Dear SSI-Group, I just finished reading Jared Diamond's book, "Collapse, How Societies Chose to Fail or Succeed", Viking, 2005, ~ 600 pages, which I recommend. It is, of course, about the generate topic of thisgroup, human colonization. To colonize on Earth typically requires transportation, food productionand other technologies, but has features that are significantly different from colonizing space. Air, gravity, oftenat least enough waterfor drinking, regulated temperature and a limited ionizing radiation environments are provided here. This book isuseful in that it offers some insights as to how societies seemed (at least in hindsight) to chose, as Diamond says in his title, to fail. Simplistically, we do dumb things because of our culture, our inability to be objective, and our lack of insight as to the consequences of our actions. One example discussed was Easter Island, where these folks cut down and otherwise killed all of their trees, and then could not build canoes to get off the island, even to effectively catch fish. Diamond goes on to describe many activities we (as a species) are doing now that will limit our options on space ship Earth. Diamond does not discuss colonizing space, so a modest effort is required to make those connections, but I think we will find itwell worth the effort. Sincerely, Jay Huebner

Another book in this genre is "A Short History of Progess" by Ronald
Wright. If you follow the logic offered by these authors (Diamond and
Wright), it appears that we are on the slippery slope of a cultural
collapse, which makes the concept of space habitats all the more
appealing. Perhaps as a species, we will need to be threatened with
extinction before we cast off our culturely inspired stupidity.

It is easy to speculate, but Diamond used science (archeology) to find out about cultures which collapsed, in some cases where all of the members of subject cultures died. For example the Scandinavians who colonized Greenland. They managed to survive there for ~ 450 years before failing and extinction. Diamond argues had they only adopted some methods of the Inuit's (fishing and such) who also lived there, so they likely observed them and so could have adopted their practices, and as a consequence could have likely survived. But they apparently wanted to live a pastoral life like their European ancestors. They were racially, culturally and religiously prejudice. One might say they were being "conservative" and just wanted to retain their previous life-style. So it does not seem the evidence in this case supports the notion that being threatened makes a group smarter, or helps such get over being "stupid."
Why do most of us eat meat, when for less money, we could live longer, with better health, being vegetarian? That would also allow many more people to have more food (this is rational presented in the book, Diet for a Small Planet). Why do we drive our own cars and build freeways when mass transport would save some of our environment, energy and time? We will not likely eat bovine, or drive personal cars, in space colonies.
Diamond does not conclude all is lost, and offers some good examples of progress, where big oil and other corporations have become responsible and good stewards of the Earth's resources. And he offers many references for more information and ways to help. I have not read Wright's book and so can not comment on that.
Sincerely, Jay Huebner