A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

Scott G. Beach · 2004-05-28 21:54:39

I have proposed the construction of an underground prototype Martian settlement that will prepare people to emigrate to Mars. The people of that prototype settlement would emigrate to Mars as “moral communities” (groups of 100 to 150 people who have previously lived together for a year or two and thereby become extended families). On Mars they would live in a settlement that has a cold-adapted culture that is similar to the cultures of the Scandinavian countries.

I realize that this “socialistic” vision of Martian civilization will not be appealing to many people so I have formulated a more politically correct plan for the development of Martian civilization. My plan should satisfy the collectivists, who prefer communistic economic relationships, and the individualists, who prefer capitalistic economic relationships.

Members of a Mars Society chapter in Mexico are planning to build a Minimal Unit of Terraforming (MUT). These units will be transparent plastic domes about 20 meters in diameter. They will contain plants that absorb carbon dioxide from the Martian atmosphere and then excrete oxygen. Periodically, an automated valve in each MUT will release the oxygen-enriched atmosphere in the dome. If there were millions of MUTs operating on Mars then the Martian atmosphere would gradually become capable of sustaining human life.

My plan for a prototype Martian settlement is posted on the web at http://www.geocities.com/scott956282743 … thenia.htm I have given that settlement the name The City of Euthenia. Imagine that “graduates” of that prototype settlement emigrate to Mars and found a daughter settlement named New Euthenia.

New Euthenia could have a “core” area that contains about 10,000 people who live underground in a Scandinavian-style socialism. That core could be surrounded by hundreds of small, communistic settlements that each contain 50 to 150 people. Some of these small settlements would be secular, like Israeli Kibbutzim, and others might be religious, like Hutterite colonies. Each of these small communistic settlements would operate several hundred MUTs. And each small settlement would have several surface rovers so that agricultural produce from their MUTs could be transported to farmers markets in New Euthenia.

Over the course of several hundred years, these symbiotic combinations of communistic and socialistic settlements would gradually transform the atmosphere of Mars into breathable air. Then, at lower, temperate latitudes, people could start living on the surface of Mars. These surface-dwellers could live in communities where there is less collectivism and socialism and more individualism and capitalism.

I have made an honest effort to design a Martian civilization development plan that satisfies people all across the sociopolitical spectrum. I am sure that my proposal could be improved and I look forward to receiving your constructive criticism.

Sincerely, Scott G. Beach

Mundaka · 2004-05-29 01:36:35

Scott G. Beach · 2004-05-29 13:07:21

Mundaka:

Your “No plan” strategy for colonizing Mars will not work. The difficulty of getting to Mars and surviving there requires extensive planning and huge capital investments.

You wrote, “Of course -- the game is rigged from the start.” I agree. The Martian ecosystem puts very tight constraints on how a human society can be organized. However, if the Martian atmosphere becomes warmer and breathable, and if a complex biosphere develops, then individually owned family farms could be established. And in an area where there are hundreds of those farms there could be farm towns which contain many independently owned businesses. That kind of Midwestern individualism could develop on Mars but it is not practical to plan that sort of settlement pattern given the current state of the Martian ecosystem.

Scott

Euler · 2004-05-29 15:59:13

Members of a Mars Society chapter in Mexico are planning to build a Minimal Unit of Terraforming (MUT). These units will be transparent plastic domes about 20 meters in diameter. They will contain plants that absorb carbon dioxide from the Martian atmosphere and then excrete oxygen. Periodically, an automated valve in each MUT will release the oxygen-enriched atmosphere in the dome. If there were millions of MUTs operating on Mars then the Martian atmosphere would gradually become capable of sustaining human life.

No, just turning the CO2 into O2 will not make the air breathable. What you really need is higher air pressure.

Mundaka · 2004-05-29 18:30:21

Scott G. Beach · 2004-05-30 02:43:26

Mundaka:

You wrote, “On Mars they would live in a settlement that has a frontier-adapted culture that is similar to the cultures of the early American colonies.”

The American frontier includes the balmy climates of Florida and the frozen plains of Baffin Island. If Florida-bound, “frontier-adapted” colonists were blown off course and ended up on Baffin Island then they would probably freeze to death during their first winter.

It should be obvious to you that people whose culture “is similar to the cultures of the early American colonies” would not be able to get to Mars.

And if you consider the character of social relationships that exist among people who live in Antarctic stations then it should be obvious to you that social relationships on the frozen rock known as Mars are going to be very different than the social relationships that currently prevail in Arkansas.

You have substituted your “frontier-adapted” for my “cold-adapted” and you have thereby made your Mars colonization proposal into a joke. Is that what you intended? Should I be laughing?

Mundaka · 2004-05-30 04:00:18

Scott G. Beach · 2004-05-30 11:28:11

Mundaka:

You wrote, “Now answer the question you keep avoiding: All else being equal, would you accept the same plan, with the exception that the first, underground 'core' colonies be capitalist rather than communist?”

You have incorrectly assumed that the core of New Euthenia would be communistic. As I wrote above, I expect that core to be socialistic; to have the kinds of social relationships and institutions that prevail in modern Scandinavian countries. That would probably include having publicly owned companies that provide air, water, and electrical power, and that provide trash collection and sewer services. Medical services might also be socialized, as in Britain, or medical insurance might be socialized, as in Canada. Beyond these socialized services, I expect New Euthenia to have hundreds of independently owned family businesses. And as New Euthenia becomes more mature, I would expect to see some investor-owned businesses develop. For example, an investor-owned corporation might be formed that builds surface rovers.

In summary, I am not avoiding your question; you are asking the wrong question.

Mundaka · 2004-05-30 12:26:54

Scott G. Beach · 2004-05-30 21:45:23

You asked if I would “accept” your alternate plan and you have incorrectly assumed that I would answer “No.”

I EXPECT early Martian settlements to be cold-adapted; i.e., I expect social relations in those settlements to be similar to the socialistic, Scandinavian countries.

I am not prescribing socialism; I am PREDICTING it based on the nature of modern, cold-adapted societies and the contingencies of survival that presently prevail on Mars. I am not, as a matter of personal preference, accepting or rejecting socialism or any other political/economic practices. I believe that my design for a prototype Martian settlement is practical in the sense that it will prepare people to cope with the Martian ecosystem as it currently exists.

If Mars had an atmosphere that could sustain human life, and if daily temperature variations were in the ranges that prevail in Hawaii, then I would expect the first Martian settlers to live on the surface of Mars. I would also expect the culture of those surface-dwelling Martians to be much less socialistic than the Scandinavians. For example, each family of surface-dwelling Martian settlers might construct wind mills that pump water and generate electricity, rather than purchasing water and power from publicly owned companies.

How would your “Hagel” deal with that?

smurf975 · 2004-05-30 22:56:15

I'm for a city-state Mars. And the only central agencies would be the Interpol (crime travels with humans), world court and Earth Mars relations.

People who make part of a certain city-state will decide what kind of government they want, the taxes and anything else that doesn't hurt other city states (such as building a dam in a terraformed mars could hurt another city state)

However there should be some base on understanding regarding pollution, human rights like you have on Earth with the WTO, UN, and Kyoto.

A city-state is a city-state if it has a certain dome size / population. Its territory is only 5 kilometers around its dome. All the other land is public and free for recreational use. However if you want to build a settlement or mine you need permission from all city-states. In this decision each city-state has the same vote. So that a bigger city-state can’t vote for mining by one of it’s businesses.

To cut a long story short basically like ancient Greece or a federation. I don’t need some government seated on the other side of the planet telling me how I must conduct my business. Remember Mars although smaller then Earth is still a whole freaking planet. To have the centralized government would be like the UN ruling the world from New York, which wouldn’t work, would be extremely expensive and very burocratic.

Of the list of huge Earth countries, there is only one that I’m sure of that isn’t a Federation. That country is the USA. Brazil a federation, India I don’t know but it has a lot of problems, China well people can’t decide for them selfs, Russia a federation.

And in India, China and Russia people are fighting or lobbying for more local power. The USA had a big war sometime ago about this issue.

MarsDog · 2004-05-31 15:18:36

People, risking life, escaping Earth regimentation; all they need is a dictatorship of the religious or communists.
-
If you want regimentation, just send robots, ones that are completely controlled.

Mundaka · 2004-06-06 06:01:17

Scott G. Beach · 2004-06-08 21:13:36

Mundaka:

You noted that, “Some of the most rugged individualists in North America live in Alaska.”

Yes, back-woods individualists can survive in Alaska but they would not last very long on Mars because the atmosphere of Mars will not sustain human life. And, furthermore, on Mars there are no animals to hunt and no plants to gather. On Mars, people will live in pressurized habitats. Nuclear fission or fusion power plants will have to be built and maintained in order to provide the heat to keep those habitats warm and to generate the electrical power necessary to manufacture air and water.

I have considered these factors and I have come to the conclusion that the first Martian settlements will be even MORE socialistic than the socialistic societies of Scandinavia. If you realistically consider these factors then you will come to a similar conclusion.

Yes, the trash collection services in a Martian settlement might be provided by an investor-owned company that submitted the lowest sealed bid (call that capitalism) or trash collection services might be provided by the settlement's government (call that socialism). However, the critical systems (heat, power, air, water and sewer) will be socially owned and controlled.

Maintaining emergency food reserves could be socialized but in this case I believe that, as a matter of social policy, family operated farms should be invited to bid on public contracts to maintain emergency food stockpiles. If, in a settlement of 10,000 people there were public schools that provided lunch to students, it might make sense to have the emergency food stockpiles administered by school officials. They could purchase food for the school lunch program and divert some of that food to the stockpile. Concurrently, they could remove older food from the stockpile for use in the school lunch program. Under these procedures, the food in the emergency food stockpile would remain reasonably fresh.

In summary, I believe that it is reasonable to predict that Martian societies will be more socialistic than modern, cold-adapted terrestrial societies. However, I also believe that 50 to 60 percent of the economy of a Martian society will probably be family owned enterprises. And, as Martian societies become more mature, I would expect to see some large, investor-owned, professionally managed companies develop.

If I lived in a Martian settlement in which people were considering adopting a “Corporations Code” then I would propose that the Code provide that the stockholders of a corporation shall not be personally liable for the debts of the corporation if the difference in employee compensation rates is 10 to 1 or less (e.g., if the janitor earns $25,000 per year then the president may not earn more than $250,000). If this 10-to-1 ratio were exceeded then stockholders would be PERSONALLY liable for the debts of the corporation. This rule would, I hope, keep the gap between rich and poor relatively small and thereby contribute to the maintenance of a broad social consensus about what is right and wrong.

smurf975 · 2004-06-08 22:19:19

I think you are making a mistake between socialisme and communisme. In communisme everything is governement owned and ruled. In socialisme the government sets the rules to whats acceptable and not the consumer but it allows private enterprices as long as it meets the laws set. A bad side effect of this is that the socialist government basically says: "You commoners are not intelligent enough to decide whats good for you" e.g. the extreme high taxes on alcohol and tabaco and notation of personal consumption of these products in socialist governments.

In your situation, a real socialist government would allow a third party to manage the food stockpiles but it makes sure that the third party does everything well. In a capitalist government, you can say that there is a demand for food stockpiles and anyone is free to start one.

In a socialist government, energy providers can be third party but the government sets the rules to what areas they provide with energy and at what maximum and minimum cost.

However, I also believe that 50 to 60 percent of the economy of a Martian society will probably be family owned enterprises. And, as Martian societies become more mature, I would expect to see some large, investor-owned, professionally managed companies develop.

Well most multinationals on Earth started as a family business (Nintendo, Coca Cola, Ford) so that doesn't say much but still in most countries family owned businesses or small companies are really the engine of the economy.

I would propose that the Code provide that the stockholders of a corporation shall not be personally liable for the debts of the corporation if the difference in employee compensation rates is 10 to 1 or less

Were I live we have different kinds of legal ententies for companines. For example: An one man shop (family owned normally), incorparted and freely traded.

The owner of the one man shop is 100% accountable for his business. The (inc) incorparted depends on how they set it up, in freely traded no one is really accountable personnaly however you can sue. I think this works fine. If you don't like it don't invest in companies that don't act that way.

Another thing socialisme is not something of only the cold european countries. Many southern european countries had a socialist government or has one (like spain now).

But overall I agree with your political view but I think its also a lot due to common sence. If you go to the US and then in a small town you will see a lot of you mentioned in a capitalist country. Its just that small communities depend on each other no matter what the political idealogy of the federal government.

A.J.Armitage · 2004-06-08 22:28:44

Scotty;

Your “No plan” strategy for colonizing Mars will not work. The difficulty of getting to Mars and surviving there requires extensive planning and huge capital investments.

You're essentially committing the fallacy of equivocation. It obviously requires *technical* planning, but, your fantasies notwithstanding, you can't (and shouldn't) engineer culture. The LAST sort of planning anyone needs is a wannabe Lycurgus imposing weird social structures on him.

Mundaka · 2004-06-08 23:48:21

Scott G. Beach · 2004-06-09 11:32:45

Mundaka:

You wrote, “I asked why cold weather would result in socialism, and you give me a full page lecture about Mars that assumes cold weather produces socialism.”

In Alaska, people can gather wood and burn it in a stove to generate heat to stay warm and alive during the winter. The cost of this sort of heat generating system is small and can be paid by an individual.

There is no firewood on Mars. Building nuclear power plants on Mars will be extremely expensive. And operating and maintaining such plants will require the expertise of dozens of people.

Nuclear power plants generate heat and electricity and there will have to be systems that distribute heat throughout a settlement. This might be done by a hot water heating system. The cost of building nuclear heat and power systems on Mars is far beyond the financial capabilities of individuals and that will result in the social ownership and control of such systems (socialism).

The Golden Gate Bridge is publicly owned. That is socialism. The New York City subway system is publicly owned. That is socialism. The Rancho Seco nuclear power plant is publicly owned. That is socialism.

Do you expect the heat and electricity generating systems of the first Martian settlement to be privately owned?

Mundaka · 2004-06-09 14:22:19

Scott G. Beach · 2004-06-09 23:32:33

Mundaka:

You asked me to “explain Juneau.” The people of Juneau do not live in air-tight underground habitats. They do not have to manufacture their own air and water.

I will not be responding to any more of your silly and sarcastic ramblings.

Cobra Commander · 2004-06-10 07:14:55

I will not be responding to any more of your silly and sarcastic ramblings.

Time for me to cut in.

For the question of cold weather causing socialism, no it doesn't. "Damn it's cold, I feel like a state-run system of governance and economic management." Sounds silly don't it? It is.

But harsh conditions in general tend to support authoritarianism though not necessarily of the socialist type. Mars, from a standpoint of conditions, is no more likely to lead to "we must cooperatively own this life-sustaining hardware for the common good and therefore these are the rules by which we must live" than it is to lead to "This is my reactor and my air supply. Do as I say or suffocate and die."

So it behooves us to take steps to avoid such an outcome early on. Those seeking the "common good " socialist system have a tendency to end with the "suffocate and die" form. Bad idea. The first Martian colonists will likely see this, being intelligent and reasonable people, and work to prevent such an outcome. And how does one prevent tyranny? Through decentralization. And what's a good way of doing that? Capitalism. Good old fashioned free markets.

Okay, the early days of a colony will probably have a heavy socialist bent, assuming the colony is a government backed operation. They'll have only what they arrived with, and so will have a sort of default communism. But then, being colonists, they'll begin building, adapting, expanding.

So let's say, for example, that the colony has a nuclear reactor "owned" by the colony, but by necessity administered by a small group of qualified technicians. We'll call it the Peoples' CANDU.

Soon the colony digs out a new hab, made from Martian materials. It needs water, power, air, etc. So the water people, CANDU crew, etc. all go to work, being good little socialists, leading to the centralization of life support functions in the hands of the cult of Phi or some other damn thing. Or, privatize it. It's a growing world, get your piece of the fortune now. The Peoples' CANDU becomes Bob's CANDU, a regulated but privately held power company. Since being intelligent and reasonable people they'd have planned a little redundancy into the mission, we can also set up Dave's CANDU, a direct competitor. Now we have two independent power suppliers, both free of direct government control.

Mars, if left to its own devices, will turn colonists not into good socialists but good workers and subordinates. Hive dwellers. Unless we consciously decide that we want a better future than that. Let go of the reins and let the chips fall where they may.

clark · 2004-06-10 09:11:51

Alright, let me toss my hat into the ring.

While I think Scott is right, I think he is right for the wrong reasons.

We can get all complex and invoke the names and ideas of great socialists, or we can just grab a mug, and hash this out simply. I'm opting for the latter because the former just becomes an intellectual pissing contest.

So, here it is in a nutshell. On Mars, what happens if you don't pay your electricity bill? Will they cut off the power? That is a death sentence, no? Those who own the power, ie the private enterprise (assuming that route) control your lives.

Do you really want that with no say in the matter?

Private land? Okay, say I'm a renter, and I stop paying cause I lose my job. Where are you going to put me? Outside? While I like pretending to play Abandon Ship, I don't think this is a good way to form a vibrant society.

The main reason that Mars will be a bit more socialist (not neccessarily completely) is that the outside environment is so unforgiving of people's mistakes or the happenstance of chance. On Earth, you're a bum, and you get tossed on the street, or your phone gets disconnected. You don't get shot.

But that is effectively what will happen on Mars if we have the same set up.

They have a saying on Mars, "Marx and Smith both died arguing over who owned what. Silly Terrans."

Bill White · 2004-06-10 09:22:40

The first settlements will need to follow a military paradigm, which is not democratic or free market.

Sailors don't pay for food on board a nuclear attack submarine or haggle over the price of doing laundry.

It will be all for one and one for all and initially the settlement will survive only to the extent the settlers are bound together by a commitment to a higher calling or purpose.

Palomar · 2004-06-10 09:38:40

I will not be responding to any more of your silly and sarcastic ramblings.

*Toy soldiers, Mundaka. :;):

Clark: Alright, let me toss my hat into the ring.
While I think Scott is right, I think he is right for the wrong reasons.

*Well of course!

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2004-06-10 09:39:30

Bill, I agree with your analysis, and I suppose by proxy some of Scott's premise, but my point is this: Conditions on Mars will fuel two major trends, the one toward centralized "socialist" controls and the other toward self-sufficiency and independence. The latter will be further strengthened by the presence of the former.

Early on we will have the socialism described in this thread to some extent, but if we allow it to ossify we'll have problems later on. We need capitalistic factors in play if only to establish a precedent and create an impression of freedom and opportunity. Decentralization of vital systems will be the key. Every colonist having self-controlled life support is ideal, decentralized systems with multiple owners is more realistic, a single centralized system is the worst option.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-05-28 21:54:39

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#2 2004-05-29 01:36:35

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#3 2004-05-29 13:07:21

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#4 2004-05-29 15:59:13

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#5 2004-05-29 18:30:21

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#6 2004-05-30 02:43:26

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#7 2004-05-30 04:00:18

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#8 2004-05-30 11:28:11

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#9 2004-05-30 12:26:54

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#10 2004-05-30 21:45:23

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#11 2004-05-30 22:56:15

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#12 2004-05-31 15:18:36

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#13 2004-06-06 06:01:17

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#14 2004-06-08 21:13:36

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#15 2004-06-08 22:19:19

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#16 2004-06-08 22:28:44

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#17 2004-06-08 23:48:21

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#18 2004-06-09 11:32:45

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#19 2004-06-09 14:22:19

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#20 2004-06-09 23:32:33

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#21 2004-06-10 07:14:55

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#22 2004-06-10 09:11:51

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#23 2004-06-10 09:22:40

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#24 2004-06-10 09:38:40

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

#25 2004-06-10 09:39:30

Re: A Politically Correct Development Plan - Communism & Socialism & Capitalism

Board footer