Social Development in Regards to Space Travel. by Fremdfirma

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Social Development in Regards to Space Travel.

POSTED BY: FREMDFIRMA
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 17:22
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 747
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, December 7, 2006 10:18 AM

Ok, here goes...

Governments, especially exploitive force-based governments, depend wholly on their ability to do violence unto you/incarcerate you in order to force you to serve their will - so, what happens when people get "out of reach" of such measures ?

They tell the Government to piss off!

So... what then ?

I put a lot of thought into this, and it seems to me that socially, especially with multiple ships/small colony/etc, you'd most likely wind up with a tribal or clan system, over time possibly even becoming an extended family heirarchy due to the smaller gene pool/intermarriage.

Crime and punishment would be radically different as well, because of needing every body one can get, and thus horrific punishments for victimless crimes would fall by the wayside pretty quick, there would be a general leniency towards the belief that if you're not hurting the crew, and not hurting the ship, then it's not the rest of the clan's problem - and capital punishment, save in the most dire extreme of cases would virtually dissappear, replaced by social isolation as the penultimate punishment for truly greivious offenses, or if situationally possible, some form of exile - with socially isolated, but necessary to ship function duties would serve as more minor punishments.

I don't figure religion would be so much affected, as no captain in his right mind would allow on board a person so strongly religious that they'd be a physical and social detriment, and codified religious belief that involves denial of science or scientific fact wouldn't last very long out in the black anyway.

Not to say religion wouldn't exist, but it would likely boil down to a mild spiritualistic deism with scientific overtones - hardcore religious fanatic types would NOT last long in a space environ, and would be shunned as a danger quickly by anyone with any sense, isolating them completely.

Violence of most sorts would likely die out, seen with horror as wasteful and destructive to the ship/crew, and even self-defensively it would be viewed with distaste as wasteful of needed resources.

Those are just my own thoughts on the matter, and just speculative guesses, really - i'd be interested in hearing the thoughts and opinions of others, as well.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 7, 2006 2:18 PM

CITIZEN

It depends on the technology. With close to modern technology space travel is very dangerous and slow.

Assuming realistic technology something like the VASIMR, a trip to Mars will still take months and space warfare will be almost non existent, if your fleet leaves Earth it'll be lit up like a Christmas tree all the way to Mars, which means a lot of EM signature. They'll know you're coming, they'll know where you are and they'll know where you're going to be.

Colonies would have to be self sufficient, Mars would be like Australia in the 19th century, best case scenario. As such ownership of an off world colony won't be an actual thing, it'll be a "yeah we're American, except the US government doesn't have much say in what we do or how we do it, we don't send them taxes and they don't send anything to us."

How can a government exert it's will if a colony doesn't want it? In space it can't, war with any realistic technology given current physics understanding would be impossible, and trade embargoes would be meaningless to a self sufficient planet based off-Earth colony. I'm sure some numb nuts'll try it, but after their first interplanetary fleet is eradicated by ball bearings fired into planetary orbit without firing a shot I suspect sentiments like "stay the course" will fall on deaf ears.

Will we fall into tribal or anarchistic societies? No, we won't, though the notion that interplanetary war would be impossible does seem to suggest it. You won't be able to live exclusively on a space ship, and certainly not any space ship a private owner could build/buy. The vast majority of people will live on planet based colonies, and those planet based colonies will have their own governments, they may swear allegiance to some sovereign Earth state (assuming such things still exist) but that'll largely be meaningless.

Fact is as your dependence on technology grows so does you dependence on a wider society comprising of experts and threads of inter reliance to keep that technology maintained. Our interdependence will increase in space, not decrease.

Religious fanatics? Space is the most hostile environment, and it's a matter of history that hostile environments bring out the fanatic in all of us. Maybe none of the current breed of fanatics will exist, but I can certainly see some sort of techno-spiritualist fanatic being a fixture in many places.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 7, 2006 3:35 PM

CYBERSNARK

Plus, remember what almost all sci-fi gets wrong: planets are Big.

There may not be any militantly religious nutcases in space, but they're sure to turn up on planetbound colonies, eager to burn passing psychics.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 7, 2006 3:47 PM

CHRISISALL

It might be like in Total Recall, with Earth still trying to maintain contol over it's 'colonies'.
Only without the Blue Sky.

INDEPENDENCE!!! Revolt! No taxation without interplanetary representation! The New-Boston T-38 Party!!!

A new America WILL BE BORN!!!!!

Revolutionary Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 7, 2006 4:35 PM

FREMDFIRMA

*hums wagner while pondering the munitions load*
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/t-38.htm
Orange Pekoe ? or Earl Grey ?

-Frem

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 7, 2006 4:41 PM

DREAMTROVE

Governance always occurs, and so it is always with you. The only truly good govt. would be an omniocracy, where everyone participated equally in all decisions, and could not act without a near-unanimity.
But that really only works when you're dealing with real small numbers of people, say 5, and so quickly that degenerated into leadership when you get up to around 20.
When you are out on the frontier, frontier govts. will take over. How much control they have is inversely proportional to the amount of available frontier.
If the frontier is a bubble colony, they'll have a lot of power, if it's a habitable world with a natural food supply, they will have no power at all.
The US and Australia are the way they are because freedom-loving is the only kind of govt. that the people of the time would accept, because they were essentially, new continents, with a natural food supply. A station in anarctica would be a different matter. Now the US has become somthing different, because there's less of an abundance of space and food, though still quite a bit. In a place like Saudi Arabia, inhabitable land, drinkable water, and edible food, are basically better than gold, and so the power stucture is obscene.

The short of it is, govt. takes as much power as the people will let it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 13, 2006 5:25 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

I think the Orson Scott Card theorem is at work here.

I don’t know how life will be in the future, but the small communal life style has never historically worked for technologically advanced societies because such societies require a large degree of specialization. No one can know everything, and the more advanced a society becomes the more demanding this will become, requiring an economy and education with interlocking daisy chains in order to produce the advanced technology and people to operate it. I think we are much more likely to see a much more regimented society in the future, where technology and resources are heavily controlled and perhaps even rationed.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 13, 2006 5:22 PM

REAVERMAN

I have to agree with Finn on this. Because of the level of technology required, colonists would have very few options.
1) they could declare independence from Earth (or wherever they're from), but within a few generations, they would revert to a much more primitive level as the machines they brought with them break down.
2) they could move in a mass exodus with enough specialists to maintain their level of technology; they could then become their own independent world. The problem with this is just how ridiculously difficult and expensive it would be to move that many people at once (or even in several consecutive waves). plus whatever government or corporation that sent them could simply deny funding for sending so many people in order to keep the colonies dependent on the homeworld, which leads us to...
3) They could simply remain dependent on more developed worlds for support.

As for space combat, assuming that enough worlds become developed enough to make war on their cosmic neighbors, space battles would be tricky to pull off, but not impossible. because of the speeds involved, entire armadas could flash past each other in half an eyeblink and never have a chance to fire or swing around for another pass. Combat would be completely reliant on the capabilities of the ships targeting computers. Fighters wouldnt be used outside of an atmosphere (at least manned ones wouldn't be used). If a living pilot attempted just about any manuever at astronomicat speeds, he/she would be crushed by the inertia. Of course, capital ships would have the same problem, but they could carry enough fuel and thrust capacity to decelerate and maneuver without plastering the crew onto the nearest bulkhead. because of these difficulties, a single battle could last months. This would discourage war, but I have no doubt that the human need to butcher those viewed as a threat will win out over any logistical obstacles that arise.

One thing that I'm sure of is that, barring the developement of FTL travel, extremely few self sufficient colonies will stay loyal to whomever sends them out into the black. The desire to go ones own way is one of the fundamental aspects of being human. just my two cents on the whole deal.

You're welcome on my boat. God ain't.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE