Intergalactic Summit

Part One: A Contemplation and Dream

At this very moment as you read this, there are people suffering. There is starvation, poverty, murder, war, disease, and violence infesting the heart of mankind; we can put an end to it. We who are among the most wealthy and priviledged in the cluster do not have to witness just how gritty and grim this cluster is, and yet we are in the best position to rectify the problem.

First, let me begin by introducing some rationale for these goals. Why end suffering? To put it simply, no one enjoys suffering. While some may argue that suffering is needed to maintain a healthy, moral society and our "human nature", I question what kind of healthy and moral society allows the aforementioned problems to persist. It is not a measure of good health to be well-adjusted to a sick society, after all. Where do any solutions lie, then? We have various fields of thought to choose from: politics, religion, philosophy, science, economics, and the like. Of these, the former two have historically been the most "risky"; politics and religion can inspire spurts of great good and growth, but can equally inspire passionate destruction and inadvertent regression. This leaves us with science, philosophy, and economics. The cold embrace of numbers and truth tables shouldn't be cause for concern; the trial-and-error methodology employed by these fields eventually arrives at correct answers. While the slow march of reason and the laboratory might seem unappetizing, it is the star that burns slower, colder, and more patiently which outlasts the violent giant.

With a clear head of how very likely our chances are of succeeding by employing rational, experimental methods based in the real world rather than in ideology, I ask the reader to set aside rhetoric for now and turn their thoughts to the realm of practicality. How can science, philosophy, and economics possibly solve the great problems facing the cluster? Can these modes of thought really feed the hungry, cure the sick, and bring peace to an unstable world? Of course! Science has already cured many diseases, and reasonably will continue to do so for as long as disease is an issue. It has also allowed arable land to be used with higher degrees of efficiency and crop yield, allowing the population to expand among the stars.

On the issue of war however science has acted as a double-edged blade, providing both life-saving technologies and weapons of immense destruction. In contemplating warfare, it is important for the average citizen of the cluster to question the meaning and usefulness of a war. Is there such a thing as a "just war"? Is the government/corporation acting wisely on behalf of the interests of myself and my community? Unfortunately, most paths to war are rooted in emotions, which in turn are rooted in the ego. It takes a strong and stoic people to abandon the instinctual and primal emotions that encourage violent behavior and warfare. A single death, and thus a single killer, can spark entire nations into conflict. Some might think of conflict (or "competition") as an inherently good thing which spurs innovation and weeds out inefficiencies. To a limited extent this is true, but there is absolutely no need for these competitive urges to be summoned forth from the barrel of an assault rifle. If history is to be considered any great teacher, it is true that early on various cultures on the planets quarreled. As I am most familiar with Minmatar history, I will use examples therein. Today, most of the tribes coexist in a peaceful state, leaving competition to the assembly meetings of tribal and clan elders. In the past, however, there was outright warfare between the tribes. There was conflict, competition if you will. And there was progress, too. The deal might appear to be sealed here, one might say. "But conflict helped!". Perhaps. But consider this: after some time the tribes stopped in-fighting and began to urbanize across the entire surface of Matar. Spaceflight was invented and colonies were set up in the Pator system, all without warfare. This trend of progress without warfare might have continued, but we'll never know due to the historical turn the cluster took after the Amarr stumbled upon the Minmatar. In any case, there are examples of progress without warfare in this cluster. History has shown us this much. With this in mind, it is safe to say that warfare can be categorically lumped in with other issues such as disease and starvation.

The average reader might wonder why I am concerning this writing so much with the issue of conflict. This is because all of mankind's problems can be put into two categories: problems arising from nature, and problems caused by other people. The former can be solved with the application of knowledge, while the latter can be solved with careful consideration of philosophy and ethos. Of course, the two go hand-in-hand, with technology allowing new and exciting spectra of experiences to be brought to a person's fingertips (or even directly into the brain itself, thanks to cybernetics). Armed with knowledge and experience, an individual can reshape their own thought processes to become less violent and more innovative. There are people who still cling to violence and conflict, stating that these things are "in human nature". I disagree, fellow individual. Referencing back to the aforementioned historical example, I believe it is not violence which drives humanity's progress, but rather the excitement of the unknown and unexplored. A new horizon awaits us with each passing day, and it is bliss in knowledge rather than ignorance that we seek.

**continuation of Part Two**

Warfare is the most controvertial topic I will discuss here. There are plenty of proposals on how to end a specific conflict here and there, but there are very few such proposals for warfare overall. Practically speaking, people have differences, often irreconcilable in nature. Unfortunately people are often willing to fight over these differences; when heated emotions get thrown into the mix even the smallest of differences can cause each side to dehumanize the other. Since this is a social issue, you as a capsuleer can do little more than a politician or university professor or the like. Having unrestricted access to the stars and the various nations of the cluster (unless you've ran into legal issues, in which case forgive the assumption), you as a capsuleer are among the best suited to make objective observations on each and every nation in the cluster. Being able to do this means you can record your thoughts and share them with the people of the cluster. Looking at the history of the cluster, warfare seems to be fueled by vengeance. People kill because someone they knew or held dear was killed or hurt, and in turn those people hurt or kill others and become hated in turn. It is a viscious and self-sustaining cycle initiated out of the strongest of emotions and, typically, a tragedy. Science may once again provide a minor aid in coming to agreeable solutions in a world of tormented hearts and shattered lives. While exotic, a biolink between two debating individuals can be established such that they can share thoughts and even emotions. This may seem like an overly intimate and alien thing to do, but imagine the squabbles of politicians disappearing overnight as they understand one another on so fundamental a level! In any case, if you truly wish to help prevent conflict, encourage people to think calmly and rationally. Is it really worth sacrificing hundreds of thousands of lives in retribution for a station-bombing that resulted in tens of thousands of lost lives? It may seem cruel to play the numbers game in this line of reasoning, but who are we to assign value to one person's life against another person's life? We are in no position to make this measurement with any sort of objective value, and so utilitarian thought is best suited to deal with such a situation. Encourage people to think critically of their government and lifestyle, for it is critical and conscious thought that will guide us into the future, not blind obedience.

I thank those of you who managed to read through all of this. Please be constructively and/or critical in your comments; it would be a shame for these words to be moderated out of public view.

While allowing capsuleers to directly transform, or terraform planets in null security space might seem an interesting idea, it remains currently fundamentally impossible considering the very state of nullsec space itself.

Due to various factors such as demographic growth, allocated and vital space, macro economics, or war, the empires are not currently expanding very much into all these territories and capsuleers are allowed to fight for the control of the space resources contained here.

Get rid of capsuleer sovereignty and alliances in there, get rid of an open and consensual conflict for resources, before doing anything else. Open warfare usually tends to ruin any local economy not directed at war itself. Eventually, when your intent is to provide more food for people and make it more easily available, you might get the exact opposite when prices will skyrocket when planets dedicated to production will suddenly stop producing due to various environnemental reasons.

Get rid of monopolies on the various resources, unless you want the ultra capitalistic nature of capsuleers to actually make the prices depending of them.

That is a risky game, where you will sacrifice stability and offer capsuleers a better grasp on baseliners resources and markets in the hope of an economic stimulus.

And how is this claim any less of a "pipe dream" than what I claim? Just because we have struggled against each other thus far doesn't mean we must. Furthermore, noticed I cited only warfare and made no comment on other forms of competition, such as business or sport. In fact, I even made direct reference to corporations, which require a competitive capitalistic market. Please do not create a strawman to argue against. Furthermore, I wonder what virtue there really is in taking the hardest path? By this logic, you would be the strongest person you could be by stepping out of your pod at this very moment and going to live in the wilderness, without the aid of technology. Mankind has not remained in such a state, but rather has continuously improved quality of life, level of comfort, and level of knowledge. We can do better, and we are our own optimizing force. Not natural selection.



How very brutal and uncivilized. Are we animals? Well, of course, strictly speaking we are while we remain in biological bodies. But we need not be, as I've pointed out. A pity that you find any beauty in bloodshed.

The best part about idealists is how much time and effort they spend pining for what should be, rather than dealing with what is.


The eventual reckoning they have to deal with as reality shatters these silly dreams can be an exquisite thing to watch and take joy in.

That, is current reality. Always has been. Everything indicates it'll always remain so.



And what exactly do you think any differences between two corporations or nations will end up as, in the end? Warfare. Hidden or otherwise. Violence will always exist as long as one side can take on the other. There is only one way to avoid it and that is completely erasing differences between entities, individuals or collectives. Not an acceptable alternative. At all. Even the tiniest difference or individuality would eventually lead to diversity and conflict.



No one's talking about "the hardest path". Every single advancement we have done as a species has been a result of some sort of conflict. Defeating the elements. The environment. Each other. Other countries. Other empires. Having a nicer lawn than the ******* neighbor. There's almost nothing left in New Eden that can give humanity even a moment's pause other than other humans and that is the only path towards improving New Eden itself. Any sort of universal peace would immediately instill humanity with lethargy and "meh, why give a ****?".



Beauty in bloodshed? Of course there is. From the smallest atom to the greatest stars, and all living things in between, endings and death contain so much beauty that it makes a heart ache. Energy and matter, moving on to be part of something new. New gas clouds producing new stars and planets. New life. The unfortunate hiker dying alone from exposure and hypothermia, ending up feeding the soil, scavengers and all kinds of life.

You may think of bloodshed and death as some sort of irrevocable ending, and for the mind in question it certainly is. The staggering reality is infinitely greater. Life, death, rebirth, life and more death in a never-ending unbroken chain all the way to that first instant of the universe. It's cheesy as crap, but the "Circle of Life" really is staggeringly beautiful when you consider it.

It also appears to be something of a universal truth. There is, to my knowledge, not a single documented life-form that does not somehow live in conflict. Plants competing for sunlight and water, creating shade over competitors or strangling the life out of the tree it embraces. Microbes dying, ingested by a bigger one. A swarm of insects feasting on the plant life, killing off entire species in their greed, starving them and even themselves to death.

Evolution, fueled by natural and artificial (all kinds) selection both, is probably the most beautiful thing in this entire universe. You can call it brutal and uncivilized, but it has been a fact of life (pun not intended) for all recorded history and it runs entirely on conflict. On differences. On adapting to and rising above challenges laid before a species.

This is why your little venture or any other will never lead to "an end to suffering". It might change parts of the cluster to the better, sure. Go right ahead and try. The beauty of it all however, is that New Eden will challenge it with ideas, fire, hate and ridicule. Conflict will remain and even should humanity fall in the process, something will rise and be better for it.

I wish you the best of luck and truly hope you start this project. Reality however, will come crashing down on you and it as your "realistic" proposals face the different viewpoints of the rest of the cluster.

Your heart is certainly in the right place, but I somehow think that you are placing more trust than you should in the ability of capsuleers to fix these issues, or even to care enough to make a start.

However, since I wish to encourage this sort of right headed thinking, I am including schematics I have designed for fixing one of the issues you have mentioned. It is a mini-arcology designed to allow three people to grow enough food to feed several hundred thousand in a 1km by 1km space. Using complex nanotechnology to care for the plants, yields can be quadrupled in the same amount of space, per floor. This building has thirty floors, and so in a 1km space contains the same yield as 120 square kilometers of farmland, managed by three trained sentient minds.

Good luck to you.

Fine,

Starvation:

You are making a ridiculous assumption that people starving and going hungry has something to do with the amount of food produced and is not an entirely political issue. There is always enough food produced, and colonizing and setting up 1,000 new agrarian worlds will not do a thing about people starving due to the political and societal failures of their leaders.

Actually it would probably cause a cluster-wide economic depression as crop prices drop to record lows due to the market being flooded and you push millions of farmers out of business as they are forced to watch their crops rot unsold on the streets. Nice job ending poverty!


Poverty:

Capsuleers are the tinniest of tiny fraction of the cluster wide population. Employing a few extra million workers to crew ships is a drop in an ocean.


Disease:

Making everyone inherently immortal with widespread cloning would be the end of us all. Overpopulation as no one dies and humanity continues multiplying exponentially sounds like a fantastic recipe for disaster. Your issues of poverty and starvation will become close friends as trillions and trillions of immortal beings are brought into the world never to leave it.

Nice job!

Statements like this give me the feeling you do not know a great many people and are quite unfamiliar with human nature.

That's exactly what I was waiting for you to say.