Our 'Manifest Destiny' is the Soil on Which We Stand
We should protect the planet we already have rather than try to colonise Mars
“No doubt there will always be some people willing to do anything at all that is financially or technically possible, who look upon the world and its creatures without affection and therefore as exploitable without limit.”
- Wendell Berry, It All Turns on Affection.
According to some rather influential individuals, to realise our full potential mankind (or more precisely, Americans) must set foot on Mars. We have already conquered the moon and almost every square foot of this earth; our ‘manifest destiny’ declares the next logical step is Mars. We will be neglecting our potential — neglecting our destiny — if we shirk from this high and noble calling.
According to a much less influential individual — but one who has repeatedly demonstrated himself to be both saner and wiser than those occupying the great halls of power — our proper destiny is the soil at our feet. We are derived from soil and dependent on soil — and will one day return to the soil.1 It is quite literally our destiny.
Rather, then, than reaching upwards to the stars, our fundamental human limitations, the responsibilities we have as land-stewards, and the utter dependency2 we have on soils, all dictate to us that we should instead plant our roots deep into our local places (and their soils) — to nurture and protect them for the benefit of man and beast alike. The land, its soil, and its creatures are our destiny; the very places our attentions and affections should be centred. This is our high and noble calling.
The two destinies and the two accompanying worldviews advocated for by these two individuals could not be more different. One is dependent on limitless economic growth and rejects all limitations; the other dependent on skilful, sustainable husbandry and an embrace of the goodness of limitations. One is founded on spectacle and fame; the other on affection, ordinariness, and responsibility. One is accessible only to the billionaires and millionaires, the other open to all who own or share a plot of land no matter how small or seemingly insignificant. One will directly benefit the lives of almost nobody; the other will benefit all who live, breathe, and eat on this earth.
It is time to put some names to the contrasting positions. It should come as no surprise to those following the news that Elon Musk, and to a lesser extent, President Trump, are the advocates of the ‘Martian manifest destiny’ position. Wendell Berry, on the other hand, is the chief advocate for the soil and the local place. Like the two worldviews they advocate, these two men — Musk and Berry — could not be more different. One has devoted his life to growth, growth, growth; the other has embraced limitations. One is concerned with gaining as much power and prestige as possible; the other is sceptical of power and relinquished long ago opportunities for academic prestige. One is aiming to extract as much wealth from the earth as he can; the other is focused on nurturing and giving back to the soil and his precious land. And at this historical juncture, where everything around us appears to be changing not only rapidly, but changing in the most fundamental and irreversible of manners, it matters immensely to all of us — and all who come after us — which of these two voices is heeded to.
It is worth considering what motivates Musk in his vision for reaching and even colonising Mars. He appears to be captivated by the Red Planet, though I find this somewhat puzzling as I am sure he and any colonisers would find Mars an immensely boring place, considering as it is just a massive globe of red, dusty rock and that surviving in these inhospitable conditions necessitates revoking much of what makes life worth living: good food, human touch, the wonders of the natural world… Why anyone would want to live there is beyond me. But the desire does exist, and appears to be shared by many, so it is worthwhile us analysing it.
One of Musk’s main stated aims is to create a plan B for humans if life on this earth becomes inhospitable, say because we have depleted it of resources, utterly polluted the air we breathe, or let loose some tyrannical AI overlord.3 At first, this appears to be altruistic, perhaps even a wise hedging of one’s bets for the sake of humanity. But when we consider that the very hyper growth-based, industrial, and extractive activities perpetrated by Musk and his ‘techbro’ friends, as well as by other industrialists the world over, are the ones threatening life on this earth, the desire to flee to Mars begins to sound a lot like abdicating one’s responsibilities and trying to escape from the consequences of one’s own actions.
It is, though, Musk’s philosophical position concerning growth and limitations that I believe shed the greatest light on understanding his Martian urge. This urge is the predictable outworking of a philosophy that detests limitations. Besides the ultimate limitation, which is that of death, the spatial limitations of planet Earth are the chief limitation confronting the hyper-growthists, transhumanists, and techno-optimists, all of whom can claim Musk as one of their most vocal and powerful adherents. Escaping the confines of this earth is one way of striking a blow to the heart of the biophysical limitations that supposedly constrain and inhibit humanity. Escaping this world may also lead to a desired cornucopia of minerals and resources, all waiting to be extracted from the red planet and turned into near-limitless economic growth — thus realising the ultimate, limitless dream of industrialists and techbros alike.
What would Wendell Berry say to all this? What would his response be to all this egotism, limitless urges, and technological advances? I believe he would repeat what he uttered in his Jefferson Lecture: “No doubt there will always be some people willing to do anything at all that is financially or technically possible, who look upon the world and its creatures without affection and therefore as exploitable without limit.”
Treating the world as if it can be exploited without limit — as the hyper-growthists and transhumanists are wont to do and as will be required if Musk’s vision of a substantial colonisation of Mars is to be achieved — causes significant ecological and social damage. Soils are eroded and exhausted, and minerals are blasted out of the ground leaving behind huge scars. People are worked till they burn out, and wastes are prodigiously dumped in the oceans. These are just a few of the many severe social and ecological costs that we will have to charge to this beautiful earth in order to colonise another inhospitable planet.
Fixing our attention upon Mars, and thus forsaking affection towards earth, will also lead to indirect costs that will further harm our planetary home. Two such indirect costs that pose a severe threat are the twin (and inseparable) costs of neglect and opportunity. It is vital that we grasp their seriousness for, it would appear, our politicians and men of power currently do not.
Firstly, the cost of neglect. If our vision is transfixed on getting to Mars, we will inevitably begin to overlook the many problems that are right in front of us. One such pressing example concerns the state of our soils. Around the globe, soils are eroding and degrading at rapid rates, dustbowl conditions are returning to parts of America, and soils laden with fertilisers are silting up British rivers. Taking our eyes off the pressing issue of what is happening to our soils and instead pinning our hopes and attention upon reaching Mars risks losing precious time in addressing this ongoing crisis. Our neglect will inevitably cause the irreversible loss of even more good and healthy soil. The fact that an inch of soil takes over 1000 years to form highlights the immense folly and risk we are collectively taking as a society in neglecting its plight and letting it waste away.
The other cost existing alongside the cost of neglect is the opportunity cost. Getting to Mars will be an extortionately expensive affair. It stands to reason that all the money spent (or wasted) on getting a human to set foot on the distant planet cannot be spent on other more worthy and pressing matters. Why spend billions in enabling a human to set foot for a few hours on some red dust while our life-giving soils are in a perilous state? Why waste billions when good farmers across the globe are struggling to make ends meet and are forced by their perilous financial conditions into working their soils ever harder just to survive? Most farmers don’t wish to neglect the Doctrine of Return. It's just that many cannot afford to obey it, such is the perversity of the financial trap they find themselves in. An investment that will pay countless dividends is to support our good and small farmers in caring for their soils. Pity it is, then, that our governments are more concerned with unsustainable vanity projects and otherworldly manifest destinies.
The places we live in, the soils they hold, and the farmers who work them, are all crying out for desperate help. Wendell Berry has spent a lifetime answering their cry. He has been shouting eloquently and forcefully for decades out in the proverbial wilderness that we would see the plight of our soils and our small farmers, that we would see the sense embrace the limits we have been given for our good, and that we would value what is truly valuable. He, I am sure, would argue that our proper manifest destiny is to be rooted where we are and to commit to our place’s health and wholeness with all our affection, wisdom, and might.
As Berry himself laments, society has mostly ignored his and his fellow agrarian’s arguments and pleas.4 It is well past time, then, that we listened to him.
Here then is a suggestion to Mr Musk and President Trump. If they want to leave behind a legacy that truly matters once they too have returned to “the dust from which they came”,5 then they should forget about Mars and turn instead to the land and its labourers. Invest in them. Invest in those many men and women who are stewarding their place with affection and care. Invest in the old and sensitive agrarian ways and practices which nurture the soil, but which are being outcompeted in this age of ruthless efficiency. Work towards creating an agricultural policy that supports small farmers rather than the current ones which neglect and hamper them. And invest in locally adapted science and knowledge that helps to resolve local problems with local solutions. These are some of the great needs of the day; fulfilling them is a legacy worth having.
The ultimate legacy for this generation is not in reaching Mars nor the stars; it is in leaving the land and its soils to the next generation in a better condition than then we inherited them. This is our high and noble calling. This is our true and proper manifest destiny.
Genesis 1-3.
In terms of our food and many of our building materials.
Though my Christian convictions lead me to believe that God would never let this world become totally inhospitable.
See the beginning to his essay The Agrarian Standard.
Genesis 3:19
I would not suspect either Trump or Musk of thinking in philosophical terms, let alone caring about their legacy for future generations. It is on us, common earthlings, to reject absurdities and choose actions which could make the Earth hospitable for our children. Yes, spreading the wisdom of Wendell Berry, reminding of simple—although not easy—rules of cohabitation between humans and Nature, is one of these helpful actions.