For centuries, the human race has looked upward toward the stars in awe if the universes magnificence and wondered what mysteries it might hold. In 1957 the Soviet Union began the quest to answer that ancient question when they launched the first satellite known as Sputnik I. When this satellite was launched the engineers that created it never could have envisioned the progress the human race would make in just over 50 years. This huge advancement in space exploration has changed who is capable of launching a space mission as “…early space missions were funded exclusively by national governments, and for good reason: going to space was astronomically expensive,” however, with the development of technology it is now possible for third parties
…show more content…
This brings up the issue raised in “The Democratization of Space;” if it is possible for nongovernmental, third party organizations to operate space programs, then how will we and deem what uses are acceptable for these satellites and more importantly, how will we …show more content…
Liberals believe that through democratization, peace can be achieved while realists believe that the only way peace can be achieved is through gaining enough power to silence your opponents. The author discusses the need for governments to work together for the collective good of the world instead of them simply launching as many satellites as possible in order to increase their power at any cost as a realist would argue. Liberalism believes multi-government organizations such as the UN are effective in creating change and in this article I felt like the author wanted to create a similar organization to address the issues that we are faced with. A realist would argue that the international system favors every man for himself and that cooperation would only decrease a states power which would make it more likely to become a target. Also, the author stresses the role of nongovernmental organizations which can play a key role in liberalism however realists believe that only states carry any real power. The author states that Tyvak Nano-Satellite Systems has started “to build satellites so inexpensive and easy to use that practically anyone can buy and launch them.” This would increase the power and influence of whatever individual or group bought the satellite in a liberal perspective but a realist would say
This brings up the issue raised in “The Democratization of Space;” if it is possible for nongovernmental, third party organizations to operate space programs, then how will we and deem what uses are acceptable for these satellites and more importantly, how will we …show more content…
Liberals believe that through democratization, peace can be achieved while realists believe that the only way peace can be achieved is through gaining enough power to silence your opponents. The author discusses the need for governments to work together for the collective good of the world instead of them simply launching as many satellites as possible in order to increase their power at any cost as a realist would argue. Liberalism believes multi-government organizations such as the UN are effective in creating change and in this article I felt like the author wanted to create a similar organization to address the issues that we are faced with. A realist would argue that the international system favors every man for himself and that cooperation would only decrease a states power which would make it more likely to become a target. Also, the author stresses the role of nongovernmental organizations which can play a key role in liberalism however realists believe that only states carry any real power. The author states that Tyvak Nano-Satellite Systems has started “to build satellites so inexpensive and easy to use that practically anyone can buy and launch them.” This would increase the power and influence of whatever individual or group bought the satellite in a liberal perspective but a realist would say