Jenesis Escobar

David Chong

Could mining on the moon forever alter how the future generations see this majestic
satellite of Earth?

It depends on the views that each individual has in our society. For those older generations, they
have viewed the moon as such an unattainable thing that humanity cannot reach. When the
astronauts touched down on the moon for the first time, it would be a moment forever
remembered in history. Now that we have the potential to both colonize the moon and use its
surface for our resources, for those older generations, it may seem that the moon has lost its
magical touch in a way. For the younger generations, especially my own, they will see that
mining on the moon is a step closer in expanding our civilizations to other parts of space for the
foreseeable future.

Who will profit and who will perish in the expedition?

I believe that those that will profit from this will be the upper class. Not surprisingly, many from
the 1% of that upper class. They will have the wealth and resources to take these expeditions
as many times as they wish. Those that will perish will be those of the lower classes as they will
not be able to afford a ticket on such an expedition. These classes will definitely contain a lot of
minority groups, who have been treated unfairly by the U.S government to say the least. “This
would require confronting some ugly truths about how science includes and excludes people. It
means that all scientists must ask themselves: what do we expect people to give up in order to
succeed?”1

Will such missions ultimately exacerbate inequalities that exist on Earth? Will missions
to Mars make life on Earth worse?

If these missions continue and Mars can become a “second Earth”, people (in power) will start
to see non-renewable resources as limitless since resources can be taken from these celestial
bodies. The concern of global warming will diminish as people (in power) will see Mars as a
fresh new planet that has no stains of pollution. There is a reason, though, why people in power
or with wealth are being brought up specifically. There will be no doubt that trips to Mars will cost
fortunes, so the people who are forced to live on Earth will be disparaged. The carbon
emissions that result from these people leaving Earth will just inflame the issue of global
warming and make life on Earth much worse. This ties to the idea that capitalist science
functions under a “colonial clock”, where there is no time to reflect on how actions can affect
people since there is only time for “discovery”, “exploration”, and “colonizing”.2

1
Prescod-Weinstein,Pg. 33,”The Disordered Cosmos”
2
Prescod-Weinstein mentions the colonial clock where a “science operating under capitalism… ticks
under the command of colonial modes of thought.”
How can we have these conversations with a language that refuses to untwine itself from
the lingua franca of settler colonialism: “discovery”, “exploration”, “settlement”, and
“colonizing”?

In the context of science, we can have these conversations by slowing down. There is a strong
urge within the scientific community to rush towards improvement. So much so that no time is
made to critically think about how these “improvements” may impact people. There is no need to
abide by the false urgency of the “colonial clock” to make achievements when the results of
these achievements can be weaponized, literally and figuratively.

What are the possible future generations on Mars? By this I do not necessarily mean
human or even Earth-originating life. Who and what do we eclipse by choosing to claim
to land?

By choosing to claim Mars as our own, we are preventing the possibility of other life forms in the
galaxy from developing and growing naturally on this planet. We also increase the possibilities
of conflicts with other life forms, “if we met another species There are millions and millions of
miles worth of galaxy, and we as humans have no idea what other living beings exist out there.