This is in a New York Times newsletter this morning, and it seems entirely appropriate to share it here:
A big space mission like Artemis II can sometimes feel like a unifying moment for humanity. After all, what better than a cold, indifferent cosmos to remind us of our shared status as earthlings?
But humanity's endeavors in space have always been entangled with humanity's politics back on Earth. Today, my colleague Selam Gebrekidan, an investigative reporter focused on China's space program, is writing with a reminder about Artemis II: As awe-inspiring as it might be, it's not a mission to bring humanity together. In fact, it's part of a high-stakes space race between the U.S. and China.
I can think of no conceivable gains to humankind as a consequence of wasting so many of the world's resources blasting a few people into space to explore the dark side of the moon.
I strongly suspect that it will be claimed that there are some spin-off benefits, but the probability that these could have been found without the excesses of this programme is very likely, and there is no prospect whatsoever of human habitation of the moon, or of the exploitation of its resources to benefit people here on Earth.
It is therefore appropriate to note, as the New York Times do, that this programme is nothing more than a giant exercise in political pettiness waged between world leaders with very small, and easily bruised, egos.
Is it possible that we might ever get to the point where politicians might think about the greater good rather than meaningless point scoring?
I can live in hope.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Yes that sounds about right. I think the allure of visiting the moon still exists, yet at the same time there are more important things we should be concerned about. What we get though is a lot of media coverage about it. The BBC went over the top with its coverage even with reports of past missions and how people felt. There is a big disconnect between what are the important news items and which are not! But I guess it does distract people from the current woes and discontents!
Much to agree with
A voyage into lunacy.
Bill, you might enjoy this book: https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691281285/lunacy
The best we can hope for is that Artemis will help develop some useful transferable technologies that might make life better in some ways. But that isn’t really enough to justify it.
In the short term there won’t be lunar habitation, but it is expected, quite possibly making user of natural tunnels to provide more stable temperatures and protection from radiation and meteorites.
If we want to ultimately explore and colonize other planets, then a lunar base is likely an important step towards that.
In terms of resources, Helium-3 gets mentioned a little, plus silicon for solar panels, but mostly not for sending to earth, instead for what can make a lunar colony more viable and sustainable, or provide resources for a launch from the moon to Mars or further.
As much as the space races have often been and beating asking country, it’s also worth noting how the ISS has been more collaborative, so progress in space has sometimes been unifying. Artemis II includes a Canadian astronaut, for example, although it’s a future lunar base that would be expected to need cooperation.
Shall we get real here? We will do none of those things. At best, we might, and I stress the ‘might’, survive on earth, and this folly undermines the chance of that.
This exercise is a perfect example of neoliberal folly.
I can agree that what was said in the New York times newsletter.
And yet, if someone is not moved by the picture of Earth rise from the moon, and many similar pictures, I feel a bit sorry for them.
There are few direct benefits from moon shots. Yes, in one sense there are better things we could do with the money (then again MMT says money is not in short supply). But, sometimes, despite all the negatives, it is worth doing something for its own sake.
Fortunately I am not yet cynical enough to think that only the strictly utilitarian is worth doing. There is more to being human than that. I’m glad the moon shot is happening. 🙂
You, I presume, are aware that the photographs are taken by cameras, not by people? Think of the truly extraordinary photos of deep(ish) space taken by satellites which cost a fraction of this pie-in-the-sky ego trip/space race. They are the worthwhile part of space vehicles, not this stuff.
There is some science to be done – but most of it could be done as well and more cheaply by unmanned spacecraft. This project is largely one of demonstrating power and capability. Planting flags and claiming territory – physical or psychological. And the geopolitical context is that China will try to do it too. So it seems the US wants to push its “manifest destiny” beyond the surface of the planet and claim what it can – for what good it will do the rest of us here on earth.
Just like the Apollo programme, when the US was competing against the USSR. The context then was the interminable war in Vietnam. Now it is the war against Iran.
Agreed
Like many who come here the attraction to me is out of a desire for a rational world.
One day, in the future, our planet will go the way of all planets as part of the life cycle of a galaxy etc., particularity bodies like the sun which one day will burn itself out and be more of a threat to life than sustaining it. That’s if we are able to live this long on the planet we are poisoning.
I don’t see anything wrong in humanity building up capacity and knowledge for space travel and survival. The void beckons us as our future. For me the Artemis mission is a bit pointless though – robotic ships could do what four men are doing. So I share your scepticism – the oil wells we see burning and munitions exploding in wars in the Ukraine, Sudan, Yemen, Lebanon, Israel and Iran are more toxic and in need of more attention right now.
At the moment we are making an enemy of our own future with the conflicts among us; there is not enough money allocated to looking after the poor of nations nor the displaced of others. We’re making a bit of a horlicks of it aren’t we? The contradictions of it all are immense. Maybe we are seeing just a ‘land claim’ to the stars in competition with other nations. But we may also be seeing more far sighted people at work too – the work on these projects would have started long before Trump got back into power or China was seen as a threat? You don’t just go into space.
Humanity eh? Messy isn’t it?
Yes
A technical correction – it is not the dark side of the moon (thanks Pink Floyd!), but the far side of the moon. Consider when there is a solar eclipse – when the Moon is between the Sun and Earth. The far side will be very brightly lit!
If there is great scientific value to go again to the Moon, construct a base, and then head to Mars, it really would be better if it was done under the UN banner with all nations available to contribute. Otherwise it is fraught with increasing international tensions. Ultimately if one side has a base and blocks the other side from trying to build their own, I can see destruction of satellites leading to a Kressler Syndrome where a chain reaction of satellite debris crashing into other satellites causing more debris until it becomes impossible to launch anything for probably centuries – and that will be the end of the Lunar (and Mars) base.
That was the first album I ever bought. Forgive me.
Enjoy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uX2cS8wvQHI
ace film.
A spectacular demonstration of industrial capitalism’s domination of nature, ostensibly in pursuit of ‘human progress’, at the expense of our immediate planetary environment.
If you want to see how it’s going to work out in space, watch For All Mankind on apple TV.
a) I don’t have Apple TV
b) It isn’t going to work. We can’t survive being in space for long
Agree Richard. The most telling thing from the BBC’s over the top coverage was a quote from an astronaut who had been in the ISS for months, (or maybe it was one of the Apollo moon landers), – saying when he got back on earth , he just sat and gazed at people coming and going from his local shopping mall – realising what a miracle it was.<p>
Check out William Shatner trying to talk about how empty space is and how we should appreciate what we have here on Earth while Jeff Bezos sprays champagne and hoots all over him. Shatner a former alcoholic as well.
Says it all really about neoliberal capitalism. The price of everything and the value of nothing.