Pax Americana - Why Mars is off NASA's agenda

Bill White · 2002-05-14 16:42:03

The following is a devil's advocate post - designed to encourage discussion even if I have real doubts about some of the content - please respond in that spirit but do let me know what you think.

K5 - the site where Shaun's haiku won 2nd place - has a new thread about American military dominance and lots of heated comments going in several directions. This piece seems to be a re-write of an article from last month's Wired Magazine about America's total domination of LEO and all military uses of space.

A first Space War? Forget about it - America already won.

Do I agree? I don't know, but US tech supremacy is rather awesome.

Anyway, why did JFK initiate Apollo? The real reason - not the pretty words he spoke at Rice University. IMHO, to show up the Russians. In pub terms, to prove who was better endowed, if you know what I mean. . .

But back in 1960, US tech supremacy was far from certain. Bomber gaps, missile gaps, Sputnik all created great fear in America. Today, America has nothing to prove. In fact, minimizing public perception of America's total dominance of space may well be in the national interest.

So, from a geopolitical point of view why should the US fund humans to Mars? Suppose the USA initiated an American colony on Mars - not a settlement - a colony. How would the rest of the world react?

It is not prudent for the richest man in town to excessively flaunt his wealth - it fuels resentment.

Yes, I know going to Mars is for the betterment of humanity. And *I* agree. But, I regret to say that I am not one of the "powers that be" :0

BTW - Who has read a book titled "Spaceflight and the Myth of Presidential Leadership" Roger Launius, NASA Chief Historian is the editor.

Former President Eisenhower was a solid opponent of Apollo, calling it a "damnfool publicity stunt" or something like that.

Mark S · 2002-05-15 10:32:34

I think that cultural stagnation, not some kind of newfound humility, is holding the United States back from Mars. A friend of mine once observed, "We Americans are arrogant, but at least we readily admit it."

I still think that the United States is dominant in the area of space technology, but the Air Force believes that other nations pose a credible threat to its satellites. China is the most likely threat, because of both their ideology and their advancing space program, which may have military goals in addition to its stated scientific ones.

It's looking like this will be an interesting century.

Bill White · 2002-05-15 11:52:26

I think that cultural stagnation, not some kind of newfound humility, is holding the United States back from Mars.

Mark - it seems I was less than clear before. Humility has nothing to do with it.

JFK saw Apollo as a means to advance US national interests in a Cold War context. It seems JFK did not really care about the Moon except as a venue to show up the Russians.

How would a Mars mission advance any US security interest or otherwise improve the geopolitical position of the US? I am seeking a "power politics" reason as to why funding Mars is good for the USA.

I quite firmly believe that going to Mars is essential for humanity's future. I have more trouble finding a practical basis to hope and expect the US government will pay for it, other than noble and altruistic arguments arising from the "best interest of humanity" or the "advancement of science."

Such arguments, plus the votes of 60 Senators, will break a filibuster.

My President, together with Congress, recently agreed to pay $180 billion in farm subsidies over the next ten years. This totally undid a a decades long effort by many Republicans to end the farm subsidy program, even after they coerced a reluctant President Clinton (in the mid 1990s) to sign a bill ending such subsidies.

15% - 20% of that $180 billion could put Bob Zubrin on Mars.

Why is the farm bill funded and not Mars? Election politics - pure and simple.

So, the key political question for Mars advocates is figuring out how we can make "finding money for Mars" a decisive factor in upcoming federal elections. And to do that, we need to explain to large numbers of ordinary Americans why they benefit from a Mars program.

Perhaps we can start here - by listing all the reasons that "humans to Mars" benefits a typical American taxpayer.

Bill White · 2002-05-15 11:54:36

15% - 20% of that $180 billion could put Bob Zubrin on Mars.

NASA might need a little bit more.

Mark S · 2002-05-15 13:40:18

In terms of "power politics," there is no compelling reason to fly to Mars. The will exists in Russia, but the funding isn't there. I'm sure that Mars is a long range goal for China, but the U.S. will be waiting for too long if we want to race China to Mars. What we need is an intellectual renaissance in America which causes current and future generations to embrace science, technology and achievement. Then we will have the will (along with the pre-existing means and wealth) to send humans to Mars.

Shaun Barrett · 2002-05-15 20:07:32

Thanks Bill, for starting this topic. It really cuts to the chase as far as the practicalities of our plight are concerned.
The big picture for me in all this is a real nail-biter: America, without question, has the money and the technology to put a permanently manned base (colony, if you like) on Mars by 2030 if it feels like it. But history is a precarious kind of thing and unforeseen events can change things more rapidly than we care to think about. If a nation has the capacity to do something great, it shouldn't hesitate too long.
I had a responsible job which paid reasonably well but, in common with most jobs, it had a high percentage of repetition involved in it. For twenty years I spent most of my waking life doing that job and I like to think I was pretty good at it. But when I look back at those twenty years, I don't remember anything much about all the days I spent at work. What I remember clearly are the vacations I had with my family; the scuba diving, the travel to interesting places, mind-altering books I read, and fascinating discussions with friends. All these activities stand out and shine like diamonds among stones to me.
Bill, what you pointed out about farm subsidies versus Mars exploration is a perfect example of what I'm driving at. In another 50 years, who is going to remember farm subsidies and all the other mundane stuff we live with every day? The diamonds that do shine out in a nation's or a planet's history are the events outside the workaday world; the breaking of the sound-barrier, the Hoover dam construction, Jesse Owens beating "the master race", the moonwalks, the eradication of smallpox, the ISS (for all its political problems), etc.
We only remember the shining moments, the uplifting moments; everything else is just paying the rent and buying the groceries. So, in a very real sense, WE ARE our shining moments, and nothing else.
Mark S, too, hits the nail right on the head when he says: "What we need is an intellectual renaissance in America which causes current and future generations to embrace science, technology, and achievement." This is what we will remember because it leads to the big things: The inventions, the exploration, the discoveries, the diamond-bright achievements among the everyday stones. THIS IS US!! This is what we're meant to do!
America is in a totally unique position: She is easily the richest nation the world has ever seen and her potential for greatness is unprecedented. She has to be made to understand what she is capable of. But NOW! Who knows what may happen tomorrow.
This may be the only reason we'll find to go to Mars, but in the end, it's the only reason that matters.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2002-05-14 16:42:03

Re: Pax Americana - Why Mars is off NASA's agenda

#2 2002-05-15 10:32:34

Re: Pax Americana - Why Mars is off NASA's agenda

#3 2002-05-15 11:52:26

Re: Pax Americana - Why Mars is off NASA's agenda

#4 2002-05-15 11:54:36

Re: Pax Americana - Why Mars is off NASA's agenda

#5 2002-05-15 13:40:18

Re: Pax Americana - Why Mars is off NASA's agenda

#6 2002-05-15 20:07:32

Re: Pax Americana - Why Mars is off NASA's agenda

Board footer