Anarchist views on space exploration?

[Stupified]

This thought just came to me: What is the anarchist's stance on space exploration? Especially as time and technology advances.

Some questions I have:

Who pays for the massive costs? R&D, engineering, materials, implementation, etc.
What happens in a space colonial race? Will wars be fought over valuable territory? (Are expansionist wars acceptable?)

 

[Cabal]

Private actors pay for the costs--in fact, this has already been taking place as the industry of commercial spaceflight becomes more practical.

Not sure. I imagine if States are involved, there will likely be some kind of conflict; it tends to be inevitable when States are involved since the State lacks the capacity to accomplish anything without violence. I would probably start off by recommending an approach of homesteading and see where reason and logic take us from there--of course this is all just thought experimentation. Too many undefined or otherwise unknown variables--not enough detail.

 

[A Son of Liberty]

The inflationary policy of the state and it's money printing organ have probably sped up timelines, but there is no reason that in a stateless society, private enterprise would not pursue space exploration. As man's understanding of the earth sciences expands, he begins to understand how space impacts life on earth, and exploration of the cosmos becomes desirable. This is true with or without the state, but it would certainly be done more ethically without.

 

[swirling_vortex]

There was actually something a few days ago about exploring the possibility of near-Earth asteroid mining: http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/mimssbits/27776/

 

[legion]

Andrew Galambos was an astrophysicist and developed the trajectories for the early ICBM programs.

He was also an "anarchist" who thought the only way man could explore space would be through commercialization. The only way to commercialize space travel would be to end the resource diverting governmental system.

His lectures were very popular in 1960's Los Angeles and cost thousands of dollars to attend. You can listen to part of them for free on the internet these days.

 

[fisharmor]

I don't think a stateless society would strongly advocate manned spaceflight in any circumstance.
Mainly because it's unnecessary at this point.
What has manned spaceflight been necessary for in the last 40 years? Nothing.
40 years ago I'm pretty sure the only reason it was necessary was a state dick-wagging contest.
Today, it's laid bare: there's no reason to put people up there.

Right now it's logistically impossible - not unlikely, impossible - to carry out manned space exploration.
A stateless society would recognize this, and adapt until such time as it is logistically feasible.

A stateless society would also recognize the validity in space programs (as opposed to exploration) necessary to launch satellites which have demonstrable market value.

 

[kuckfeynes]

My position is that I cannot know how much more advanced society would be with a proper market-based allocation of R&D resources, but I am certain that it would be a hell of a lot more advanced than it is now.

 

[DamianTV]

In space, no one can hear you protest.

 

[Wesker1982]