Elon Musk will run into trouble setting up a Martian government, lawyers say:
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is steadfast in realizing his dreams of establishing a permanent colony on Mars, but any new government there will face immense legal challenges.
We got an early glimpse of what such a future society could look like, buried deep inside the user agreement for SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet service.
“For services provided on Mars, or in transit to Mars via Starship or other colonization spacecraft, the parties recognize Mars as a free planet and that no Earth-based government has authority or sovereignty over Martian activities,” the terms of service read. “Accordingly, disputes will be settled through self-governing principles, established in good faith, at the time of Martian settlement.”
[...] Lawyers, however, have their doubts about SpaceX’s abilities to set up a Martian state. In fact, several told The Independent in a new story, what SpaceX has laid out in its Starlink user agreement isn’t radically different from space treaties that have been signed over the years.
[...] For instance, the 2020 Artemis accords stipulate that “outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.”
[...] “[Musk] could be trying to lay some groundwork for offering up an independent constitution… just like he did for electric cars and reusable launch vehicles,” [Randy Segal, of the law firm Hogan Lovells] told The Independent. “Does it have any precedent or enforceability? The answer I’d say is clearly no; but if you say something enough, people might come around.”
Related Stories
Charlie Stross, a science fiction writer based in Scotland, has written a post about different possible approaches to space colonization. He includes a discussion of several different models.
While the strong form of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is evidently invalid, a weaker version—that language influences thought—is much harder to argue against. When we talk about a spaceship, a portmanteau word derived from "[outer] space" and "ship", we bring along certain unstated assumptions about shipping that are at odds with the physical parameters of a human-friendly life support environment for traversing interplanetary distances. Ships, in the vernacular, have captains and a crew who obey the captain via a chain of command, they carry cargo or passengers, they travel between ports or to a well-defined destination, they may have a mission whether it be scientific research or military. And of these aspects, only the scientific research angle is remotely applicable to any actually existing interplanetary vehicle, be it a robot probe like Psyche or one of the Apollo program flights.
(Pedant's footnote: while the Apollo crews had a nominal commander, actual direction came from Mission Control back on Earth and the astronauts operated as a team, along lines very similar to those later formalized as Crew Resource Management in commercial aviation.)
Anyway, a point I've already chewed over on this blog is that a spaceship is not like a sea-going vessel, can't be operated like a sea-going vessel, and the word "ship" in its name feeds into various cognitive biases that may be actively harmful to understanding what it is.
Which leads me to the similar term "space colony": the word colony drags in all sorts of historical baggage, and indeed invokes several models of how an off-Earth outpost might operate, all of which invoke very dangerous cognitive biases!
There are few more models which he missed.
Previously:
(2022) Moon Life 2030
(2022) Why Werner Herzog Thinks Human Space Colonization "Will Inevitably Fail"
(2020) Elon Musk Will Run Into Trouble Setting Up a Martian Government, Lawyers Say
(2018) Who Owns The Moon? A Space Lawyer Answers
(2017) Stephen Hawking Urges Nations to Pursue Lunar Base and Mars Landing
(2015) NASA Working on 3D Printers to Print Objects Using Martian Regolith
SpaceX's 1st crewed Mars mission could launch as early as 2024, Elon Musk says:
Company founder and CEO Elon Musk said on Tuesday (Dec. 1) that he's "highly confident" SpaceX will launch people toward the Red Planet in 2026, adding that the milestone could come as early as 2024 "if we get lucky."
Musk made the remarks during a webcast interview with Mathias Döpfner, CEO of the German media company Axel Springer SE. The two spoke at Axel Springer's Berlin headquarters as part of a ceremony honoring Musk, who won this year's Axel Springer Award.
"And then we want to try to send an uncrewed vehicle there in two years," Musk told Döpfner. (The two-year target intervals are dictated by orbital dynamics: Earth and Mars align favorably for interplanetary launches just once every 26 months.)
[...] The vehicle that will make these Mars trips is the 165-foot-tall (50 meters) Starship, which will launch from Earth atop a giant rocket known as Super Heavy. Both of these craft will be fully and rapidly reusable; Super Heavy will return to Earth for vertical touchdowns shortly after liftoff, and Starship will be able to fly from Earth orbit to Mars and back again many times, Musk has said. (Starship will be powerful enough to launch itself off both Mars and the moon, which have much weaker gravitational pulls than that of Earth.)
SpaceX is iterating toward the final Starship via a series of prototypes, the latest of which, SN8 ("Serial No. 8"), is gearing up for a big test flight. SpaceX aims to launch the three-engine SN8 to a target altitude of 9 miles (15 kilometers) this week, Musk said recently.
[...] The final Starship will sport six of SpaceX's powerful new Raptor engines, Musk has said. Super Heavy will sport about 30 Raptors.
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @06:42PM (2 children)
Serious enough to commission a ~3 story high mural of a Mars-scape for one of the walls inside SpaceX Hawthorne plant...with a full size prototype carbon fiber landing leg sticking out of the wall. The foot of the landing leg is an inch or so above the floor, so you can step on it to experience the stiffness of the carbon fiber strut & brace (it doesn't deflect noticeably in the vertical direction...)
Searched for a pic, but it's a no-photos zone on the nickel tour (a couple of friends work there). It looks like the only way to see this impressive bit of high-tech-art is to get a tour.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 31 2020, @01:27AM
Elon is so serious he invented time travel and name himself the ruler of Mars.
Project MARS: A Technical Tale - Werrnher von Braun, Dr. Wernher circa 1952:
All the world is a stage, and we are merely players.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Thursday December 31 2020, @03:16PM
Remember, this is the guy that bought into the idea that the universe is a simulation, which is possible but I think unlikely. What is impossible is his call for scientists to find a way out of the simulation. Duke Nukem ain't gonna leave your computer. If we're simulations than that's all we are.
It shows that he's really smart (and lucky) about money, and loves tech (Tesla Falcons) but has no clue how any of it works. That's just not how his brain is designed.
Why do the mainstream media act as if Donald Trump isn't a pathological liar with dozens of felony fraud convictions?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by fakefuck39 on Wednesday December 30 2020, @06:43PM (20 children)
This is not a new dilemma, nor new legal territory. Nationals of a country have to obide by the laws of their home jurisdiction, due to being a citizen, as well as the laws of the local jurisdiction they are in. So in this case, a mars colony can set up their own laws, and the people visiting have to obide by them, as well as their national laws.
If you drive to the hotel shirtless in Thailand from the brothel where you screwed a 15yo, you have broken a law in the states, and have broken a law in Thailand. You can be prosecuted for both within their respective jurisdiction. An American can say "I'm a martian, I don't need to follow American law" all he wants. Unless he gives up his citizenship, he might as well be talking to a rocket booster.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @06:53PM (5 children)
https://www.spellchecker.net/misspellings/obide [spellchecker.net]
Once is a type, twice is ignorance.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @06:54PM (2 children)
s/type/typo (but I only made the mistake once...)
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday December 30 2020, @08:59PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law [wikipedia.org]
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Wednesday December 30 2020, @11:27PM
But you made it for 100% of the uses of that word in your post. ;-)
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0, Troll) by fakefuck39 on Wednesday December 30 2020, @06:59PM
yep. how's your russian and french? languages I spoke before english. your how about korean any good?
ignorance is thinking I bother to right-click the underlined word and correct the detected misspelling. because you know, this isn't an email at work. i know, i know, you don't have anything else to do in your life besides duplicating the automatic spellcheck function in firefox. thank you for your service, typeman.
correcting a spelling error on a random internet forum is ignorance. having a spelling error while doing it is a clown. how ya doin' bozo?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @09:29PM
Captain Autist saves the day once again!
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday December 30 2020, @07:15PM (2 children)
But then again, 15 martian years is like 15 * (687/365) ~= 28 and a quarter earth years. So you're probably safe on that count. Except for the shirtless part, in which case you should be wearing at least *something* else.
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Wednesday December 30 2020, @07:28PM (1 child)
oh definitely - by law in thailand in addition to not driving shirtless, you also have to be wearing underwear - like even under your shorts. or at least that's what the hilton check-in lady told me. oh man was that a country with some ugly, ugly people.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 31 2020, @12:43AM
Maybe they have that law for ugly people and she meant you specifically rather than people in general.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @07:17PM (6 children)
Your example merits discussion of the concept of JURISDICTION.
The law you quote of an American committing an AMERICAN crime for something in a foreign country is recent law, and very flawed at that as it ignores the centuries held concept of jurisdiction where one country cannot make laws that apply outside its borders. In Thailand, Thai laws apply. American laws do not. The idea that American laws apply everywhere in the world has no legal basis unless you accept that American citizens are property of the American government: slaves, essentially.
As a practical matter, you can only be held "responsible" for laws of a country once you are inside that country's borders. Again, because of jurisdiction.
Taking a step back, the only reason a particular place has a "legitimate" government is that it has a police force / military to impose its will on the population if need be and a military to keep other countries/governments out. It's all based on sufficient force to kill off your competition. Elon's Mars government will be "legitimate" only if he can FORCE other governments/countries to leave his ass alone. Nothing more.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by barbara hudson on Wednesday December 30 2020, @07:24PM
If you have enough force to keep it, you ARE the law, whether it's an asteroid, the moon, or Mars.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by fakefuck39 on Wednesday December 30 2020, @07:35PM (1 child)
I never said I agree with the law. It was literally passed because people were going abroad to fuck 12 year old girls - it let people go to jail for it when they came back home.
There are many laws that aren't ethical and are overstepping in authority. Having to wear clothes in public is a good example. They are passed because people want to make the world what their opinion of better is. It's why trumpers often call communist millenials nazis, while the starbucks kid with purple hair calls trumpers nazis - despite the two being on opposite ends of the spectrum and mortal enemies. they're confusing political and economic opinions with authoritarian violent enforcement.
but authoritarian violent enforcement is what lets you take a piece of earth which can't belong to anyone because it wasn't theirs to claim in the first place, be a country in the first place. So I guess why stop there.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @11:30PM
People still go abroad to fuck 12 year olds though.
Anyway, wearing clothes in public is the least decent thing to do, and it really allows people to better protect themselves and others. It really creates a black/white distinction as to your intentions when you show up in public with your pants down. Of course some Leftist clowns want to ruin this, most likely so they can hide their devious intentions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 31 2020, @06:03AM (1 child)
This is a sad commentary on modern governments. The need for a military to protect one's sovereignty from invasion is necessary, yes. However, a government need only impose its will on the population if the people are not ruled voluntarily by the government. Ideally, government should reflect the will of the people, who voluntarily accepts the authority of the government. In that case, the role of the police is to prevent bad actors from subverting the people.
There are two other issues here:
1) Let's say that Musk sets up a Martian state that is sufficiently beyond the ability of Earth governments to enforce their will. Musk will still have assets on Earth, which most certainly will be within the reach of those governments. The USA might lack the ability to impose their laws on Mars, but they can still seize Musk's assets in the USA.
2) It's entirely possible that it wouldn't be worth the effort to try to regulate a Martian state, allowing it to be a de facto government for a period of time. The sovereignty of a Martian state might become the accepted precedent and later efforts to encroach upon its sovereignty might be opposed by the people of Earth on the basis of the accepted precedent. An example is the Holy See, which doesn't fully satisfy the criteria for statehood, yet historical precedent allows the Holy See to operate as a sovereign nation. Italy legally recognizes the sovereignty of the Holy See within Vatican City pursuant to the Lateran Treaty of 1929, but other countries are not bound by the treaty.
(Score: 2) by Socrastotle on Friday January 01 2021, @04:02PM
It's not "modern governments" - monopoly on violence has always been what defined a government.
It can be easy to view this cynically as you have, but there's a very practical reason that this is the way it is. Imagine, for instance, that Google had sufficient power to resist any efforts of legal enforcement on behalf of the US government. They could, at this point, effectively declare themselves the new government, start unilaterally passing their own laws and enforcing them, and require every person involuntarily give them a percent of every transaction - a "tax." What's the "old" government going to do? Tell them that's against the law?
This is also why we are trending towards becoming a country, if not a world, ruled by corporations. As corporations grow immensely more powerful and integrate themselves into governments, at some point the governments will become less able to enforce their will than the corporations. Some might argue we're already there. We can get laws passed banning competing businesses (TikTok), making "illicit streaming" a felony with a decade in prison, give the mega-corporations billions of dollars while small businesses are left to die, and much more. But a basic digital privacy (or even civil) rights law? Dead on arrival. Laws benefiting genuine* small business and entrepreneurship? Again, generally dead on arrival. I add genuine because the definition of small business has been co-opted [ecfr.gov] by big business. Are you a commercial bank with half a billion dollars in assets and 1,000 employees? Congrats, you're a small business!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 31 2020, @01:18PM
This is one of those laws that seems like a good idea as long as it's "won't someone think of the children!" Of course, the actual solution to this problem is to pressure sex-tourism destinations to change their own laws, so the same act is a crime everywhere.
The problem happens when, for example, repressive countries start charging people with various crimes against the state, then demanding extradition of asylum-seekers (or even citizens of other countries entirely). Which, under the terms of various international treaties, would likely be required to be upheld. For example, Saudi Arabia could charge one of their citizens with blasphemy for visiting a Christian church while in Europe or America, then sentence them to death when they returned home (or demand their extradition). Europe has prohibitions on extradition to countries for crimes which might be punished by death, but as far as I know the US doesn't (as the US still conducts its own executions), but either way they might decide to lower the charge just to life in prison. Irritating the Party is a capital crime in China.
Extraterritoriality just isn't a good idea, and unfortunately the current regime of international law is more focused on expanding it than curtailing it.
In any event, this doesn't have much to do with Mars, at least not yet. Earth-based national laws just aren't ever going to work or make sense in space, and this will be obvious to everyone as soon as any space colony is capable of surviving independently and building its own spaceships (as Earth-based governments could enforce their will by preventing companies from launching if they didn't toe the line in space). This will happen faster than most people expect, much more quickly than the three centuries from first contact it took for the American revolution, and possibly within the lifetime of people reading this.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Wednesday December 30 2020, @09:44PM (3 children)
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈 - Give us ribbiti or make us croak! 🐸
(Score: 4, Interesting) by fakefuck39 on Wednesday December 30 2020, @09:54PM
Well, many have reached some deep sea trenches and things like that, but never tried creating their own laws. The most apt example I can think of is https://sealandgov.org, [sealandgov.org,] which you've likely heard of. And they did, in theory, establish their own country while being british citizens. In practice, no one cares and they're not doing anything, so whether they're really their own jurisdiction or not has never come up, despite their wildly exaggerated story of invasion, which is meant to be funny and not a legal document of events passed. I have a feeling that'll be the case w/ Mars for hundreds of years to come, as the number of people there grows from 3 to 50 over those hundreds of years.
(Score: 4, Informative) by NateMich on Wednesday December 30 2020, @11:04PM
Historically? Absolutely. Read up on mining towns in remote locations back in the day.
Essentially, the company is the law, as there isn't anyone else around.
There were technically governments and laws in those regions, but when you are weeks away from anything, and only accessible using someone's private railroad, they don't have a lot of power.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday December 31 2020, @12:18AM
The Hudson's Bay company in North America, and the East India Company in India. The Brits weren't able to enforce their law in those regions, so they allowed privately owned companies to represent them.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 2) by oumuamua on Wednesday December 30 2020, @06:59PM (15 children)
Precisely to get away from the economic systems or governments on Earth
(Score: 3, Touché) by fakefuck39 on Wednesday December 30 2020, @07:14PM (14 children)
Do you really think a government set up by a corporation on Mars is going to be so much better than what we ended up with here? Now I miss that Canadian wonder Continuum.
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Wednesday December 30 2020, @08:44PM (10 children)
Agreed, it would have to be very strict and authoritarian, in order to maximize the chances of survival. Thinking otherwise is a flight of fancy.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 1, Troll) by fakefuck39 on Wednesday December 30 2020, @09:35PM (9 children)
can you imagine a mars dome with a bunch of trumdumb antimaskers screaming about their rights when a dome-demic of killer airborne herpes breaks out? and they find out the virus species jumped from the cow in the dome-farm.
I do think mask laws, like not being naked in public laws, are a goverment overstepping authority, but I wear an n95 because of my freedom of choice. I do not however support fucking a cow, as it can only give consent by walking and sliding off the redneck dick, at which point penetration has already occurred and it's too late go give consent. Now if this was a smart monkey.. He knows what's going on before it happens. But smart monkeys on mars lolwut? What is this, Congo III (Congo in space).
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @10:27PM (8 children)
Can you picture whining feminists and self-appointed minority spokespeople living under a Martian dome expecting a work-free sinecure publishing occasional screeds in the Martian government online newspaper? It will take a crew willing to do hard physical work without complaint to live on Mars. I picture conservatives as more fit for that environment.
(Score: 4, Informative) by fakefuck39 on Wednesday December 30 2020, @11:14PM (7 children)
Your picture of an astronaut is a fat hairy redneck with a GED? NASA uses cement bricks to weight test rockets.
As far as work-free... Strange how the red states always receive financial aid from the blue states. Strange how even within the red states, all their money comes from the blue areas of the state. Who's working here again?
From 1945 to 2020, GDP grep 4.1% under democrats, and 2.5% under republicans. Democratic counties are responsible for 70% of American GDP. Since you failed 5th grade math, that means for every dollar a republican produces with his work, a democrat produces $2.33.
I'm sure you're going to quote some newsmax for me and rant to stop the steal. But I'll save you the work. I won't bother reading your response here. But you should post it anywise and hit refresh every 5 minutes for the next hour just to be sure.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @11:36PM (1 child)
"Financial aid" is a stupid red herring. Most of this "aid" is for infrastructure used to make deliveries to and between said states. And most of the "wealth" in blue states is a result of population density creating a pressure of market forces, it has nothing ot do with anything productive. If anything it is overtly opressive to have corporations that service populations in Red states be headquartered in Blue states, thus creating an invisible tax on all services rendered because they have to pay their workers premium to live in an area that is overpopulated.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 31 2020, @02:43AM
That is the sound of wheels spinning.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday December 31 2020, @12:24AM (4 children)
Roughly 60% of Americans live in three rather small regions, where the price of living is highly inflated. When unions clamor for raises, they don't speak for flyover country, they only worry about those three biggest cities, and the areas around them. So, yeah, they make more than twice the money, but they can't buy twice the groceries. Sane people shake their heads and cry when city people talk about 30 million dollar mansions.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 31 2020, @02:42AM
Yah like 30 mil is average. You're not even talking rich. Everyone has one and a spare in case the Red hoardes encrouch the city limits *spit*
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Thursday December 31 2020, @10:29AM (2 children)
Except salaries aren't part of the GDP number, so I'm not talking about making money. I am talking about how many dollars of GDP is produced by the person - how productive that person is. Assuming half the country is democrat and half is republican - which is close enough, a democrat is 2.33 times more productive than a republican. So what you say doesn't actually have a point.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 31 2020, @01:26PM (1 child)
That is a distinction without a difference. GDP is recorded when those very same people spend their salaries, and they spend them in the same states they earn them. Inflated prices = inflated GDP. Purchasing power parity is what matters (which is why red states are actually more productive than blue ones, and also why China's economy actually passed the US's a while back). Insurance salesmen and bankers passing money back and forth in New York racks up the GDP numbers, and it doesn't accomplish a damned thing. Farmers and factory workers in Michigan, Nebraska, and Alabama do.
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Thursday December 31 2020, @03:12PM
so, lemme get this straight, your method to show republicans produce more dgp and just divide the democrat number till it gets lower than the republican one? brilliant!
here in the real world, a republican person still produces over twice less than a democrat, and china's economy is a joke compared to ours. you know, because 70% is higher than 30% and 13 trillion is lower than 20 trillion.
(Score: 2) by Socrastotle on Friday January 01 2021, @04:26PM (2 children)
Yes. For the exact same reasons the United States ended up better than just about everything that came before it.
1) Learning from the past. We got to see what worked, what didn't work, and what needed improving. And we did it, mostly. There was a good deal of ideological sacrifice in exchange for pragmatic compromise, but it was still better than every other major system prior. Same thing with Mars. It's not hard to list a thousand possible improvements to our political system that few would disagree with. But they'll never happen because of inertia, corruption, and so on. Same thing for e.g. the British Empire (and Spanish and Dutch and...) in the 18th century and prior. The only way to really fix things is to start over. But that's become impossible on Earth since there remain no lands that can be reasonably claimed by a new nation. By contrast space offers effectively infinite lands subject only to very foreseeable technological advances.
2) Attracting great minds. The freedom and opportunity available within America helped to attract the best the world had to offer and, in turn, created an exponential explosion of knowledge and progress within the country. On Mars this will be exponentially more the case. There's going to be a bit of a paradox in that the main people who will be desired on Mars will be those who can thrive in the systems we have on Earth, yet are effectively willing to give it all up to move to a rock 40 million miles away from everything. That takes a certain kind of crazy that's going to make the early Mars generations something that's very likely to yield great dividends for all of us.
(Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Friday January 01 2021, @04:38PM (1 child)
Me: do you think corporations running the government instead of people voting is going to be better than what we have here now?
You: Yes, because we have the best government.
Irrelevant of what you think happens here on earth, the reason we have the best goverment is because it is indirectly run by the people voting and making rules to keep the corporations in check. You mention learning from things that didn't work. You need to learn some middle school history to learn from history. You should, um, look up what the corporations did to the people before the government stepped in. Thing like shooting striking workers with guns and making 12yo kids work in a coal mine 80 hours a week.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 01 2021, @08:00PM
So government saved people from corporations, eh? One of the first things you've said that actually makes me believe you a product of the US education system. When you look at the sort of things [wikipedia.org] you reference, whose side do you think the government took? It was inevitably the wealthy and connected. This has always been the case and likely always will be. Those people did not earn their freedoms with votes - they earned them with blood. Men who never stand up for themselves will, inch by inch, be driven into servitude.
The realization of this is what made America so great and unique. The founding fathers understood that governments inevitably trend towards authoritarianism, incompetence, and corruption; that government is, at its best, a necessary evil. Rather than trying to imagine the best of humanity, it assumed the worst. We aimed to create a government that would work not under ideal circumstances which never exist, but in real circumstances. It was designed to be minimal and largely dysfunctional with excessive checks and balances. And by contrast states, and even the people within them, were designed to be relatively strong and ready to resist against the inevitably tyranny of the empowered. When the second amendment speaks of the security of a free State, who do you think they are speaking of protecting themselves from?
Governments with immense power can achieve great things when they are well run and benevolent. In the 60s China was literally starving to death by the tens of millions. Today they're already the world's largest economy and are likely to soon become the most dominant power in the entire world. Yet that same power will also be what inevitably leads to their return to ruins, perhaps even during our lifetime - mirroring their past of periods of disunity and unity quite strongly. Their leadership will inevitably fall victim to corruption and/or ineptitude, and the impact of this will be immense with such an incredibly powerful government.
Yet we too are now going down the same path as China with an ever more powerful, more authoritarian, and more centralized government. And this is no doubt playing into our gradual decline that began sometime around November 22, 1963. The founding fathers would recoil in disgust at what we, on both a government and social level, have become. So how did this happen? There's an immense amount we can learn from ourselves, and this can be put to use in the birth of what will inevitably become the next great civilization. Yet another pattern that has repeated itself over and over throughout history. The only difference this time is it will be on another rock.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday December 30 2020, @07:12PM (5 children)
His intentions aren't the problem, so much as stating those intentions. In the normal course of things, Mars can be expected to make Martian law. Even if sixteen nations establish sixteen independent colonies scattered around the globe, Martians are going to cooperate with Martians when SHTF. (shit hits the fan) They'll have no choice. Help from earth may be months or years away, whereas the neighboring colony is minutes or hours away.
Also, in the normal course of things, Mars can be expected to rebel against unjust and/or unreasonable laws imposed by earth governments.
But, Musk is sticking his neck out unnecessarily when he tells earth up front that he is seeking independence before he ever puts a boot on the ground. One or more nations may well charge him with treason, if the UN doesn't charge him with something similar as well. He could even be guilty of a war crime or six, before any war is ever contemplated, FFS.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @07:21PM
i agree. he shouldn't tell these parasites what he's doing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @08:49PM (1 child)
He now has the power to wield. He can not sell them any launches if they don't agree. Being the only mars launch capible company on earth gives him the power. The ships captain makes the laws on ship and the new frontier landing camp.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday December 30 2020, @09:00PM
Yes, and no. Almost any government on earth has the power to interfere with Musk's plans. Any nation with missile capability can nail a ship as it launches. Any government with engines in orbit can target a ship after it launches. Musk won't be as powerful as any government with those capabilities for a long time.
You and I may well think it's nuts to target a SpaceX ship over politics, but politicians don't think like people.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @10:11PM (1 child)
Almost like he recognizes that this is still science fiction and is only talking about it to grift people who think it's feasible.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 31 2020, @02:47AM
almost like he needs to throw the followers a bone every now and again to keep the faith burning strong... don't forget to teleport onto a passing asteroid so you can meet the thetans
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Mojibake Tengu on Wednesday December 30 2020, @07:52PM (7 children)
There are tricky catches in ancient habits of sovereignty. All of them apply even today.
Commoners mostly do not realize that. Diplomats and Military brass understand them well, as well as bankers and high priests.
- Borders are consensual and not static for eternity.
If you claim a (new) territory (or aquatory), and your law and power over it, you shall be able to exercise your power by defending it.
First of this is ability to patrol said territory. If you cannot even patrol either technically or denied by adversary, it's just not yours, plain and simple, by the ultimate rule of reality check. That's why most fortresses and military bases in history have been built.
Doing expeditions, doing regular patrols and quickly react to adversary incursions by projecting force are completely different things. For example, project Apollo was an expedition. Americans are not able to patrol the Moon since, so it's not their territory.
This is well observable in current Arctic and Antarctic territories, with both pretensions and military patrols.
Example of performing cyclic patrols to keep pretension live and unresolved is:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/08/world/what-in-the-world/canada-denmark-hans-island-whisky-schnapps.html [nytimes.com]
In this case, removing the adversary bottle is essential diplomatic ritual.
- Contrary to the common population belief, the peace between sovereigns is rather exceptional. War is default. Treaties are temporary. Check the timeline of history. If you want to hold a territory, you must be able to defend it with using a force.
If your defense relies on force or law of someone else (like, on USA or another superpower), your are not a sovereign.
You are vassal and you shall obey the laws thrown upon you by your suzerain.
Conclusions:
Verily I doubt the ability of Elon Musk to perform patrols outside a very small territory.
He may be able to claim a settlement and call it 'city' in media. Then, his adversaries will arrive to neighborhood...
And he will never become a true sovereign. See how difficult is for real regional powers with real technology such as Russia or China to exercise their sovereignty against pressure of their adversaries.
Rust programming language offends both my Intelligence and my Spirit.
(Score: 2) by BsAtHome on Wednesday December 30 2020, @08:16PM
Newsflash: USA launches nuclear strike on Mars from Earth over a territorial dispute.
(There where no survivors on either planet. Extrasolar lifeforms have already claimed ownership of the entire system. Please deliver any complaints to Alpha Centauri and leave them at the front desk.)
(Score: 3, Funny) by barbara hudson on Wednesday December 30 2020, @08:22PM
There are other ways to maintain sovereignty over territory. Currently nobody is going to invade the US because who wants to catch covid?
Laying waste to your own territory and population (pollution, radiation, widespread pestilence, bad water) also makes it stupid to invade.
Being physically inaccessible - nobody's bothered trying to claim Antarctica. This could change with the discovery of large deposits of rare earths, cobalt, lithium, or even gold.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday December 30 2020, @08:56PM (1 child)
Not that anybody else will have much of an easier time getting boots on the ground out there to contest the planet...
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday December 30 2020, @09:09PM
Space Force. Well before any Mars colony is ready to declare independence, the US will have troops available, and transportation. Imagine, one psychopathic commander with a squad or two who don't question orders. I refer you to My Lai and dozens of other massacres in history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%E1%BB%B9_Lai_massacre [wikipedia.org]
Wonder how long a pyramid of skulls would last on Mars . . .
https://www.britannica.com/event/Battle-of-Aleppo-1400 [britannica.com]
Hey, isn't that the same Aleppo that gets crapped on a lot today?
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @09:12PM
Very easy. Just mount rockets on hidden asteroids in the asteroid field. Then he has his own MAD (Massive Asteroid Damage) system. Works for earth and mars. Just takes time to deploy.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by sjames on Thursday December 31 2020, @12:05AM
On the other hand, how likely are others to bring the sovereignty into question in the traditional manner? What's the U.S. going to do, shoot cops and judges into space? If they do, will it be a return journey? What keeps them from going native? How will they make sure the political officer doesn't slip on tea?
This won't be the first time a sovereign nation has been protected by geography, but it will be an extreme case of it.
(Score: 2) by legont on Thursday December 31 2020, @12:53AM
That's true unless the colony does some essential service. If it can't be exterminated because the service is needed, the colony can ignore any pressure an do as it sees fit provided residents are ready to die, which they are.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Wednesday December 30 2020, @08:01PM (1 child)
Mars can have an independent government that can do whatever it wants if it has a self-sustaining colony with no need for resupply from Earth. Maybe even long before that as long as one country is still willing to launch cargo there. Space treaties or Artemis accords are meaningless, only power/force matters. The colony will be really weak and could be easily conquered, but nobody will care to do so.
In reality, the leadership positions on Mars will be stuffed with people with allegiance to U.S., China, etc. Most colonists won't have "Mars national pride" for a long time. The colony will probably be small and full of geologists temporarily staying there.
The stuff in the user agreement is just meant to be a funny easter egg.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by barbara hudson on Wednesday December 30 2020, @08:24PM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 3, Informative) by VanessaE on Wednesday December 30 2020, @08:08PM (1 child)
Somewhere here there's a joke tying into the series "The Expanse", but I'm not finding it...
(Score: 4, Funny) by sonamchauhan on Wednesday December 30 2020, @10:16PM
Musk is going full 'Beltalowda' about Mars.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by istartedi on Wednesday December 30 2020, @08:19PM
If they can't bring guns to Mars, Mars is sovereign.
We're getting way ahead of things though. We haven't even set foot on it, and even if we do it may prove to be a consumer of human flesh. It may not be possible to even sustain a population, but if we solve the problem of radiation shielding, if the low gravity doesn't impede human reproduction, and if Mars can find a way to sustain itself then it'll be sovereign. So let's say all those problems are solved and it declares independence.
Don't like that? Come to Mars with guns and change their minds. Until then, "lawyers doubt" and it's impotence.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 30 2020, @08:49PM
I'd like to get some input from the masters of global colonization. How did that process work? If a foothold colony is established, is SpaceX the new East India Tea Company? There going to be a Muskie Army to kill anyone who goes against the grain?
(Score: 1) by throckmorten on Wednesday December 30 2020, @09:04PM
It's almost as if he's never read Red Mars ....
(Score: 2) by anotherblackhat on Wednesday December 30 2020, @10:30PM (2 children)
The number of nations able to put a military force on Mars is currently zero.
SpaceX is arguably going to be the first to be able to do so, and for a long time, any nation that wants to contest any claim SpaceX makes about Mars is going to have to use SpaceX to get there — good luck with that.
If Musk actually does "colonize" Mars, there will be a lot of sabre rattling, but not much else.
I'd like to believe the US would get off it's ass and develop a real space program, but I don't see it happening.
(Score: 3, Touché) by maxwell demon on Wednesday December 30 2020, @11:46PM
As long as the Mars colony is not self-sustainable, you don't need guns on Mars to control it. Guns on Earth that can target the supply ships are more than sufficient.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by legont on Thursday December 31 2020, @12:56AM
How do you mean? Quite a few powers can send a deadly missile to any point on Mars.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Wednesday December 30 2020, @10:47PM (1 child)
If only we had one to hand...
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday December 31 2020, @12:27AM
When philosophers run out of shit to talk, soldiers and sailors settle the issue.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 31 2020, @07:41AM
Send Trump to run the place. At least he won't be on Earth.