There’s been a flurry of reports on President Obama’s intentions for our space program—in particular, the Constellation human spaceflight venture. Conceived with the intention of replacing the aging space shuttle and possibly returning humans to the moon, the program is a phantom of John F. Kennedy’s world-changing Apollo Program. Initially, some sources, including New Scientist, claimed that the 2010 budget would include provisions for a return to the moon by 2020. Others seemed certain that lunar prospects had been scrubbed and funds redirected to extend the International Space Station’s service life. Privatized space travel is also on the president’s mind, no doubt in an effort to relieve some of the pressure from NASA, for whom space exploration is still a one-agency show. Expert opinion is divided on Obama’s long-term vision for the Constellation Program. But now, the moon dustup seems settled: The space program’s horizons are, for the time being, fixed.
With the president’s State of the Union Speech Wednesday came not a word about the 2010 budget’s bearing on NASA. He did, however, make longing note of the stateside lag in science, and called for innovation in energy technology. One oblique reference—within a paragraph on science—sounded somewhat reminiscent of the space race challenge.
From the day I took office, I have been told that addressing our larger challenges is too ambitious. . . . For those who make these claims, I have one simple question: How long should we wait? How long should America put its future on hold?
You see, Washington has been telling us to wait for decades, even as the problems have grown worse. Meanwhile, China is not waiting to revamp its economy. Germany is not waiting. India is not waiting. These nations aren’t playing for second place. These nations aren’t playing for second place. They’re putting more emphasis on math and science.
Well I do not accept second-place for the United States of America.
Is this the first time Obama has hinted at the stuff of space races? Nearly one year ago, in a not-so-State of the Union speech to a joint session of Congress, newly inaugurated Obama made a similar, plaintive call:
In the next few days, I will submit a budget to Congress. So often, we have come to view these documents as simply numbers on a page or laundry lists of programs. I see this document differently. I see it as a vision for America—as a blueprint for our future.
My budget does not attempt to solve every problem or address every issue. It reflects the stark reality of what we’ve inherited—a trillion dollar deficit, a financial crisis, and a costly recession.
Given these realities, everyone in this chamber—Democrats and Republicans—will have to sacrifice some worthy priorities for which there are no dollars. And that includes me.
But that does not mean we can afford to ignore our long-term challenges. I reject the view that says our problems will simply take care of themselves; that says government has no role in laying the foundation for our common prosperity.
At the same time, he drew attention to epochs arguably more difficult than our own in which Americans nonetheless sacrificed for the sake of advancement:
History reminds us that at every moment of economic upheaval and transformation, this nation has responded with bold action and big ideas. In the midst of civil war, we laid railroad tracks from one coast to another that spurred commerce and industry. From the turmoil of the Industrial Revolution came a system of public high schools that prepared our citizens for a new age. In the wake of war and depression, the GI Bill sent a generation to college and created the largest middle-class in history. And a twilight struggle for freedom led to a nation of highways, an American on the moon, and an explosion of technology that still shapes our world.
In each case, government didn’t supplant private enterprise; it catalyzed private enterprise. It created the conditions for thousands of entrepreneurs and new businesses to adapt and to thrive.
The bit about private enterprise confirms current suspicions and makes Richard Branson look somewhat more relevant. But is Obama trying to have it both ways? Is the nostalgic reference to advancement amid struggle a jealous rhetorical hat tip to JFK or is it a genuine hint at the road ahead?
Who knows? There’s still more to this story. Having it both ways is more indicative of Obama’s frustrated ambitions than it is an oracle for our future in space. The president, by all accounts, considers himself a progressive, and it’s hard to think of any undertaking more clearly progressive than space exploration. But is he really? “Progressive” is an awfully nebulous term. The age-old critique submits that progressivism per se contains a logical fallacy: It fails to designate what makes progress identifiable as such, a goal or intended result. In other words, the concept of progress is incoherent without a conceptual framework that includes something toward which to progress.
Chesterton put it better in Heretics: “Progress is a comparative of which we have not settled the superlative.” Once a goal is proposed, we can decide whether or not it’s worth progressing toward. But progress without this step is hardly something to rally around. Who would trust a president who proclaimed, “Trust me, folks—I have an excellent goal in mind and I assure you we’re progressing toward it”? We would dismiss such a president as an elitist and a Gnostic. Yet that’s exactly what some people hear with claims of progress towards “hope” and “change.” Hope and change are, after all, frames of mind that influence our choices, not ends in themselves. Worse, they’ve been abstracted to the point of no return by their incessant repetition. A trip to the moon (or Mars, perhaps) is the kind of thing that makes progress identifiable as progress—it’s a discernable, intelligible goal clear enough to let us know exactly where we’re going and how we’re getting there. It remains to be seen whether or not Obama will be starstruck by this promise.
January 29th, 2010 | 8:58 pm
[...] on Progress and Space Also over at First Things, Kevin Staley-Joyce posts reflections on “Obama, Progress, and the Space Program”: “Who knows? There’s still more to this story. Having it both ways is more indicative of [...]
January 29th, 2010 | 11:09 pm
I suspect that we as individuals, families, and a nation have so mortgaged our future in order to enjoy consumerist pleasures in the short term that, as our debt-soaked reality starts slapping us in the face, we will be fortunate to be surviving. Our forbears who achieved great things also made some very uncomfortable sacrifices in order to do so, sacrifices that too many Americans would be unwilling to make. Our comfort is too dear to build for the future.
January 30th, 2010 | 12:39 am
The Space Coast and communities across the country have been looking to the President for leadership and a bold vision for the future of space exploration, and after months of delays he seems to be falling short.
January 30th, 2010 | 1:12 am
The Banks Get Trillions…Humanity And It’s DREAMS Get Cut From The Budget!
I have disagreed and on rare occasions agreed, with much of what President Obama and his Administration
has done. Since not only taking the steering wheel of our nation, but supposedly humanity and it’s species, via the Nobel Peace Prize.
But I am a sad and repulsed American here today. When I see that the banks and special interest can get Trillions in Tax Payer money. Comprised of human blood, sweat, and tears. Yet, we as a nation, supposedly a highly educated one, cant muster up $5 billion a year to give NASA?
To explore sending a Human once again returning or manning a permanent space station on the Moons surface.
If not for the sake of a demonstration of our advancements as a species, that will possibly boost morale across the nation. And while taking prudent measures to ensure our survival of our species in the event of catashophy, be it made made or natural caused. Than to at least not acknowledge the fact, it is our specie’s next frontier in our evolving to a higher living and functioning intelligence species. Preferably
with the best of our collective gene pool. It’s called “seeding the STARS” and it is where our exponential advancements in technology both medical in life longevity/expectancy and the creation and morph between biological and machine.
I always reference a great scene in the movie Armageddon with Billy Bob Thornton as the NASA space
director. And the President asking him “Why didn’t we see this asteroid comming Dan?…Our Earth Collision Budget only allows $2 billion dollars Mr. President….that covers about 3% of the sky sir..with all do respect…it’s a BIG ASS SKY sir”….lol
And to give reason that Govt funding is not needed nor a budget allotment this year. Because private corporation profit seeking and the creation or enterprise for space tourism will drive the exploration is just preposterous at present time. Don’t get me wrong, I am a believer in that in the longer picture. A big
fan of Sir Richard Branson and his visions there. But in it’s infancy(now) we have many things orbiting around our planet at any giving time that are detrimental to not only our national security, but our way of daily life, that if interrupted could fall back to creating National security issues. Many satellites,
weather, cell phone, TV, spy, etc. We dont want people looking for cheap ways to get things in orbit and
risking them screwing things up. So to say I feel the NASA Space Program be militarized is yes!
On another note…GOOGLE once had a contest offer to anyone who could launch an object(unmanned) from earth
to the moons surface and drive it like 10 feet remotely from Earth would get like $5o million bucks.
I wrote a blog the day entitled ” Google going to the moon!….Sell the stock now”….because going to the moon is the all time penny stock pumper dumper scammer phrase….lol…..GOOG was trading $700 then Dec 2007.
I think the Govt should just come out and say we have had manned stations on the dark side of the moon for the last 20 years. And we feel the human race is intellectual enough to not only appreciate it. but understanding of the need to be kept secret up till this point. Where now it serves the greater good to be
known and developed by the world together in efforts…I would be like coooool ohhhhhhh!….How do I get a job application there? It would inspire generations and the averice corporations and bottom lines will take
it from there I tell ya!…Children will have something to reach for once again in this country. They say
“shoot for the sky, cause if ya miss, you’ll land among the STARS”…So appropriate…yes?
Steve Goff
Margate, NJ
January 29, 2010
January 30th, 2010 | 5:24 pm
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by gforb: Obama, Progress, and the Space Program – First Things (blog) http://bit.ly/bC8hfv…
January 30th, 2010 | 5:52 pm
I really hope the Obama administration tries out space at least, it would be such an anti-climax having the moon-landing to be the zenith of human endeavors.
January 30th, 2010 | 9:53 pm
Scrap the space program entirely, and disband the money-pit called NASA, a.k.a. the welfare program for scientists who could not make it in private industry.
January 31st, 2010 | 12:29 am
[...] First Things: Obama, Progress, and the Space Program [...]
January 31st, 2010 | 6:50 am
William L. Harnist:
What about all those “private industry” science and engineering contractors that work for NASA? How do they fit in with your perception of NASA, its personnel and programs?
February 2nd, 2010 | 5:16 pm
Obama’s cancellation of NASA’s manned space program takes the government out of the space transportation industry. This is very good news for anyone who is pro-space. The high cost of space transportation has been the biggest impediment to the emergence of space development. Having the government in the space transportation industry made no more sense than to have a government-run airline. Remove the government and allow the emergence of a competitive space transportation industry is the only way that costs will drop such as to allow the human settlement of space.
This is very good news.
February 2nd, 2010 | 5:46 pm
Some Irony for those of you who came of age during the cold war:
http://www.hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=18373
Do you think maybe we actually lost the cold war? Many Americans still believe in the efficacy of bureaucracy.
February 3rd, 2010 | 12:12 pm
I would think some might regard a moon landing as “Been there, done that”.
I think this article convinced me that NASA is yet another government agency, like the IRS, the DEA, the CIA, Medicare and Social Security, that we could do without.
February 4th, 2010 | 6:58 pm
Seeing these kind of posts reminds me of just how technology truly is ever-present in this day and age, and I am fairly confident when I say that we have passed the point of no return in our relationship with technology.
I don’t mean this in a bad way, of course! Societal concerns aside… I just hope that as memory becomes cheaper, the possibility of uploading our brains onto a digital medium becomes a true reality. It’s a fantasy that I dream about almost every day.
(Posted on Nintendo DS running [url=http://kwstar88.zoomshare.com/2.shtml]R4i SDHC[/url]NDSBro)
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact