What's the point of nationalism in science?!

Post Reply New Topic

So Neil Armstrong dies and everyone on the news proclaims that he's a great American hero because he was the first man on the moon!

Whereas the latter is impressive as it's the first time any person went anywhere solid outside of the world, what's the point of pointing out where he HAPPENED to be born?!

Not sure about anyone else, but, like religion, I see nationalism also as part of a group of diseases that not only have absolutely nothing to do with science, but actively hinder it. Not to mention act as disgusting parasites when science succeeds.

To death with ret*d delusion!

If somehow the entire world had been involved with Apollo 11 you might have a point. As is, it was the United States, and I think they have a right to be proud of their achievement; the minds that were involved in it, the technical hurdles they had to make to get past so many obstacles..

I also despise nationalism btw

Nationalism and nostalgia are almost the same word here.

Because if the astronauts were born in Africa, you would have been shooting at a mythical monster eating the moon during a lunar eclipse- even in that late time period.

If you were in China, you were crating an artificial famine for yourself to try and stay off Mao's bad side.

If you were in southeast Asia, you were running around the jungle in a cone hat, black pajamas, an old M44 or German Mauser, and weren't expected to survive the conflict.

If you were in eastern Europe, the moon wasn't such a big deal as long as soap and toilet paper were still available by the time you got to the front of the 2-hour long line for them.

If you were in the islamic crescent, all you cared about was holy war with Israel. Man, some things don't change.

If you were in south America, you were trying to avoid being tortured in a converted soccer stadium.

If you were in Europe, a lot of the most capable minds to build a space program fled to the US to avoid getting kidnapped by the KGB.

Australia and new Zealand were probably capable scientifically, but were more concerned with bio-weapons to drop on Indonesia and southeast Asia.

If you are in Mexico, even to this day this is the closest thing to a space capsule your country has ever produced:

One of the biggest hoaxes in archaeology - the Piltdown Man - succeeded for decades specifically because of British nationalism. France had the Cro Magnon Man, and Germany had Neanderthal Man, leaving the English feeling empty handed in regard to prehistoric antiquities. So when some hoaxers stuck an ape jaw on a human skull and treated it in order to give it an ancient appearance, the English public ate it up, and the press ballyhooed England's place in human prehistory. Winston Churchill even declared these "human ancestors" the Lords of Creation. To be sure, there were scholars in the field who had immediately doubted the authenticity of Piltdown Man, but they were either ignored or attacked by the same nationalistic press. I believe it wasn't till the 1950's that it had to be conceded that Piltdown Man was in fact a successfully perpetrated hoax, which could never have worked without the tie in to British nationalism.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

What's the point of nationalism in general? It's the worst form of collectivism. 'Some people - or even someone - who happened to share the same time and space as me did something great. Woo!'.

I see John_Browning has been at Jeremy Clarkson's joke book. For the non-uk, Jeremy Clarkson is our Glenn Beck. See,

...because of a right wing, free-market coup, aided by the US.

The economic system and conditions in the United States lead to Americans being the first to send men to the Moon. The Russians with their pseudo Marxist Red Fascist economy complete with the KGB running the space program failed at the task. However the Russians did come up with some good technology. There space-suit design was initially superior to the space suit design used by the U.S. technologists. The Russian failure shows the inherent weakness of the command model in technological development. Centralizing the effort really puts a damper on creativity.

ruveyn

If you want a contemporary answer to that. Do a google search for "Chinese Space Program", followed by "Chinese Moon Landing". CNN should have some interesting things.... NPR more likely so. More directly, our government is going to hype our nationalism in the face of a very real, very nationalistic, competitor in such a unique area of human reality where nationality at the time played such a huge role, and will continue to do so until private corporations or owners finally manage to do it without governmental aide.... IIRC, every single astronaut that went up on a US Sponsored flight, Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Skylab, or Shuttle carried an american flag on their uniforms, even the foreign sponsored ones (Though I could be wrong about that nearer the end of the shuttle program, Im dredging this from memory I must admit, and its not something Ive looked into recently). Just be Glad Kraft or Nabisco didn't sponsor the Apollo Missions, or would you really want to the moon to be renamed "The Macaroni Orb"?

Aldran

European colonization was effectively carried out by business firms, for example, the British East India Company. It was a corporation that sold stock and it made India a British vassal for many decades. If private companies would make a profit from manned program they already would have done it and done it better than the Government. Our government is a clumsy, crude awkward thing, generally run by congenital incompetents whose main talent is winning elections.

Business firms do serious things like sponsor and fund the invention of brand new technologies and bring them into the life of the country. It wasn't a Government that developed an automobile that ordinary folks could buy. It was the Ford Motor Company started by Henry Ford.

Corporations may not be perfect, but Government is always second or third best.

ruveyn

Well, Ill remember that if they ever land on the moon. Did you even read what my post was about? or just jump on my post because it didn't show corporations in a light you liked?

And I wont hi-jack this post about Moon landings and nationalism with a debate about Corporations vs Government. Start an interesting thread about it elsewhere, and if I see it and want to respond, perhaps I will.

24 billion 1960 dollars and all we have to show for it is a set of high grade right angle reflectors, a footprint and various discarded junk on the Lunar surface. That is government at work. Second and third best.

It turns out that the basic rocket motor design was done by Robert Goddard in Worcester Mass. funded out of his own pocket.

The computers that controlled the Apollo vehicles were invented and developed privately prior to government funding.

By the time Apollo flew to Moon, controlled by five extremely crude computers, there were computers that were 1000 times as capable available in the private market. That is government at work. Billions spent to produce a product with inferior technology compared to what is available privately.

Eventually, when we do go back into space with manned vehicles they will be produced by private firms at a fraction of the cost as Government spent.

Government is always second or third best. It is run by politicians whose only talent is being able to win elections.

ruveyn

This is my last response to you Reuvyn in this thread until you do something besides quote me and spout almost entirely unrelated information. You didn't even answer my questions....

And last time I checked, the US was the first, and only group of humans to land on the moon..... Or can you just not get over that the government has done something a corporation hasn't done? And honestly, Id rather have governments deal with things like Aerospace. You can dream about a world with a Macaroni Orb all you want, not my cup of tea, and Ill fight against that long as I can in any way I can. Last thing I want is for corporations to start renaming things like the moon and trying to copyright it for themselves....

Perhaps moreso than any other 20th century achievement, the Apollo program was an expression of nationalism, and so it stands to reason that its leading figure would be the subject of that same nationalist reverie that greeted his achievement 43 years ago.

The Space Race was the perfect vehicle for government, particularly government in the 1960's:

It was expensive--private interests could never had demonstrated a return on investment, but government could shovel trainloads of cash at it in exchange for the national pride that it engendered--particularly as the national malaise over Vietnam festered.

It created jobs--most of the dollars spent on the space race went into salaries creating strong government stimulus.

It created pork--the dollars spent on the space race could be broadly distributed to districts in exchange for Congressional support for other initiatives

It created new technologies--both military technology and civilian technology received a boost from research paid for by the public purse.

The space race was an American triumph, to be sure. But it was also the program that, more than any other, created the crony capitalism under which the United States now staggers. Since World War II, the United States government has been the largest cog in the United States economy, and public sector spending has been critical for maintaining economic stability. The space race demonstrates how public money can be used to suckle the private sector.

That "space race" was a p*ssing contest between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. (which is a lot better than a hot nuclear war). Think of what is on the Moon now. Some junk, some useful reflectors and some foot prints bought for about 30 billion 1960 dollars. Fortunately the unmanned programs particularly the comm sats and the GPS and the various orbital earth surveyors have turned out to be very useful. The manned program turned out to be an expensive waste of treasure and time because it never led to the settlement and development of the Moon for various useful ends.

ruveyn

The Apollo mission computers were prototypes, at the time NASA was using two thirds of the entire planets integrated circuit supply and fairly obviously these computers needed to be hardened against radiation and also spend years in testing.

Even today the processing power available for space work is over a decade behind the latest and greatest chip in use is the RAD750 (that is what is in Curiosity)

It was released in 2001, runs at 110 Mhz and still costs $200,000 per board...

"The big bad wasteful government" aka NASA made it possible to put computers in space because if it wasn't for them bankrolling the billions of dollars needed to understand how to protect computer components no private player would have had anywhere the funds to put a satellite in space that did useful work.

Meanwhile the private market developed chips, chip technology and end products that far outran anything the government contracted for. Governments always prepare to fight the previous war and fund obsolete technology.

Beware when Governments pick winners.

ruveyn

Last edited by ruveyn on 27 Aug 2012, 1:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.