Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

Cobra Commander · 2003-12-13 15:13:48

Anyway the opportunities available in America are drastically less than the opportunities that were available in the 19th century.
Unless you happen to be black, yellow, brown, a woman, an immigrant, disabled, poor, uneducated...
We have more opportunity, not less. :;):

A valid point, but opportunity comes in many forms. There was a time when I could have moved out into the wilderness and lived however I chose, now that opportunity does not exist. We have more opportunities within the established system, but almost none left outside of it.

In a sense, we have the same total sum of freedom, but spread over a larger group of people. Yes, the example is wrought with flaws (how do you quantify freedom?) but the general effect is as described. Some people have more freedom than they would have before, others have less. If everyone is to have the freedom once enjoyed by the few, the conditions that allowed it need to be restored, meaning large tracts of uninhabited but accessable land with little or no governing authority.

In short: No planetary government for Mars.

And finally, welcome to the fray bmk.

Josh Cryer · 2003-12-13 23:40:12

Hmm, thought you advocated large militarized societies, Cobra. Wouldn't a planetary government fit with that?

Cobra Commander · 2003-12-14 10:41:12

Hmm, thought you advocated large militarized societies, Cobra. Wouldn't a planetary government fit with that?

Such societies need safety valves. Not everyone wants to live under them, as you well know. I advocate something vaguely akin to the Roman model, in which you have a large, militarized state surrounded by an ever expanding frontier. Most people would be perfectly content to live in the developed "core," while those who choose to can leave and live as they see fit on the frontier. When enough of them are out there and the frontier becomes increasingly developed, it is brought further into the fold while new areas become open for settlement. The civilization grows and the malcontents can always get land of their own and live by whatever screwy ideology they choose, rather than fomenting rebellion and terrorism. Everybody wins. A sort of anarchist-friendly fascism

So yes, I fully expect and would advocate a planetary government for Mars at some point, but only after the planet has been heavily developed and other suitable sites for colonization have been located and can be reached.

Josh Cryer · 2003-12-14 16:38:21

Wouldn't be anarchist friendly, since it'd be expanding, and it would eventually expand into already settled anarchist societies. I can see a planetary Martian government, of course, but I can also see potential for a planetary Martian anarchy. I would prefer the latter to the former.

clark · 2003-12-15 10:36:39

There was a time when I could have moved out into the wilderness and lived however I chose, now that opportunity does not exist.

It dosen't? How has this 'opportunity' really changed? Do you mean you could have lived in the wilderness without worrying about your actions having consquences that might affect another? Is that the opportunity you are talking about?

All of this seems to be us chasing shadows. I don't see that changing with Mars, or with space.

We rocket off into some pre-fab hab, for what? To live with like minded individuals who want to get away from whatever it is they want to get away from? You end up going deeper into the very thing you are trying to get away.

Ultimate freedom, that thing we seem to dance around, comes from an individual being able to do anything they want without consquence. How is this attainable? By putting us in a place where our choices and actions cannot affect anyone else. The less people, or the more spread out we are (think population density), the more freedom we have becuase there are less individuals whom we might affect with our personal choices.

But space ain't gunna give you that guys. You will have higer population density, not less. You will have more people in a smaller place, not less people in a bigger space (liveable area). You will have greater interdependancy upon the people there, not less.

All of this leads to less freedom, or at least less of the opportunity some seem to want with big open spaces and very few people.

Bill White · 2003-12-15 11:53:45

Hmm, thought you advocated large militarized societies, Cobra. Wouldn't a planetary government fit with that?
Such societies need safety valves. Not everyone wants to live under them, as you well know. I advocate something vaguely akin to the Roman model, in which you have a large, militarized state surrounded by an ever expanding frontier. Most people would be perfectly content to live in the developed "core," while those who choose to can leave and live as they see fit on the frontier. When enough of them are out there and the frontier becomes increasingly developed, it is brought further into the fold while new areas become open for settlement. The civilization grows and the malcontents can always get land of their own and live by whatever screwy ideology they choose, rather than fomenting rebellion and terrorism. Everybody wins. A sort of anarchist-friendly fascism
So yes, I fully expect and would advocate a planetary government for Mars at some point, but only after the planet has been heavily developed and other suitable sites for colonization have been located and can be reached.

Do you believe the "Roman" core could be sufficiently open minded to allow the fringe to live in peace? Or would the quasi-fascist leaders of the core be unwilling to tolerate ideas percolating back from the fringe?

clark · 2003-12-15 11:54:45

Let them worship their gods, but let them worship ours first.

Josh Cryer · 2003-12-15 16:00:21

All of that is debatable, clark. You might have a "higher population density" but that population density will be local. Certainly Mars will have more dense colonies than many places on Earth, but as far as the overall population density is concerned, Mars will (at first) look like a science outpost.

I don't think anyone here is arguing for absolute freedom, just merely pointing out that ones freedom from government is far higher in a more sparse environment. Look at people at the antarctic outposts, they live there with a "high population density" (we'll ignore that there are only a few thousand people on the whole continent of Antarctica for now), but how often are they told to pay taxes? Where are the police?

The key here is that in space you have the potential to be with like minded individuals; in such a situation your freedoms do not feel infringed, because you're basically with a bunch of sycophants.

clark · 2003-12-15 16:20:45

and I'm saying that freedom from government you're talking about can't be had in space.

Josh Cryer · 2003-12-15 16:53:39

Yeah, well, I'm sure you're just using "clark definition" for government.

Cobra Commander · 2003-12-15 20:12:49

Wouldn't be anarchist friendly, since it'd be expanding, and it would eventually expand into already settled anarchist societies.

Okay. Maybe nomadic anarchists would fare better, wandering the universe to escape the riff-raff that keeps moving in. But the expansion would happen over two or three generations at any rate and so wouldn't take anyone by surprise.

On a related note, it has been my observation that it is the nature of government to grow and I see little reason to doubt this would also be the case in a society founded by anarchists. It may take longer, but after generations in one place the "real" anarchists may want to relocate even without the prospect of Imperial Military and Corporate Behemoth moving in. ???

There was a time when I could have moved out into the wilderness and lived however I chose, now that opportunity does not exist.

It dosen't? How has this 'opportunity' really changed? Do you mean you could have lived in the wilderness without worrying about your actions having consquences that might affect another? Is that the opportunity you are talking about?

The opportunity I speak of is one in which I am so far from civilization that my actions are unnoticed, and more importantly, the actions of government are unable to affect me significantly. Maybe I take the myth of the American frontiersman too seriously, maybe I just don't want to pay taxes. Either way, I cannot escape the ever-present reach of governing authority asserting itself into matters of which I neither desire nor require its "assistance." I don't want to destroy government, I just want it to leave me the hell alone.

Do you believe the "Roman" core could be sufficiently open minded to allow the fringe to live in peace? Or would the quasi-fascist leaders of the core be unwilling to tolerate ideas percolating back from the fringe?

This would depend heavily on the history of the society in question, but It seems more likely that the "core" would have little reason to be hostile to the ideas that filtered back. Unless, as governments are sometimes prone to do, it became corrupt and oppressive in which case the outer colonies would be the hope of humanity.

But focusing on Mars, let's say for the sake of discussion that the Terran authorities grew hostile toward a group of Martian settlers. What can they do? They can't invade the planet, not without massive expense and telegraphing the move 9 months to a year ahead of time. Factor in the UN haggling and they've got plenty of time The distance is just too far to subdue them.

The real problem comes in when Mars is too heavily populated and propulsion technology allows large amounts of cargo or personell to be transported quickly. Then the whole expansion phase has to start again. Better get to work on that hyperdrive, but don't make it too fast.

All of this leads to less freedom, or at least less of the opportunity some seem to want with big open spaces and very few people.

As Josh so often points out, technology changes everything. If we possess sufficiently advanced technology then we longer need to live in cans on the surface of the planet. Some surely would, but others could live in big pressurized Mars trucks, wandering the planet as they please, only stopping at settlements at rare intervals. There are almost endless possibilites if the technology is sufficiently reliable. Living off the land allows tremendous freedom of movement and independence. A person could live on Mars and never have to speak to another human being for the rest of their life if they were so misanthropically inclined.

Yeah, well, I'm sure you're just using "clark definition" for government.

Ha! Make sure you rewire that kill switch before you start talking like that.

clark · 2003-12-16 11:04:36

Kill switch? Just put Adrian in charge... others here are less leniant.

The opportunity I speak of is one in which I am so far from civilization that my actions are unnoticed, and more importantly, the actions of government are unable to affect me significantly.

Oh, so Cobra wants to get away from ER service, postal service, indoor plumbing, the electrical grid... I know, you would rather buy all of that stuff *if* you wanted. As it is, the government practically forces you to buy at their price. If ever there was a case of monopoly, it's gotta be the gun'ment. Improvin my standard of livin! It ain't constatuional I tell ya!

I think I will vacation in a techno-anarchy in the far future this weekend. I'll send some post cards and look up Josh's relatives. Tell you all how it turns out. ???

Josh Cryer · 2003-12-16 16:11:11

Going to read some Iain Banks novels? Sounds like a plan. Hope you enjoy them.

bmk · 2003-12-16 16:22:59

Maybe an Islamic form of government may be more appropriate for Mars. Have anybody ever considered the fact that Islamic civilization will also arrive on Mars?

Maybe I should initiate a new thread on this subject.

Cobra Commander · 2003-12-16 16:47:03

Oh, so Cobra wants to get away from ER service, postal service, indoor plumbing, the electrical grid... I know, you would rather buy all of that stuff *if* you wanted.

Yep. There's a balance; convenience and security on the one hand and liberty on the other. It would be nice to have the option of choosing one's own balance, rather than having it dictated.

Maybe an Islamic form of government may be more appropriate for Mars. Have anybody ever considered the fact that Islamic civilization will also arrive on Mars?

If a group of Muslim colonists want to set up an Islamic society in territory they develop, I don't have a major problem with that. As for an Islamic government "for Mars" I must give an emphatic NO. I would oppose a Martian planetary system of any form for the first several decades at least of settlement.

On a more general note, mixing religion and government has a tendency to end badly. Were I neighboring such a colony, Islamic or otherwise, I would watch them very closely.

Palomar · 2003-12-16 16:57:43

*I sincerely hope future Marsians (Earth-born or native born) will have the wisdom to:

1. Put aside differences which have plagued the Earth-bound human community for millenia now. The Earth's past is just that -- the Earth's past. It is *not* the Marsian past. A fresh start!

2. Be blind to color/race/ethnicity/gender.

3. Do away with hyphens ("We are Marsians" -- that's IT).

4. Religious tolerance for all its peoples including those who decide not to be religious.

5. Realize that Mars isn't America or Syria or Peru or Kenya. Let's let Mars develop its own direction!

If we can't all join hands and step forward together, what is the point?

Let's work for unity...and divisiveness will diminish.

--Cindy

Byron · 2003-12-17 06:57:00

*I sincerely hope future Marsians (Earth-born or native born) will have the wisdom to:
1. Put aside differences which have plagued the Earth-bound human community for millenia now. The Earth's past is just that -- the Earth's past. It is *not* the Marsian past. A fresh start!
2. Be blind to color/race/ethnicity/gender.
3. Do away with hyphens ("We are Marsians" -- that's IT).
4. Religious tolerance for all its peoples including those who decide not to be religious.
5. Realize that Mars isn't America or Syria or Peru or Kenya. Let's let Mars develop its own direction!
If we can't all join hands and step forward together, what is the point?
Let's work for unity...and divisiveness will diminish.
--Cindy

I agree with each of these points 100%....

If we're going to bring along all of our faults, hang-ups and jingoism...I say let Mars remain barren until such time we (humans) can go there with a rational frame of mind...

B

clark · 2003-12-17 12:42:01

Rational? :laugh:

What's rational about placing three people (or more), two of the same gender, one of the opposite gender, in a small enclosed space?

Every manner of tragedy and horror is the result of exactly the above listed equation. 2 men + 1 women = what? 2 women + 1 man = what?

Throw in some love, a dash of rejection, sprinkle with contained spaces, and you have a lovely recipe for murder.

'Space' is just a different kind of crazy. :laugh:

Josh Cryer · 2003-12-17 12:59:51

Animals can be driven crazy by putting too many in too small a pen. Homo sapiens is the only animal that voluntarily does this to himself. -- Lazarus Long

clark · 2003-12-17 14:51:57

Then, you've got folks who got nothing better to do with their time, I guess, then make trouble for other people, or pick at 'em.

Don't you just hate those people?

But the future's not ours to see...

one of my favorite songs Paul.

clark · 2003-12-17 15:09:00

Well, you are an enlightened individual. Kudos to you.

Pendragon · 2004-01-14 18:23:33

Well, first off, I am new to this site so if I mention something that has already been discussed in a different thread, my apologies.

1) I realize that while Mars seems like a totally new beginning, its not. Any baggage we have here on Earth, we will take with us. And a new government in a new world ahs already been formed. Thats what gives us the USA. And guess what they were "enlightened" as well. So while I think it is a good idea to debate all the possiblities, I wouldn't be surprised if a government on Mars turned out very similar to what the founding fathers envisioned.

2) As for a wild frontier, there is a very good chance that will happen naturally. As soon as the technology evolves enough for settlers to live on their own. This means it might not happen on Mars since the whole planet will be reachable to whatever government body does arise. Also, don't read that much into Walden-style of living. Thoreau (and whatever frontiersmen there were and will be) still need contact with a organized society to survive.

Earthfirst · 2004-02-05 20:36:36

I dont think there will be any mars goverenment, For example if the usa starts a colony there it will be runed like a milartary base. The people will members of the USA airforce that what astronaghts are, and they are proud americans. Look at antartica the colonist there are not forming a nation of the antartic. People born in a american colony will see them selfs as americans. When there is enough people there it could enter as a state in the USA. Just because it another planet does not mean it cant be apart of a union with earth. Sure it would have its own state flag, government, laws, but still be apart of america under federal laws. They to vote in federal elelations. As a example england did not include america colonys as part of it gov that why they revolted.
As a example Alaska is far away from the rest america but they did not from there own gov, but state gov under the americas flag.
You will have lots of states on mars but apart of america union. To be more acurate The USA would have to change its name to the United states of the universe or solar system, or Planets. The USP. Given much it would to colonize mars I am sure that the USA would sure that it stays apart of it.
To do this america would have to cliam mars for its self and not let any other nation cliam it. It could let other nations people there but Mars must be aapart of america

Mundaka · 2004-02-10 20:22:15

Earthfirst · 2004-02-10 22:11:31

What doe 1 man and 10,000 perty youg child bearing women= Heven. You think that just 12 or 25 would be fine but on mars only one man is need for sperm mission as the french army calls it in ww1. That would be the perfect government one Dickitor with all the power, I think that would perfect. A population of 1 million women would only need 100 men to govern them. Plus with the men so occuped with ruling there people. The men would not get into fights or start wars, mainly because they be too worn out to fight. As for any males born theres plenty of girls to go around. Beside with a world with so many women most men would leave after being nagged by thousand of step mothers on top of there own. Sound more like hell then heven. But then again if the reverse happen then men would be fighting all the time like in gold rush towns. So the best government would be democrate with just a little bite more women then men to keep the men from fighting. A mix like 70% women and 30% men plus when women are around men, men are well beheved, save there breads, and dont get into fist fights.
This is the reason why they let women into the military,and at remote research sations like at the south pole. By keeping the men happy an worn out you keep things peaceful. Something to the cerdit of the french had figured out.
Thats a good discusion what would be the ratio of men to women, races, and religions would you have?
In mine it would be more women than men, almost all whites and few other races from the USA to keep the gene pool active and all chirstens a mix of the verouse sects. NO athestist, homosexuals "nonbreeders" as long as they breed it ok. Also no low IQ, handecaps, gentic disease, tatoos, pircings, fat people, inmoral, demicrates, liberals. lazy!
Maybe a few islamic people, they have all good morals of christens, hate what I hate, exsecpt americans, plus they like dessert worlds.
Sounds racist? maybe it does but when trying to rule a people of many ideas, takening care of special needs, stds aids, inmoral people, selfish lazy people, is hard to here on earth. On Mars a distant harsh world only people that storng phiscal, moraly, and mentaly could surive. Letting in any persons that comes anlong would be disatorist. Thing would fall apart and people would die.
Only when things are stable and set could you consider letting in less fit people. I like to see you get around such problems in a colony, sure love is great but it dont put food on the table
Grits an't food! :laugh:

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#51 2003-12-13 15:13:48

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#52 2003-12-13 23:40:12

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#53 2003-12-14 10:41:12

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#54 2003-12-14 16:38:21

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#55 2003-12-15 10:36:39

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#56 2003-12-15 11:53:45

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#57 2003-12-15 11:54:45

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#58 2003-12-15 16:00:21

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#59 2003-12-15 16:20:45

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#60 2003-12-15 16:53:39

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#61 2003-12-15 20:12:49

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#62 2003-12-16 11:04:36

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#63 2003-12-16 16:11:11

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#64 2003-12-16 16:22:59

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#65 2003-12-16 16:47:03

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#66 2003-12-16 16:57:43

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#67 2003-12-17 06:57:00

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#68 2003-12-17 12:42:01

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#69 2003-12-17 12:59:51

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#70 2003-12-17 14:51:57

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#71 2003-12-17 15:09:00

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#72 2004-01-14 18:23:33

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#73 2004-02-05 20:36:36

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#74 2004-02-10 20:22:15

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

#75 2004-02-10 22:11:31

Re: Nations or World Government on Mars - Nations or World Government?

Board footer