See:
I set out to summarize Trevelyan's account of the Stellar Union but found that I had already done it. He says that cross-purposes have clashed and that this has:
"'...meant annihilation.'" (CHAPTER XII, p. 105)
But why? Each home planet of an intelligent species must be economically self-sufficient. Trevelyan states that there are no strong economic ties with colony planets. Apparently he has said somewhere, on- or off-stage:
"'...that there was no reason for interstellar empire...'" (CHAPTER XVIII, p. 159)
- although he then makes a single exception, as a defence against ideological attack.
But surely space is big enough for starfaring races to bypass each other or to communicate, at most, at a distance? What purposes would clash? Let alone seriously enough to mean annihilation? This requires further elucidation.
I think that there would be not one civilization, not many, and that, if one went under, others would not.
1 comment:
Kaor, Paul!
All human societies/states, without exception, are actually/potentially unstable because of that protean enemy every single one of us has within us. Something to be managed with great difficulty, not eliminated. Wise states and societies will have no delusions about human beings and arrange matters accordingly. Basically, by rejecting dreams of "ideal" societies and rigid, one size fits all political schemes.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment