17 thoughts on “The Latest Wokist Assault”

  1. The Planetary Protection Agency, to me, is an example of something that be a law with somebody’s name attached.

    If you create an agency whose only purpose and power is to throw up road blocks, don’t be surprised if all it does is throw up road blocks. If they weren’t throwing up road blocks, they couldn’t justify their existence, because that’s all they’re tasked to do.

  2. When I started skimming the manifesto, I began to wonder if it wasn’t another Sokol hoax.

    But then, I remembered that this is 2020.

  3. These people thrive off the kindness of others. When that kindness ends; these people will have more than microbes to worry their minds.

    1. I think the correct calculus is that, at this time, tolerating them is less hassle than giving them a Chilean Helicopter ride.

      Should that calculus change……

      They always forget that the number one rule of a good parasite is to never annoy the host.

      I warned Bob Zimmerman about this crap months ago but haven’t been back since he went asshole on me, have no plans to deliberately return either.

  4. It’s interesting how profoundly irrelevant most of their concerns are. For example, starting on page 2 of the paper, they speak of “colonial structures past and present” such as “Biological Contamination and Ecological Devastation” (which obviously isn’t a structure at all). The other three are completely irrelevant. There’s no “race science” nor indigenous people to suppress. And why in the world are they complaining about public-private partnerships? Seriously.

    In the next section “Ethical Questions in Space Exploration”, they’re stating that we have obligations to future life that might development elsewhere in the universe. I guess this means that we should consider leaving say Mars or Titan alone because they might a few tens of millions of years from now develop life. And of course, they want us to preserve environments on dead worlds just because the old environment might have value to someone. And of course, they have to talk about resource extraction which among other things they suggest should be done in a “sustainable” way.

    But the money shot is in the conclusions.

    The space science and space exploration community must address the above concerns and build an enforceable policy structure that seeks to actively dismantle the current systems constructed by the violent past of exploration on Earth. ​This must be done not simply to right past wrongs, or ensure ethical interactions with extraterrestrial environments and potential forms of life, but for an ethical and livable future for humanity. The structures we bring to other worlds will ultimately be those that humans live in as well, and in this sense, we need look no further than the existential threats we face here on Earth to see the future: the destruction of our planet’s habitability, the ravaging of its ecosystems with disease, and the persistence of racism and other forms of inequity around the globe. Replicating a violent colonial framework will hurt the humans living off-world, retaining our current social inequities and hierarchies and reinforcing those systems on Earth. Ultimately, we must build a better, moral, and livable future because it is how we will survive on our own planet or any other. Proving that we can interact with other worlds in ways that don’t reproduce capitalist extraction, that respect and preserve environmental systems, and that acknowledge the sovereignty and interconnectivity of all life, will illustrate these practices are not only possible, but necessary and liberating.

    Funny how these people never, ever pay attention to what works on Earth, like the above “capitalist extraction”, and then want to tell us how to live. You can’t be ethical, if you ignore reality.

    1. Whenever I see code phrases I’m unfamiliar with, I like to look them up. Putting “capitalist extraction” in the search engine and limiting to .edu sites, I came up with this little gem.

      “Certainly, the theory of exploitation is at the center of Marx’s critique and certainly attempts to eliminate exploitation strike at the core of capitalist development. However, there are reasons to think that not only does the socialist project fail to accomplish the proposed inversion, but it also fails to propose sufficient positive content to constitute a substantive alternative. We can agree with the socialists that exploitation involves the capitalist extraction of surplus labor through their control over the means of production.”

      I think it’s safe to say that for the foreseeable future, the offworld frontier will not suffer from a surplus labor condition, so Marx doesn’t apply.

    2. “In the next section “Ethical Questions in Space Exploration”, they’re stating that we have obligations to future life that might development elsewhere in the universe.”

      And I guarantee you every miserable one of them is pro-abortion and completely misses the irony of their diametric positions.

      1. If “Gaia” is a solitary organism, then shouldn’t it reproduce at some point? It appears that humanity will be that mechanism, spreading “life” to what appears to be a dead universe. Fifty years ago we briefly brought “life” to an otherwise dead world. And it appears we will be doing that again, soon. These people should celebrate that, not hate it.

        I guess self-hatred isn’t limited to over-educated “white people” who hate being a part of Western Civilization and a recipient of all it has accomplished. These people just hate themselves so much they should lead by example, make the Universe a better place, and just eliminate themselves.

  5. Does anyone know if the proposals for new planetary protection developed by that board headed by Alan Stern last year ended up being implemented?

    It looks like two interim directives were released last July, but beyond that, I can’t find anything online. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-updates-planetary-protection-policies-for-robotic-and-human-missions-to-earth-s-moon

    When does “interim” become “permanent?” Before January 2021, I hope.

  6. Watching the SpaceX live feed of Crew-1. Saw they had Travis Tritt singing the national anthem right before the astronauts came out to get in the cars. I wonder how long it will be before the wokesters complain that none of the astronauts took a knee.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *