Glenn Reynolds has a review of Bob Zubrin’s new book in the Journal today. Apparently, living on Mars is much different than living on earth and not in all the ways you might think:
Evidently, there is lots of honest work on a planet under settlement (as well as a lot of potentially lucrative semi-honest work in land speculation). And the shortage of people produces a number of other differences from Earth, not least when it comes to dating, sex and parenting. “I need to discuss one fact concerning our social life that inevitably startles and amazes all new Earthling immigrants . . . ,” Mr. Zubrin writes. “On Mars, the institution of marriage still exists. I am not making this up. . . . Incredible as it sounds, people on Mars actually want to have children of their own and they form families for that purpose. Thus, while sexual attractiveness is a factor among us while seeking pairings, unlike Earth, it is not the only factor.” Concerned with getting ahead and raising families, Mars settlers view traditional attributes like loyalty and trustworthiness as far more important than do the residents of Earth, who, as best as can be determined from Mr. Zubrin’s passing allusions, live in one gigantic welfare state.
As in the past, some will satisfy themselves with the (false) safety of the mundane and coddled, and others will seek frontiers and freedom.
[Mid-morning update]
Taylor Dinerman has a review up as well, over at The Space Review.
Encouragement
some will satisfy themselves with the (false) safety of the mundane and coddled, and others will seek frontiers and freedom.
Hey man, everyone likes freedom. Some just prefer freedom from risk and uncertainty. You buy flood and fire insurance, don’t you? Taxes and regulation can be like that. Just another sort of premium.
That doesn’t happen to be my own cup of tea, but I know people who are aware of the trade offs and consciously choose it.
Hmmm.
(Father to son)
“See this? This is our home. Forty billion dollars spent to haul our sorry asses 50 million miles to setup the equivalent of empty spot on deserted highway in the Arizona desert.
No visitors because it would take another ten billion for anybody to come here and go back. So anybody who shows up, is here for life.
Why are we here when everything we’re doing now could be done with robots?
Because son sometimes people have a really stupid idea that crawls up their ass like a wild hair and nothing but nothing is going to prevent them from wasting forty billion dollars in whatever idiotic manner they want to.”
I guess I’ll have to buy Zubrin’s book – it looks interesting.
Memomachine – I’ll leave Rand to pick apart your vastly overstated transport costs. I would suggest that you consider who settled North America, especially in the Colonial era. A lot of those folks were either kicked out of Europe or rejected Europe’s rule.
Assuming one can make a go of a self-sustaining colony (Zubrin’s chapter on agriculture looks valuable), a lot of people who are unhappy on Earth will leave.
This does not mean that Mars will be colonized by saints. White separatists, for example, are generally unhappy on Earth. Ditto various fringe religious groups. In short, if the opportunity is there, folks will go. Some of them might even volunteer 😉
“Because son sometimes people have a really stupid idea that crawls up their ass like a wild hair and nothing but nothing is going to prevent them from wasting forty billion dollars in whatever idiotic manner they want to.”
This is such a great line. I mean, it doesn’t apply to Mars, but it’s really useful to explain all sorts of things. Like the European Union, animated Star Wars movies, you name it.
My only real response to memomachine is:
When some 52% of the people have gone and made the planet so unbearable to live on for some other 10%, and no compromise is possible between the two points of view, you have to expect that the 10% are either going to rebel or light out for the frontier. Just because you happen to be in the 52% that believes in nannyism and stasis, that doesn’t make you morally superior to others who like progress and freedom. It just makes you an insufferable git.
The frontiers are where real progress will happen, and just as the USA is more dynamic, progressive and powerful than the nations that gave it birth, I expect the same of the other planets and asteroids.
I’m looking forward to reading Bob’s book, but I’m still betting on Venus. The lack of solid land at 1 atmosphere seems more easily overcome than the lack of warmth, atmospheric pressure or gravity.
Brock –
I think there’s always a “malcontent” 10% or so, and always has been. What’s changed is how they have responded.
Verging WAY off topic, Tobias Buckell’s novel “Ragamuffin” is an interesting look at living on a Venus-like planet. Well, that and a hell of a good read in general.
/Running from Rand and the topic cops/
Zubrin talks about how the settlement of Mars is necessary for promoting the values of pioneering and the frontier spirit. He then argues for why government funding and a government program is necessary to settle the red planet. Am I the only one who notices the cognitive dissidence with this?
kurt9,
No cognitive dissonance. The Spanish Crown funded Columbus. The US government funded Lewis & Clark. Those worked out okay.
“As in the past, some will satisfy themselves with the (false) safety of the mundane and coddled, and others will seek frontiers and freedom.”
These declarations about how one loves freedom and frontiers and disdains the mundane and the coddled more than the next guy would have a lot more punch if they were actually delivered from a frontier instead of Florida.
kurt9,
Government would also probably prefer to move the discontented out. Seems like a win-win for everyone.
These declarations about how one loves freedom and frontiers and disdains the mundane and the coddled more than the next guy would have a lot more punch if they were actually delivered from a frontier instead of Florida.
Perhaps they might, but Florida is where I happen to live, unfortunately, so it’s the only place from which I can currently make such a comment. I’m not sure what your point is. Am I supposed to refrain from it until I can do so from Mars?
Hmmmm.
To avoid clogging up the comments I’ll just compile everything into this one.
1. @ Chris Gerrib
“Memomachine – I’ll leave Rand to pick apart your vastly overstated transport costs.”
They were intentionally overstated to mock the whole nonsensical idiotic business.
“I would suggest that you consider who settled North America, especially in the Colonial era.”
Sure thing. And I’ll point this out … the people who -funded- the colonial expansion largely did not -benefit- from it. Certainly not the British who bore the expense but not the profits. That’s certainly an example destined to garner huge government programs.
“A lot of those folks were either kicked out of Europe or rejected Europe’s rule.”
Ummm. I’d suggest there are much -cheaper- methods of getting rid of malcontents than shipping them to -Mars-.
“Assuming one can make a go of a self-sustaining colony (Zubrin’s chapter on agriculture looks valuable), a lot of people who are unhappy on Earth will leave.”
Good. Now pay your own damn way.
Oh you can’t because it’s too expensive and you need the government to do it for you? Well that’s certainly an argument worthy of taking to the American taxpayer. I’m very certain that 90% of the American tax paying base would be amused to pay through the nose to send the other 10%, or perhaps not even people who pay taxes, to Mars.
Not like there’s anything else to do with that kind of money.
2. @ Brock
“This is such a great line. I mean, it doesn’t apply to Mars, but it’s really useful to explain all sorts of things. Like the European Union, animated Star Wars movies, you name it.”
Thanks! Every now and then I come up with a memorable line. Well memorable for -me- at least. 🙂
“When some 52% of the people have gone and made the planet so unbearable to live on for some other 10% …”
Aaaaaannnnnndddddddd that 10% can pay to move? Because I seriously doubt you’d be able to convince people who don’t like you to spend billions on hauling your ass to Mars.
Seriously. Mars? If I have issues with my neighbors dog crapping on my lawn my response isn’t going to be:
‘WTF! He wants to go to Mars, let him. Then at least his dog won’t be crapping on my lawn. Now how much is it going to cost -me-? …’
“Just because you happen to be in the 52% that believes in nannyism and stasis, that doesn’t make you morally superior to others who like progress and freedom.”
As a hardline fiscal conservative, which should be apparent even to the dumbest monkey in the tree by this point, I’d have to point out that nothing I’ve ever written could have possibly been construed in that manner. Particularly since the entire thrust, nay -point-, behind my comment was oriented around -cost-.
Now … frolic.
“It just makes you an insufferable git.”
Correction: it makes -you- a git. Insufferable or not, but the jury is still out on that one. Dumb as a post though is definitely on the menu.
“The frontiers are where real progress will happen, and just as the USA is more dynamic, progressive and powerful than the nations that gave it birth, I expect the same of the other planets and asteroids.”
Right. Because it’s physically impossible for us to do the same thing via robotics.
Sure.
“I’m looking forward to reading Bob’s book, but I’m still betting on Venus. The lack of solid land at 1 atmosphere seems more easily overcome than the lack of warmth, atmospheric pressure or gravity.”
Because who needs a breathable atmosphere, temperatures under 800c and a non-toxic atmosphere that won’t strip your flesh from your bones?
And I thought the idea of colonizing Mars was silly.
3. @ kurt9
“Zubrin talks about how the settlement of Mars is necessary for promoting the values of pioneering and the frontier spirit. He then argues for why government funding and a government program is necessary to settle the red planet. Am I the only one who notices the cognitive dissidence with this?”
The whole thing is a silly idea. If we’re going to use the government to fund the colonizing of Mars to promote some nonsensical idea of “frontier spirit” then let’s fund the colonization of the south pole to promote the “spirit of snow cones”. Or maybe the colonization of Canada to promote the idea of odd bacon and beer.
Except where the emperor penguins hang out. Nobody needs a snow cone full of penguin crap.
4. @ Brock
“No cognitive dissonance. The Spanish Crown funded Columbus. The US government funded Lewis & Clark. Those worked out okay.”
Because they both wanted to make –money–. Gobs and loads and barges and galleons of money.
5. @ Jim Davis
“These declarations about how one loves freedom and frontiers and disdains the mundane and the coddled more than the next guy would have a lot more punch if they were actually delivered from a frontier instead of Florida.”
What I want to know is what they’re going to do for toilet paper on Mars. Not like there are any trees there. And you’d have to devote a lot of agricultural work to produce the necessary biomass that could be converted to toilet paper. Plus the time delay necessary to grow that biomass in the first place.
A lack of toilet paper is definitely a sign of being on the frontier.
6. @ Karl Hallowell
“Government would also probably prefer to move the discontented out. Seems like a win-win for everyone.”
Ummm. I’d suggest that most governments would find it infinitely easier, and cheaper, to simply make your lives an utter living misery so fell and so awful that you’d simply move yourselves somewhere else.
I’d also suggest that making people’s lives an utter living misery is what governments -do-.
So it’s not really a stretch here.
This thread is likely deader than a nudist in Hellas Planitia but MarsBlog has posted on this book too, and is promising a full review.
He (and I) are complaining about Zubrin’s apparent support of corruption in this bravest of new worlds.
Brock: what is your plan for maintenance and expansion, on a cloud city with no easy way to get solid materials? You need metals and silicates to replace all the equipment that will corrode in a permanent sulphuric-acid superheated stormcloud.
Leaving aside whether Zubrin has solved the problems you mention – On Mars, to get glass and iron ore you don’t have to do much more than melt the dirt and wave a magnet. To make essential chemicals you just do it yourself (pollution doesn’t matter in an environment which is lifeless and near-airless). How are you going to get miners onto Venus and, more importantly, back?