# Who will rule Space?



## TimRise77 (Mar 15, 2017)

I'm curious to have some people's thoughts.  Having taking a class in college on colonialism and a course on multiculturalism in graduate school, I'm curious what might happen when space travel and settlements/colonies on either other planets or via space stations come to fruition.  Will these become property of the countries, corporations, institutions or regimes that put them in place, or will we see that they belong to the citizens of Earth?  And what might happen once the colonists don't want to be a part of the colonizing power?  Will it be much like what we've seen in our history?


----------



## Dave (Mar 15, 2017)

Firstly, I cannot see a united Earth government anytime soon, which is a prerequisite to having the colonies under Earth control. The United Nations isn't anything like as powerful as science fiction stories postulated it would become, and the major powers continue to have a veto on decisions. If there is a space colony it will not be a UN colony. In addition, I can't really see any exo-planets being colonised soon, so the colonies that you are thinking about will be Mars and the Belt. The distances are too great for Earth to be able to keep a grip on distant colonies on exo-planets, but let's assume for the sake of this argument that they can be colonised anyway:-

Corporations have the most power today, _Amazon_ and_ Google _dictate tax regimes to governments and _News Corp. _influences elections, but they don't (yet) have the same kind of power predicted in scifi novels written in, and films made in, the 1970's. So, it is anyone's guess if they will continue to have power, or ever achieve such power. If they do then, it will be the _Weyland-Yutani Corporation _or the _Tyrell Corporation _who will own these new colonies because they have the money and the resources. However, I think independence is something inbuilt into the human psyche, and it would not be very long before such colonies freed themselves from the shackles of those corporations. I'd say 50-100 years. If you are making a comparison with colonialism and imperialism then I think that is very likely to be true.


----------



## Starbeast (Mar 16, 2017)

With the way things are going (which I've noticed getting worse since the 1970's), I do not see any positive future in colonizing on any planet or moon. Definitely not in our life-time.

Perhaps, after a great period of catastrophic man-made and natural disasters. Humankind may attempt living beyond Earth, thousands of years from now.


----------



## Abernovo (Mar 16, 2017)

You'll probably be aware of the international space treaties, creating a legal framework for exploration in space, which is mostly based on the International Law of the Sea. As such, it is illegal for individuals, including corporations, to own planets, planetoids, or other bodies of matter in the Solar System. Equally, a country may not claim ownership of an extraterrestrial body of matter, but they may stake a claim for a territory, such as a segment of land for research purposes, in a similar manner to how Antarctica has been divided into areas of interest, without sovereignty. 

Which is fine on paper, but:
1) it is based on the law of the sea, and space is not the sea, despite Star Trek being basically an 18thC naval adventure in outer space; and
2) everybody agrees it needs updating, as it was written when only government agencies were involved in space exploration, and we all know loopholes will be exploited.

I can imagine corporate-communal councils, where the colonists of a particular region of Mars (for example) form a a governing body for self-regulation, but with input from the organisation which enabled settlement. The input level could vary from lax suggestions and only safety being enforced strictly, to full-on authoritarian corporate paranoia (no mention must be made to outsiders of what is discussed, corporate gag orders) -- I cannot imagine the latter being self-sustaining, as the colony would be too far away for the policy to be enforced too rigorously, although they might make it difficult for colonists, at the risk of bad PR. 

There could (would probably have to be) inter-colony co-operation as well, for the sake of survival, but it would take a long time for any planetary government. That said, any government, from council upwards, creates a voice, and would therefore suggest representation in a new Solar System intergovernmental chamber, like the UN, but with an outward-looking (from Earth) mandate.

In terms of colonists no longer wishing to be part of the colonising power, the best result would be if they were either self-sufficient (a long process), or had a resource which was vital to Earth, and they had the equivalent of union representation and diplomatic talks could then be held. But they'd probably have to break contracts to do so. Of course, talking seems to be low on the agenda for some politicians.


----------



## Dave (Mar 16, 2017)

Treaties can be torn up. The fact is that space exploration will cost money and corporations will have that money. When I mentioned the _Weyland-Yutani Corporation _and the _Tyrell Corporation, _I was thinking of the history of the _Honourable East India Company_ (HEIC).


----------



## farntfar (Mar 16, 2017)

Although I see extraterrestrial colonies being essentially independent in a reasonably short space of time, because of the difficulty of enforcing a dependence given the distances involved, I would suggest that the colonies might keep a sort of national identity or pride. (Although I expect it to become inaccurate over time. ( like American Irishness or Italianness etc.) **)

I'm thinking along the lines of Julian May's Galactic Milieu books where you have French planets, Italian planets etc.
It's interesting on that point to notice that one of the most enthusiastically independent planets in the books is full of Scotsmen. 

(** I notice in my own case how out of date my Britishness is after only 18 years living in France)

Of course in most SF books some sort of almost instantaneous communication is predicated, even if not rather longer travel times.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Mar 16, 2017)

Abernovo said:


> As such, it is illegal for individuals, including corporations, to own planets, planetoids, or other bodies of matter in the Solar System.



It was illegal to exploit the Arctic, until the ice began to melt and governments saw the big profits they were ignoring by not stepping in while conditions were favourable.


----------



## Abernovo (Mar 16, 2017)

Dave said:


> Treaties can be torn up.


Hence my comment on the consensus of existing treaties being out of date, and that loopholes would be exploited. 


Brian G Turner said:


> It was illegal to exploit the Arctic, until the ice began to melt and governments saw the big profits they were ignoring by not stepping in while conditions were favourable.


And thus, my third paragraph suggested corporate colonisation, and therefore, exploitation. ;-)
I'd agree that such exploitation is inevitable, Brian. It's only a question of which principles guide it.

One of the issues with present treaties is that they have never been fully thought out and remain based on a very much Earthbound thinking.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Mar 16, 2017)

Well, considering that Mars always seems portrayed as separatist in SF, I pity the corporation/government that lays claim to that planet.


----------



## Parson (Mar 16, 2017)

The amount of control or influence a company or nation can extend over a colony is inversely proportional to the length of time it takes to put some muscle behind your law/demand/plan etc.


----------



## J Riff (Mar 16, 2017)

There's no law, off this planet, deal with it, Earth-fleas.


----------



## Cathbad (Mar 16, 2017)

With the privatization of the space industry it becomes even more probable that corporations will control space.


----------



## J Riff (Mar 16, 2017)

And they may announce that any day now. 'Space' being approximately .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% x 10 to the trillionth power, of visible space.


----------



## Cathbad (Mar 16, 2017)

J Riff said:


> And they may announce that any day now. 'Space' being approximately .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% x 10 to the trillionth power, of visible space.



Yes  I suppose I should have said "Relative" Space.


----------



## TimRise77 (Mar 16, 2017)

farntfar said:


> (** I notice in my own case how out of date my Britishness is after only 18 years living in France)



Identity sure is a hot button here in America.  It appears to be most everywhere.  It's a subject I like exploring when I can.  Thanks for your input.


----------



## TimRise77 (Mar 16, 2017)

Brian G Turner said:


> It was illegal to exploit the Arctic, until the ice began to melt and governments saw the big profits they were ignoring by not stepping in while conditions were favourable.



This is some of the premise behind Greg Rucka's "Whiteout" graphic novels.


----------



## J Riff (Mar 17, 2017)

I claim outer space for the human empire! All planets are henceforth enemy planets! Etc. The premise behind Nemesis The Warlock comix, a loverly Brit comic around the same time as Judge Dredd and 2000 A.D.


----------



## DrMclony (Mar 18, 2017)

Here is one thought: it might be crowd funded by average joe and janes. It will be a "people's colony" funded by millions of individuals. As such, it will be forced to become a democratic independent nation, with member citizens from all over the Earth coming together. Imagine the disaster that might be! Especially when the "votes" an individual get becomes determined by the funds they put forward. Or their ancestors put forward... I see a dystopian colony story growing here...


----------



## Mirannan (Mar 21, 2017)

Good question. A couple of questions: Which bit of space and at what date? If you are talking about the Solar System and relatively near future, then I would say who ever gets of their collective arse first and does something about meaningful space presence; right now, if forced to guess I would say the Chinese or maybe some private company.

If talking about space as a whole, the only correct answer is nobody. There are places out there 100 million lightyears from the nearest _*galaxy*_; a distance at which one would need serious optical aid to even see the Milky Way.

What's out there, hiding in the dark?


----------



## SilentRoamer (Mar 21, 2017)

I agree that space exploration will be driven by the Corporations of the future. We can already see it now - governments finding it harder and harder to justify huge tax expenditure to their electorate, this is especially difficult given that there are many missions with operational aspects far longer than the lifespan of an individual human being.

We can already see a movement towards Corporations spearheaded by idealistic individuals with vast wealth making moves towards the stars. SpaceX have done all sorts of things that Commercially have never been done in space and also done things that have never before been done. I think (hope) that these very wealthy individuals will be enough of a driving force and presence to give us the nudge we need to get to the stars.

Because, unfortunately, if we don't head to the stars we are pretty much doomed. Even if we don't die out completely I would expect to see boom/bust periods for the human race over the next thousands of years.

I am reading George R. Stewart The Earth Abides at the moment and this quote struck me as pertinent to spreading in space and ensuring mans survival:

_“As for man, there is little reason to think that he can in the long run escape the fate of other creatures, and if there is a biological law of flux and reflux, his situation is now a highly perilous one. During ten thousand years his numbers have been on the upgrade in spite of wars, pestilences, and famines. This increase in population has become more and more rapid. Biologically, man has for too long a time been rolling an uninterrupted run of sevens.”_

Now I think it unlikely, given the ingenuity and powers of human minds that there would be much short of an earth shattering cataclysm that could cause human extinction, but living, not survival is the point of life and what better way to live as a species than to reach for the stars?


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 21, 2017)

As a species  we might not even get the opportunity to extensively colonize space.


----------



## SilentRoamer (Mar 21, 2017)

Yeah @BAYLOR I don't expect it is a given at all.

I highly doubt any sort of interstellar Empire could exist as it does in Space Opera, at least not with extrapolations of known science. The distances involved are just too massive and assuming we could build a craft that could get to .9C (as an example) then the timeframes are still immense and I think it hightly unlikely we will ever build something approaching any significant percentage of C.

Now an intersolar Empire might be well within our reach. Colonize Mars and the belts - thinking the belts would probably be great for mineral extraction and have the advantage of not being at the bottom of a gravity well (at least not a planetary sized one). I think our most likely chance though are the multi national corporations that aren't held responsible to a tax payer.


----------

