28 | New Scientist | 19 March 2022
Views Columnist
W
HEN I was a kid, only
a few governments
could afford to send
people into space. By and large,
this continues to be true. Though
much has been made of the
billionaire space race, what often
goes unsaid is that the likes of
SpaceX and Blue Origin relied on
enormous investment from the
US government, through NASA,
to advance the experiments that
would allow them to launch
civilian astronauts.
Such public-private
partnerships aren’t entirely new.
Corporate actors have always
played a role in US spacefaring
efforts: military contractors like
Lockheed Martin and Northrop
Grumman have long had a
seat at NASA’s table, providing
launch rockets and spacecraft
development. One thing that has
changed, however, is the people
involved. These days, NASA is
working alongside companies
with fewer ties to the defence
industry, companies that also
happen to be strongly identified
with billionaires – especially
Richard Branson, Elon Musk
and Jeff Bezos.
This has triggered a new
personality-driven space race
and, with it, a re-evaluation of the
power dynamics. Increasingly,
the public conversation seems
to assume that government
organisations like NASA are no
longer leaders in space. Instead,
NASA has been relegated to
client (for getting astronauts to
the International Space Station),
funding source and launch
management support. My
own understanding is that this
transformation in attitudes isn’t
an accident, but rather began
intentionally under the George W.
Bush administration in particular.
The goal? The commercialisation
of space, the next capitalist frontier.I am under no illusions about
why NASA came into existence.
I know it is a product of the cold
war between the US government
and the government of the Soviet
Union. I make a point of saying
this was a conflict between two
governments because everyday
people were caught in the middle,
with little say over the power plays
of their leaders. In different ways,
people on both sides of the Iron
Curtain weathered a terrifying
time, filled with extraordinary
amounts of propaganda and a
militarised space race that each
nation’s leadership articulated
as proof of political supremacy.Part of the propaganda I grew
up with was that the US was a real
democracy. The United States
is, in theory, a democracy where
the people can have a say in what
NASA does. I say in theory because,
to quote Langston Hughes,
“America never was America to
me.” As a settler colonial nation
that built its wealth through
dispossession and slavery and
followed those acts up with a long
and ongoing campaign to deny
many citizens the right to vote,
the idea that the US is a democracy
can seem a bit laughable.
But an interesting idea arises
out of the false narrative that the
US is a true democracy: a space
agency for the people, by the
people. This week, I have been
thinking about this possibility
a lot because I have recently
been at a two-day workshop
that brought interested parties
together to discuss the futureof the space economy. I think
that most of the attendees
came in concerned about the
opportunities space provides
for economic growth – plans are
already afoot to mine the moon
and asteroids, for example.
There were a few sceptics like
me who were concerned that
accelerating human expansion
into space will exacerbate colonial
logics and already growing
economic inequalities. What right
do we have to exploit other planets
the way we have exploited Earth?
In two days of conversation, I
was the only person I heard bring
up the importance of labour rights
advocates having a say in how
it all pans out. There was little
acknowledgement of billionaires’
dependence on public finance, on
the taxes paid by workers across
the US that helped to launch their
commercial space-flight ventures.
One person told me that a
particular billionaire, some of
whose workers are currently suing
because of alleged workplace
racism, was entitled to everything
he had because he had earned it.
I said my concern wasn’t with
merit – I mean fine, give him an
award – but rather how we can
create the conditions where
everyone has what they need.
You might think that has
nothing to do with space. But
I think space is part of what we
need. Every human community
has a long-standing relationship
with the night sky. It is part of
who we are. The problem is that,
right now, very few of us have a say
in what happens to the night sky,
how humans get to space or what
we do there. That has to change.
Instead of giving space up to
billionaires, maybe we should
all be working to make good on
the idea of a space agency that
supports humans living in good
relations with each other. ❚“ I’m concerned that
human expansion
into space will
exacerbate colonial
logics and growing
inequalities”Who is space for? Billionaires fuelling a new space race are
having a big say in what happens to the night sky. But space
belongs to everyone, writes Chanda Prescod-WeinsteinField notes from space-time
This column appears
monthly. Up next week:
Graham LawtonWhat I’m reading
I have been rereading
one of my favourite
novels, Kiese Laymon’s
Long Division.What I’m watching
Wow, do I have opinions
about the new season
of Love Is Blind!What I’m working on
I’m helping to lead
a national particle
physics planning
process here in the US.Chanda’s week
Chanda Prescod-Weinstein
is an assistant professor
of physics and astronomy,
and a core faculty member
in women’s studies at the
University of New Hampshire.
Her research in theoretical
physics focuses on cosmology,
neutron stars and particles
beyond the standard model