You are not logged in.
True - the idea of 'owning property' is as ancient as when bears first started pissing on trees. Sure its the governments, or in an anarchy, who's ever got the biggest guns.
it's always whoever has the bigger guns. governments have alot of guns. in some places, all the guns.
Fact is that in this country we enjoy a near correct balance of personal ownership with some government still in the doorway (Else you would have people bunkering off their homes and refusing to pay taxes in Montana )
Well, I'd dispute that correct balance statement, but I suppose it depends largely on your frame of reference. Personally, I don't have a problem with people bunkering in their homes. As long as they're not bothering anyone else, bunker off.
I fully agree with the whole lets get our butts in gear thing. It is our time to sieze the moment or are we stupid enough to think a country like America will stand forever?
If we get moving on this, among other things, a country like America can stand far into the future. But I'm a proud cultural imperialist. Particularly of late.
well the problem with bunkering in is the threat that such places have on the rest of the country. Where do you draw the line - I mean isolationism is fine, (I think of Ukrainians, omish etc) but if one is participating in society (using roads, infrastructure, getting pay checks) they also need to pay taxes and be responsible citizens (not commit horrendus crimes on their bunkered off territory). I still think a balance is key.
I'm interested in your phrase 'cultural imperialist' - that has much connotation with it. I would be interested to hear what caused this recent change.
Offline
Just a reminder...
From the discovery of America by Colombus in 1492 to the declaration of independence in 1776 there passed 284 years.
It took a long time for American settlers to be able to break away from their mother country. And, they had to do it by force. If I understand correctly, it took Canada even longer to break away peacefully.
Martians will be heavily influenced by their sponsoring countries for a long, long, long time.
Offline
The future for our red planet..what will it be?
An Empire or a nation can only get so big and it can only expand or fight battles on so many fronts. Take the USSR, its ideas may have been Ok to some, but it was filled with power hungry people and corruption, the Soviet Empire got too large and too greedy and was doomed to failure. The same might be said for the British who wanted to install a common trade and rulership across the globe, the British were in Europe, the Scottish were ruled by the Kingdom of England, they had Pakistan, HongKong, they got much wealth, minerals and taxes from these places but lost because they could not control it.
The same could be said for some of the Chinese Emperor or dynasty, the Chinese that made an effort in the past to go into Vietnam and install their own form of ideas, building and government. Only to see Vietnam fight back and push China out again. Even a great nation like American can fail if they go too far, trying to push and control other areas like in Somalia, Vietnam, the bay of pigs...and the great Romans another failure of the past expansions. No matter what nation or what Empire sees to rule Mars the task might be too difficult. If a single nation tries to enforce its form of leadership or push its way of democracy it could fail. That is why Mars should not be the burden of any one Company, Agency, one Empire or Country.
The work and costs in the colinizations of mars should be shared between different companies or various countries, after it is settled and there are people working there it should be given fair choice in its own politics will be a massive task, the workers there might choose a political or even turn into a mars worshiper chanting nuts, but once we have people in mars bases and camps, living and going about their daily life, it will be them that decide their own future not us. Yes Mars will have an unbreakable link with Earth but after sometime the workers there will want to decide their own future and policy, for it is them who will be making risks, living and working.
'first steps are not for cheap, think about it...
did China build a great Wall in a day ?' ( Y L R newmars forum member )
Offline
Good points Yang Liwei Rocket, but there is something else to consider. Take the examples of the British and Roman empires, while they both died in the course of time (centuries!) they also had profound influence beyond their reigns. Both established a cultural groundwork that influences societies even today. That is their greatest achievement, many of the nations that were once part of the British Empire are are today the most free and prosperous on Earth. One can get by with the English language all over the world, even places untouched by the old empire. The legacy of Rome is in many respects the very foundation of Western society.
Whichever nation reaches Mars first will have the opportunity to mold that future society in its own image, and in that they will secure a hold on the future that will last long after their fall. This is why I would greatly prefer that the US go it alone than leave it to other, less open societies. The greatest triumph of empires is their effect after they fall. If we equal the impact of the Roman and British empires we will have done well, historically speaking.
It took a long time for American settlers to be able to break away from their mother country. And, they had to do it by force. If I understand correctly, it took Canada even longer to break away peacefully.
and they still have the Queen on their money!
well the problem with bunkering in is the threat that such places have on the rest of the country. Where do you draw the line - I mean isolationism is fine, (I think of Ukrainians, omish etc) but if one is participating in society (using roads, infrastructure, getting pay checks) they also need to pay taxes and be responsible citizens (not commit horrendus crimes on their bunkered off territory). I still think a balance is key.
Taxes are fine, but I'm of the opinion that they should be avoidable if one chooses such a lifestyle. If for some reason I wanted to stop going to work, shut off my electricity and live off a garden in my backyard I see no reason why it shouldn't be permitted. Certainly we can't have people murdering other citizens in their basements, but that is not a direct result of "bunkering." And still, there can be zoning restrictions and other controls that are not tax-based. No artillery pieces allowed in residential neighborhoods, for example. Unless one can find a defensive use for them, then I suppose I'm locked into my "right to bear arms" position. You'd have to be damn good shot with that howitzer, though.
I'm interested in your phrase 'cultural imperialist' - that has much connotation with it. I would be interested to hear what caused this recent change.
Well, for the short version you can start with the "Race and Culture" thread in Free Chat. It reinforced my belief that western civilization and culture is 'better' than the competition and should be protected. It then logically followed that it should be expanded, and I find myself becoming a cultural imperialist advocating policies which encourage other cultures to become more like ours. It doesn't necessarily entail invasions or crusades, just the steady exertion of influence.
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Offline
Has anyone read The World Inside?
The sky is the limit...unless you live in a cave
Offline
Yang Liwei Rocket, I love those images!
Go Taikonauts!
Offline
Mars for the Martians, whoever they be.
But I hope that "Martians" will also include me.
In the interests of my species
I am a firm supporter of stepping out into this great universe both armed and dangerous.
Bootprints in red dust, or bust!
Offline