This 1964 file photo from the World’s Fair in the borough of Queens in New York shows a views of a moon colony in the Futurama 2 ride put together by General Motors.
This 1964 file photo from the World’s Fair in the borough of Queens in New York shows a views of a moon colony in the Futurama 2 ride put together by General Motors. AP Photo
That is, until a few years ago when several new plans were hatched to go back to the moon. In addition at least two U.S. companies, Planetary Resources and Deep Space Industries, which have serious financial backing, have started targeting asteroids for the purpose of mining their mineral resources.
Geek note: Under the aforementioned Outer Space Treaty, the moon and other celestial bodies such as asteroids, legally speaking, belong in the same basket. None of them can become the “territory” of one sovereign state or another.
The very fundamental prohibition under the Outer Space Treaty to acquire new state territory, by planting a flag or by any other means, failed to address the commercial exploitation of natural resources on the moon and other celestial bodies. This is a major debate currently raging in the international community, with no unequivocally accepted solution in sight yet. Roughly, there are two general interpretations possible.
So you want to mine an asteroid?
Countries such as the United States and Luxembourg (as the gateway to the European Union) agree that the moon and asteroids are “global commons,” which means that each country allows its private entrepreneurs, as long as duly licensed and in compliance with other relevant rules of space law, to go out there and extract what they can, to try and make money with it. It’s a bit like the law of the high seas, which are not under the control of an individual country, but completely open to duly licensed law-abiding fishing operations from any country’s citizens and companies. Then, once the fish is in their nets, it is legally theirs to sell.
OSIRIS-REx will travel to a near-Earth asteroid called Bennu and bring a small sample back to Earth for study. The mission launched Sept. 8, 2016, from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. As planned, the spacecraft will reach Bennu in 2018 and return a sample to Earth in 2023.
OSIRIS-REx will travel to a near-Earth asteroid called Bennu and bring a small sample back to Earth for study. The mission launched Sept. 8, 2016, from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. As planned, the spacecraft will reach Bennu in 2018 and return a sample to Earth in 2023. NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center/ASSOCIATED PRESS
On the other hand, countries such as Russia and somewhat less explicitly Brazil and Belgium hold that the moon and asteroids belong to humanity as a whole. And therefore the potential benefits from commercial exploitation should somehow accrue for humanity as a whole – or at least should be subjected to a presumably rigorous international regime to guarantee humanity-wide benefits. It’s a bit like the regime originally established for harvesting mineral resources from the deep seabed. Here, an international licensing regime was created as well as an international enterprise, which was to mine those resources and generally share the benefits among all countries.
While in my view the former position certainly would make more sense, both legally and practically, the legal battle by no means is over. Meanwhile, the interest in the moon has been renewed as well – at least China, India and Japan have serious plans to go back there, raising the stakes even higher.
Therefore, at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln we will need to teach our students about these issues for many years to come. While ultimately it is up to the community of states to determine whether common agreement can be reached on either of the two positions or maybe somewhere in between, it is of crucial importance that agreement can be reached one way or another. Such activities developing without any law that is generally applicable and accepted would be a worst-case scenario. While not a matter of colonization anymore, it may have all the same harmful results.
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. The Conversation has a variety of fascinating free newsletters.

(th)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-08-14 10:49:00

The Space Force Is Launching Its Own Swarm of Tiny Satellites
https://www.wired.com/story/the-space-f … atellites/

tahanson43206 · 2023-08-14 11:58:15

In another topic recently, Mars_B4_Moon reported on a flash mob looting of a Nordstrom's department store in California.

In another topic recently, Mars_B4_Moon reported on wild fires in Maui.

The flash mob looting is a signal of the deterioration of the social fabric of the United States population. "law and Order" are buzz words, in my opinion. What is needed is a civilized population. it seems to me that in recent times, and under the influence of both internal and external forces, the civic fabric of the United States has become badly frayed.

(th)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2024-06-07 10:35:56

It could be argued some countries seem to have turned inward the Canadians, the Germans, the French, the also opened their borders which seems crazy. In other centuries were defined by Nation States and Kingdoms and Country, over time Mega Corporations seem to have similar influence of Countries.. Are Empires coming to an end and would you even class the USA-Britain as an Empire? The "Clash of Civilizations" is a thesis that people's cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post–Cold War world. The USSR was described by some media as an Empire was supposed to have collapsed but now Russia is back and invading and attacking Ukrrine.

Samuel P. Huntington defined something outside of Rome, Pax Britannica, Pax Americana, the FBI, the Hague, British movies, Italian food, Hollywood, German music, Swedish car makers, Canadian wood pulp and chemicals, the Australian, the Czech culture was all defined as 'the West'

Japan was left out there odd and alone defined as simply Japanese

Arabia and mohammedanism was classed as a large entity

Sub Sahara Africa Bantu was a grouping

India/Hindu was classed as its own thing

Haiti was unclear and so French Guiana, British Guyana and Surinam unofficially known as Dutch Guiana but 'Latin America' was a cultural grouping

Bhutan, Thailand, Laos was classed as a Buddhist bloc

Russian influence was noted into Kazakhstan, Belarus, the country of Poland not included as it was 'Western' but Russians went into the Balkans on his map.

From China to Vietnam was defined as 'Sino' although I think the Vietnamese would perhaps be angry and argue against it, one fo the first to defeat Genghis Khan and after a War with the French and then the USA, there was a Chinese-Vietnam War with China sent home bloody.

from another discussion on colony, research at the South Pole and crime

Haiti does not have many official police per 100,000 of population and the Country is an ongoing disaster of Social Collapse and Anarchy

Japan a high trust social conformist country with low crime has 255 Police per 100,000 of the Japanese population
the United States has a similar number 278 but higher crime
Jamaica has 316 Police per 100,000 but is far more violent and dangerous than the USA again
Somalia only has 43 Police per 100,000 but is also far more violent and dangerous than the USA again
'Palestine' has a high number of 'Police' but its a disaster, historically they are in conflict with Jewish Israeli Police or there are Sharia Law islamic Militia who link to Terrorists.

Mars and the offworlds might have people who are scientifically busy and little crime as the South Pole has little crime, there might be doctors human or an AI Robot that learns to read signs of problems on the rise before they become serious problems.

Biden’s ‘border order’ is the new version of Trump’s wall, but will it work?
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/bi … 58110.html

Popular European city's major migrant crackdown after '15 arrests every day'
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/19078 … sts-police

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2022-01-15 10:58:06

Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#2 2022-01-15 11:07:04

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#3 2022-01-15 14:31:01

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#4 2022-01-15 14:57:34

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#5 2022-01-15 17:39:22

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#6 2022-01-15 18:10:45

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#7 2022-02-03 10:58:29

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#8 2022-02-03 11:27:34

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#9 2022-02-03 12:24:09

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#10 2022-03-21 10:24:33

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#11 2022-03-21 12:10:43

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#12 2022-03-21 14:06:55

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#13 2022-04-19 13:46:17

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#14 2022-05-12 02:50:49

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#15 2022-08-10 05:04:32

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#16 2022-09-13 10:25:07

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#17 2023-03-26 16:45:30

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#18 2023-08-14 10:49:00

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#19 2023-08-14 11:58:15

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

#20 2024-06-07 10:35:56

Re: Rule of Law vs Rule by Force

Board footer