Dec 22, 16 03:24 UTC

How will Agardia Achieve its Aims if it is Opposed by Earth Govs or Corporations?  

I imagine that many of Asgardia’s aims are or will become inconvenient to Earthly powers.

Soon (okay it may be a while off) nations and corporations will be able to venture into space purely to make money. To mine asteroids and whatever else may come. When this happens, I believe inevitable conflicts will follow and I understand this is what Asgardia wants to prevent. However, this will likely (and perhaps ironically) bring Asgardia into conflict with those who are either not as interested in peace in space or are too short sighted to care. (The arrogant way in which we continue to amplify climate change on Earth with only cursory and superficial acts of prevention and preparation, lead me to believe this will not be a problem for the powers that be when the time comes.)

I am struggling to understand how Asgardia will be able to prevent this. I understand (I think) the purpose of Agardia, I understand Agardia will seek to become a fully-fledged member of the UN – But should Asgardia’s ideals be inconvenient for some country/corporation, how will Asgardia be able to resist? What happens if they say, ‘Actually this is a hell of a money maker, and yeah it’s dangerous, but we need it. X country will do it if we don’t, you are an inconvenience so we will ignore you, or worse.’ ?

What recourse will Agardia actually have? Will Asgardia (ironically) fight for peace in space? Can Asgardia fight? Will Asgardia be relegated to making ‘condemnation statements’ should someone behave not to its liking? Will Asgardia eventually seek space hegemony in order to prevent space conflict, and if so, who is to give Asgardia the right to do that? If Asgardia will even be capable of doing that? And how can Asgardia be sure it won’t have to constantly be defending itself against earthly powers that find it to be inconvenient or too…conceited?

Sorry if I am rambling, It is 3am, I should definitely be asleep.

  Updated  on Dec 22, 16 03:26 UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Dec 27, 16 20:47 UTC

Ultimately, if we cannot proceed with consent, or at best apathy, then we "just do it anyway".

It's to the point now where we are numerous enough that if we work towards common goal then short of mass executions we are literally unstoppable. Space really is big enough to share. There's more than enough resources to go around.

Anyone considering the plentiful resources of space will rapidly concede the concept of currency is futile, long term. This is why I put forwards a model that would end result in us just giving Earth anything it wants. By the time we are able to do that their money will be of literally no use. It's beneficial from Earth's point of view as for no effort they get significant gain as individuals, and there's more of them than corporations.

Can Asgardia fight... I'd like to think we wouldn't be required to. This ofc does not mean I not prepared to. I can't speak for all, ofc. But there's definitely "military experience" on board. Consider we already are deeply embedded into the potentially problematic countries - if there was a little more effort to protect our citizens data then they'd not even know who they are. Until it's far to late. If they leave us no other options, we can literally take them apart from the inside. Tactically applied, even small groups or lone operators can be remarkably effective. However I think it's more prominent to attempt to build amicable relations. There's far more gain to them than loss, long term.

No, Asgardia is unlikely to ever engage in hegemony. We should make specific effort to not interfere with Earth's political systems and their natural progressions. If there is behaviour of a nation we do not approve of, the best we can do is attempt to educate them of a better path. Any measure taken "against" such a nation would also require to be balanced to be sure not to inadvertantly impact their populous - Like the way current trade sanctions really don't impact nations but instead their occupants.

The best thing we can do to assure we are not required to constantly defend ourselves from other nations is to pay no particular nation specific favour and attempt to build relations of a more positive and productive nature constantly. Be of as much use as is practical. This ofc does not assure, just gives us the most probable chance.