some alternatives in the sociology of space colonization: the kibbutz as a space colony

8/12/2019 SOME ALTERNATIVES IN THE SOCIOLOGY OF SPACE COLONIZATION: THE KIBBUTZ AS A SPACE COLONY

1/28

SOME ALTERNATIVES IN THE SOCIOLOGY OF SPACE COLONIZATION: THE

KIBBUTZ AS A SPACE COLONY

by

Michael Ashkenazi

KEYWORDS: Space colony; space exploitation; space industrialization; kibbutz

7500 words


2/28

SOME ALTERNATIVES IN THE THE SOCIOLOGY OF SPACE COLONIZATION: THE


(Abstract)

by

Michael Ashkenazi

This paper critiques the scanty sociological examination on future space colonies. It

suggests that the sociology of space colonies has not been examined with due attention to the

relationship between the physical problems of surviving in space and the social form of the

colony. The Israeli kibbutz form is examined as one example of a viable and logical alternative

form of settlement for space colonization.


3/28

Kibbutz-Space 1

SOME ALTERNATIVES IN THE SOCIOLOGY OF SPACE COLONIZATION: THE


1. Introduction

Discussions of space colonization [1, 2, 3] address sociological issues, if at all, as if life in

space were merely a continuation of life on Earth. This is highly unlikely, given the conditions of

life off the earth. Life off Earth, in this discussion, includes artificial satellites (space

stations) and colonies on other natural bodies: Mars, the Moon, asteroids, and Jovian moons

seem viable candidates at this time. Notwithstanding certain differences between off-Earth

planetary and zero-gravity colonies, all are likely to have many things in common: physical

insecurity, distance from Earth, internal environmental problems, and lack of personal space are a

few.

This paper examines some assumptions of the suburban life-style implicit in current

visions of space colonies. Alternative communal arrangements, such as the very successful Israeli

kibbutz community, are suggested as appropriate for three main reasons. (1) The kibbutz form

could ensure a combination of economic and social viability. (2) It enhances the physical

integrity and operation of the colonys biome. And, (3) it offers an alternative to the vexing

contradictions of personal liberty and limitations on it that space life imposes.

The literature on the sociological implications of space colonies [4, 5, 6] is rather strong

on posing questions, and less certain about the answers. Considering the lack of hard data, this

situation is neither surprising nor undesirable. However, it is the nature of the questions that

leaves much to be desired. The questions make little attempt to focus on problems peculiar to the

space environment. For example, Melchionne and Rosen [7] pose a set of questions about the

potential nature of space colony society, but could have posed the same set of questions about

any human society.


4/28

Kibbutz-Space 2

Given the nature of the Space endeavor, in which people from many cultures are likely to

be involved in a broad effort, it is likely that other sociological paradigms will necessarily evolve

in space.. Accordingly, alternative social arrangements that already exist should be examined for

possible applicability to space colonization. The example brought here the kibbutz is

presented not to urge kibbutz settlement in space, but to illuminate the possibility of alternative

social design for space colonies. The initial design and consideration of such social communities

must carefully consider the physical parameters of the space colony as the framework for social

issues. At the same time, some sort of balance must be maintained between collective needs (for

example, limiting some sorts of individual activities to preserve station integrity) and individual

desires and freedoms (that is, providing some form of popular and individual control over

collective decisions and policy).

2. Space colonization

Space colonization refers to the settling and residence of human beings in space for the

purpose of exploiting the physical characteristics of Space. Space colonies are likely to emerge as

a result of the energy-cost requirements of servicing space exploration and exploitation. Though

ideological considerations may be primary for many in favor of space exploration and

colonization, economic necessity could well be a crucial driving motive for space colonization.

Even just the elimination of the process of lofting payloads and human workers from Earths

gravity well, with its attendant prohibitive costs, would make space colonies a cost-effective

mechanism for space activities.

Phase One of the Space effort (which is likely to continue for several decades) is

characterized by massive government investment (for lack of other resource providers and

probably because of low initial returns from space investment), strong Earth-based regulation

(flowing from the first point), and 3) a limited utilization of space environments: Earth orbit and

possibly reaching to initial Lunar colonies [8].


5/28

Kibbutz-Space 3

Phase Two, the routinization phase, will emerge as the benefits (if any) of exploiting

space become apparent. It will likely be characterized by entrepreneurship and smaller

investment (as service and economic opportunities become available, but not worth major

government investment); weaker enforcement of Earth-based control; and extended space

occupation, both in terms of duration of individual stays and dispersion of colony points:

Lagrange and circum-Earth space stations, Lunar, and possibly Martian and Jovian-moon

colonies.

3. Problems specific to the space environment

The problems peculiar to settling in space include a number of physical factors, and social

problems deriving from them. Some will be solved initially simply as engineering problems.

Others, particularly the social ones, which are derivative, are more insidious and more difficult to

identify.

The physical limitations of the space colony must be kept in mind. A comparison of

basic individual needs on a space colony compared to individual needs on Earth indicates clearly

where many analyses of social issues in space colonies fail. The degree of importance of these

factors is roughly measured by how long an individual can do without them. In Space the order

of importance is: air, power, room, pollution (e.g. heat pollution in the first instance, human

waste disposal in the second), food-water, and gravity. On earth this order is reversed: food-

water, pollution (human waste disposal), room, and power. Air and gravity do not, of course,

factor at all. The physical design of a Space habitat is a consequence of these requirements [9].

Social design of a space colony must flow from a recognition that these factors impose special

problems on social forms and behavior.


6/28

Kibbutz-Space 4

3.1 Physical risk

Physical risk in settling space is a consequence of two factors. First, the hostile

environment, and second, the lack of, or improper/incomplete application of engineering solutions

to the environment. The physical needs hierarchy discussed above can be roughly divided into

three sets of related human problems.

(a) Lack of external atmosphere, alternatively, poisonous atmosphere. The former is

more likely, given our current technology and inability to contemplate set tling planets such as

Venus and all the Jovian planets. The lack of atmosphere implies first, a need for full integrity in

the biome, and second, special training and technology to function outside the habitat or in it in

case of loss of integrity to the habitat. Related to that are questions of bio-toxins and energy. As

settlers increase, so too does the microecology they live in, including micro-organisms. The

possibility of unwanted biological reactions (e.g. uncontrolled fermentation in air or water

systems) must be considered a real danger. Lack of power (or lack of power in required form)

will lead in the first instance to lack of air as air circulation fails. At a greater remove it will likely

cause problems of the entire functioning of the habitat.

(b) Temperature control. For biological purposes, Space may be considered a complete

vacuum, that is, heat is gained or lost through radiation alone. This implies that temperature

regulation of a biome is of primary importance. Both excessive heat gain (through solar exposure

and biologically produced heat) and excessive heat loss (less through radiation than through

expiration) must be considered.

(c) Lack of, or inappropriate, gravity. This has both medical consequences (calcium loss),

and effects on physical activities, such as lack of coordination [8] which, though not medical

problems per se, could be prime causes of accident. Lack of familiarity with the effects of

gravity is likely to cause, at best, errors in judgement and skills, at worse actual risks to station

personnel.

Any of these three factors, or all acting in unison, will affect the health of space colonists.

Moreover, to ensure that no man-made error is likely to threaten the biome, its population


7/28

Kibbutz-Space 5

requires the sort of preparedness and training required of submarine crews or other human

communities exposed to extreme environmental stress. The higher the technical qualifications and

abilities of the population as a whole, the better the colony is likely to survive a crisis in any of

the environmental areas. It should be noted that egoistic behavior under such environmental

conditions would be ultimately self-defeating.

3.2 Hardship

This embraces all problems relating to physical comfort as distinct from survival and

health. A number of factors may be cited. Close quarters and social proximity. Lack of social

variation. Inability to form sub-groups because of limited social variation, psychological

problems due to enclosed environments, cumulative physical stress. These are irritants (at least

initially) rather than actual physical problems that will affect the long-term physical viability of

residence in space. Some of these problems have been addressed [8, 10, 11], but there is little

data to suggest how colonies (as opposed to extended spaceflight missions with select crews) will

fare in space Recorded human experience from De Veer and Barents in the 1590s to Soviet

cosmonauts in the 1980s demonstrate that dedicated, trained individuals can maintain themselves

over extended periods of time in isolation notwithstanding great physical discomfort and

extended personal proximity. The settings, however, were not permanent settlements, and it is

necessary to consider social factors likely to affect permanent settlements in space.

3.3 Individuals and individual activities

Individual initiative and self-interest propel capitalist endeavor, the currently-dominant

economic ideology. In contrast, exploration and colonization in space necessitates a collective

effort. The minimal support echelon for positioning even one person in space is too formidable

to allow individuals to pursue their personal interests regardless of others. More importantly for


8/28

Kibbutz-Space 6

this discussion, the survival of any space enterprise in a hostile environment requires absolute

commitment to the habitat. Without such a commitment, the habitat or biome is at physical risk.

As long as exploration is carried out by professional space agencies such as NASA or

ESA, the calibre of personnel and their degree of commitment to the habitat can be controlled.

This may not be the case when profit-oriented firms or entrepreneurs are concerned. On the

Earth, neither national nor international regulation and policing have proven sufficient to ensure

that individual or corporate activities do not have harmful side effects on the biosphere. An

overriding commitment by colonists to their biome is paramount among the safeguards for

prolonging the viability of a space colony, and for its long-term economic success.

3.4 Absence of normal age/sex-distribution curve

Ideal colonies such as those proposed by ONeill [3] aside, it is highly likely that space

colonies will be inhabited by a high number of young to middle-aged males and much lower

numbers of other cohorts. This is of particularly true of Phase One colonies, but is likely to

extend into Phase Two as well. Laws prohibiting discrimination against women and the elderly,

such as those in the US notwithstanding, the sociological reality world-wide is that high-risk,

high-prestige technology-related activities are dominated by men [12]. In other words, given a

capitalist economic system, and a free employment market, there are likely to be a smaller

number of females and of course an almost complete absence of children and older citizens.

Women, bearing the twin burdens of physical limitations during pregnancy and factual male

dominance of the economy and the sciences, are likely to be underrepresented, and where

represented, skewed towards less-significant positions because of career interruptions.

The same issue will also affect age distribution. Both children and the elderly will

probably be absent, because neither are economically productive in terms of the colonization

effort. The absence of mixed age- and sex-groups may have little or no bearing on a colonys

productive abilities, but their presence should be expected to contribute to a colonys social


9/28

Kibbutz-Space 7

stability. It should be added that both childhood and ageing are natural biological consequences of

human societies. Properly speaking, colonization implies some form of self-replicating human

society.

3.5 Need for flexibility in living arrangements.

Living arrangements commonly described in the literature [2] imply a direct transfer of

Earth-type conditions, specifically, single-family units. Given the technical and engineering

problems associated with the construction of a biome [13, 14] and particularly the parametric

social assumptions made by Spurlock and Modell [9] this may not be truly practicable. An

attempt to replicate suburban family units [2, 3], for instance, ignores problems such as caring for

children while parents are at work, the need for changing residential systems in response to

engineering, social, and life-cycle requirements, and so on. Social-family patterns of the middle-

class are particularly rigid and not amenable to change. In such a pattern, a certain amount of

flexibility in individual preference (e.g. size, arrangement, coloring, food services) requires great

(and essentially wasteful) investment in replicated facilities ranging from living units and kitchens

to recreation areas: something a space colony could likely not afford.

3.6 Economic production

The most important factor in Space colonization is probably the economic. Given that

economic production and manufacturing in Space has not yet been attempted, it is difficult to

empirically examine the economics of space colonies. Nonetheless, some general approximate

models have been attempted.

Economic sources will include resource exploitation: minerals from planetary and sub-

planetary bodies [15, 16], solar power for sale to Earth [17], manufacturing, particularly in

weightless, and near weightless colonies [14, 18]), and services for the other ty pes. This implies


10/28

Kibbutz-Space 8

the need for a certain amount of technologically sophisticated flexibility to exploit available

economic possibilities.

Space colonies will probably be dependent, in some areas of their economy, on Earth for

some time. Concurrently, they will be likely to seek autonomy, par ticularly in areas such as

manufacture, local administration, and internal distribution of resources and rewards. Given

variable distances and communication lag, distant colonies (e.g. Jovian moons) will require more

autonomy than closer ones. Space colonies in any case would need to be fairly autonomous for

many of their economic decisions. A mix of autonomous decision-making and external policy-

making from Earth is a possibility.

A second economic factor that must be considered is innovation. The long-term

proisperity of a space colony is likely to be tied to technical and scientific advances originating

with the larger scientific and academic mass of Earth. The solution of immediate local technical,

manufacturing, and economic problems, however, will depend to a large degree on local initiative

using, as much as possible, native resources. Given the high cost of transportation, and the need

for long-range planning, it is likely that economic expenditures, whether for investment (capital

goods) or for personal (consumer goods) use, will be limited. Thus a premium will be laid on the

ability of a space colony to supply its own needs and requirements, to the greatest degree

possible.

All this is to say that a viable space colony will require a sophisticated mix of local and

external input. Moreover, the precise mix in each colony will be different (even disregarding

individual ability and demographic factors) depending on the colonys economic environs and

opportunities.


11/28

Kibbutz-Space 9

4. The accepted social model of space colonies.

One of the most comprehensive attempts to deal with the social structure of a space

colony is by Heppenheimer [1] and particularly [2]. The socio-political position he adopts

derives from a particular American experience, and makes assumptions that are worth examining

here.

Heppenheimer suggests in effect two things. First, given the economic reality of

investment by a government body (the only one capable of such massive projects, though the

claim can be disputed), political control ought to be vested in the investor. That is, managerial

and political (Heppenheimer makes no distinction) functions in the colony will be exercised by

individuals appointed by the colony funder, normally a government. Domestic arrangements will

be determined by individuals and families, based on norms prevailing in the society (presumably

a homogeneous one) that formed the colony. The settlers will be salaried employees of the

funder, who will also, presumably supply consumer goods and services. The settlers will have

political input in two areas: minor advisory comments regarding personal-material problems, and

the right to vote with their feet and leave the colony voluntarily (or be expelled) in the absence

of agreement with the funder. Thus there will be

a society of Americans expecting to live according to American customs, and with

American rights, while depending for these rights on a powerful government that concentrates all

responsibility and authority into its hands while conferring benefits upon its employees. [19].

Heppenheimer relies too much on benevolent dictatorship, and historical experience has

demonstrated that benevolent dictatorships rarely remain so. Heppenheimers assumption that

the power of the state will eventually wither away [2] is highly unlikely given the propensity of

totalitarian governments to cling to power. Moreover, the economic model is flawed as well,

considering that much of the labor in the Canal Zone is supplied by Panamanians from outside

the Zone itself. The transfer of earth models must therefore be considered with greater attention


12/28

Kibbutz-Space 10

to the special parameters of the space environment, and with more careful analysis of the

implications of particular settlement forms.

In the environment of a space-colony, a socio-political system such as that proposed by

Heppenheimer or ONeill would be impractical, even dangerously self-defeating. It is possible

that all residents of a space colony will have to contribute to its economy and to the biome;

spouses engaged solely in housework, and even children who are unable, during the early stage in

their lives, to assist in colony survival, are unlikely to be acceptable. Communal self-reliance will

be paramount. Finally, any political form that will not enable immediate input and changes by

informed and concerned residents will lead, inevitably, to political excesses. Some alternative

model must be considered.

5. The kibbutz as a colony

The idea of a voluntary communal settlement is not unique to Israel. Kibbutz-like

communes were actually founded before Degania (the first kibbutz, founded 1909) in Japan along

very similar lines. Communal-religious communities have existed elsewhere as well. The Shakers

in the US, the Saint Simeon movement in France in the eighteenth century, and collective

movements in Russia before the communist revolution.

The Israeli kibbutz differs from all of these in two ways. First, kibbutzim are largely

non-religious. At least, their life-style was not influenced by religious considerations, and thus

excesses such as celibacy which limited the evolution of Shaker communes, never occured. The

isolation, required almost, by religious groups to protect their beliefs and life-styles has also not

been a feature. Kibbutzim never barricaded or isolated themselves against non-communal society

[20]. On the whole, they have been, and still are, enthusiastic and successful participants in

Israeli social, cultural, and political life.

The second difference between kibbutzim and other forms of communal settlement

derives from and is related to the first: unlike most other forms, kibbutzim have been very


13/28

Kibbutz-Space 11

successful. Since the first kibbutz was founded in 1909, 268 kibbutzim have come into

existence, and with one or two exceptions, have been successful. The total kibbutz population of

Israel was 127,000 out of a total Israeli population of 4,406,500 (2.9% of the total population.

Numbers correct to 1987 [21]). The average kibbutz population is 440. Some larger kibbutzim

number up to two thousand members. Though there are smaller, newer kibbutzim with

populations of a couple of dozen.

Originally based largely on agriculture, most kibbutzim today are economic mixes of

agriculture and industry [22]. High value is placed on technological innovation, problem solving,

and technical expertise. There is also a great emphasis on individual commitment to the collective

effort. Kibbutzim vary greatly in demographic factors, sources of income, and socio-political

orientation. This variance is the consequence of economic, environmental, psychological,

ideological, and other factors.

Most of the industries chosen by kibbutzim have been technology intensive. This has

had the advantage of providing satisfaction for young members, while not requiring great

investments in manpower. In addition, most industries are chosen with an eye towards engaging

the interest, and not limiting the participation of members in all physical conditions, including the

aged and the very young [23].

Socially, some kibbutzim have always maintained an extreme communal way of life (no or

little private property, communal dining at all times, communal child-care) while others have

changed, fine-tuned, or completely abandoned some aspects of communal living. Nontheless, all

maintain common usage and communal input and benefit from all means of production [24].

Most kibbutzim spend a great deal of time and resources on educating their members.

Free schooling is provided to all members from the cradle through high school, and to advanced

university degrees if wanted. In addition, kibbutzim often sponsor their members private

educational goals, including training in the arts and sciences outside Israel [23]. Kibbutzim in

general have displayed a very strong commitment to advanced technology and its usage. Ninety

four percent of 196 kibbutzim surveyed used computers as a matter of routine [24]). Of those


14/28

Kibbutz-Space 12

users, 96% used the computer for accounting, 77% for industrial purposes, and 61% for

education as well. The same study found 202 kibbutzim tied into 10 local, centralized computing

systems. It is significant not only that kibbutzim are able to use advanced technology, but that

such usage supports their own social and economic aims [25, 26].

The growth of industry is stimulated by the availability of a technically highly trained

work force (for example, the Japanese economy [27]). Basic elementary education is supplied by

the government and implemented by the kibbutzim as part of their educational, social, and

cultural efforts, and this reflects on their industrialization. Kibbutzim benefit from the presence

of a fairly high percentage of people with tertiary and professional educations. This has emerged

in response to the need for trained managers, doctors, engineers, etc. In part, however, this is

also due to pressure from individual members, who, as part of what they perceived as the social

welfare function of the kibbutz, have demanded access to higher education. The result, in any

case, as noted, has been a growth in the numbers of skilled professionals, including engineers.

Among other things, this contributes both to the presence of advanced technology industries in

kibbutzim, and to personal satisfaction and fullfilment for kibbutz members.

The process of industrialization in kibbutzim has proceeded as result of the efforts and

requirements of individual settlements, not guided national or government policy. That is, each

kibbutz, based on its own interest has invested (or not) in industrialization. This implies a great

deal of flexibility in choosing particular industries, and what amounts to an ability to fit particular

industries to ecological and economic imperatives. Due to the high absolute cost of labor in

kibbutzim (which generally have suffered from a lack of manpower and have been ideologically

opposed to hiring labor from the outside), kibbutzim have, from the start of industrialization,

invested in technologically sophisticated enterprises where the return on labor is high. Ideological

preferences have dictated a higher than normal (in the prevailing market) capital/labor ratio with

heavy capital investment due to labor shortage [28]. This investment is nontheless, intentionally

curtailed by non-economic considerations. Constitutional and welfare constraints [29], dictate


15/28

Kibbutz-Space 13

the type of industry the kibbutz engages in, and its form even though the major objective is to

turn a profit, which most kibbutz industrial enterprises manage to do competitively [28].

The constitutional and welfare constraints, that emerge from the general social tenets of

the kibbutz, include egalitarianism in valuing of industrial function and no direct return for labor;

sovereignty of the kibbutz over its manufacturing; and lack of positive or negative coercive means

between management and labor. This requires the use of other means to motivate the labor force.

Other constraints limit the choice of industries engaged in to those in which labor is not tedious,

is technologically challenging, and is not destructive and threatening to the local environment.

The work place is normally also the home of the entire labor force: labor, managers, and owners

being interchangeable. Thus the choice of kibbutz industries relies on three main criteria:

profitability (since the survivability of the kibbutz depends on it); satisfaction of the labor force

by providing interest and job rotation [23]; and proper employment and training of staff.

Kibbutzim have been successful economically because of the application of three

principles. First, the quality and motivation of kibbutz manpower. Second, proper running of a

system balancing participatory, often direct democracy, with goal-oriented activity. Third, the

ability of the kibbutz as an economic enterprise, to allocate sufficient capital for investment and

development [29]. The first and last, are in effect prerequisites for space colonies. The second

may well be as well. Only insofar as the colonists are able to participate in the goals of the

colony are they likely to suppor t it. This is particularly true during the pioneering stage, when

standards are set against a background of great difficulty and hardship.

To summarize, the kibbutz form exhibits a number of features that are, in themselves,

important for space colonization. (1) A mixture of agricultural and industrial economic sources.

(2) A preference, in industry, for technologically sophisticated industries. (3) A proven, and

structurally driven need and ability to choose industries flexibly. (4) A highly trained and

motivated work force. (5) The integration of economic unit and social unit, both being large

enough for economic and social viability and small enough for close integration. (6) The physical

proximity of economic unit and social unit, leading to a concern for labor safety and ecological


16/28

Kibbutz-Space 14

factors. (7) A need for a certain degree of social isolation to maintain a chosen social milieu,

combined with an openness towards wider social trends and influences.

6. The principles of the space-kibbutz.

This section shall relate some of the principles discussed above directly to a kibbutz-form

space colony. The discussion is not intended to be comprehensive nor exhaustive. It merely sets

the foundation to the solution for certain basic problems.

6.1 Recruitment and membership.

Kibbutzim normally are founded as planned cooperative efforts. Most kibbutzim emerge

through a long process of social aggregation and crystallization, which, by the latter part of the

twentieth century, is fairly routinized. Psychological and sociometric measures have been

devised to ensure a minimum standard of compatibility between members. Members of proto-

kibbutz units (a garin [seed] in Israeli parlance) have an opportunity to acclimatize to one

another and to the kibbutz milieu, usually working for a year in an established kibbutz. What is

important, is that the establishment of a new kibbutz is routinized. It is no longer a utopian,

essentially hit-or-miss social collective. This planning and preparation underlie the high rate of

success in establishing new kibbutzim. Significantly, once established, a kibbutz becomes an

autonomous unit. The scope of the autonomy extends to two areas. First, socially, kibbutzim

can, and do vary their social arrangements. This ranges from fine tuning of work assignments to

major decisions about reward allocation. Second, given the means of production, kibbutzim may

and often do make changes in the ways in which they exploit their economic opportunities.

Given the land to work on, the economic choices types of crop and crop mix, whether to go


17/28

Kibbutz-Space 15

into industry and if so which one are based as much as possible on economically rational

decision making [30] The same is true of industrial development.

Turner cites two problems likely to occur in a space colony we want to know what

the first colonists would give up on earth to strengthen their motivation to remain members of the

community and what mechanisms of investment would ensure that they committed to the

community their individual 'profits' however defined so that they will not readily leave [31 p.

60]. related to that, Allocating different technical jobs to people usually creates a social division

of labor with its own statuses, relationships and tensions. These form the constituent elements

in the social drama of work. What social drama will develop around the tasks of Lagrange

Five? [31 p. 64]. If a kibbutz were a utopian commune, such as those described by Kanter [32]

in the US, this would indeed seem to be a problem. Unlike such communes, however kibbutzim

are no longer utopian communes. That is, through a lengthy process of routinization kibbutzim

have emerged as rather pedestrian, albeit uncommon forms of human settlement. The two

questions Turner struggles with have been overcome, and on the whole quite successfully, by an

extant residential-economic form. Moreover, the usual questions asked about viable communities

childbearing and rearing; marriage patterns; treatment of the aged; law; resource sharing; illness

and medicine; relations to environment; religion; life transitions have been addressed, and a

number of viable solutions provided empirically by kibbutzim. These can be subsumed under

three headings: economics, society, and personal responsibility.

6.2 Economics.

Kibbutzim in Israel, from their inception, have been financed in their first years from

public funds. Land allocation and funds for the purchase of means of production and residence

have been public. In this, a space kibbutz is likely not to differ either from the parent form, or

from the establishment of any other type of commercial enterprise. That is, given an agency

intent on exploiting an economic opportunity in space, it makes sense (for reasons detailed in


18/28

Kibbutz-Space 16

previous sections) to recruit and finance the establishment of a kibbutz. Such an agency might

well be a government agency or a commercial firm, or, for that matter, an international agency,

ideological movement, or benevolent foundation.

The economic relationship between the funder and the kibbutz itself might be a continuing

one (for example, in the case of an industrial firm), or limited to the provision of seed money. In

any case, the kibbutz maintains its social autonomy and much of its economic decision making

power, perhaps as a contractor for some enterprise: the maintenance of solar-power satellites, or

lunar mining come to mind. The community, as a unit, will be competing with others in seeking

economically viable activities, while preserving its biome.

Space-kibbutzim imply two things: first, space colonies which are likely to exhibit high

standards of physical safety. Second, space colonies with an overall flexibility in their approach

to the exploitation of space. Physical safety is crucial to continuing human presence in space,

complexity and flexibility are preconditions for any successful economic sector.

One would expect kibbutz-ty pe space colonies to engage in economic and scientific

activities in much the same way that any other colony does. Using contemporary kibbutzim as a

model, it is likely that they will attempt to create a balance between resource-driven and

manufacturing industries. It is also possible, considering their origins, that many of them will

engage in agriculture certainly for local consumption (see [2 pp. 162-186] for a summary of

agriculture in space and [9] for actual operating assumptions), possibly for export ( that is, to

other colonies lacking the same orientation) which tends to create greater self-sufficiency.

Given their possible financial origins, it is also likely that those colonies that have been funded

initially by an economic enterprise, will be paying off their debt, or relying on long-term

contracts for the supply of resources or manufactured items.


19/28

Kibbutz-Space 17

6.3 Space kibbutz as a viable social entity

A kibbutz is a community. In order to maintain itself it must renew its personnel. This

is done through two methods: through biological reproduction, and by recruitment. For fairly

complex reasons, kibbutzim in Israel tend to be exogamous. That is to say, members find mates

from outside the community. Those leaving to join their spouses (in other kibbutzim or

elsewhere) are balanced by those joining spouses on the kibbutz. Successful kibbutzim tend also

to slough off groups of younger members by assisting in the foundation of a new kibbutz

elsewhere, and people do leave the kibbutz for life elsewhere. This is the result of

overpopulation, dissatisfaction, and the desire of younger members for greater control of their

lives. It is likely that kibbutz-type space colonies will replicate this pattern, given the ability of

the colony to maintain a reasonable affluence, and an equitable distribution of effort and reward.

Thus we are likely to find that kibbutz-type space colonies are viable for the extremely long

range, and, moreover, will also establish daughter communities when they are able. Since the

establishment of a daughter colony is a major financial and personnel undertaking, such daughter

colonies will be established, as new kibbutzim often are today, in cooperation with similar

colonies and consequently with close industrial and social ties. This helps ensure broad internal

cohesion between families of kibbutzim, industrial streaming, control of upstream resources by

specializing in different aspects of a particular industrial process, and so on.

The Israeli kibbutz model suggests that a kibbutz is a long-term proposition. That is, the

planning horizon for kibbutz managers is in the range of generations, certainly no shorter than

decades. This means that such space colonies are likely to invest heavily in education. The

experience of most kibbutzim shows that individuals trained professionally outside the kibbutz,

tend to return to the kibbutz with relatively high frequency [24]. This suggests that this type of

space colony will enjoy a high level of technical competence and professional expertise among its

members. Moreover, on the whole, such a colony is not likely to suffer from a brain-drain.

Though a certain number do leave, they are replaced through training in the kibbutz community,

through borrowing specialists from other kibbutzim, or through recruitment.


20/28

Kibbutz-Space 18

The tremendous isolation imposed by distances in space is not likely to be a major

problem. In one aspect, at least, it may even be beneficial. A comparative analysis of kibbutzim

and Hutterite colonies [20] suggest that a certain degree of social and physical isolation positively

correlates with the success of a collective community. It forces the members to confront and deal

with social and technical problems without recourse to outside help. The isolation may also spur

the birth of second-generation space colonies, as the colony seeks to improve its economic and

social position in space, a point discussed above.

6.4 Personal responsibility

A factor implicit in the Space environment [2] is the problem of law and control. A Space

biome will be extremely fragile. Obviously, a variety of safety devices can and will be installed.

Nontheless, even those, which presumably will be expected to be fool-proof and multiply

redundant, require the presence of a population exhibiting, at the very least, two qualities. First,

technical sophistication and second, a commitment to the community and biome that exceeds

their commitment to their own personal goals.

Both qualities would be fairly easy to achieve in Phase One stations. During this phase,

crew selection is likely to be rigid. Control of whatever type, whether through training or police

activity or a combination of the two, relatively easy. This is not the case during Phase Two,

when economic imperatives will determine a much more heterogeneous mix of population. Under

such a case it is not hard to imagine attempts, however innocent, to bypass safety procedures, to

expand ones own economic opportunities into the risk zone of station habitability, or to totally

threaten the long-term survival of the station by immediate economic concerns. One strategy to

counter this problem is improving police procedures, but this strategy always carries a high cost

in manpower and specialized, non-productive personnel. Moreover, improved police

procedures, can be, and often are, a euphemism for greater control of the individual by the

authorities, raising severe problems of individual liberty, however they are designed.


21/28

Kibbutz-Space 19

Kibbutz-type organizations do not ensure that population will always be able to face the

technical challenge, nor that economic or political immediacy will not threaten a space colonys

physical existence. What they do guarantee is that the effort required to ensure technical

competence and to limit dangerous activities will be much smaller. Rather than extrinsic controls

(which is presumably what Turner [31] means by law and order), internalized controls and

community controls would be operating. It is likely, though no evidence is yet available, that

such controls would be far more efficient than having a sheriff making the rounds of a station.

Internalizing self-discipline is dependent on a number of factors. One, at least, is

perceived equality in effort and rewards. Kibbutzim have been industrialized for a full

generation. Their populations include full-time managers, and technical specialists ranging from

technicians and engineers to Ph. D.s. Nontheless, there is little evidence that this has led to major

economic or social stratification in kibbutzim [33]. Even studies focusing on the specific

question of equality have not really managed to demonstrate anything beyond minimal status

differentiation (e.g. newspaper deliveries to the domiciles of older members [34]) and consequent

dissatisfaction with reward allocation. The answer to What kind of status and economic

inequalities are likely to emerge in this town in the sky? [31] is implicit in the form of the

question. Given a town in the sky, a heterogeneous human aggregate, economic inequalities

would be a real problem. Given another type of community, the problem would probably be

much smaller. Thus a whole host of questions asked by Turner and others are not real issues.

Poverty, for example, is untenable because, unlike on Earth, nothing in the space colony is going

to be free. Air, free on Earth, is going to be a critical factor in colonies lacking oxygen bearing

rock and rock-cracking facilities. Starvation is not the problem for the poor, breathing is.

The greatest danger in a stratified, unequal system (almost a given in a purely

capitalist/entrepreneurial system) is simple station integrity. Space colonies cannot afford to

have violent revolutionaries, whether they are Bakunists or not. Station integrity depends on

committed, aware, concerned citizens: poor disaffected revolutionaries may be a danger to public


22/28

Kibbutz-Space 20

order and public safety on Earth; in a space colony they endanger every living thing and the

existence of the biome as a whole.

The question of local government is related to that. Obviously, full participatory

democracy is impossible in any community that is much larger than a face-to-face group.

Kibbutzim, which are usually small face-to-face groups allow a maximum personal freedom

consistent with their surroundings (in fact, kibbutzim have found that another problem crops up:

motivating members to participate in the general meetings [35]). Kibbutzim have an enviable

record in maintaining participatory democracy without the need for a supervising paternal

autocracy.

7. Conclusions

Whether space colonies are ever built depends on a number of factors that are beyond the

scope of this paper. On the assumption that space colonies will come into being, three main

points have been discussed. First, most of the common wisdom regarding the sociology of space

colonization has suffered from not examining the implication of the physical issues in sociological

context. Second, the sociological models suggested have suffered universally from narrow focus

and an almost rigid ethnocentrism: an attempt, in effect, to predispose the discussion to one

particular form of settlement. It might be added that any resident of an American town, from

whence the model originates, knows that it is inherently problematic even on Earth. The third

point providing an alternative example is an illustration of the fact that alternative

settlement models for space colonies do exist, and that, on the face of it, they seem more suited

to space colonization than the suburban model, offering a reasonable answer to most problems in

space colonization and balancing some serious conflicts between the requirements inherent in

space, and those desirable from a human viewpoint. The paper is definitely not suggesting that

space colonies should be kibbutzim. It is suggesting instead that careful attention be paid to

alternative successful models of human community. Japan and China have both evolved native


23/28

Kibbutz-Space 21

models of small-community living, many of whose features are likely to be applicable to Space.

The same can probably be said about a number of other set tlement and associative forms. It is

important that we not blind ourselves to such alternatives merely because most of the analysts

come from one particular, roughly similar, cultural background.

- THE END -


24/28

Kibbutz-Space 22

REFERENCES CITED

1. T.A. Heppenheimer, 1978 Colonies in space. N.Y.: Warner Books. pp. 182-187.

2. T.A. Heppenheimer, 1979 Towards distant suns. Harrisburg: Stackpole Books [NY:

Fawcett Columbine]. Ch. 9, 10.

3. G. K. O'Neill, 1977 The high frontier. N.Y.: William Morrow and Co. [1978

Doubleday & Co.]

4. C. Holbrow, A. Russell & G. Sutton (eds) 1985 Space colonization: Technology and the

liberal arts. AIP Conference Proceedings 148 Geneva, N.Y.: American Institute of Physics

5. A. Russel, 1978 "Human societies in interplanetary space: Toward a fructification of the

utopian tradition" Technological Forecasting and social change 12: 353-364

6. R. Johnson and C. Holbrow (ed) 1977 Space settlements: A design study.

Washington DC: Government Printing Office

7. T. L Melchionne and S. Rosen 1985 "Space colonization as a tool for teaching

anthropology" pp. 73-82 in C. Holbrow et al (eds) Space colonization: Technology and the

liberal arts. Geneva, NY: AIP

8. Space Science Board 1972 Human factors in long-duration spaceflight. Washington:

National Academy of Sciences. pp 78-107


25/28

Kibbutz-Space 23

9. J. Spurlcok and M. Modell 1979 Systems engineering overview for regenerative life-

support systems applicable to space habitats pp. 1-12 in J. Billingham and W. Gilbreath (eds)

Space resources and space settlements. Washington: NASA (NASA SP-428)

10. M.M. Connors 1985 Living Aloft: Human requirements for extended spaceflight.

Washington DC: NASA

11. T.S. Cheston and D. Winter (eds) 1980 Human factors in outer space production.

AAAS 50. Boulder CO: Westview Press

12. B. Powell and J. Jacobs 1984 Differential evolution and male and female workers

Sociology of work and occupation 11(3): 283-291

13. H.F. Wuenscher 1972 "Manufacturing in space" Astronautics and aeronautics 10: 42-

54

14. G. K. O'Neill 1976 "Engineering a space manufacturing center" Astronautics and

aeronautics 14: 20-28, 36

15. W. K. Hartmann 1985 The resource base in our solar system pp. 26-41 in B. Finney

and E.M. Jones (eds) Interstellar migration and the human experience. Berkeley: University of

California Press

16. M. Gaffey, E. Helin and B. O'Leary 1979 "An assesment of near-Earth asteroid

resources" pp. 191-204 in J. Billingham et al. (eds) Space resources and space settlements.

(NASA SP-428) Washington DC: NASA


26/28

Kibbutz-Space 24

17. P.E. Glaser, 1977 Solar power from satellites. Physics Today (July): 30-69

18. G.H. Stine 1975 The third industrial revolution. N.Y.: GB. Putnams Sons. 89-146

19. T.A. Heppenheimer, 1985 "Resources and recollections of space colonization" pp. 129-

140 in C. Holbrow et al (eds) Space colonization: Technology and the liberal arts. Geneva, NY:

AIP, pp. 139

20. D. Barkin and J. W. Bennet, 1972 "Kibbutz and colony: Collective economies and the

outside world" Comparative studies in society and history 14: 456-483

21. Statistical Abstract of Israel 1988 Jerusalem: Central Statistics Bureau. p. 11, Table II.

22. U. Leviatan, 1973 "The industrial process in Israeli kibbutzim: Problems and their

solution" in M. Curtis and M.S. Chertoff (eds) Israel: Social structure and change. New

Brunswick: Transaction

23. U. Leviatan, 1980 "Importance of knowledge: Intensive occupations for the kibbutz

society" in U. Leviatan and M. Rosner (eds) Work and organization in kibbutz industry.

Norwood PA: Norwood editions

24. D. Katz and N. Golomb, 1974 "Integration, effectiveness and adaptation in social

systems: A comparative analysis of kibbutzim communities" Administration and society 6:

283-301; 416-421


27/28

Kibbutz-Space 25

25. S. Shur and D. Mittleberg 1987 Towards the computerized kibbutz: results from a

computerization survey in the kibbutz movement [in Hebrew]. Haifa: The kibbutz research

institute #30

26. U. Leviatan, 1976 "The process of industrialization in Israeli kibbutzim" in J. Nash et

al. (eds) Popular participation in social change. The Hague: Mouton

27. C.J. McMillan, 1984 The Japanese industrial system. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter

28. Y. Don and U. Leviatan, 1987 Kibbutz industrialization pp. 21-56 in R. Bar-El and

A. Nesher (eds) Rural industrialization in Israel. Boulder: Westview Press.

29. Y. Don, 1977 "Industrialization in advanced rural communities: The Israeli kibbutz"

Sociologia ruralis 17: 59-72

30. N. Golomb, 1980 "The relation between the kibbutz and its industry" in A. Cherns

(ed) Quality of working life and the kibbutz experience: Proceedings of an international

conference. Norwood PA: Norwood editions

31. B. Turner, 1985 "Asking sociological questions about Lagrange Five" pp. 56-72 in C.

Holbrow et al. (eds) Space colonization: Technology and the liberal arts. Geneva, NY: American

Institute of Physics

32. R.M. Kanter, 1972 Committment and community: Communes and utopias in

sociological perspective. Cambridge Mass.: Harvard U. press


28/28

Kibbutz-Space 26

33. I. Vallier, 1962 "Structural differentiation, production imperatives, and communal

norms: The kibbutz in crisis" Social forces 40: 234-242

34. G. Kressel, 1983 To each according to his needs.: Equality and stratification in the

kibbutz. [in Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: Cherikover

35. M. Rosner and Nissim Cohen, 1986 "Emancipatory use of new technologies as seen in

the kibbutzim" Haifa: University of Haifa, The kibbutz Center.

some alternatives in the sociology of space colonization: the kibbutz as a space colony

Documents