I disagree with Philip Shropshire about almost everything, but he understands why space is important.

I agree that he understands why space as a
frontier is important. However, he completely
misunderstands the greens' focus and intent.
Perhaps I missed some sort of irony, but he
couldn't have expected to make a rational
arguement that would convince them, could he?

I a quite certain Shropshire's article IS intended to be sarcastic.

Sarcastic toward whom? The greens, or the space activists?

I found his comments regarding the supposed "tolerance" level of Democrats in general either highly sarcastic or merely self-delusional. I've chatted with Democrats who are as intolerant of opposing points of view as any Republican, Libertarian or Green I've ever met.

But maybe he just wasn't thinking much when he wrote that. I've exchanged some comments with him on Will Wilkinson's blog and found his level of tolerance is not all that high.

It's self-delusional. Leftists really do see themselves as more tolerant than the evil right wingers.

Was Shropshire the guy who wanted to resettle the Jews on Mars, if we couldn't find 50-60 square miles of Alaska that nobody else wanted right away?

Can't recall, and can't be bothered to confirm it - all of the idiotarians blur together.

Uhhh, actually I was and am quite serious. Keep in mind I made the argument for a move because I think that Israel is kind of a sitting target, that terrorists and evil doers will someday hit. As for the tolerance point, please read my first several graphs carefully...

Philip Shropshire
www.threerivertechreview.com
www.majic12.com

So the basic thrust of the article is, "Let's form a society to force people to be as tolerant as we want them to be"?

Actually, I do find the thought of Greens using the latest technology to avoid leaving the gatherer stage rather...er...Islamist?

To Ken: No, that's not the basic thrust of the article. What I was trying to say is that you can go to space, either Mars or a orbital habit, whatever is your poison, and create the rules that you want. You want the second amendment to include handheld nukes, fine. I want the first amendment to include the speech of kids, fine. Create your own world with its own rules. Keep in mind that their are hints that the Mars Society would be more liberal and tolerant of things like drug use. Also: Kim Stanley Robinson, who is on the Mars Society Board, has already given us a constitution that includes an Environmental Supreme Court, a living wage, and no property rights...If his constitution makes it intact then Mars sounds like a place that Greens would like...

Philip Shropshire
www.threerivertechreview.com
www.majic12.com

PS: By the way, the piece on my site includes links that might explain this better. Go here:

http://www.threerivertechreview.com/leftspace.htm