ThinkProgress Home
ThinkProgress
ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Space

Politics

Moon Bases And Beyond: Newt Gingrich’s Top 5 Sci-Fi Policy Proposals

Gingrich tests virtual reality goggles in 1996

It’s not often that moon bases play a key role in presidential politics, but when Mitt Romney sought to draw a contrast with front-runner Newt Gingrich during Saturday’s ABC debate, he explained: “We could start with his idea to have a lunar colony that would mine minerals from the moon.” The comment drew laughter from the audience, but Gingrich is serious. “I’m proud” of the idea, Gingrich said. “I grew up in a generation where the space program was real, where it was important.”

Indeed, Gingrich has had a long fascination with ideas that most Americans would probably consider science fiction. Gingrich’s top five science fiction ideas, beyond moon bases:

1. EMP attack: As the New York Times notes today, Gingrich has a unusual phobia for outlandish doomsday scenarios like an electromagnetic pulse attack, even though most nuclear experts dismiss the threat. He even wrote the foreword to a 2009 sci-fi thriller based on an EMP attack.

2. Space mirrors: Gingrich has proposed a “a mirror system in space [that] could provide the light equivalent of many full moons so that there would be no need for nighttime lighting of the highways.”

3. Space lasers: Gingrich has flirted with several variations of orbiting death rays. For example, in 2002 he called for “directed energy weapons and laser pulsing systems that could actually [shoot down missiles] from space.” “If you go to a space-based system, we can almost certainly build a workable system,” he said in 2009.

4. Geo-engineering: Gingrich has suggested that instead of actually stopping global warming from happening (this was when he believed in global warming), we should use geoengineering to ameliorate its impact. “Geo-engineering holds forth the promise of addressing global warming concerns for just a few billion dollars a year,” Gingrich said in 2008. Geo-engineering is the process of artificially altering the climate in fundamental ways and is considered so dangerous that it faced a ban from the U.N.

5. A better life through video games: Gingrich made a political speech to Second Life in 2007 in which he said that the “3-D Internet in all of its various forms” will help create a better “parallel country.” “It’s a parallel that enables us to do things that would be much more difficult to do in the real world.. [It's a] world that works.” Second Life has basically failed.

Gingrich’s “futuristic proselytizing” even earned him the nickname “Newt Skywalker” among the local press in his home state of Georgia in the 1980s and ’90s, Politico notes today.

But Gingrich’s fascination with science fiction goes far deeper than gadgets and to his core motivations as a politician. Ray Smock was the historian of the U. S. House of Representatives from 1983 to 1995 until Gingrich fired him as one of Gingrich’s first acts as Speaker. As Smock wrote last week for the History News Network, Gingrich’s “hero and role model” was the protagonist of Isaac Asimov’s Foundation series, who invents a new field of history — Gingrich is himself a historian — and fundamentally changes the course of history for thousands of planets in the process. A tagline of the series is, “In a future century the Galactic Empire dies and one man creates a new force for civilized life.” As Smock writes, “Newt liked the idea of one man shaping the destiny of entire civilizations.”

Indeed, Gingrich has spoken often about his galatic inspiration. For example, as he wrote in his 1996 memoir, To Renew America:

Isaac Asimov was shaping my view of the future in equally profound ways. …For a high school student who loved history, Asimov’s most exhilarating invention was the ‘psychohistorian’ Hari Seldon. The term does not refer to Freudian analysis but to a kind of probabilistic forecasting of the future of whole civilizations. The premise was that, while you cannot predict individual behavior, you can develop a pretty accurate sense of mass behavior.

Gingrich’s sense of grandiosity is by now famous, but his reverence for Seldon underscores the planet-sized ambitions Gingrich held, as helps elucidate his fascination with grand, futuristic projects. In a doodle of Gingrich’s recently published in Slate, the then-Speaker wrote that his two primary missions were to be an “Advocate of civilization” and “definer of civilization.” Another doodle “shows Gingrich (the “system designer”) at the hub of concentric circles featuring his staff, key supporters, the media, constituents, and the public.”

Alyssa

Invasion Of The Humanity-Snatchers

Mike Wall argues in Scientific American that alien movies might be back because we’re at a moment when scientific discoveries make the prospect of extraterrestrial life more plausible:

Just 20 years ago, scientists had yet to find a single planet beyond our own solar system. Now the count of confirmed extrasolar planets tops 550, with many more about to be added to the list. In February, for example, scientists announced that NASA’s Kepler space telescope had detected 1,235 candidate alien worlds in its first four months of operation. Of those, 54 likely orbit in their host stars’ habitable zone — the range of distances that could support liquid water. These candidate planets need to be confirmed by follow-up observations, but NASA researchers have estimated that at least 80 percent will end up being the real deal. And last year, astronomers reported strong evidence that the Saturn moon Enceladus likely harbors a huge and salty ocean beneath its icy crust. Subsurface oceans are also suspected to occur on other moons, such as Saturn’s Titan and Europa, a satellite of Jupiter. In short, the prospect that life exists beyond Earth — and perhaps even beyond our solar system — is becoming more and more likely. This is big news that affects the way many people view our species and its place in the universe.

All of that is true, though I’m not sure how much it penetrates the public consciousness. Our public space program is a policy afterthought, our anxieties about the math and science performance of American students in comparison to their foreign counterparts are more about winning the future on this planet than about building it on another one. If terrorism is our great foreign policy fear, that lends itself less to grand invasion metaphors and more to stealthy, unnerving small invasions and quick strikes. I wonder instead if some of the rise in alien movies comes from a sense of unease about what it means to be human.

One of the few interesting things about Cowboys and Aliens was the prospect, before it became clear how Daniel Craig acquired his nifty, alien-killing bracelet, that in captivity he’d become something other than entirely human, that he was standing between two species and two worlds but part of neither. Whether it’s Jason Silva calling for humanity to embrace the grandness of its ambitions and its potential; SyFy shows like Eureka and Alphas that suggest that rather than dividing us into binary categories of men and superman we’re all somewhere on a continuum; or the increasing integration of technology into our lives, affecting the way we live and think, increasingly, the aliens are us.

Update

I should note that of course Zack is right that alien invasion movies are mostly about giving us an enemy who isn’t the Russians or the Chinese to fight, and that makes us feel like we’re not the big bad invaders that we are in Iraq and Afghanistan. That said, if alien movies are about scientific anxiety, which I think is part of the equation, I think the anxiety’s more about the meaning of humanness than it is about the idea that we’re about to make first contact.

NEWS FLASH

Perry’s Moon Shot: Accusing Obama Of Leaving Astronauts To ‘Hitchhike Into Space’ | Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) looks increasingly likely to launch a presidential campaign as he takes every opportunity to criticize President Obama. In a sharply worded statement, Perry accused Obama of “leaving American astronauts with no alternative but to hitchhike into space.” Texas is home to the Johnson Space Center, and Perry says he’s outraged that the U.S. is halting its leadership in space exploration. Perry charges that the administration “continues to lead federal agencies and programs astray, this time forcing NASA away from its original purpose of space exploration, and ignoring its groundbreaking past and enormous future potential.”

Alyssa

‘Questionable Content’ Cartoonist Jeph Jacques On Post-College Career Paths, the Space Program, and What He’s Learned From Readers

Questionable Content, Jeph Jacques’ tale of post-college discontent, Massachusetts coffee shops, and tiny eccentric robots is one of the most famous and emotionally realized comics published online. Over the years, Jacques’ characters have run small businesses, entered treatment for depression, bonded over Toto songs, and grappled with what to do when weapons-grade lasers get installed in your personal computer. Jacques was kind enough to take some time to answer my questions about the stalled professional life of his main character, Marten Reed, what the world would look like if the U.S. hadn’t given up on space exploration, and what he’s learned about drawing lesbian characters from his readers.

With the exception of Dora, who is a small business owner, and Raven, who’s back to school, finding career paths seem like fairly low priorities for your characters. Is that an intentional decision to leave a clear path to focus on their emotional lives? A function of time moving more slowly in the strip than it is in the real world? Is it a function of living in a college town without a lot of non-academic industries or a terrible economy? And whatever happened to Hannelore’s counting business?

A lot of it is based on who I was in my twenties, and the Northampton folks I know who are that age now. When you’re living in a college town and all you’ve got is a liberal arts degree, you’re pretty much gonna take whatever job you can get that pays the bills and isn’t too demanding. I think the philosophy is that working a job that is relatively low-responsibility and low-committment gives you more time and energy to focus on the stuff you REALLY care about. That’s certainly how I felt about it when I was 23!

But I also think that is a bit of an illusion and a trap that you can get caught in. Even if it’s a low commitment job, you’re still giving it hours and days and months and years of your time — suddenly you’re 25, or 29, and you haven’t really “done anything” with your life, and you’re not entirely sure how that happened. And that’s something I’m planning on exploring more in the relatively near future, with Marten in particular.

I imagine that Hanners still does the counting business on the side. With her family connections, she probably doesn’t actually NEED to work to support herself, but it’s important to be at least somewhat free of that kind of a family dependency. Working at CoD is more of an enrichment exercise for her than a means to make money.
Read more

Alyssa

This Week In The ‘Red Mars Book’ Club

I floated the idea last week of doing a book club on Kim Stanley Robinson’s Red Mars, the first book in his three-part exploration of human colonization of the Red Planet and the attendant issues of climate change, relationships between Muslims and the West, and how we process culture change in a world of increasing longevity. Enough people seem to be in that we’re going for it, so this is how it’ll work. Let’s read parts 1 and 2—up to, but not including “The Crucible” for Friday. I’ll write a post outlining some issues during the day, and we’ll hash them out in comments.

Alyssa

Book Club

As veteran readers know, I love doing book clubs on the blog. So let’s get one started for the summer. Normally I take requests and we vote, but I actually wanted to propose a book myself this time. I’d love to revisit Kim Stanley Robinson’s Red Mars since it will, somewhat unbelievably, be 20 years old this summer, and explores everything from the relationship between Islam and the West to futurist architecture. Let me know over the weekend if you’re interested, and if we’ve got enough people, we’ll kick off next week and I’ll post the first set of chapters we’ll tackle on Monday.

Yglesias

Prospects for Bipartisanship

200px-The-caves-of-steel-doubleday-cover

Reihan Salam talks to the Economist:

DIA: What are some areas where you think Republicans can successfully work with Democrats in the future.

Mr Salam: In the far future, I imagine that there will be bipartisan cooperation on space colonisation and efforts to terraform Mars. In the nearer term, I’d like to see Republicans work closely with the Obama White House on education, an area where Jeb Bush and Arne Duncan, the secretary of education, agree on everything important. I’d also like to see cooperation on Medicare reform, but that won’t happen. Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree on giving states and local governments more flexibility when it comes to designing transportation initiatives and welfare-to-work programmes. Efforts to decentralise government united congressional Republicans and the Clinton White House, and perhaps we’ll see more of that under Barack Obama.

On space colonization, I’m afraid I have to strenuously disagree. The problem is that the Spacers will inevitable become politically independent of earth, and then use their command over superior natural resources and robots to oppress us.

On education, I’m basically in agreement. There are, however, fundamental limits to the potential scope for cross-party cooperation on much of anything as long as conservative activists succeed in making it all-but-impossible for Republican politicians to embrace taxes of any kind. Their current stance toward fiscal issues points in the long run toward their not being any money with which to fund education programs of any kind.

Yglesias

Education Policy on the Moon

s_full_moon_1.jpg

Revisiting Barack Obama’s education speech, this bit near the beginning touched on some interesting themes:

I know there are some who believe we can only handle one challenge at a time. They forget that Lincoln helped lay down the transcontinental railroad, passed the Homestead Act, and created the National Academy of Sciences in the midst of Civil War. Likewise, President Roosevelt didn’t have the luxury of choosing between ending a depression and fighting a war. President Kennedy didn’t have the luxury of choosing between civil rights and sending us to the moon. And we don’t have the luxury of choosing between getting our economy moving now and rebuilding it over the long term.

I agree with Obama’s conclusion, but this Moon analogy seems terrible. It’s true that there was no zero-sum tradeoff between civil rights and the moon, but at the same time we obviously did have the luxury of just not going to the moon. The point I would make about education is that the quality of the education the current generation of children receive is critical to the economic well-being of the country 20, 30, and 40 years from now and if screw it up, you can’t get the kids back in school. We really don’t have the luxury of choosing, but Kennedy did.

The Lincoln business, meanwhile, is one of congress’ great untold stories. People generally don’t think about this very much, but one important consequence of secession was to radically shift the balance of power in Congress since almost every southern member was gone. Suddenly, the super-empowered northern-based Republican majority could pass all sorts of legislation on all sorts of topics. And legislate they did—Homestead Act, all kinds of trade protections, railroad schemes, etc. Just imagine would happen in congress today if the South seceded? It would change everything! And, obviously, it’s not as if there was less regional polarization back then. Conversely, what if Southern Democrats hadn’t seceded back in 1860-61 and had just instead decided to mount a ton of filibusters of all Lincoln’s key legislative priorities? Of course back then we didn’t have the present-day understanding that routine filibusters are okay. But just for fun, project today’s alleged supermajority requirement back to the election of 1860 and a Southern decision that obstructionism was a better path to the preservation of slavery than secession.

Yglesias

By Request: Space Flight

astronaut_free_flight_above_earth_1.jpg

Max asks about the great beyond:

I, sir, would like to now what your issue with the space program. And by issue, I mean, what exactly are you beefing about? NASA itself? Launching people into space in general? The ‘no waste’ argument of black boxing the solar system (already done, actually)? The argument that the money could be spent on other expensive science projects (known as ‘we could fund MY project with that money instead’ argument)?

The first place to start is that, of course, we have two different space programs — one military and one civilian. The existence of some sort of military concern with outer space is natural for a great power, but this is an area in which we tend to go too far. Instead of agreeing to abide by and help enforce the existing international law on the demilitarization of space, the United States has in recent years been pushing the envelop toward the militarization of space complete with a Bush administration National Space Strategy that sets perpetual military hegemony in space as a national goal. The upshot of this sort of policymaking is to help create a self-justifying “space arms race” with the Chinese in which Chinese responses to our moves become the justification for further moves that lead to further Chinese responses and further moves. It’s bad for you, it’s bad for me, it’s bad for the world, but it’s good for the aerospace industry.

Then you have the civilian space program for science and exploration purposes. This is a fine idea. My only beef with it is that the program has been disproportionately focused on the idea of manned space exploration. Human beings, being fragile creates who evolved on the planet earth, turn out to be hard to send into space. They also, being humans, tend not to be interested in taking extremely long trips even though many interesting things in space are very far away. Under the circumstances, it’s just not very practical to send human beings into space unless there’s something important that only human beings can do. And in recent decades, there just having been the sort of compelling projects that justify the difficulties of manned space flight. Instead, we’ve been making up missions — most recently the preposterous idea of a manned mission to Mars — in order to justify the human-oriented space program.

But what we ought to do is leave the manned space flight to eccentric billionaires looking to do something weird, and focus our civilian space activities on doing science and exploration through unmanned probes and telescopes and the like. There’s lots of perfectly legitimate things for NASA to be doing, including sending vehicles to other planets to tell us more about them and establishing better systems for tracking (and better understanding) the asteroids and comets that are flying around.

Yglesias

NASA vs. Obama

One of the less important things I liked about Barack Obama back during the primaries was that on a couple of occasions he indicated a desire to cut back on NASA’s wasteful human space exploration missions in favor of doing more actual science. It appears that this has not endeared him to NASA, and that the space agency is proving to be a major dark cloud in a transition process that’s otherwise gone very smoothly.

Older

Switch to Mobile