Political Leadership from NASA
One framework approach called “Any planet, anywhere” highlights the illogical nature of post-MAD nuclear existence if it excludes the possibility of reaching the stars. However it is “politically” near impossible for NASA to officially consider any submission of a theoretical “faster than light” origin. The conclusion of “Any planet, anywhere” insists that a choice exists absolutely in the long term only between an evolution to the stars or an incomplete or partial MAD global event.
Scientists could not, do not and will not ever shoulder the burden of prime political leadership. Instead they are allocated the charge of placing the burden of scientific rationality upon the body politic of scientific but it is still “perceived” theological wisdom. Therefore I wish to underline, above all else, that it is the very conceived scientific wisdom in insisting a light barrier irrefutably exists for all “self-propelled objects” that burdens politicians with no means in the final scheme of things to avoid nuclear war in the long term. I thus ask you to reflect (as best as you can), if after a potential and frankly foreseeable destruction due to any incomplete or partial MAD conflict, what scientist would not actually lay the blame squarely at the door of professional politicians? This raises the question that, if it is inevitable scientists must evade the final political responsibility for the use of scientific discovery at the highest level, what general command and hence the all encompassing mode of all current space exploration theory is not invalid?
Political Leadership from NASA continued
This book, a revised Orion, should still be considered technically interesting if it is politically required to adhere to the accepted wisdom of light speed limits. The development path of the Orion Elevator (ACCTOPE) provides a way to launch big payloads into space and at least explore Saturn (the stated objective of the original Orion Project). Yet I remain, both as an economist and a “social and economic” historian, guarded of my need to declare a “moral assertion” that only by reaching the stars at faster than light speeds might our planet progress safely beyond the “Catch 22” of MAD.
This revised Orion model proposes at least a new path to follow whilst we are still at a moment of comparative global peace. It is very probable that the current and existing time frame of opportunity to consider space exploration as a whole would be beyond reach for many years if, when and should “partial or incomplete MAD” events unroll. Many economic historians would likewise plot a positive correlation between economic pressures and a propensity for war. Thus “Fry or fly!” should be considered the best slogan the world’s future needs to hear from NASA and global decision makers working on trillion dollar budgetary models.