You are not logged in.
How could a nation *own* a planet? By what right could they declare that it is thiers, the whole planet? Yes, if an earth-based government will build a colony on mars, it could claim ownership over it. But the *entire* planet? This is simply imperialism.
I've read some of Lightman's arguments, and I don't believe that he wants the United States to "own" Mars. He's arguing for America to act as a custodian for the planet during the colonization period. Some of his arguments include:
1. The U.N. is too bloated and corrupt to act as a custodian for Mars.
2. The United States is a beacon of freedom and would be the most likely to ensure that Martians live as a free society.
3. Any effort to colonize Mars would be lead, either entirely or in part, by the United States. Furthermore, the United States has a favorable economic status for acting as a custodian for an extended amount of time.
American trusteeship of Mars will not inherently prohibit other nations from settling or claiming parts of Mars. But the watchful eye of the U.S. will be making sure that these colonies are performing well and behaving themselves. it is important to note that Mars will not be self-sufficient for hundreds of years, and somebody back on earth must be able to send supplies to the Martians on a regular basis, lest the colonies die.
"I'm not much of a 'hands-on' evil scientist."--Dr. Evil, "Goldmember"
Offline
Like button can go here
We will have to do things right on the Mars the first time around, because Mars will never be forgiving as Earth has been for the human race.
*So true. And the taxpayers and legislators on Earth, funding and overseeing the mission from afar [from whatever nations involved] won't easily forgive a major screw-up on Mars...particularly if it should come about as a result of human pettiness or stupidity. The project would be shut down.
It behooves the first Marsian astronauts and settlers to do their utmost to make it work. If the Mars project fails due to factors which could have been intercepted and prevented, it'll be a very long time before further human solar system exploration is approved of and funded.
Alot is at stake...we all know that.
--Cindy
We all know [i]those[/i] Venusians: Doing their hair in shock waves, smoking electrical coronas, wearing Van Allen belts and resting their tiny elbows on a Geiger counter...
--John Sladek (The New Apocrypha)
Offline
Like button can go here
1. The U.N. is too bloated and corrupt to act as a custodian for Mars.
I was talking about an international treaty, not the UN. The UN is inefficient to the extreme. The treaty should form an independant international body which will control Mars affairs. To the very least, this organization should be composed of the representatives of all nations that will participate in the colonization project.
The United States is a beacon of freedom and would be the most likely to ensure that Martians live as a free society.
The USA might be a "beacon of freedom" right now; some people will argue on that but the last thing I want is this thread to turn into a "Bash America" one. However, no one knows what the USA will be in several decades; giving one nation that power is problematic.
Any effort to colonize Mars would be lead, either entirely or in part, by the United States. Furthermore, the United States has a favorable economic status for acting as a custodian for an extended amount of time.
If the USA will only take part in the effort, it should not be the one totally in control of it; this would be unfair towards other participating nations. I don't think that any single Earth nation should have a "custodian" status on Mars, be that the USA, Russia, the EU or China; Since we're talking about a time period ranging from decades to centuries (whatever time it will take to make Mars independant), and no one could predict what would happen during that time. Giving too much authority to one nation and making the project economically dependant on it would put too many eggs in one basket. What would happen to the project if the USA will have a less democratic or less efficient government? What if the opponents of space exploration win in the USA? Involving more nations in the decision making proccesses will increase the stability of the project. But as long as there will be an international treaty governing the process, and thus limiting the authority of any one nation in this issue, I don't really care who governs the effeort.
Offline
Like button can go here
I was talking about an international treaty, not the UN. The UN is inefficient to the extreme. The treaty should form an independant international body which will control Mars affairs. To the very least, this organization should be composed of the representatives of all nations that will participate in the colonization project.
Joel:
I agree that Mars should be governed by "an independent international body." My solution the The Problem of Owning Mars is based on this idea.
The fifth paragraph of Article 11 of the Moon Treaty reads as follows: "States Parties to this Agreement hereby undertake to establish an international regime, including appropriate procedures, to govern the exploitation of the natural resources of the moon as such exploitation is about to become feasible. This provision shall be implemented in accordance with article 18 of this Agreement."
These provisions of the Moon Treaty provided the inspiration for my proposal that the Mars Society (an international organization) adopt a constitution for a Provisional Government of Mars and then ask the United Nations to endorse that constitution.
Scott
"Analysis, whether economic or other, never yields more that a statement about the tendencies present in an observable pattern." Joseph A. Schumpeter; Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 1942
Offline
Like button can go here