Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

Scott G. Beach · 2004-04-26 21:14:03

I sent the following message to the President's Commission on Moon, Mars and Beyond.

Dear Chairman Aldridge:

On November 11, 1620, John Carver, Myles Standish and other Pilgrims signed a Compact and thereby combined themselves "together into a Civil Body Politic." They subsequently set sail for the New World aboard a ship named The Mayflower. I believe that the actions of these Pilgrims provide us with a good example of how to colonize the Next World -- Mars.

I have written a plan for the colonization of Mars. My plan provides people with the opportunity to live together in a prototype Martian settlement and to organize themselves into a "Civil Body Politic" by adopting a set of ordinances that will govern their lives on Mars. The components of my plan are posted on the web at http://www.geocities.com/scott956282743 … t956282743

I believe that the United States of America and its international partners should plan to send complete moral communities to Mars.

Sincerely, Scott G. Beach

clark · 2004-04-27 08:26:31

You do realize that the Aldridge Commission is limiting itself to the outline of the Space Plan as laid out by President Bush, don't you?

I don't believe your colonization plan for complete moral communities will be perceived as applicable to their work, or their mandate.

Perhaps if you found a way to tie in your ideas to the goals set out by President Bush when he outlined NASA's new space exploration plan.

Scott G. Beach · 2004-04-27 11:54:04

The "Scope and Objectives" of the Commission are broadly enough stated that the Commissioners could regard my plan as supporting "sustainable human and robotic exploration." The Commissioners could recommend the establishment of one or more permanent human settlements on Mars with the primary mission of the settlers being to explore Mars to locate resources that can be extracted economically.

clark · 2004-04-27 12:02:50

Perhaps, but I believe your ambitous goals far exceed the requirements of exploration beyond the moon. It is not neccessary to establish a permanent presence on Mars in order to explore it. In fact, a great deal of disccussion needs to take place prior to anyone actually going off to live on Mars, since doing such has scientific and ethical ramifications.

People living there, permanently, pollutes Mars, it changes it.

The Commission is looking for ideas that enable NASA to achieve the objectives as outlined by Bush, nothing less, nothing more.

Mundaka · 2004-05-29 12:53:29

MarsDog · 2004-05-31 06:01:57

Startrek had numerous stories of ancient cults and cultures transplanted to unexpected places. Often there was some form or suppressive agent in control.
-
US Pilgrims were motivated by religious disagreement. The Martian settlers will be science oriented.

smurf975 · 2004-06-01 15:17:07

Startrek had numerous stories of ancient cults and cultures transplanted to unexpected places. Often there was some form or suppressive agent in control.
-
US Pilgrims were motivated by religious disagreement. The Martian settlers will be science oriented.

And will have science based disagreements. Like you have now on Earth.

clark · 2004-06-01 15:21:19

With what? Life? You've got to admit clark, that's a bit of a switch from the pollution theme down here.

Okay, what's one of the major selling points for sending people to Mars? To see if there is life, or ever was. People are more capable and more versitile than machines in determining the answer to this question. Thus, everyone gets excited when we find evidence of water because now the search for life on Mars by humans just made more sense.

Except putting humans there makes it harder to establish if the life there originated on Mars, or if it was imported by humans to Mars. Coloniazation only compounds the problem by making it harder to discern the origins.

You can't sterilize humans, and we're walking bacteria farms. Colonization introduces lots of garbage to the native environment and more opportunity to pollute the primary reason for going to Mars, which as I have heard, is to find out the story on life there.

Hey, I don't care personally. It's just some intellectual question some geeks want answered. Make her blue I say. But there are quite a few people who like the girl red, and the more people you put there, the less red she is going to be.

It's a debate that hasn't happened yet, what should happen to Mars. [shrug]

smurf975 · 2004-06-01 15:35:52

You can't sterilize humans, and we're walking bacteria farms. Colonization introduces lots of garbage to the native environment and more opportunity to pollute the primary reason for going to Mars, which as I have heard, is to find out the story on life there.

I care as much as infecting Mars, as Mars microbes would care about infecting the Earth. Remember although we are humans we are just multi-cellular life forms at the end. We are just an advanced form of microbes thats able to travle between planets.

clark · 2004-06-02 08:59:19

Colonization works counter towards the goal of seeking out the origins of life. I leave it to everyone else to figure out how they feel about the whole thing.

Me, I really don't care if they find life, or if they do. It isn't a big deal either way. I don't care if they bulldoze the life they find on mars (assuming they do). Why?

Because I look outside and see a myriad of life and I think it has more value than any possible martian bacteria. I think spreading this life, the one we know to be, has far more value than respecting any "could-be" theory.

But that's just me.

ChristianDude · 2004-06-03 04:30:41

works counter towards the goal of seeking out the origins of life. I leave it to everyone else to figure out how they feel about the whole thing.
Me, I really don't care if they find life, or if they do. It isn't a big deal either way. I don't care if they bulldoze the life they find on mars (assuming they do). Why?
Because I look outside and see a myriad of life and I think it has more value than any possible martian bacteria. I think spreading this life, the one we know to be, has far more value than respecting any "could-be" theory.
But that's just me.

Colonization

hia dudes test

Mundaka · 2004-06-06 06:22:16

smurf975 · 2004-06-06 09:13:08

And will have science based disagreements. Like you have now on Earth.
You mean like whether or not we really went to the Moon? :;):

No like Quantum theory or string theory and then what string theory. Or what way did the dino's die or is the global warming due to pollution or the end of the ice age. Save Alaska or get oil from it. However no scienicetits are killing each other of this. (AFAIK).

Dook · 2004-06-06 14:00:31

I think the above proposal is a very aggressive colonization of the planet mars and although I do agree that we should colonize and terraform mars I do not believe we should move that fast. Send a few habitats and some astronauts to conduct science experiments, perform some martian archeology, see if all the ideas in The Case for Mars work. Then maybe build a small community that can try and be self sufficient. There is just no need to send civilians to mars only to live out there lives in domes. I don't think they would want to either. Why would anyone give up green forests and wild rivers, the ocean, the wind, a mid-winter storm just to live inside a pressurized tent? Scientists maybe but not civilians.

MarsDog · 2004-06-10 22:29:59

"Why would anyone give up green forests and wild rivers, the ocean, the wind, a mid-winter storm just to live inside a pressurized tent? Scientists maybe but not civilians."

All the people living in big cities, in deep canyons walled in by tall buildings, artificially lighted shopping malls, have already given up nature for the concrete jungle. Will be the same on Mars, except the neighbors will be easier to get along with.

smurf975 · 2004-06-11 00:15:29

Why would anyone give up green forests and wild rivers, the ocean, the wind, a mid-winter storm.

A lot of urban people have never seen such things in real life, except for maybe on TV.

However what you loose in Earth natural views you gain in seeing a pink sky, dessert like planet, biggest mountains of the solar system, deepest canyons and more.

Living in a dome doesn't mean you can't suit up, take a rover and do some sight seeing. Or use a pressurized rover if you will.

MarsDog · 2004-06-11 12:24:00

On the positive side, some people want the isolation that the harsh environment provides, a moat around their castle, without a drawbridge. Better to rule on Mars than to serve on Earth.

FrankPoole · 2004-06-11 19:27:42

Considering colonization is probably in the more far off future, developments in VR and BIG LCD screens should enable at least viewing the nature one left behind.
Zubrin brings up a good point in one of his books, that colonists will still have access to news from Earth and entire libraries of music and art-much more than the early settlers of North America.

Socrates · 2004-09-01 18:36:05

Mr. Beach this is (I know, I know I'm stating the obvious) a thinly disguised story of the Mayflower. The government a Plymouth was good except for one thing...It was theocratically influenced. The Pilgrims did not allow women to vote, slaughtered Native Americans (admittedly after fifty years of peace and there will be no natives to slaughter on Mars), massacerd religious dissenters, and organized witch-hunts. What they called moral communities we'd call dictatorships, so you'd best be wary of how you use the words "moral communities" because one day that could mean a theocratic and dictatorial regime on Mars. We want society to progress on Mars, not retrogress

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-04-26 21:14:03

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#2 2004-04-27 08:26:31

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#3 2004-04-27 11:54:04

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#4 2004-04-27 12:02:50

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#5 2004-05-29 12:53:29

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#6 2004-05-31 06:01:57

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#7 2004-06-01 15:17:07

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#8 2004-06-01 15:21:19

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#9 2004-06-01 15:35:52

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#10 2004-06-02 08:59:19

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#11 2004-06-03 04:30:41

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#12 2004-06-06 06:22:16

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#13 2004-06-06 09:13:08

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#14 2004-06-06 14:00:31

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#15 2004-06-10 22:29:59

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#16 2004-06-11 00:15:29

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#17 2004-06-11 12:24:00

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#18 2004-06-11 19:27:42

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

#19 2004-09-01 18:36:05

Re: Moral Communities to Mars - Send "Civil Body Politics" to Mars

Board footer