Potpourri CL

I haven't done one of these in awhile, but I'll keep the links to a minimum, for your sanity's sake, and mine.

Science fiction writer Charles Stross has a provocative essay on why space exploration is inherently incompatible with the libertarianism that seems to pervade so much of the pro-space community.  It's not that I disagree with most of Stross's individual points, but I think he's missing a crucial aspect of the appeal of space exploration, even among non-libertarian white males, which is simply the romantic notion many human beings have of going "where no one has gone before," which includes more than a little "frontier narrative."

I found an intriguing paper via Facebook that links creativity to law-breaking. I have a very long response to this paper in the works, but I'm a little on the sleepy side to finish it this evening. The truth is out there.

From Lin: Interesting conflict of values in the whole "green power" debate: if those giant windmills kill hundreds or thousands of bats, birds, etc., which faction of the environmental movement wins that debate?

From Karen: a personal website for one of folks who designs cool things for Hollywood.

From Martin: a wiki for those interested in commercial space.

Oh, here's a shock (sarcasm font ON): Huntsville has been rated among the top 10 geekiest cities in America.

From Antoinette: celebrity commentaries on the stupid stuff you see on TV.

From OpenCulture:

• An interview with Jorge Luis Borges recorded before the eminent SF writer died.
• Harvard University has released an open-source program to help scholars create project-related web sites in a hurry.

From Jerry Pournelle: some remarks on the Tea Party movement and its effect on the American political scene, as well as other matters.

From Jim P.: The top ten human-hating ecologists.

From Mom: a time-lapse video showing the "progress" of unemployment across the country. Note the "bright" spots in the underpopulated Great Plains and just outside Washington, DC. If those are the choices...think I'll tough it out here in Huntsville. The taxes are lower and the weather's warmer.

I'm probably going to lose my battle against my buying urges on this one: a Star Wars sun shade for the dashboard.

From Janel (a.k.a. FemiFist): some suggested links if you need to do web tracking of your marketing efforts.

And I think that'll about do it. Have a good week, everyone. Keep the chaos down to a minimum on your end, and I'll try to do the same on mine, 'kay?

Potpourri CXLIX

The odds of my getting through the blog file backlog aren't good this evening, but I'll do what I can. The format of this blog has been evolving over the past four years or so, and it will continue to do so. To wit: I’m going to try not to bombard my readers (all 20, God bless you!) with scads of links. Instead, I’ll try to focus on just a few—the ones that really catch my eye—and provide a little more commentary. Maybe it’ll work, maybe it won’t. If you want a lot of links, I’ll just refer you to the pages at the right, where I find most of this craziness anyway. However, since I still have an inbox to clean out, the limited-link rule isn't going into effect quite yet.

Science, Technology, and Space

Might as well start with some good news from the space biz for a change: my friend Rick Tumlinson gave a really great, level-headed, forward-looking speech at the NewSpace conference this past week. It's worth a listen on both sides of the government/industry "debate" (I put the words in quotes because it's been more like a screaming match).

From another libertarian space friend, Tom Olson: a couple of ideas here and here on how to get carbon out of the atmosphere--"carrots instead of sticks," as he puts it--that would not require an economy-destroying idea like "Cap and Trade."

From the University of Central Florida: a simulation that is supposed to help teach pre-teenage girls to resist social pressure to engage in sex and other behaviors. Hm. I guess "Just say no" doesn't sell anymore?

What if the Earth really did stand still?

New Airbus concept aircraft. Cool!



The inventor of the “black box” has died.


SpaceShipTwo could do glide tests this autumn.

The flight over the three-hour “tarmac rule” continues. The consultants are right on this one: airlines are canceling more flights. And since many of these three-hour waits are due to weather, the airlines manage to avoid both the FAA fine and having to reimburse passengers for hotels or other expenses because weather-related delays are considered beyond their control. Something that is under control, as Mike Boyd keeps pointing out, is upgrading the government-controlled Air Traffic Control system to 21st century technology. Don’t hold your breath waiting on that to happen quickly.

Need an upgrade to your yacht? Have you considered a Maltese Falcon-class ship?

Culture

From Father Dan:

• Three of Time Magazine's Top 50 American Roadside Attractions are located in Alabama. "Y'all come," as we might say around here.
• Want to know where the speed traps are in your area? Check this out. Disclaimer: I am not encouraging speeding here. You pays your money and you takes your chances.

From Cousin Katherine: a new cultural dictionary, which is definitely more polite and less profane than the Urban Dictionary. This one is interesting because it doesn't just define terms but explains what cultural trend they are reflecting.

Interested in being a science writer? Check out this link.



I won a t-shirt today from Science for Citizens (W00t!). If you're interested in DIY science experiments, give that site a look. And speaking of t-shirts, I thought Darlene the Science Cheerleader might like this new t-shirt.

Ever heard of a Turboencabulator? Some technobabble humor, courtesy of Karen and Doc.

Hard to top this: The Best Image of Chewbacca Riding a Giant Squirrel and Fighting Nazis That You Will See Today. No foolin'. And along the same lines: Cow choreography.

Is there a relationship between Social Darwinism and classical liberalism?

From Lin: A new authorized biography of SF giant Robert A. Heinlein is due out soon. This should be fun.

From Anthony: how to open a bottle of wine with just a shoe. Not sure I'd want to admit to this one, though...

Famous authors reading works aloud.

Oh, the Old Spice towel guy isn't done quite yet. He can leave your voice mail, if you're so inclined.

Robert Silverberg, one of my favorite SF writers, has written an essay suggesting that the days of the full-time science fiction novelist might be numbered.

U.S. Politics


From Lin: Okay, so remember all the brouhaha about American banks not being "transparent" in their dealings with the public about this or that financial instrument? You know--that whole cause of the now-two-year-old-recession? Anyhow, it's a bit odd that the Securities and Exchange Commissions (SEC), the government agency responsible for overseeing these suitably bailed-out or publicly chastened banks, is exempt from Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Wonder who will complain first?

This essay has been on my reading list for awhile, and it was worth the wait. It is an American Spectator discussion on America's "ruling class," which is a different thing from the "political class."

How d'ya like that? I managed to clear the inbox and still have time to shut down and slow down the brain before sleep. Will wonders never cease? Anyhow, I hope you've enjoyed these quick-hit excursions through the internet. In the future, seriously, I'll try to restrict my "Oh, look at this!" list to a choice few. After all, if you just wanted links, you could probably go to one of the sites I'm already surfing. The point here is to cough up some thoughts of my own, right? Or so the theory goes.

Peace and happy thoughts, all.

Miscellaneous Thoughts

I'm fascinated and occasionally horrified when liberal friends ask why a "smart guy" like me is a Republican/conservative/libertarian. The assumption behind the question is rude on its face; might as well just come out and say it: "Only stupid people are Republicans, so why are you joining them?"

Well, I happen to believe this position is wrong, but I've let the insult(s) slide, for the most part. I do, after all, have a life to lead and don't feel like arguing all the time. I save that for the blog because I write better than I speak. But the opinions and attitudes that lead me to vote to the right of John McCain probably deserve an explanation or two. I'll try now.

I am a libertarian on economic issues because I believe that the private sector is more fair and less coercive than government "transactions." The only coercion that occurs in the private sector is if you're borrowing money from the mob. Texaco, Burger King, Apple, Barnes & Noble, Publix, Microsoft, Dell, and the local book or trinket shops do not receive my business because they threaten me. If I stop buying from them and go to another provider of the same services, that's a result of my individual choice or competition. The original vendors are welcome to try things--sales, discounts, new products or services--to try to win my business back, and they might succeed. But I don't worry that representatives of any of those companies are going to come to my house or serve me with an arrest order if I stop paying for their services. I have no such choice with government. I must pay my taxes or I will be audited and sent to jail. The sheer difference in power should make this position self-evident, but some folks still rail against "the power of Big Business." Well, "Big Business" is about to get bought out, wholesale, by the government. Now you've got a reason to worry. What do you suppose will happen somewhere down the line if you don't purchase cars from GM or banking services from Goldman Sachs? And unlike free-market businesses, which must control costs to make a profit, government is under no such constraints. How efficient will the new quasi-government entities be? Or a nationalized healthcare system? Or some new carbon-credit monitoring agency? We will soon find out, I'm afraid.

I am a conservative on social issues because I don't particularly like drug use, child exploitation, pornography, or abortion-at-convenience. Such things come from my attending church on a regular basis and my respect for women and mothers in general. I don't want tougher laws on any of these things, just consistent and rational enforcement of the laws currently on the books. I might even go so far as to suggest that the states, not the federal government, deal with such things. That might be a little radical, but what the heck, a guy can dream.

I am somewhere else on foreign policy compared to many of my conservative peers. I don't see the need to force our way of life on others. I don't think we need to be the world's policeman. I believe we have a right to defend ourselves if attacked. I believe we can and should pursue activities that benefit the direct, vital interests of the country. I don't believe we should lower our standards of conduct to the average tyrants in the United Nations, nor do I believe we do ourselves credit by aping the social policies of our European allies.

In general, my approach to domestic and foreign policy is rather simplistic, but it follows from my own personal behavior: if you don't get into my business, I won't get into yours. Privacy matters to me, as does hands-off leadership. I don't like micromanaging others and I don't enjoy others micromanaging me. I would like to think that everyone would think that way, but I would be wrong. Some folks sincerely believe that unless certain people are "in charge," the rest of society will go to heck in a handcart. This overestimates the abilities and virtues of certain people and underestimates the abilities and virtues of those they mean to rule. However, we appear to have given up on self-government--both of ourselves and of our nation--so perhaps I expect too much.

Again, some of this attitude comes from my upbringing in the church (Lutheran, for the record), where premiums are placed on honesty, respect for life, personal charity, obedience to the laws (civil and spiritual), and self-restraint. If most of my fellow citizens and I are doing all of those things, there is less need for intrusive government. If I wasn't getting a steady diet of these behaviors, perhaps I might require an iron fisted government above me to tell me what to do. But then who would restrain the government? What higher power would they answer to?

The view of a conservative is one of a "fallen" humanity--one that sees human nature as essentially unchanged throughout history. The Bible still has resonance today precisely because human nature hasn't changed: violence, lust, shady dealing, power-seeking, lack of self control--they're all there. And yet religion persists as well because it offers human beings an ideal, a way off the wheel of history, which cycles through good and bad periods. Am I blind to the evils done in the name of religion? Hardly. But the wars against human sin are still to be fought at the individual level, by changing hearts and minds, not forcing them at the point of a sword or a gun. What has been true in the past and is occasionally true in the present need not continue in the future.

Religion offers me a hope for a better future, and standards by which to make that hope come about. However, it does not assume that human beings will ever be "perfectable," through brainwashing, tinkering with our DNA, technological additions to the flesh, or any other radical alterations. Human nature is what it is, and therefore radical experiments in government control (or largesse), behavior modification, or childhood education are to be approached with the utmost caution. One way or another, we'll all have to answer for the wrongs we've done, regardless of what justification we use.

There you go: now you know.

Book Review: NewSpace Nation

Here's a clever way to get your political tract out to the public: put it on Kindle and charge a few bucks. I say clever only to the extent that I allowed myself to be persuaded to buy it (Kindle really IS bad for impulse book buyers).

So what do you get for your $4.99 (more than I paid for the complete works of Aristotle, Plato, or the King James Bible, by the way)? Basically, you are treated to a part-philosophical (libertarian), part-economic tract that discusses the basics and virtues of "New Space" companies--that is, smaller entrepreneurial firms formed in the last 10-15 years that are not making the bulk of their money through government contracts.

This unique economic niche includes groups like the Rocket Racing League (and the companies producing their racers and engines), Zero-G Corporation, and Virgin Galactic (which is hardly "small" in the financing sense, given Sir Richard Branson's deep pockets--a point Mr. Krukin hedges by noting that defining a "NewSpace" company is sometimes more art than science).

Each section cites the company web site and other details. Essentially what you've got here is a handy marketing brochure for the private space industry, albeit a brochure that you pay for.

For people unfamiliar with the libertarian point of view, the author Jeff Krukin describes the advantages of this new upstart segment of a 50-year-old industry as follows:

• Market segmentation
• Emphasis on private customers rather than cost-plus government contracts
• Free, expanding markets / economic development
• Job creation
• The simple focus on profit rather than maintaining political support, which is an annual battle for NASA
• New resources

Perhaps now is a good time for a tract like this, given the government's increasing desire to downplay capitalism in favor of government regulation of industries. Gosh knows I'm a big fan of capitalism, and miss it more every day. However, this text is a little overpriced, given its length--430 "locations" (pages) at the font size I use--and the much lower price for much longer products on the Kindle site. Still, it's a good thing to have, if only as a reference for keeping one's message short, punchy, and to the point. A- for message, C+ for execution and price/value.

Potpourri XL

This isn't an "extra large" Potpourri, just Potpourri #40. Being a pompous git on occasion, I thought I'd use Roman numerals because I can.

Interested in starship engineering? Tip o' the fedora to Stu for point out Zero Point Frontiers, Inc. as a starting point for developing a national ability to build vehicles capable of leaving the solar system. Works for me.

*

I just finished Neil Schulman's Alongside Night on the Kindle. It's akin to Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged in that it depicts the U.S. collapsing from socialism and its own shortsightedness (in this case, inflationary monetary policy, combined with out-of-control spending--sound familiar?). It also depicts an underground libertarian economy and the members of that economy fighting back against the system.

The depressing part of these libertarian fantasies for me is that they are utterly believable in their depiction of the socialist collapse, but they fall flat when it comes to reasserting the gold-currency, civil-law world the libertarians seek to create. We have enough examples in Western history to show us what happens when currencies become devalued and governments overtax and overspend. But the result has never been a libertarian revolution and a return to sane, bounded capitalist practices. Here's why: when people see money being overspent, they don't call for better money, they call for an end to money. And if an elected government won't provide them with sane prices and incomes, they'll demand that a dictator come forth and save them from the cacophony of representative government and an unregulated marketplace.

Another worrisome aspect of the libertarian-cabal-as-savior story line is that these organizations are inevitably run along quasi-fascist lines themselves. Examples include Rand's hidden capitalist sanctuary; Heinlein's "Families" in Methuselah's Children or post-nuclear family in Farnham's Freehold; or Schuman's "Agorist Cadre." The capitalists-in-hiding are believers in the gold standard and personal freedom, but they accept top-down rule like a bunch of Marxist guerrillas until that great day when they can come out into the open and reveal themselves as humanity's economic saviors. I don't have an alternate solution (or I would've written it by now), but perhaps this explains why I'm a conservative with libertarian tendencies rather than a full-blown libertarian. I still think government has a place in the affairs of men.

*

Protests are heating up at Notre Dame University in advance of President's anticipated commencement address there. This is the same guy who asked that any Christian symbols be hidden during his recent address at Georgetown University. If the ND administration knew all this going into it, why did they invite him?

You might have to be an English major to appreciate this, but I thought this cartoon on NeedCoffee.com was frickin' hilarious.

Darlene the Science Cheerleader has a couple of fun articles on her site this week: one on the anniversary of getting her Master's Degree (Science History & Policy), another on her friendship with eminent astronaut Story Musgrave. Speaking of Dar, I believe she's hosting a benefit on behalf of our little buddy Morgan this evening. I helped out a little by translating some stuff into a Word document for her.

And that's about all I have for this evening. I'm trying to get back into the swing of my foreign language lessons, but find that a) I can't play on the computer and concentrate on the course simultaneously, and b) even if I focus only on the language lessons, I'm only useful for about 60-90 minutes, tops, before my brain turns to multilingual mush. This might explain why those two-hour classes never quite worked in college.

Space Cadet Politics

Nader Elhenawy has a rather long, but worthwhile piece on The Space Review. Go on and read it, or my selective commentary won't make much sense.

*

I could not help being struck by the predominance of a libertarian-conservative outlook among those who follow these matters online. (I specify it as libertarian-conservative because our use of the word “libertarian” tends to overlook the long history of left-libertarianism.)
Why this should be the case is far from obvious.

The author would not be surprised by the prevalence of conservatism/libertarianism in space if he read a little more Robert A. Heinlein, who was a science fiction writer focusing on rockets. He also was a 1930s liberal and later '50s and '60s conservative/libertarian, but a capitalist all the way down the line.

Re: postmoderism as a conservative perspective

I found this twist on things interesting, but ultimately irrelevant. Classical liberalism, with its emphases on individual liberty and progress, is now part of today's conservative-liberatarians. Meanwhile postmodernism is very much a part of progressivism/liberalism, with its emphases on relativism, postcolonialism, feminism, and other -isms that question Western rationality, technology, and universal philosophies (e.g. Christianity, capitalism).

The "final frontier" of Democrat John F. Kennedy (and his disciple Gene Roddenberry) is now questioned as "imperialist" by postcolonial theorists in that same party. Progressives support green power and genetic activities because they are small, earthbound, and so not likely to intimidate or overpower the individual. Rocketry cannot help but be big--a sin in itself, for reasons that elude me--because of the sheer number of experts and money required to make it a going concern.

In short, space is merely an extension of our present and past ideological battles applied to a broad canvas--the ultimate blank slate. Examples can be found in the pages of science fiction. The "Future History" short stories of Robert Heinlein collected in The Past Through Tomorrow might be seen as the genesis of the conservative-libertarian viewpoint. If you want to see an example of government-centric "New Deal" or "Great Society" liberalism in space, check out Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars Trilogy, starting with Red Mars. Another "grand vision" for space is the (Carl) Saganite ethos of making the universe safe for robots, while humans stay home. Still another is that of Gerard K. O'Neill, which is more or less the vision of the National Space Society. O'Neill believed in large orbital settlements/cities in space, manufactured by and sustaining a high-tech industrial civilization. It's very difficult to find a postmodern vision for near-term space exploration because most of the component ideologies that make it up are more concerned about denouncing and undoing Western capitalism/conservatism here on Earth.

One thing that I should point out is that science and technology are essentially apolitical. You can be a communist, a capitalist, a Mormon, or a Zoroastrian--if you follow the laws of nature and build things correctly, you can get people and cargo into space. As the Soviet Union proved. As did Communist China, India, and now Iran. A human future in space is, perhaps, inevitable. The form of society that the future takes is up for grabs. So we'll see how it all sorts out. The private sector might, indeed, win the battle to control the economy in low Earth orbit...at least until the government decides to regulate them out of existence.

Space Advocacy in the Age of Obama

The National Space Society Board of Directors met here in Huntsville this past weekend, and it was quite illuminating, as always. NSS is not, of course, uniform in its demographic or ideological makeup. That's why we have committees and votes and officers--to keep things reasonably orderly. We are a consensus organization, more or less, and unlike some organizations, bipartisan in makeup. This makes life more interesting for the Policy Committee and other groups, as we have to craft documents that will reach the bulk of the American public.

Anyhow, because of this diversity of opinion, we are faced with many different perspectives on, and reactions to, the election of Barack Obama. There is obviously a great deal of uncertainty. This is common with any new presidential administration, I think. There's a a difference between electioneering and governing. Will Obama deliver on the lofty things he said regarding our nation's space program? Will he be able to?

Regardless of the speculation, space advocates must go forward accepting that Obama and his party's ideology will soon have firm control of the government. My positions were:

1. Space is not a priority for Obama (nor was it a priority for McCain, if it came to it).
2. The economy, foreign affairs, and education will be his priorities.
3. Space advocates need to tie the value of space exploration to the things that DO matter to the incoming administration.

This is probably rather pragmatic of me, but the alternatives are uglier. My libertarian friends, who advocate that space exploration be placed completely in the hands of the private sector, overlook the political popularity of NASA. The odds of having NASA disbanded? Zero. The odds of the private sector (SpaceX, etc.) getting additional support for their efforts in space? Better than even (IMHO). The odds of getting Constellation replaced by some other architecture? Slim.

So that's the political reality. That still doesn't prevent NSS from "going bold." One might hope or push for a Kennedyesque call for a return to the Moon or a human mission for Mars. Advocates can lobby for Obama to call for American greatness, technological leadership, energy independence, quality education, and peaceful international leadership, using space exploration as a vehicle. I've suggested as much in my blog on mass marketing. Could it happen? Maybe.

We also have a "friend at court" of sorts--Lori Garver, a former NSS Executive Director and NASA Associate Administrator, is Obama's space policy advisor. She speaks the advocates' language, and she had a hand in crafting Obama's most recent space policy. So: there's hope that Obama's policies can be made more pro-space.

This conversation is probably moot until Obama is sworn in, so I'll drop it for now, but "always in motion is the future," as Yoda might put it.