As a word of warning, if you’re a big fan of Newt Gingrich you might be slightly offended by this post, but I will do my best to tell both sides of the story. Let me start with the offensive part. A U.S. colony on the moon applying for statehood? Really? A candidate for the President of the United States suggesting this? Really? If you’re not familiar, Presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich recently suggested that by the “end of his second term,” we could have a permanent base on the moon, “and it would be American.” He also suggested that if the colony’s population grew to 13,000, it could apply for statehood. I think this statement is so ridiculous that I wouldn’t want my child attending a public school where a teacher advocated it, not to mention living in a country where the President does. However, I believe in trying to see things from someone else’s point of view, so please take a look at this Forbes article explaining why it may be a good idea. Also, my wife and I have recently started watching Rock Center with Brian Williams and they did a short piece on the subject highlighting why this idea might resonate with a lot of Americans. Many people feel like our space program was once a source of great national pride and unification, a motivational force for our youth and education system, and a catalyst for scientific and technological development. Gingrich’s idea can resonate with those who long for the rejuvenation of such a success story, and I share that desire. But before we start planning our vacations to a U.S. owned golf resort on the moon; let’s cut through some of the lunacy and consider what may be a less ridiculous way to pursue those same goals.

An international research station on the moon – though incredibly ambitious and expensive – might be worth consideration, but a U.S. colony on the moon applying for statehood is absolutely absurd. The central problem, in my opinion, is not the goal to restart our space program, it’s the, “and it would be American” comment. I can’t think of a more useless and expensive way to make the entire world hate than putting an American colony on the moon. (Invading Iraq was a pretty expensive way to make the world hate us, but at least the democratization of a tyrannical country was a potential upside.) We’ve been fighting wars in foreign lands for over a decade while trying to avoid the image of an imperialistic nation. The founding identity of this nation, as well as countless decades of foreign policy, was centered on the injustice of colonization and imperialism. Claiming the moon as U.S. territory awaiting statehood is the most fantastic way I can imagine to turn nearly 250 years of our values and ideology into hypocrisy. I believe our space program needs rejuvenation; and an expensive, ambitious project might even be in order, but I’d much rather hear our President (or anyone applying for the job) declare our commitment to an international project to put a man on Mars than the thought of colonizing the moon. We could have the same pride, motivation, and development with the added benefit of international cooperation instead of unnecessary international contention and alienation.

While reviewing a lot of comments on this topic, it became apparent that many people lament how the only nation to put a man on the moon now can only get to space by hitching a ride with the Russians. Though I am a strong proponent of a rejuvenated space program, that fact that we now rely on the Russians for space lift is an amazing success story in my opinion. Consider that the reason we unilaterally sent a man to the moon was the fact that we were in a potentially disastrous military and technological competition, spending decades in constant fear of total nuclear war. I would much rather cooperate with the Russians in space travel than compete through another Cold War. But if you, like me, only caught the tail end of the Cold War and are sad you missed all the nuclear attack drills in elementary school and the riveting entertainment of the Cuban Missile Crisis; please feel free to ignite another arms race and Cold War by declaring our commitment to make the moon an American state. Constant fear of mutually assured destruction was way underrated; I hope we can bring back round two for my kids to experience.

Insulting sarcasm aside, Gingrich clearly has a respectable following and not everyone thinks his ideas are ridiculous – so perhaps he’s on to something. I think this comes down to simple nationalism. It’s the same emotion that we feel so deeply when we think of our Founding Fathers or the Greatest Generation, watch a Fourth of July celebration, recall Neil Armstrong’s historic foot step, or watch an inspiring moment in the Olympics. However, it’s also the same emotion that has led to dozens of unnecessary wars, millions of deaths, discrimination and racism, and untold misery throughout history. Nationalism can be a powerful force for good, but can easily be misguided and misused in small or disastrous ways. I’d like to spend my next few posts discussing some random topics that play on this common theme of nationalism. Stay tuned for some thoughts on international development, Apple, protectionism, China, industrial policy, parochialism, and what they all have to do with nationalism and patriotism. (I’m not working night shift anymore so hopefully you won’t have to wait two months for these next few posts – at least I can’t use constant sleep deprivation as an excuse now.)