G'day again, To follow up on Allan's point that
> much of modern day exploration, including the deep sea, and space, has
Those rasons don't result in people colonising a planet. They >may result in
something WORTH finding on other planets, but they aren't reasons to
fund multi-trillion >dollar colonising efforts.
> There has to be an economic reason to go to the stars. Running out of
My husband concurs with you that wealth is the greatest motivating force, but
he'd like to point out that because of it interstellar travel and colonisation
is far more likely. For instance if you look at the costings of just one of
the privately funded dutch explorations (during the age of sail), which went
looking for tradeable items (for instance the spices from Indonesia etc),
you'll find that it comes out at an amount greater than what NASA spent on the
Voyager missions. Basically the returns from such missions of exploration and
colonisation made the initial outlay look piddling. And its not just all the
direct returns you get which make space exploration and colonisation
attractive its the incidentals. For instance my 87 year old grandmother was
berating me on our last visit that I had my
head in the clouds and what had space ever done for her - this as she
was
cooking dinner in her non-stick fry pan.
Lastly, as to running out of space and resources. We're running pretty short
of a few essentials already. For instance, xenophobic arguments aside,
Australian immigration should be slowed or even halted. Not because of any
social or racial issues, but because the population has outgrown (or is just
about to outgrow) the environment's longterm ability to provide it with water.
Mind you there is also one other very good reason to get off the planet
(and I am being a tad silly here) - its the fact that Sol won't last
forever:)
Have fun,
Lastly, as to running out of space and resources. We're running pretty
> short of a few essentials already. For instance, xenophobic arguments
Beth! Where would all the Irish twenty-somethings go for a years
working holiday? Anyway as long as you have beer why would you need water...
> Mind you there is also one other very good reason to get off the
By that time there might not be many other places left for us to go either. I
remember reading some of a book investigating interstellar colonisiation. One
of the main reasons postulated as to why we should colonise other stars was
that it was a way to ensure racial survival. One planetary disaster would not
be the end of the race.
Until we all see some sort of international consensus on space travel we're
very unlikely to see any progress on this. I very much doubt the American
taxpayer wants to fund this, the Russians can't (since very few people pay
their taxes over there), and the European space agency seems to be content
with launching satellites. Maybe we should look to the Chinese.
> Have fun,
G'day Niall,
> Until we all see some sort of international consensus on space travel
One of the fundamental reasons for the International Space Station (63 days to
go!!) is that it will be one of the first steps necessary for us to head into
space. As to funding, I realise it remains a contentious issue, but as NASA
has pointed out for every dollar spent on space programs it returns at least
$2 in direct and indirect benefits (the US's strongest export sector is
aerospace technology and in 1995 its value exceeded US$33 billion!). So
I guess if/when governments stop giving money entrepreneurs and
interested parties will at least try to take up the slack (e.g. Microsoft's
satellite network could quite easily translate into Microsoft's orbital
station network etc.). Either way if present trends continue I don't think the
extended colonisation of space is that unlikely or far off (I'm not talking
tomorrow, I'm talking within the next couple of hundred years at most). I hate
to bring family into this again, but as my late Great Grandfather pointed out
when he was born (1890) anyone who said they could fly was locked up, but now
they've even had to change children's learning curve indicators because you
can no longer tell a child its wrong if when asked which of these can fly they
point to bird and man.
By for now,
Beth
On Wed, 16 Sep 1998 16:35:43 +1000, Beth Fulton
<beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au> wrote:
> Lastly, as to running out of space and resources. We're running
Of course, here in Canada we have far more fresh water than we are ever going
to use. The US has noticed this, though, and wants to start buying it from us
(of course, they want to keep their OWN hand on the faucet...). This is the
beginnings of what will be the MAIN reason for interplanetary exploration:
sociological, political and economic factors. Persecution has been a big
motivator in colonisation, probably right behind wealth. Whole peoples have
moved because they weren't wanted where they were...
> Mind you there is also one other very good reason to get off the
You may be silly, but you've brought up a good point. It's likely that in the
next 10,000 to 100,000 years something big and nasty is going to happen to the
planet: comet collision, meteor collision, what have you. If we don't somehow
destroy our own environment through stupidity, it's entirely likely that
something else cataclysmic will come around. We're all sitting ducks; the only
question is when a hunter will --- if ever --- come waltzing into this
particular duck pond...
Allan spake thusly upon matters weighty:
> Of course, here in Canada we have far more fresh water than we are
And if no one gives them the keys, they'll just start draining the Great Lakes
via Lake Michigan....
> sociological, political and economic factors. Persecution has been a
I forsee colonies (perhaps struggling ones) for: Welsh Nationalists Scottish
Nationalists Irish Nationalists (all of these three want out from under the
English King) Quebecois (same deal) Mohawks or other North American
Aboriginals (get back to the old ways or just get away from the English King)
Aussie Aborigines and Maoris (another get back to the old ways) Israelis
(although I don't think New Israel is struggling) Former Christian groups from
the IF and ESU (notoriously unpopular with ESU Communist leadership and IF
extremist Muslims) LLAR (another not struggling group of people who've lost a
home on Earth)
Innuit/Eskimos (maybe find someplace with some resources and no one
to bug them) 5x10^10th religious groups (everything from cults, covens, and
oddball sects to the catholic church - all of whom may underwrite
colonies - imagine papal colonies backed by a no-birth control policy
and a bunch of catholic money...) And just about every other disenfranchised
group you can name. Luddites, Mennonites, Hutterites, Quakers, etc. (Some of
whom may burn the colony ship hulls once they leave)
> You may be silly, but you've brought up a good point. It's likely that
the only
> question is when a hunter will --- if ever --- come waltzing into this
And if we make it through the long hall, bang goes our Sun. But that isn't a
current problem. We're not even dealing with 10,000 years hence, just about
200 years hence. But the cheap cost of stardrive and the desire of
disenfranchised people to 'get their own place in the galaxy' will spur a lot
of migration.
Here's a thought: Remember what britain did with Australia? Can we say
spaceborn penal colony for civilized gov'ts too kind to just pop off annoying
dissidents and malcontents. Gulags in space....
Tom.
/************************************************
> You wrote:
> Former Christian groups from the IF and ESU (notoriously unpopular
Heh... I've got a lot of these covered in my NRE and associated territories.
New Tiblisi got a lot of the Georgians. Armenians are a major ethnic component
in the Empire, and brigades of Christian Arabs are part of the Tagmatic
central army.
> 5x10^10th religious groups (everything from cults, covens, and
I can't imagine birth control on any colony world. You need to have kids. Lots
of 'em.
5x10^10th ethnic groups that don't want to be near other ethnic groups. I've
got a planet settled by Serbs, with Croatians also moving in to
try take it away from them. It's a nasty planet with low-technology
and completely fragmented. Some princelings can barely raise a reinforced
batallion. NRE "peacekeepers" defend enclaves, including all the spaceports
worthy of the name.
/va/basileus/serbs.html
> Here's a thought: Remember what britain did with Australia? Can we
My Free Ukranians.:)
> At 12:16 PM 9/17/98 -0500, you wrote:
And here I thought that they only wanted *drinking* water;).
[snip]
> 5x10^10th religious groups (everything from cults, covens, and
In JT's words, Vaticorp...;)
> And just about every other disenfranchised group you can name.
Luddites??? More likely they would be sent to prison than allowed to form
their own colonies. Very different motivations than the other three groups
mentioned.
[snip]
> Here's a thought: Remember what britain did with Australia? Can we
Like the home planet of the Sarduakar from Dune. Could make for some dead 'ard
troopers and mercs.
> Tom.
Are these related to the Ukrainians?;]
> On 17 Sep 98, at 11:39, Tony Christney wrote:
> Luddites??? More likely they would be sent to prison than allowed to
I thought Luddites espoused technology.... so their only option for
interstellar travel would be a REALLY long ladder?
;)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You mean eschew, Luddites that espouse technology would be very schitzoid
indeed. I figure any luddite colonists would be forced transportees...
> ----------
> You wrote:
> Are these related to the Ukrainians? ;]
Actually based more off 9-10th century AD Kievan Russ. In my slightly
alternate universe, the split-off of the RH from the former Russia when
the latter went Commie again was NOT amicable by any means. Ukraine
became a rather shot-up battleground and portions of it were held by
the ESU when the shooting stopped. The ESU didn't want to deal with the
resultant insurgent problem the normal way, and they couldn't
reprise 1946- with the world watching them (for non-history buffs, the
guerilla organizations formed in the Ukraine during WWII to fight the Nazis
went and started fighting the Soviets when they moved in,
intending to set up an free, independant, non-communist Ukraine. So
Stalin engineered an artificial man-made famine that killed 10 million
Ukranians. This is after he did a simillar thing in the 1930s. The Ukranians
I've met (including an exchange student from Kiev) do NOT like Russians one
bit.). So they packed 'em up and shipped them to a
dirtpoor and hostile-environment planet, along with the contents of a
lot of Russian prisions. To the ESU's great surprise, they colonists
eventually formed a working government which negotiated a deal with the
Scandanavians to trade living space for technical assistance, with the result
that you got a lot of Swedes moving in. This is where the Varangian Guard is
recruited from, and brigades of Free Ukranians are also recruited as mercenary
troops for dirty jobs the NRE doesn't want
to have an official hand in--Volunteer Brigades make for more plausible
deniability than Imperial Regulars.
> At 22:37 17/09/98 -0500, you wrote:
> the latter went Commie again was NOT amicable by any means.
One thing I wonder about the role of the ESU in the FT universe is how
"Communist" are they in comparison to the now defunct USSR? If we take China
as an example today while it is a nominally communist country it has enormous
levels of trade with the rest of the world and on the ground its far more like
unrestricted capitalism these days than communism. Entreprenuership is
encouraged or at least tolerate so I believe. So in the next 200 years
wouldn't most communist countries have evolved more towards free trade rather
than central planning? To actually be able to afford to launch starships and
found interstellar colonies they would need a very solid economy indeed which
presumably requires large volumes of trade.
I'm intrigued as to how the ESU would differ from the NAC if we eliminate old
communist economic policies from the equation. Do the secret police hold sway?
Freedoms are more restricted? The NAC being a more class oriented soceity has
it devolved back to the old ideal of an aristocracy and their cronies running
things?
Any ideas?
> At 03:58 PM 9/17/98 -0700, you wrote:
> You mean eschew, Luddites that espouse technology would be very
My understanding (admittedly I could be wrong) was that the Luddites, led by
some bloke named Ludd, were men who made cloth from cotton and wool, in
essence, weavers. With the start of the Industrial Revolution, they understood
that they would soon be out of a job. So they went around smashing up
mechanical looms, etc. So they weren't technophobes per se, just people trying
to keep their jobs. Of course, the rich factory owners weren't too happy about
their actions, and there was a law passed that made the crime punishable by
death, which spelled the end of Mr.Ludd. AFAIK, the Luddites had much popular
support from the "lower" classes (god I hate that term).
Given this, Luddites are more the type of people who are against automating
jobs that were/are traditionally done by humans. Not exactly the case
when it comes to space travel. Also, you wouldn't exactly call them
marginalized or disenfranchised.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ---- Big Niall (old joke, sorry :-)) wrote:
modern china is only nominally communist. it is really just a vanilla
totalitarian dictatorship.
> Entreprenuership is encouraged or at least tolerate so I believe. So
conversely, is there the possibility that, in a state
where the planets are seperated by week-long hyperspace
paths, and there is a huge disparity between the
populous/industrialised planets and the
sparse/agricultural planets, that free-market countries
like the NAC have introduced more central planning?
> I'm intrigued as to how the ESU would differ from the NAC if we
i bet they're both essentially the same. one is a dictatorship of the supreme
soviet in the name of the people, the other is a dictatorship of the
eton-oxbridge-aristocracy-dominated civil service
("yes, admiral...") under the cover of a powerless parliament.
> Do the secret police
*back* to the old ideal? the way the rulers of the UK and the USA are 75% from
established
wealthy/educated/powerful families. :-)
> At 13:21 18/09/98 -0400, you wrote:
I remember. My pun phase.
> modern china is only nominally communist. it is really
Traditional soceity I suppose. Hasn't changed much in thousands of years it
would seem. I'm no expert on China though so anyone who cares to interject,
fire away.
> Entreprenuership is encouraged or at least tolerate so I believe. So
Or else rely on sector commanders or regional governors much more. We're back
to the 18th and 19th centuries here.
> I'm intrigued as to how the ESU would differ from the NAC if we
It would require a rather huge coup to allow this to happen in Britain when
you think of it. I mean in terms of parliament being powerless. Unless the
monarchy seizes political power again. Political appointees by the monarch?
Now it sounds like a Tsarist regime.
> Do the secret police
Far be it for me to criticise from afar. I think its the same everywhere and
throughout history. The rich and educated will always end up running things.
Now whether thats a good or bad thing is another argument
entirely. Well except for the fact that most of the big ones are run
by lawyers.
What I mean by aristocracy is the old thing of officers being the upper class
types who can either afford to buy their commision or know the right people to
get them one. The kind of setup where even the best candidates in the ranks
will never rise up through them because of class restrictions. In other words
the nominal meritocracy in existence today has been replaced by a
reconstituted aristocracy.
Of course that all depends on what the NAC is really like. As Jon has said
before there aren't any good guys in this universe but then there aren't that
many bad ones either.
Well except for the Kra'Vak. Nasty bug eyed aliens. With big nasty ships.
> Tom
[snippage]>
> Of course that all depends on what the NAC is really like. As Jon has
What I meant by that is that everyone has some skeletons in their respective
closets; most nations will be "good" by their own frames of reference, but
this of course won't agree with everyone else's {grin}. Some may well have a
much better record on things like human rights than others,
but no-one is perfect (especially in politics and international
relations).
> Well except for the Kra'Vak. Nasty bug eyed aliens. With big nasty
Yeah. Smeg 'em. [grin]
Jon (GZG)
> Tom
<<Translated>>
As acting ambassador to the humans, I must strongly object to the way that we
Kra'Vak are portrayed and regarded. It is for precisely this reason that we
can forsee no peace occuring between our races any time soon. Your words
wound us. You call us bug-eyed but we do not repsond to your short
sighted taunting.
Do we mock your merely binary vision? No.
Do we call you mushies? No.
Do we rant on about your strange and illogical physiology? No, though we are
very puzzled as to why a respiratory drainage vent is positioned ABOVE your
food ingestion orifice and why your sight organs require constant moistening
to function.
Sadly, comments like the attached are the reason why we must completely and
totally subjugate you.
My very best regards, K'Urt Ws'Rmn. esq. Kra'Vak Embassy
K'W@kx'krkk'kaaa.com.krvk
========SNIP=========
> What I meant by that is that everyone has some skeletons in their
> On 18 Sep 98, at 9:41, Tony Christney wrote:
> My understanding (admittedly I could be wrong) was that the Luddites,
Yup, 'working class' is much better....<chuckle> hey I'm one of them;)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In message <199809160735.RAA03634@strait.ml.csiro.au>
> Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au> wrote:
> For instance if you look at the costings
Slight difference in that the Dutch were funding sailing expeditions at a time
when sailing was very common. 'All' they were proposing was going a bit
further, using tried and trusted technology.
Currently, to start any big scale space expeditions requires cutting edge
technology (assuming you want to go colonise somewhere), which hasn't really
been tried and tested, It not only requires lots of money, it requires
spending that money on things most people don't really understand.
----------
Samuel Penn replied to
> Beth Fulton
Yes, but currently we're not colonizing anywhere either. So our steps will be
something like: Let's build a better space station. Let's build a lunar base.
Let's go visit Mars. Let's build a space station and send that to Mars. Let's
build a lunar base--on Mars! (etc.)
By the time we get around to actually colonizing, we will be using tried &
true. For a very interesting book that goes into a proposal on the
steps, see _ The Millennial Project _ by Marshall Savage. I have some
reservations about his proposed politico-economic systems but the basic
path seems reasonable.
> ---- niall wrote:
well, i was sort of arguing from the premise that parliament is currently
powerless, given that it cat only really act via the cabinet, which is
informed by and acts through the civil service, which thus has a great deal of
influence.
i was tipping hat to 'yes, minister'/'yes, prime minister' (jon must be
old enough to remember these too!), a pair of old BBC comedy series in which a
suave, clever civil servant relentlessly manipulated a naive
minister/pm. as wll as being very funny, it was strangely believable ...
> Unless the monarchy seizes
maybe the parliament + cabinet focuses on terran/core affairs, leaving
the civil service / house of lords / monarch to deal with outer space.
it all depends on the relative importance of the outlying reaches vs the core.
> >> has it devolved back to the old ideal of an aristocracy
[snip niall accurately and concisely summing up human history]
> In other words the nominal meritocracy in existence today has been
it is possible that the aristocracy is not reconstituted but new - as
jobs get more complex and the rich-poor gap gets wider, we see the
emergence of (explicit or implicit) 'guilds': the only way to get a job
as (navy officer/civil servant/academic) is if you are the offspring of
one. it's unlikely, i admit. as usual, i'm just throwing random ideas around
and trying to play devil's advocate.
> Of course that all depends on what the NAC is really like. As Jon has
in that kind of universe, there aren't too many wars. i prefer the dystropian,
everyone is a bad guy, approach, but ymmv.
> Well except for the Kra'Vak. Nasty bug eyed aliens. With big nasty
welll, an intro text to a scenario in MT leads me to think that they see
humanity as an important public health issue...
> well, i was sort of arguing from the premise that parliament is
You have as cynical a view of these things as I do then.
> i was tipping hat to 'yes, minister'/'yes, prime minister' (jon must be
I must be getting old. I remember seeing it years ago and more recently when
they repeated it. A favourite of mine. I begin to see what you mean more
clearly.
> Unless the monarchy seizes
Perhaps a department of the outer colonies rather than the delegation of it
to the upper house and monarch. Its unlikely the government would want
to cut themelves out of what may someday be lucrative areas. Although you
could draw some conclusions that the Lords and monarch regard these outer
colonies as a sort of playground where they will brook no interference from
parliament. Could be an interesting power stuggle within the NAC. Division
would be along upper and lower house rather than on a party polotical basis.
> >> has it devolved back to the old ideal of an aristocracy
Nasty habit of mine...
> In other words the nominal meritocracy in existence today has been
> it is possible that the aristocracy is not reconstituted but new - as
Its an interesting idea. Its certainly true that jobs are getting more complex
as they require more education than brawn to accomplish. Formal guilds might
be unlikely but informal ones could come into existence as you say through
inheritance. While there aren't any laws saying that you can't get into a
particular profession its unlikely you will proceed very fa without
appropriate patronage.
> Of course that all depends on what the NAC is really like. As Jon
Thats a very rational explanation of why the bug eyed aliens would like to
come here in the first place.
Its good to know you're being exterminated by aliens with good personal
hygiene.
> Tom
> Niall Gilsenan wrote:
...Snip...JTL
> >i was tipping hat to 'yes, minister'/'yes, prime minister' (jon must
...Snip...JTL
What do you mean, Comedy? I always thought these programs were documentaries!
Having has a first hand look at the abilities of the MPBW, (Ministry of Public
Bungles and Worse, later transformed into the DOE (Department of
Entertainment)), I always considered these programs to be reality with the
names changed to protect the guilty.
Bye for now,
---- K'Urt Ws'Rmn. esq. <K'W@kx'krkk'kaaa.com.krvk> wrote (:-)):
> <<Translated>>
surely if it was the other way around, if you were eating bread, you'd be
breathing crumbs? unless of course you eat whilst hanging upside down. note
that down, Dr Watson, it may be a vital clue...
> My very best regards,
'ping' complained that this was a bad ip address. i don't think single quotes
are allowed in (human) domain names. this brings up a truly vital point: how
do domain names work in 2150? are we looking at the possibility of
--- tony wrote
> At 12:16 PM 9/17/98 -0500, you wrote:
or just a lot of really bad soap operas.
> You wrote:
> I'm intrigued as to how the ESU would differ from the NAC if we
Depends. If they pay lip service to Marxism in any way, then they are
convinced they have a historic destiny to conquer the entire human race. And
while today we see a blossoming of economic liberty in certain carefully
restricted areas (both by industry and geographical area), we are still not
seeing private land ownership, privatization of heavy industry, removal of
certain price controls, or any polical
liberalization in any way. They still use rebuilt T-55s as riot
control vehicles and throw students in prision for making speeches. They still
consider torture to be a normal way of collecting evidence of various crimes.
They still engage in slave labor. At least they've given up cannibalism.
> You wrote:
> Sadly, comments like the attached are the reason why we must
Esq? What a pretentious little bug-eye. It will be a joy cleaning out
your genepool.
Dues Nobiscum!
> At 22:08 20/09/98 -0500, you wrote:
> an aristocracy >and their cronies running things?
That's "liberate the proletariat while liquidating the bourgeoisie along with
there assorted running dogs and lackeys..."
"Unbreakable Union of free republics..." Rob