Science vs Politics

The first vehicle was designed to fulfill a scientific purpose, the latter to make a political point. When the focus of the space program shifted from exploration to "beat the Russians," all thought of practical application went out the window. Yes, the U.S. spaceflight program accmomplished its political goal, but it did so at the high price of stagnating manned space exploration for fifty years. The Shuttle, in case you're in doubt, did not count as exploration. Even Carl Sagan was very adamant on that point.

Only now, a half-century later, are we finally seeing real commercial efforts to explore space for scientific and ultimately industrial purposes. The second half of this century will be analagous to the American western expansion during the second half of the 19th century. A shame I won't be around to see it, but I blame politicians. They and priests are the groups which are inevitably at the root of all evil throughout human history. They have done more harm to human progress than every natural disaster in history. The two professions always seem to attract the people least qualified to wield power, in much the same way that honey attracts flies. And like flies landing in honey, they always make a total mess of things.

Two steps forward, one step back. Thus has it ever been. The forward steps are made by entrepenuers, the backward one by priests and politicians. I don't see that ever changing.

"Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded--here and there, now and then--are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as 'bad luck.'" - Robert Heinlein