|
Ahhh, you're commenting on your contempt for the military, I see that now. I didn't get that at first, from your apparent comment about economics. ("the fact is that technology development is not some generic facility; if you develop technology devoted to getting things up into orbit, it will basically give you the expertise to do that. It doesn't, say, develop your semiconductor design, biochemistry, medicine, agriculture, or whatever else your country might need.") Both the space programs and the military have well documented positive direct and indirect effects on private business, and both have many spinoff technologies that do benefit society. That is in addition to some well documented negative impacts, not to mention wars and death. But you didn't really want to talk about the economics, right? If you just don't want to build weapons and don't think we should as a society, that's a reasonable view to hold, I can certainly find some ground to agree with you. Personally, I'll just suggest choosing clarity and not ridicule might help get that point across and convince more people. The sarcasm and ridicule tend to alienate, especially if you're talking directly to people who might enjoy space topics and would otherwise agree with you that weapon building is ugly business. You're choosing to ridicule innocent bystanders, rather than the people making weapons. > Space fetishism is a diversion that exists to bilk engineers into careers and positions that are in aid of the military. That makes it sound like a conspiracy theory, as if nobody would be interested in space were it not for the sneaky military. Isaac Newton had a space fetish and died before NASA or the US military industrial complex began. You didn't get tricked into a NASA career, right? I know a few engineers that have worked in space & military applications, and all the ones I know participated knowingly. |