OWL: A Free Country in Free Space]

Hello Space Visionaries,

I want to thank Arthur Smith, of the Space Studies Institute List, Mike Combs,
Lucio Coelho, and Ryan Healey, of the Space Settlers List, for your gracious
responses to questions raised by some discussants on the OWL
(Objectivism@WeTheLiving) list recently about moving to and living in space.
Your answers show clearly that you know the technological future of being in
space is not a matter of ~if~ but of ~when~, and not of a distant future, but
soon. I would add that the "soon" is as soon as enough ordinary people, i.e.,
private individuals and businesses exercise and defend their freedom and right
to advance, without coercion, to the higher quality of life possible in space.

I've collated all your comments and posted them to OWL tonight. We'll see what
follows from that.

I've included below my post to OWL that sparked the discussion there recently,
for you and your lists to ponder over.

Best wishes,

Monart

Subject: OWL: A Free Country in Free Space
Date: Sat 21 April 2001 17:37 MDT
From: Monart Pon
To: objectivism@...

I want to thank Daniel Ust (4/17), Peter Cresswell (4/19), Sourav Mandel (4/19),
and Matt Ballin (4/19) for expressing their views on my question of creating a
free country in space (4/16). Related posts by Phil Coates (4/20) and TanTrung
LeTran (4/20) were also valuable. I hope to respond with specific comments in
future posts, but in this post, I want to provide a wider context for
considering this issue of moving to and living in Free Space.

In my masters thesis that I did in 1985 on "objectivist astronautics", the
philosophy of space colonization--I began, after a brief introduction, with a
presentation of the technological aspects of the starship/space-colony project,
describing the advantages and higher quality of life possible in space, and the
basic methods of creating in orbit a viable human ecology, with controllable,
earth-like environments. The article, "Starship Astronaut - Prologue", posted at
SOLO is an updated chapter
from the thesis, and is a sketch of the technological aspects of constructing
the first space colony, with weblinks to illustrative paintings of some space
habitats' interiors:

Many detailed descriptions of the structure of a space colony, and on how the
first one can be built, are contained in the pioneering 1976 book, _The High
Frontier_, by Gerard O'Neill, then a physicist at Princeton (now dead, but
survived by his Space Studies Institute). The catalyst for his designing and
advocating space colonies for ordinary people, i.e.,
non-government-and-non-military people, was in a freshman physics class that he
was teaching, where he posed the question for his students to answer: "Is the
surface of a planet like Earth the best place for an advancing civilization to
grow?"

The answer that he and his students arrived at, after studying the differences
between being on-planet and off-planet, is: No, not on-planet but in Space, for
reasons based on: 1) the availability in space of constant, bountiful solar
energy, 2) vast readily accessible materials from first the moon, then asteroids
and comets, and 3) greater control over gravitational and environmental
conditions.

Over the next few years (and the decades following), he and his colleagues did
research and conferences, worked out the engineering details, crunched out
numbers, and devised plans and schedules for a first colony in space housing
10,000 people, a colony with earth-like conditions, i.e., forests, hills,
rivers, and lakes, but with controllable weather--no droughts, blizzards,
hurricanes, or earthquakes. The original schedule for the first colony to be
completed was...well, by around NOW -- if, right away, enough people invested
the needed 250 trillion (1970s) dollars estimated to bootstrap the venture to
the point of beginning to sell to Earth the cheap electricity, and numerous
valuable products manufacturable only in space.

I mention O'Neill's project here to indicate that the technology for space
colonization is known and that the construction is feasible -- but, also to
point out that something else vital is lacking, as shown by the lack of money
invested. That key deficiency is traceable to the ignorance and lack of
philosophy, objectivist philosophy.

There are growing numbers of organized research and advocacy groups, e.g.,

, as well as
industries, devoted to the technological, engineering achievements of space
exploration, development, and colonization. Some are free-market oriented. Some
are not. Some are worse.

One group to be aware of--and whose existence illustrates the seriousness of,
and the non-physical dangers threatening, the Space movement--is: ARCSEC
, the Association of Roman Catholics
for the promotion of Space Exploration and Colonization. I am quoting from their
charter here to show who would win by default if objectivists do not show a
greater interest in the space movement.

ARSEC's purpose is: "to promote the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ in the next
great endeavor of mankind. As we stand on the threshold of the Third Millennium,
we look to the present and future needs of human civilization, seeking to
promote authentic Catholic doctrine and morals in the construction of
Christendom on a New Frontier. Our Goal is the promotion of an authentic
Catholic approach to the scientific study, exploration, development, and future
colonization of Space, while placing ourselves at the service of both Catholics
and non-Catholics in the witness of our Holy Faith. To this end we at ARCSEC
will strive to pray, study, work, and build up the human community in communion
with the Roman Pontiff, who is the Vicar of Christ, both on Earth and in the
heavens. We understand that there are many needs that need to be addressed, such
as poverty, hunger, disease, throughout the world. But as Catholics we recognize
there is a more urgent and fundamental need to evangelize, for God did not make
the Universe to be a permanent home for mankind, but a place to prepare him for
the world to come. And so, wherever mankind goes, there the Gospel must be
brought and proclaimed, on Earth and in the heavens. Thus ARCSEC's primary goal
will be the spiritual welfare of its members and the promotion of the spiritual
welfare of men and women in the study, research, exploration, development and
future colonization of Space, seeking in this manner to be a leaven in this new
society for the good of all."

Shades of post-Columbian settlement of the Americas! "Those who don't learn from
history are doomed to repeat it."

The defense against stowaways and hitchhikers like ARCSEC is not merely for the
astronautical groups to embrace atheism. These groups and sectors of the culture
also lack the knowledge and conviction of the rational, objectivist philosophy
needed to advocate the moral, egoistic value of their endeavors and to defend
against the altruist, collectivist undermining of their efforts. At best, if
they could accomplish the construction of a space colony without the aid of
objectivists, the colony would culturally be another version of the mixed up one
on earth, but with more regimented, paramilitary, statist control, using as
justification, the vulnerability of the high-tech systems to accidents and
sabotage.

So my aim is not primarily to promote the technology of astronautics, but to
promote the (objectivist) philosophy of astronautics. Furthermore, my aim is to
define and promote the ~integration~ of the two ideas and the two movements, and
to entice contemplation of the esthetic, symbolic meaning of that unity. The
two broad cultural groups--the startrek/space-colony group and the
libertarian/objectivist group--are among the most intelligent, rational,
productive, and romantic groups in the world, and they are the hope of humanity
for a better life on Earth and in Space.

The movement to create a free country and the movement to live in Free Space
are parallel, if not congruent. Working for one entails working for the other.

The goals of constructing factories, farms, studios, schools, habitats, etc., in
Free Space are vital projects that bring physical reality to the moral purpose
of achieving happiness beyond the Earth's limiting surface. However, as
important as the generators, shields, and engines are--like all technology--they
are tools, the means to a moral end. The moral end of the starship/space-colony
project is what I want to focus attention on, to arouse enthusiasm for, and to
use as the vision to inspire, motivate, and give meaning to the struggles,
battles, defeats, and triumphs that are part of the wondrous adventure to create
a free and prosperous life on Earth and in FreeSpace.

Monart
http://members.home.net/monartpon/
"Freedom is the child of beauty in love with truth" -Peter Zarlenga