Denialism & Colonization

A concept that I first formally learned about through reading Michael Specter’s book Denialism is the idea of setting aside reality, to push forward with your own agenda, or avoid a reality which is perhaps less acceptable to ones self.  Specter tends to apply this concept to science and technology, where it relates to the medical field and drugs/medicine themselves.  He touches on such things as vaccines vs. autism, homeopathy and going organic compared to non-organic foods and the like, as well as the scientific study of drugs such as Vioxx and their results vs. the reality which companies and such looking to sell the drug were interested in seeing.  Somewhat of a political aspect of denialism is also shown in the book, particularly around AIDS/HIV and Africa.  I found it to be an intriguing book!  It has sparked some thoughts in my mind as to things I could write.  Therefore, I may write further about the book in another post if I see fit, but I thought applying the general concept to a trilogy written by Kim Stanley Robinson, the books Red Mars, Green Mars, and Blue Mars would be appropriate.

The Mars trilogy takes the human population from planet Earth and sees it colonize the planet Mars over a couple of centuries, starting around the 21st century.  It sees us through growing troubles on the planet earth, while mostly focusing on the development of things on the (initially) Red planet.  The main characters seen throughout the three books live on Mars and go through the normal issues which we see in our everyday life such as conflicts of various natures and relationships growing and conflicting.  The thing that interested me most was that they are also speaking of various perspectives; from political, scientific, economic, and religious/philosophical, among others that affect the overall outlook of the new Martian civilization.

As with probably just about anything, there is a form of denialism which takes place in the trilogy.  In fact, one could say that this denialism that comes to my mind at the moment, is what caused troubles on earth to worsen; if not begin.  It is that of corporations looking out for themselves with little or no thought of the environment, its plants, nor animals, nor its people which as a whole were ultimately responsible for creating them out of nothingness in the initial stages of industrialization.

Corporations, in the trilogy, become larger bodies called “transnationals” or “transnats” and they are less focused on a democratic way of operation and more on making bigger and bigger gains; the goal being to compete to see who might become the biggest and ultimately be able to control the interplanetary market.  There are buyouts of smaller companies in the process to become bigger and better.  They have their own intentions for development on Mars, along with all those perspectives coming from the initial 100 people who first arrived on the planet.  The transnats become metanats who want to take control of what goes on within the Mars civilization.  I remember that some of the discussion amongst the first 100 was around different concepts and was intrigued that Buddhist concepts were referred to in discussing the fate of the mars civilization that would be built.

A Buddhist outlook is much different from that of the corporate cultures in the novels.  It is one where living in harmony is of utmost importance to strive toward as opposed to focusing upon the ego and desire.  A Buddhist outlook or philosophy tends to shy away from sins such as gluttony and greed.  So there is a big contrast in the novel between what some of the first colonizers of Mars had in mind for the planet and what could potentially come to said planet depending on which voices reign in the end.  I don’t want to give away too much of the story line in this post, so as not to spoil things for potential readers as to what comes of either the Earth or of the planet Mars.

But there is also much focus in the book on scientific development and just how development of Mars should take place.  Some believe in the more natural approach whereby living off the land is best, others have thoughts around wanting to play around with the planet’s atmosphere and land in order to have the planet mimic that of Earth’s geography in a sense.  Both of these seem like they could make sense, but one is more or less playing God and looking to be in control, and the other is going with the flow of things.  Clearly, people do not have full control though, as in the Mars Trilogy, right from the get-go things happen that are not planned or anticipated at all.  Life is a mystery.  You never know how things will unfold.

About magnuswendler

The author is a recent university graduate, who enjoys reading and writing as well as pondering life and its issues.

Posted on September 17, 2012, in Book related and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 3 Comments.

  1. Great post, I find this to be an interesting topic. Corporations are completely unrelated to human needs yet through advertisement and inherent human laziness they seem to prevail. The thing is, from the days before the industrial era we had already begun building the foundation of the corporate model. We started domesticating animals and having grounds at which we could keep our livestock, as well as making land to farm. We eventually turned this into a business until we came to a point where people can purchase all of their food at a store; thus giving them time to work in a different area and not have to worry about hunting for their meal. Now this style of living opened up the market for corporations: we now have people working jobs to “further” the human race with advanced research and materialism which means they have an income that is disposable. Corporations see people with busy lives and market things to make these lives easier. This system inherently creates larges cities and a bigger population… We kill off life from our planet to make things we do not need… The question you can ask yourself is what was wrong with living to hunt, eat, relax and be part of the rest of the planet instead of separating ourselves from every other species? There is something soul soothing and peaceful about being surrounded by life and the natural parts of the earth rather than in a domesticated urban area. Mind you, this topic itself can be viewed in many different ways, some people feel we need to keep progressing with our research and building, and others would much rather live a simple life and let things be how they are. Just take it how it comes…. but I still think corporate sucks

  2. great post!
    Corporations are made of people. I often wonder whether corporations are naturally evil or they turn into evil because of the people running them?
    Gluttony and Greed are it.The 2 evils that are shaping the world more than anything else today. Unfortunately, I cannot see any “practical” method of eliminating the two without curtailing human freedom.

    • Interesting question! It would seem to me that corporations themselves cannot exactly be evil in and of themselves. They’re created by people, and people operate sometimes through certain motives that aren’t necessarily pure.
      I also don’t see a practical method of eliminating gluttony and greed. You can’t exactly change a person, while letting them remain totally free to be who they are or what they want to be. The only potential solution might be to promote the opposite, in hopes that a change of heart might occur in others maybe?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: