How should off world settlements be governed?

[Bregor]

For some time now Elon Musk has had the goal of establishing a city with a population of one million people on Mars.

Personally, I have my doubts if this is achievable any time within this century. The technical, financial, and political problems that have to be overcome are enormous. But lets suppose it does happen. How should such a settlement be governed?

Let's set up a hypothetical situation:

It is 2040. Elon Musk died just last year, knowing that his goal was within sight. The technology required has been developed and sufficient funds have been raised to establish a self-sufficient settlement on Mars. There is already a small pathfinder base on the planet, and within two years major shipments of supplies and people will begin.

The project has overwhelming support both in the US and worldwide. You are on a government commission established to recommend to congress the form of the settlements government.

What do you recommend?
Should it be an extension of the US government?
Should it be run on behalf of the UN?
Should the settlement be independent, and if so, what form should the government take?
How are the settlers chosen?

Some considerations to keep in mind:
Survival may be difficult, and the settlement will be unlikely to have much in the way of excess resources for comforts.
The settlement will by definition have to be highly technical, and have a highly tech-savvy population to survive.
Though it can be taken for granted that the initial population are believers in the cause and willing to suffer to establish the settlement, their children may not be so.

 

[Deleted member 7051]

Individual countries laying claim to entire planets or even colonies on other planets is a recipe for disaster.

 

[Qikz]

They should be governed by themselves. If Gundam has taught us anything Earth having any control over space colonies is a terrible idea and will only lead to war.

 

[Iacomus]

StarGate SG-1 kind of touched on the politics on it's run. Generally it was the first nation that got there due to their experience they had a base set up and allowed others to use their services.

In modern day it's more whoever build up their first and I assume a similiar situtation to the Space Station, it is netural but governed by both groups for the betterment of humankind.

 

[JustinBB7]

I don't know much about that kinda stuff, but just the thought children could be born on Mars sometime in the future is pretty crazy. (Even if unlikely it will be soon)

 

[mugurumakensei]

Ideally they should be self-governed and must be a form of democracy.

 

[Vector]

They should govern themselves.

Space colonialism sounds like a horrible idea.

 

[Thorn]

If Gundam has taught me anything, you better let them be independent because they might get pissed off at the earth government then drop a colony on Australia.

 

[mentok15]

None, space anarchism so we can become The Culture.

 

[Gunny T Highway]

Just let them be independent or else you will get a Gundam situation and they will start dropping colonies onto Earth.

 

[PsionBolt]

Gundam, Zone of the Enders, Blade Runner... It's always the same story. Keeping Mars people under Earth government never works out well.

 

[Grug]

Lmao at the U.N. suggestion.

 

[Eoin]

You are on a government commission established to recommend to congress the form of the settlements government.

Click to shrink...

Why would the US Congress be the body that chose the government?

If the process starts with the US government in charge, the process is already fundamentally broken at step 1. Any such decision cannot be solely in the hands of the US government.

 

[HStallion]

With an iron power fist!

 

[Bregor]

Why would the US Congress be the body that chose the government?

If the process starts with the US government in charge, the process is already fundamentally broken at step 1. Any such decision cannot be solely in the hands of the US government.

Click to shrink...

The US government would have the most power to enforce it's decision on the settlers. The FAA has to authorize every rocket launch in the US, so the project cannot go ahead without their approval.

You may assume that there are international pressures on the US, however.

 

[Mezentine]

It should be an autonomous local government. Any government based off-world is a recipe for exploitation from the jump. The wellbeing of the colonists will be out of sight and out of mind.

 

[Psittacus]

Individual countries laying claim to entire planets or even colonies on other planets is a recipe for disaster.

Click to shrink...

In general colonising space is going to be a similar disaster to our current problems with international cooperation and use of the commons, but dialled to 11.

 

[Siggy-P]

People taking the wrong lesson from Gundam.

The real lesson is that inter-planetary conventional warfare is gonna be so violent that you wanna keep as tight control on any space colonies as possible.

Realisitvally I doubt any colony is gonna be capable of independence by 2040. They'll be too reliant on earth for too many resources

 

[BossAttack]

Self governed colony. Simple. If they wish to join the US as a new state, they have every right to petition Congress to do so.

 

[Eoin]

The US government would have the most power to enforce it's decision on the settlers.

Click to shrink...

This is colonialism, and statements like this perfectly illustrate why the US cannot be in sole charge.

The FAA has to authorize every rocket launch in the US, so the project cannot go ahead without their approval.

Click to shrink...

This is not just colonialist, it's extremely short term thinking. Rockets can be launched from places on Earth other than the USA, and in any case the originating point of supply ships isn't a logical basis for determining who's in control of a community (the wish of those in control is to maintain control by strategically threatening denial of supplies).

 

[Qikz]

It should be an autonomous local government. Any government based off-world is a recipe for exploitation from the jump. The wellbeing of the colonists will be out of sight and out of mind.

Click to shrink...

There's even this problem on earth already. The government of Westminster in the UK for instance doesn't give a shit about Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland and we're neighbouring countries.

 

[ChippyTurtle]

There's this idea where Earth becomes this nexus with colonial worlds feeding it materials and products. Space mining mostly I guess.

I guess the question is how this relationship works out. Ideally, there should more than enough resources to ensure both the nexus and colonial world are wealthy, hopefully.

On one hand you would want autonomy to ensure good relations with the colony and home world. On the other hand, it would be inefficient to replicate multiple industrial processes so the colony world is gonna gain influence and importance around the fact that Earth will become dependent on it in some facet.

Better to divorce this colonial idea then no? Earth should be relying on itself to be self sufficient and other planets are merely at best population valve releases (tho with the way our population is flat lining maybe not?)

Dunno this is too much to think about, wrapping my head around a colonized world being able to provide something of value to Earth. (I mean I feel like asteroid mining shouldn't result in independent colonies, your mining asteroids)

Edit: realistically, I mean in our lifetimes, no off-earth settlement is gonna be self-sufficient. Shoot, I'm pretty sure it's gonna take multiple lifetimes before any settlement offers anything of value to Earth that isn't scientific. (Again I don't think asteroid mining should result in self sufficient colonies)

 

[Bregor]

This is colonialism, and statements like this perfectly illustrate why the US cannot be in sole charge.


This is not just colonialist, it's extremely short term thinking. Rockets can be launched from places on Earth other than the USA, and in any case the originating point of supply ships isn't a logical basis for determining who's in control of a community (the wish of those in control is to maintain control by strategically threatening denial of supplies).

Click to shrink...

I didn't claim there was any ethical basis for the US being the ones to choose, merely that they were the ones who would be most likely to be able to do so.

ITAR regulations prohibit the export of rocket technology to other countries without authorization from the government. Most of the launches will come from the US, or at best US allies.

I'm not trying to take any moral position here. I'm laying out a scenario that seems plausible to me. If you don't like it, suggest another scenario that you feel more just and where the deciding body actually has the power to enforce it's decision.

Or you could address the the question of how you think the settlement should be governed, a question which I hoped would include peoples judgement on what would be the most ethical system to apply.

 

[Planx]

As long as Mars or whatever colony is dependent on Earth for necessities, the colony would probably descend into tyranny around control of imports

 

[Qikz]

People taking the wrong lesson from Gundam.

The real lesson is that inter-planetary conventional warfare is gonna be so violent that you wanna keep as tight control on any space colonies as possible.

Realisitvally I doubt any colony is gonna be capable of independence by 2040. They'll be too reliant on earth for too many resources

Click to shrink...

I'm really not sure that's the lesson from Gundam. Especially given part of the reason the colonies were pissed off was due to the huge amount of control the Earth Federation already had over the colonies. They were taxing people to breathe despite not actually doing

You then have the issue of Earth then coming up with a group such as the titans to quell any civil unrest and at that point it's already too late. War is/would have been inevitable by then.

 

[Eoin]

Better to divorce this colonial idea then no? Earth should be relying on itself to be self sufficient and other planets are merely at best population valve releases (tho with the way our population is flat lining maybe not?)

Click to shrink...

Yes, the idea of off-world communities as being in any sense "colonies" is just poorly thought-through. That didn't work on Earth, it won't work off it.

However we also need to nix the idea of other planets as population valves. Over 80M people are born on Earth every year. There is no technological means in sight for moving any relevant fraction of that number off-planet. Virtually every human born on Earth will remain on Earth. If we ever get off-world in any meaningful sense, the bulk of off-world population growth in the medium to long term will be from off-world births.

Dunno this is too much to think about, wrapping my head around a colonized world being able to provide something of value to Earth. (I mean I feel like asteroid mining shouldn't result in independent colonies, your mining asteroids)

Edit: realistically, I mean in our lifetimes, no off-earth settlement is gonna be self-sufficient. Shoot, I'm pretty sure it's gonna take multiple lifetimes before any settlement offers anything of value to Earth that isn't scientific. (Again I don't think asteroid mining should result in self sufficient colonies)

Click to shrink...

Self-sufficiency probably isn't a useful metric to try to apply. I'm not sure there's any nation on Earth that I'd describe as being "self-sufficient". Off-world settlements could be independent without being self-sufficient or anything close to it.

Also, asteroid mining is probably just as likely as any other off-world activity to result in independent off-world communities. That'll be the first activity that produces resources on the scale needed to build a large off-planet settlement.

I'm not trying to take any moral position here.

Click to shrink...

Defaulting to the unqualified assumption that the US government is in sole charge of the entire process is taking a moral position. If you wanted to qualify that assumption in any way then you should have done so in your first post, or at least edited it when I pointed out it was colonialist.

Or you could address the the question of how you think the settlement should be governed, a question which I hoped would include peoples judgement on what would be the most ethical system to apply.

Click to shrink...

It should be determined by the settlers themselves. The most that should be decided before they're on the ground is a constitution that's robust enough to keep a democratic framework in place but flexible enough to be altered later in any way that the settlers democratically choose. They should start off unaligned to any nation, free to build their own political future as they see fit.

 

[Bufbaf]

I love how Elon Musk's death is a prerequisite in this hypothetical lol

Why! :D

 

[Thorrgal]

Wasn't Musk already writing a draft of a constitution for a possible Mars settlement?

I think he wants to be the Founding Father of a whole planet civilization lol

 

[obin_gam]

With a pile of money and lots of beautiful naked people.

 

[jetpacks was yes]

Well we're already off to the worst possible start with an unethical billionaire heading the project. Pure scifi dystopia from there on.

 

[Vilam]

It's a territory of America; treat it as such. Simple.

 

[Dennis8K]

Well, that is going to be up to the likes of Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, not you peasant.

 

[Burly]

All disputes are resolved in the arena.

 

[Bregor]

I love how Elon Musk's death is a prerequisite in this hypothetical lol

Why! :D

Click to shrink...

I wasn't interested in how Elon might want to see the settlement governed, but how the forum thought was best. So I removed him from the scenario.

 

[Kinthey]

With an iron fist!

 

[Cation]

50 year lease by establishing government.After that, it's going to be autonomous

 

[Small Red Boy]

Not enough posadism in this thread.

 

[Dennis8K]

And the people gathered around the dying Elon Musk.

"Who shall rule the Offworld Colonies, Lord Musk?"

"The strongest" whispered Musk.

 

[Gabbo]

Until the settlement can be self sufficient, it's basically at the mercy of whomever sends it the goods required to survive. If you mean day to day? You'd set up local bodies that answer to the settlers and maybe sends info back, but you're going to get dystopian if that settler government has to call earth to get anything done.

Base laws on UN human rights codes/etc, but actually calling the shots would need to be done locally. Who gives a shit what Washington thinks if they cant do shit about it.

Not enough posadism in this thread.

Click to shrink...

Does this hold up when youre the one landing on a foreign planet in the ufo?

 

[More_Badass]

Musk establishing a colony is only going to lead to some interplanetary Fordlandia nightmares.

 

[BlueStarEXSF]

If the UN was more than a joke, I'd say they should oversee the initial development of the settlement until it transitions into an independent entity.

 

[TheXbox]

Anything is preferable to corporate governance, but I see that as the most likely outcome.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

Billionaires will declare themselves emperors. There's no alternative.

 

[Deleted member 18400]

Lets be realistic, whoever pays for the colony is going to run the colony.

Money talks.

 

[Tavernade]

Given the difficulties of the early colony years and the fact they likely won't be self sustainable without off world help, it makes sense to me that the initial colony would be run like an experiment of some kind. Like, they answer to NASA aligned with other similar organisations, instead of being under a specific government's rule. Once the colony is sustainable second generation Martians can leave the earth linked colony and start their own.

 

[jroc74]

Should it be an extension of the US government?

Click to shrink...

With the way the GOP are.....hell no to this. It would have to be a possible radical change to the US government.

Billionaires will declare themselves emperors. There's no alternative.

Click to shrink...

Lets be realistic, whoever pays for the colony is going to run the colony.

Money talks.

Click to shrink...

Basically, maybe sadly...this.

 

[Nola]

My guess is that like today with SpaceX, any sort of settlement will be deeply dependent on revenue derived from and subsidization from a government. So as such it will really be up to the home country to determine how that settlement should be governed.

But in terms of day to day, yeah, you can set up a local government structure, but my guess is the need for that would be a long ways off since pretty much everything, from food to housing, will be dependent on the host government to supply(whether through direct materials or subsidization of a private company). And so systems will simply be set up in a way that allocates those resources and in a way that allows the growth objectives to be maintained and advanced.

My guess is that For All Mankind's depiction is pretty close to accurate, just replace NASA with SpaceX and the added dynamics of privatized operations. Basically a mix of civilian and military agents slowly expanding the colony and looking for resources and ways to become more self suistaining. Once that's achieved you'll kind of already have a structure in place to govern from. If you start growing exponentially than you would begin looking to areas of self governance.

Though thought exercises like this also make me realize how much I hate what America has done with their space program and instead of self-investment, subsidizing private companies, and all the authoritarian bullshit that comes with it, that have the power to eventually become as powerful as governments themselves.

 

[thewienke]

Human history has shown that communication and travel time will probably dictate off world independence more than anything.

In the 20/21st century with its relatively instant communication and rapid travel time is more the aberration than the preceding millennia of empires and their colonies. So a return to something on the level of 17th and 18th century transit and communication times would absolutely lead to independence movements or at least highly autonomous local governments paying whatever the space equivalent of "tribute" (tariffs and taxes?) would be.

Or if the colonies are more "Enders Game" level of transit times then the question is almost irrelevant as the colonies will need to be autonomous from day one.

 

[DreadPirateRoberts]

They should be independently governed, ideally the settlement would be a multinational project not just space feudalism under Bezos/ Musk

 

[Nooblet]

There will never ever be a situation where a substantial amount of population in a location gets governed by people who live far away, and the said people remain happy/not feel neglected...period.

If we do end up setting up proper colonies which can sustain itself then they will always ask for independence. A colony in Moon would basically be the only colony that Earth would be able to govern due to the proximity of it as communications will be near instantaneous and travel/shipping will be quick. Mars? Forget it..once they have a population of few hundred thousand to a few million they'll ask for independence...The Expanse style.


Distance, as in the time it takes to travel as well as the time it takes to communicate will be the single most important factors (aside from population) in determining whether a colony can remain a colony or whether it'll want independence.