Escape

[matrixmann]

Maybe there's a reason why the American establishment wants to colonize Mars so badly: If they can build themselves a shelter on a distant planet, maybe they think "oh, now we can make nuclear war as we want, we don't need to have consideration for anyone anymore - if we want something, we get that something by all means!".
They don't need to care about the destruction anymore, but about the business value.

Comments

[onb2017.livejournal.com]

Good luck with Mars. I always wonder what they are thinking, there is different level of radiation and gravity and all the other conditions that humans that evolved on Earth are not meant to live under. Plus society develops based on objective laws, nobody can artificially create society the way it is on Earth now. It is a natural process. But I bet they want it the exact same way, so they can exploit others. Utopia for stupid capitalists. But mainly I think they won't survive there physically.

[matrixmann]

Same thing that I see. What the fuck do they want over there? Physical laws already differ that much from the earth's, recreating that artificially and also shipping all the equipment nessecary for it over there, it's just like a never-ending story.
And this doesn't even try to calculate how much money that shit will cost if they want to do it really seriously. Tell me a Russian or an American oligarch which puts up with one of his toys just this long and puts in that much money - they're so easily bored; before you start to reach a solid base, they already pull their money out again like "argh, this takes too long!" because the success of a Hollywood ScienceFiction movie coming true just keeps on being missing.

I always wonder why the Russian aerospace also keeps on sticking to the idea to make plans for Mars. But I would think it's simply because America wants to go there and make Mars theirs, so this side thinks it cannot sleep, it needs to aim for it too. Only to be at eye level with them.

[onb2017.livejournal.com]

Good luck once again. Just to be clear I stick to the most progressive materialistic theory of how society develops and the reactionary bourgeois anthropologist with idealistic views and inconsistent results can go and f...themselves. There is a reason nobody heard of Margaret Meade and almost everyone at least fairly educated heard of Marx. Most are reluctant to grab and study his very consistent and deeply scientific theory. Nough said. If somebody wants to be idealist I don't care, I am not here to argue.
Ps This is mostly to the comment below. But I do agree with you.

[mandarinsun.livejournal.com]

Whoa! You pretend to KNOW EVERYTHING in that response.

[mandarinsun.livejournal.com]

Just to break it down: 1. of course there are different levels of radiation and gravity, but through trial and error human beings MIGHT do ok there eventually. No one is saying that tens of thousands won't die trying to colonize it.

Society definitely does not develop based on objective laws. There is no evidence, scientific evidence, for that anywhere. If anything, I'd say the opposite is true. There are no objective laws for societies. Anthropologists like Margaret Meade have studied tribal societies where the opposite of what Western Society has happened. There are societies where people eat each other etc... You really should make references to what other people have studied and written if you are going to make broad overarching statements claiming knowledge of everything.