> Many spaceflight movies and TV shows for example show very bad things in the future giving people a false impression that the future will be worse than the past
I think The Expanse got it right, in that we're more likely in the near to medium term to get a bunch of oligarch type Jules-Pierre Maos (Hi Bezos!) running things behind the scenes. Not a utopia type technology + spaceflight + social inequity problems solved future.
The Expanse is one of the TV series that I was thinking of actually when I wrote that comment. It'd be too long to write down here but I feel like while The Expanse got many things right it also portrayed all sorts of fundamental things that were completely off.
For example even in the first season things that are fundamentally off that result in very different futures:
* The idea that we would actively intentionally re-create the situation of MAD in another context. MAD was an accident of historical happenstance and now that we know about it, we wouldn't try to re-create it.
* The idea that a magical new engine would suddenly appear that made many of the things in the tv series possible.
* The idea that Earth will for some reason simultaneously become a massive welfare state, yet still somehow have solar-system spanning power.
* The idea that there would be a complete backtrack in labor rights and labor safety (the ice asteroid mining scene).
> The idea that a magical new engine would suddenly appear that made many of the things in the tv series possible.
Assuming you're talking about the Epstein Drive and not the protomolecule... it didn't suddenly appear, it was invented. And, surprisingly enough, it's way closer to realistic than most scifi.
> The idea that there would be a complete backtrack in labor rights and labor safety (the ice asteroid mining scene).
What labor laws cover the asteroid belt today? Or, closer to home, the moon? If an earthly nation claims some territory out there its own and seeks to enforce the law, that's one thing. But what if a private company sends workers out there in unclaimed space? Humanity hasn't had access to such a lawless frontier in centuries, but we've got a lot of ugly history to look back on. Civil rights are not won by optimists, they're won through bloody and protracted fights. Look no further than Apple to see that companies in today's economy are still fully on board with slavery and sweatshops, and Apple is one of the "good guys" known for holding vendors' feet to the fire over human rights abuses.
1. Is it recreation, or just maintaining the status quo? Once MAD exists, I don’t think it ever stops existing. Space creates an opportunity to escape MAD thus intrinsically a threat. It’s not hard to imagine MAD proliferating as humanity proliferates. It may seem obvious that this is the wrong path, but it’s not obvious that major world players see things the same way.
2. I think books and shows tend to be made about periods of time that involve extraordinary discoveries because the time prior to this is not particularly interesting and there wouldn’t be anything to tell a space story about.
This show also sets out to show the relatively near future and early stages of space exploration which means it must necessarily come on the heels of some major breakthrough.
3. Why do the two have to be mutually exclusive? Is this too far off from current reality?
4. Look at the current climate towards human rights and the trend towards losing them worldwide. Recent major decisions by the US Supreme Court also come to mind. That old behaviors would re-emerge in environments subject to less oversight seems pretty plausible.
Obviously everyone has personal preferences, but $0.02.
> [The Soviets] believed that whoever had superiority in these weapons would take over the world, without necessarily using them. He was afraid of a "missile gap" and took several more steps to achieve his goal of keeping up with the Soviets
(This is an except from the parent's wikipedia link)
Dystopia is just as lacking in creativity as Utopia. You can have very interesting things happening even when overall society is getting better. For example: A TV series showing civilization winning against some form of evil is plenty interesting and has been done many times, despite it not being dystopian. Right now it's become "popular" to have things go badly or to have a set standard start of things going badly. This is a mental disease of movie writers in the modern era.
The original Channel 4 version was brilliant (although the subject matter didn't age well, or maybe aged a bit too well). Didn't see the US remake but heard it was a dud.
Utopia doesn't mean that there are no more challenges, it just means they are different. You can have space travel in a utopia - same with time travel. There are lots of ways to get into dangerous situations. The drama is just centered around different things than it is with dystopias.
> The idea that we would actively intentionally re-create the situation of MAD in another context. MAD was an accident of historical happenstance and now that we know about it, we wouldn't try to re-create it.
I haven't seen The Expanse, but "try" doesn't seem to come into it: We are very close to that situation right now with NATO and Russia.
I've got to disagree with a couple of your examples:
* MAD has proven an extremely effective tool for maintaining (relative) peace. It's almost certainly the only reason for the Russian Federation remaining an ongoing concern, and it's been the primary motivator for the continued existence of NATO, which is itself a stabilizing force. If you're a state that wishes to maintain independence, super weapons are a proven approach.
* In the US, we're currently watching a backslide of all sorts of gains made over the last century. History is far from monotonic, and taking progress for granted is a surefire recipe for losing it. In the case of a full-blown regime change, it would not at all be a given that basic things like labor rights were upheld.
It is possible that I am biased, because I watched Expanse and ( apart from being annoyed by how it quickly it became a relationship show ) I absolutely bought into the premise including the points you listed:
* The idea that we would actively intentionally re-create the situation of MAD in another context. MAD was an accident of historical happenstance and now that we know about it, we wouldn't try to re-create it.
If there is one thing that best predicts how individual human will behave, it is how they have behaved in the past. It is sad, but that is the reality. Similarly, as a species, once we know, a certain set of actions are an option, there will be people who will aim for that set of actions. If a creation of blackholes becomes possible, you can rest assured, MAD will almost instantly will be recreated throughout the known human biome. I personally think you give humanity way too much credit than it deserves.
* The idea that a magical new engine would suddenly appear that made many of the things in the tv series possible.
Hmm, not exactly magically, but most of recent technological wonders sped up developments in other areas significantly to the point, where ( naturally with exception of fusion which is always 20 years away ) we sometimes see developments in ways that could not be imagined before ( Operation Warp speed and resulting vaccine come to mind ) save for science fiction's like Rainbow's End, where a line between development and production is.. ridiculously short. I think in the span of human existence, suddenly likely needs to be limited by definition somehow.
* The idea that Earth will for some reason simultaneously become a massive welfare state, yet still somehow have solar-system spanning power.
I don't want to be that guy, but not to search very far Soviet Russia was just such a state ( with the tech allowed to it at the time ). I am not sure how this is a contradiction. Each society governs its own priorities.
* The idea that there would be a complete backtrack in labor rights and labor safety (the ice asteroid mining scene).
I can't even.. We can just barely force corporations to maintain labor rights now with some semblance of control since we have them physically operating and we can summon the representative in court and enforce compliance. And even then, those controls are eroded via various means. Is it really that difficult to imagine 'when cats away' scenario?
> While the 2016 U.S. election was a watershed in computational propaganda, the same phenomenon has basically swept the planet, beginning as early as 2010.[..] We posit that this frontier leads toward mutually assured destruction, like all frontiers of arms races in weapons technologies.
> I can't even.. We can just barely force corporations to maintain labor rights now with some semblance of control since we have them physically operating and we can summon the representative in court and enforce compliance. And even then, those controls are eroded via various means. Is it really that difficult to imagine 'when cats away' scenario?
We've had massive improvements in workplace safety in 100 years. Just look at some old footage/pictures of an industrial linen sewing plant from the turn of the 20th century. Limb amputation happened on the regular. Or look at the job descriptions of "chimney sweeper". Any person from our era would be horrified at what they saw. We've come so far that almost the entire reason for labor unions even needing to exist has almost been eliminated.
It is possible that we are arguing two different things. I am not denying that progress took place. That is indisputable based solely on the examples you provided already.
What I am saying is that this civilization that allowed it to eventually happen is not a fixed construct, but a continuous process that can go forward, stay unchanged or, just as easily, revert to its original starting point.
The basic argument is that just because we currently did not have any massive atrocity ( lets say along the lines of Crusades, Khan or Mao ) does not mean we can't have one tomorrow. It is hard for me not to channel George Carlin now by saying something along the lines:
"This civilization that you are so proud of. Do you realize how fragile all this is?"
"The idea that there would be a complete backtrack in labor rights and labor safety"
Our economy has always relied on people lacking labor rights or safety. From serfdom, to colonialism, to slavery, to police fighting strikes, to banana republics (governments overthrown for not trading on the US terms), and today hundreds of millions work in unsafe conditions or as child labor for coffee, chocolate, diamonds, precious metals, clothing, in recycling, etc. But that doesn't make good TV, so it's asteroid mining and there's no kids on screen.
As for the idea the human race has transcended past MAD... that's just wishful thinking on your part! I could equally say capitalism was due to historical happenstance and wouldn't be invented today. It would have about as much evidence.
I think The Expanse got it right, in that we're more likely in the near to medium term to get a bunch of oligarch type Jules-Pierre Maos (Hi Bezos!) running things behind the scenes. Not a utopia type technology + spaceflight + social inequity problems solved future.