Due to a power issue, it looks like the lander may now no longer have sufficient fuel to make a controlled landing on the moon. This was the lander that was set to carry human remains to the moon despite objections from the Navajo nation. Hopefully, this discourages any future attempts at such a stunt, since instead of a permanent mausoleum your ashes may instead be stranded in orbit or scattered amongst the moon dust if the thing crashes.
The moon belongs to everyone; we should resist those who want to turn the cosmos into the playground of the rich. There is no scientific or public value in erecting such a mausoleum with public funds just because a few (presently dead) billionaires thought it would be neat. The fact they could afford to partially fund such a mission just goes to show that they had far too much money to spend in a productive or even recreational fashion: that money should have been expropriated and NASA or any other space program shouldn't need to be servicing such macabre fantasies.
Of course, many cultures across the world have had and continue to have a reverence for the moon along with the earth itself, and turning it into a graveyard for the fanciful rich should be generally offensive.
Removed by mod
weasel language. Of course we should allow scientific exploration of the moon. We should not allow private commodification of the moon. You conflate the two like a weasel. There is no utility in allowing rich creeps to dump their corpses on the moon, in fact it just interferes with scientific endeavors.
Removed by mod
Found the lolbertarian
Removed by mod
Here's your reward
, wait for it
Only if your starting assumption is that commons must be privatized and looted, which is a capitalist assumption but one that doesn’t necessarily make any sense. It’s just something you are asserting. Commodification by private entities should not be allowed on public land, think of it like a protected national park. You don’t just get to mine and make theme parks on it because it’s “public”. Likewise, rich fucks don’t just get to treat it as their playground. If they have enough money to waste on polluting and wasting resources then their money should be taxed away from them and put to better uses
Removed by mod
Then why are you defending this absurd project? You aren't even doing liberal ideology coherently if you (correctly) say that their money should probably just be taken from them if this is what they are spending it on. So what, you acknowledge that this is a socially worthless endeavor such that it would be more pro-social to seize a portion of their assets, and in fact that them trying to do this should be considered a good pretext for such a seizure, and yet simultaneously that the endeavor should but considered sacrosanct?
I am begging you to read any [leftist] critiques of liberal political theory. Literally any. This contains an offhand example that is nonetheless very solid.
Removed by mod
it’s called compensating for inequality of opportunity dumbass
edit:
it's called compensating for inequality of political power dumbass. We haven't been listening to "[group]" for literally centuries. We have to at least make an attempt to catch up before treating them the same as all the people we already listened to. If it was some random christian denomination you might have a point, but these are people we've been killing en masse for fucking ages. The least we can do is not LITERALLY throw shit at the things important to them.
Which page of the Epstein flight logs has your name?
It's called an idiom, concern troll. Sorry, is "troll" too dehumanizing?
Actually, giving rich pricks free rein while the rest of us can only watch does indeed infringe on our "rights" to the moon. These things can only be understood collectively, your atomized account is basically just a sophistical way of saying "first come, first served"