From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Space and Presidential Politics
Date: 1 Oct 92 12:54:53 GMT
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
Distribution: sci

In article <BvEJ3s.MLE.1@cs.cmu.edu> amon@elegabalus.cs.qub.ac.uk  
writes:
> > The problem with this is that I've met some space enthusiasts
> > over the years who would vote for Adolf Hitler if they thought
> > he would support a strong space program.  Almost ANY issue has
> > to be put in perspective, and balanced off against others. A
> > candidates view of space explorations is ONE issue by which I 
> 
> > judge the candidate.  You can argue about whether it should be 
> 
> > one of the most important ones or one of the minor ones, but it
> > certainly should not be the ONLY one.
> > 
> 
> 
> This should not be a problem for you. Under this scenario, Adolph  
can  
> only get elected if:
> 
> 	a) A majority of the population consider this to be the
> 	   primary  issue, in which case, by any definition of
> 	   "public interest" it then IS. Neither you nor I can
> 	   make something the prime issue just because our
> 	   personal opinion says it is.
> 
> 	b) Adolph has enough support due to his stands on other
> 	   issues to garner a majority via the sum of the the
> 	   different public interests.
> 
> 	c) He doesn't make the mistake of saying he's going to
> 	   execute or drive out of the country many of the leading
> 	   scientists and engineers required for that space program.
> 
> The later is partially tongue in cheek, but there is a serious  
point  
> to it. Those of us pushing for space are indeed pushing an entire  
set  
> of values and a vision of the future that is built around space. 

But much of that never gets to reflected in these discussions. Many
people have posted "I don't care how they stand on other issues,
candidate A is pro-space and candidate B is luke warm on space
so obviously I'm for candidate A."   But what if candidate B
has an industrial policy that would better able us to establish
a space infra structure 10 years from now. Or what if candidate 
A also believed in various bigoted positions, that would erode parts
of our society (Well, that has nothing to do with space so it 
wouldn't effect your vote, right?)  [By the way, I'm NOT specifically
talking about Bush and Clinton here.  I don't think Bush is
a bigot, and even voted for him in '88, though I'm not voting for
him this time.]

> 
> You cannot castigate us because we do not happen to share YOUR  
> particularly set of values and priorities.

Yes, I can.  It doesn't simply come down to "everyone has
their own values, and everyone's are as good everyone else's."
Nor does it simply come down to the public interest being that
of the private intrests of the majority.  Taken to extremes, your
statement becomes "we can't tell the Nazis they are wrong. If the
majority of the people support them, what they are doing must
be in the public interest."  

Besides, in a sense, isn't the above statement hypocritical.  Many
people in America don't think space is all that important. 
Space enthusiast have always felt that it was OK to tell them
that they're priorities were wrong and that they should think
more about the future.

> 
> The truth is, I am personally not voting on a single issue. I have  
an  
> entire social/economic/technological agenda. (In case you haven't  
> noticed :-) But I am NOT going to knock someone who does.

OK, but I will. I think single issue voting is generally 
silly, and hurts us all in the long run.  

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com  
Newsgroups: sci.space,talk.politics.space