Shanghai Moon

As a species, we have never really had any good motivations to go into space. Despite the altruistic humanism of John F. Kennedy’s support of the Apollo program, which in reality represents the high watermark of human achievement in space, the only reason we went to the moon in 1969 was because the Reds beat America to the punch on every other astronomical first. Lunar naysayers and conspiracy aficionados need not respond with accusations of a Hollywood fraud, nobody is listening. The perceived neutering of communist Russia made manifest by the slide rulers and pocket protectors of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, dulled the blades of American interplanetary cultural imperialism. Since Apollo seventeen, the last time man set foot on the moon, American space exploration has been uneventful. Fourteen astronauts have died and their noble sacrifices have been for what? To build the world’s largest orbiting Lego toy? Resting on the laurels of the Apollo program, America, Russia, the European Union and China have really just exploited space as a means to further telecommunications and espionage. Taking a page from the Viking attitude toward North America, we know space is there, we have seen it, and as a people we seem mostly content to leave it alone. Without any group or nation setting a moral benchmark to the great beyond, and the very real fact that we can barely manage earthbound affairs, outer space is in danger of becoming nothing more than another grounds for economic exploitation. Said exploitation, in its newest iteration, comes through Sir Richard Charles Nicholas Branson, dyslexic turned billionaire eccentric media mogul. Apparently being worth billions of dollars is now a knightly virtue. Branson, through his company Virgin Galactic, has planned to turn space into a tourist attraction beginning in 2008. For only a quarter of a million dollars you too can train in the Virgin Galactic spaceport and then strap into a commercial rocket for the most fun you can have clothed. Guffaws about joining the thermosphere high club aside, does anybody else not see the inherent wrong in this? Perhaps I am still somewhat moved by John Kennedy and his thoughts that space exploration and technology require man to give it a conscious and make it a force for the greater good. Some small shred of my soul that has not otherwise become filled with the malaise of 21st century North America, still believes that there is knowledge out there that is meant for all people. Now the door is open to anybody with six figures of disposable income and a desire for a cheep thrill. My nightmare ensues: Reporter: “Miss Hilton, Miss Hilton, what was it like going into space?” Paris Hilton: “Yeah space…its really empty and I think it would be really hot to have sex without gravity because you know gravity holds us all down and we should all be free without gravity” Reporter: “Tom Cruise how did you feel about your time in space?” Tom Cruise: “I felt a fear that the intergalactic Lord Xenu would detect my presence and come get me in his space plane. NO PICTURES OF MY BABY!” As much as we should consider that actors in space seems like a preamble to the apocalypse, there is a greater issue at hand. Since the Ansari X-Prize, an international contest to develop a reusable space vehicle, was won in October of 2004 it will have only taken four years for commercial space flight to become a reality. Virgin Galactic’s pimped out ride, the SpaceShipTwo, is, in fact, a direct descendent of the X-Prize winning SpaceShipOne. Assuming that Virgin Galactic launches on time and as projected, one is left to ask a simple question, what’s next? From Mercury 3 to Apollo 11 it only took NASA eight years to go from sub orbital fights to landing on the moon. If Branson has as much business interest in space as NASA had impetus to beat the Ruskies then we could potentially see a Virgin Galactic mission to the moon by 2012. For the record, G.W. Bush has promised that Americans will return to the moon no later than 2014. While the American’s planted a few flags on Lunar soil, it was always in the spirit of, “for all mankind”. What if, like a swaggering Spaniard of the fifteenth century, Richard Branson, or an appropriate proxy, goes to the moon and plants a flag claming the moon as an acquisition of Virgin Galactic and its shareholders? Is it really that unrealistic to expect? Space exploration requires more of a conscience than business, by its nature, can possess. Business is driven by bottom line day by day profits. Do we really want monopolies and economic competition defining our ventures into outer space? I don’t suggest that governments have any more of a moral compass than Virgin Galactic would, let’s be honest, the only way you could get America back to the moon in a hurry would be if Osama Bin Laden filmed a video from the Sea of Tranquility. So in the final assessment who is to say what would be worse, Richard Branson presents “The Moon” featuring Blue Man Group or American space marines leading a coalition of the willing to liberate the moon from the evil freedom haters that have oppressed it for so long? Should we really be forced to chose between these two options? Does it really ask too much of this cynical world to harkon back to the ideology of the past, even if it was an excuse for cultural imperialism, and have people believe that somethings are worth doing for intangible reasons? Becasue if nobody is willing to belive that there is a greater good that is worth the investment, then perhaps we should just let Branson conquer space.