It seems science fiction movies and video games portray conflicts in the distant future where a human colony would break ties with Earth and form an independent nation. I wonder if this would really hold true should the time come that one day we are able to populate nearby star systems with habitable worlds.
For some reason, whenever I think about this scenario, I think of the U.S. revolution. Sure, many of us (Americans) are taught that we fought for freedom since the British did not treat us fairly, taxation without representation, etc. However, consider the position the colonists were at during the revolution. Despite the constant threat of Native American tribes on the western border, Spanish and French colonies existant in the New World at the time, the colonists had many resources ripe for the taking. If you were a colonist living at that time and had the opportunity to make big profit from kicking out the government and setting up your own, wouldn’t you do so?
I believe that if most of the inhabitants of an area want to leave a nation, they should be allowed, regardless of the reason.
I think there would still be a war if the mother nation wanted to keep the colony–space wars would be cool.
doesn’t this belong in IMHO?
A self sustaining colony may not want any interference from some bureaucrats situated millions of miles away. And it would be really difficult for people on Earth to enforce laws on a colony so far away.
Some colonies might owe a big debt to the country which set them up. Say for example the moter country spent trillions making mars a habital planet, then they wanted to seperate to increase their profits without paying their debts. Of course on earth most colonization was good for the mother country, and bad for the colonized.
The location of the colonized planet is most important.
Let’s say the U.S. happens to colonize some distant planet in Alpha Centari. Let us also say that Japan has already colonized two planets there. If those U.S. colonists decide to declare their independence, they must consider the fact that they could be invaded by the neighboring Japanese colonists.
At least with U.S. support, the U.S. colonists would receive reinforcements from their home planet. However, if they’re on their own, they’ve pretty much signed their death warrant, with regard to the Japanese invasion.
Now, if you go somewhere a little more closer to home, like Mars, there wouldn’t be any opposition from the neighboring planets, so the colonists could revolt if they chose to. But, again, they have to look at who they’re going up against.
In this case, it’d be their own country, the U.S. The aforesaid is very powerful, miltaristically speaking, and could probably take Mars back. The U.S. would most likely have support from the U.N. as well, because it would be in the world’s best interest to “share” Mars. Not have it controlled by a small group of traitors.
So, I think distance to home planet and opposition from neighboring planets must be defined.
Some parameters to consider:
[ul]
[li]Most likely there will be at most only one habitable (M-class to trekkers) planet in a system[/li][li]With that single M-class planet in that particular system, it would most likely also be shared – UN would want nations/multinational conglamorates to cooperate in joint ventures, etc[/li][li]With the recent discovery of gas giants in neighboring star systems, most of the colonies set up would be mining facilities that would harvest liquid hydrogen,[/li][li]Or colonies situated on asteroid fields for mining minerals[/li][/ul]
