AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1042 times:
Comes now, news that the United States has had highly classified manned military access to space for some years now, according to Aviation Week & Space Technology's recent expose' of the so-called "Blackstar" Valkyrie-style two-staged booster-fighter spaceship.
I wrote about this new machine in the abstract some time ago, on another site.
The question that arises from the parallel universe of "deep black" programs is this:
To what extent is the idea of democracy -- of open, transparent, democratic governance -- undermined by the secret programs of government?
This is not merely a military matter, but one of civilian interest as well.
After all, how many of us can take pride in the secrecy entailed in the operations of Guantanamo Bay? Are such things exemplifications of representative democracy, let alone Americanism?
Seldom have I felt so discouraged about the responsiveness of government to the needs of the people. And this is despite my usual deference to the needs of government for a certain degree of secrecy.
What is it about the world that keeps us in the dark?
Mrmeangenes From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 566 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1018 times:
Could it be the military has a need for secrecy ? Thiat it might actually choose NOT to reveal the intricate details of highly sensitive research to others who might-tomorrow or next week-decide to use this technology against US ?
Searpqx From Netherlands, joined Jun 2000, 4349 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1003 times:
As much as I can't believe I'm backing up AerospaceFan - I think his point is, at what point do you draw the line? There is no argument that the military has a legitimate need to keep some things 'dark'. The stealth programs are perfect examples of that.
But to what extent is it acceptable that there is a parallel world of development out there that the average citizen will never know about it? Are we to trust that someone, be it Congress or the Pentagon, has sufficient oversight and is curbing any potential abuses? These are mostly rhetorical questions, because I don't have an answer. I already said I support secret military development, so can I honestly say I have a problem with that development extended to space, I just don't know.
"The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity"
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (10 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 996 times:
Quoting Searpqx (Reply 3): As much as I can't believe I'm backing up AerospaceFan
There is always that first time, I guess!
Quoting Searpqx (Reply 3): think his point is, at what point do you draw the line? There is no argument that the military has a legitimate need to keep some things 'dark'. The stealth programs are perfect examples of that.
Thank you for your defense!
My point -- stated rather elliptically, admittedly -- is that we live in a world with parallel authorities doing parallel things completely hidden from view. The fact that this is so is nearly as inevitable as the setting of the sun.
I think that what the villain played by Jack Nicholson said in his final courtroom speech in A Few Good Men was intended to be taken as a vindication of the prosecutor. It was meant, I believe, as a foil to the good liberal lie that everything must be done in the open. But instead, I take his speech as a statement of realism, a counter to the Panglossian vision of transparency smashed to a million little pieces by the slightest contact with the cold, hard world.
Is it doublethink, after all, when the world itself is double?