TONYA MOSLEY, HOST:
That is FRESH AIR. I am Tonya Mosley. What occurs when a billionaire has extra management over America’s house program than the company that put a person on the moon? Franklin Foer, a employees author for The Atlantic, has written a brand new piece titled “The Man Who Ate NASA.” It traces how Elon Musk, via his firm SpaceX, has change into not only a accomplice to NASA however, in some ways, its substitute. Final yr alone, 95% of rocket launches within the U.S. got here from SpaceX. That features missions for the Pentagon, for intelligence businesses and the Worldwide House Station. And now the facility shift is accelerating. Simply this week, practically 4,000 NASA staff, that is 20% of its workforce, opted to go away beneath the Trump administration’s deferred resignation program. The administration has additionally proposed slashing NASA’s finances.
Foer argues that these strikes sign one thing bigger, the dismantling of NASA as an emblem of American idealism. For many years, the company embodied the idea that via public funding and collective effort, we may accomplish the unattainable. As we speak, Foer writes, that imaginative and prescient has been ceded to non-public ambition, and as an alternative is an area program more and more formed by Elon Musk’s obsession with colonizing Mars. Along with being a employees author for The Atlantic, Franklin Foer can also be the creator of a number of books, together with “The Final Politician: Inside Joe Biden’s White Home And The Battle For America’s Future.”
Franklin Foer, welcome again to FRESH AIR.
FRANKLIN FOER: So nice to be right here.
MOSLEY: So let’s speak in regards to the newest information – 4,000 of NASA’s staff have opted to go away – that is 20% of the workforce – which sounds fairly huge. How vital is that quantity to the general company?
FOER: It is crushing on a number of completely different rounds. The primary is if you stroll down the road, you see individuals sporting NASA T-shirts, toting NASA tote luggage. You do not see this for the IRS or the Social Safety Administration. NASA is one thing that evokes idealism, and it impressed idealism in its workforce. I over the course of reporting this piece, bought to spend time with numerous NASA staff who have been actually nervous about the way forward for their company within the Trump administration, with all of the looming cuts. And I feel they felt like they may work anyplace on the earth. They have been the most effective and the brightest, and but they selected to work at NASA and take a decrease wage as a result of they felt that they have been doing one thing extremely necessary, and so they have been working on this magical group.
And what the finances cuts which have come down on NASA have signaled to these staff is that that idealistic mission just isn’t going to proceed. It isn’t going to be this magical place. And I feel numerous staff simply determined relatively than undergo via this squeezed, cramped mission that is been imposed upon them, the place numerous NASA’s scientific ambitions have been stripped away, they’d relatively go away and go someplace else. And I feel it is actually a tragedy that displays this broader tragedy that is befallen the American authorities, the place we’re simply we’re hemorrhaging all of those people who find themselves extraordinary with their skills and extraordinary in the truth that they determined to commit these skills to america, though there have been alternatives within the personal sector that will be far more profitable for them.
MOSLEY: Since you’ve got talked to so many NASA staff, former and present, I wish to know what this seems like on the within, contemplating, as you stated, a lot of them volunteered to go away.
FOER: It is extremely painful. It is anguishing for them. I sat round a desk with a gaggle of NASA staff earlier this yr, and so they’d come to Washington to foyer Congress to guard their company, to protect their company. And I simply was so struck by how dedicated and devoted these individuals have been to the concept of NASA and the truth that they really feel like NASA cannot be its outdated self, and that relatively than keep and battle for this factor that they deeply care about, they’re simply going to concede defeat. That to me is simply – it is achingly unhappy to witness.
MOSLEY: I am simply curious, you stated that they’ve determined to go different locations, however NASA’s just about a certainly one of one in the case of this sort of work right here in america. This huge variety of people who’re leaving, they’re everywhere in the nation. The place are they going inside the personal sector?
FOER: Look, the personal sector is strong. There are particular issues that NASA does that may’t be replicated anyplace else, not in academia, not within the personal sector. NASA’s pursuit of science is singular. However there’s a sturdy aerospace neighborhood in america. There are all these firms. Numerous NASA’s work over time has been handed via contractors and center organizations, and so it is potential to go work for these different organizations. A number of the individuals will go to work for SpaceX and work for Elon Musk as a result of it is an thrilling place to work as properly. There are all kinds of startups in Silicon Valley hoping to capitalize on an rising house financial system. So it is not like there usually are not different locations to work aside from NASA, however NASA was a spot – NASA is a spot that has a particular sort of idealism that had a particular sort of mission and that was dedicated to sure tasks that actually cannot be replicated elsewhere.
MOSLEY: I imply, Congress has been backwards and forwards. The Trump administration has been backwards and forwards concerning cuts. And I used to be curious, have been these cuts at all times within the DOGE plan, or did Trump make this resolution after he and Musk fell out?
FOER: It is attention-grabbing. When you return and also you have a look at Challenge 2025, there’s not a chapter dedicated to NASA. And DOGE did not initially descend on NASA. It felt prefer it may be protected territory due to its relationship with Elon Musk. However there are different forces within the Trump administration, and a type of main forces exists within the Workplace of Administration and Funds, which simply hopes to sort of lower throughout the board. NASA is attention-grabbing as a result of NASA was engineered, if you’ll, to be a politically impregnable entity that NASA’s workforce is definitely not concentrated in Washington. It is dispersed throughout the nation in any respect of those completely different bases. These bases are linked to politicians who foyer on behalf of jobs which might be necessary to their native financial system. There’s this aerospace foyer that is extremely highly effective.
And so there’s a part of NASA that may be very, very onerous to chop, and that a part of NASA that is onerous to chop has truly managed to outlive the early Trump period pretty intact. So all the pieces inside NASA that’s dedicated to human house flight, you understand, roughly persists and in some cases, perhaps even bought extra funding within the Trump finances within the Huge Stunning Invoice. However there are components of NASA that need to do with science, and people have been hit exceptionally onerous. And so, you understand, we have to replicate on the truth that NASA did all of these items. It isn’t nearly taking astronauts on the moon or going to Mars, or it is not nearly house shuttles, the Worldwide House Station. It is about telescopes. It is about satellites. What NASA does is it stares again on the planet. It has tracked deforestation. It is tracked local weather change, each of issues that make it weak to ideologues on the appropriate, who wish to shut that down. It stares again into the deepest historical past of the universe. It is impressed youngsters to enter the sciences. These are the components of NASA which might be weak and which have fallen prey to the Trump finances.
MOSLEY: I wish to get into the facility that Elon Musk holds inside the U.S. house program, and I wish to quote one thing out of your piece. You say, “as america misplaced confidence in its capacity to perform nice issues, it turned to Elon Musk as a possible savior and in the end surrendered to him.” First off, Franklin, what do you imply if you write that the U.S. misplaced confidence in its capacity to perform nice issues?
FOER: We return to the Apollo program, which is absolutely launched within the spirit of ambition on the top of the Chilly Conflict. It was supposed to be this demonstration venture that confirmed that you could possibly get 400,000 individuals, which was the quantity of people that participated in setting up these rockets on the top of this system, to work in sync to create applied sciences that had by no means been constructed earlier than to go locations that we would by no means gone earlier than. And that was the height of a sure American idealism.
And after the Nineteen Sixties, we continued to go to house. We launched the house shuttle program. Nevertheless it was a sort of zombie program the place we thought we have been doing one thing necessary, however there was no clear objective. We started to outsource numerous our capability to protection contractors, so it wasn’t the federal government truly doing this. And If we simply step again and we have a look at this trajectory, it is like, america says it desires to do massive, formidable issues in house, and it invested an enormous amount of cash in doing them, nevertheless it wasn’t doing it with a objective that was inspiring. It wasn’t doing it in a means that demonstrated the competence of the federal government.
MOSLEY: As a result of it had ceded its energy to contractors. And so this brings us to the – early 2000 with Elon Musk. He is simply been pushed out of PayPal as…
FOER: Proper.
MOSLEY: …The CEO. He is bought cash. He is bored, and such as you write, he is in search of the following massive factor. He even goes to Russia to attempt to purchase missiles. And the way did that wild search then finally lead him to NASA and actually to beginning SpaceX?
FOER: So Musk grew up studying sci-fi, and numerous the sci-fi novels that he learn depicted a hyperrational engineer who swoops in to save lots of society, save humanity from an apocalyptic collapse. And he begins to resolve that he desires to do one thing on this realm of house, and so he goes and he tries to purchase rockets in Russia. A really drunken dinner goes badly. He was clearly being ripped off. And so he decides that he’ll begin to construct himself. He is very disillusioned when he begins to do that as a result of he thinks, oh, NASA should be on its solution to Mars proper now. After which he goes and appears at NASA’s web site and sees no point out of Mars. And he decides he’ll do the toughest factor. Now, wealthy individuals are very drawn to house.
MOSLEY: Proper. That is nothing new presently. There are many billionaires who’re investing in know-how, eager about attempting to be the primary to go up there as a personal citizen.
FOER: Precisely. As a result of it indicators standing. There is no such thing as a more durable factor than going into house. And so billionaires wish to think about that they’ll make investments on this pastime and so they can reveal to the remainder of the world their superiority by doing the toughest, costliest factor. And so Musk units out to do that. And in 2002, he founds SpaceX with this wildly implausible concept that in a suburban Los Angeles warehouse, they are going to cobble collectively their very own rockets.
Now, it is believable to try this as a result of the know-how of rocket engineering does not actually advance that a lot over time. It is only a query of with the ability to do it cheaper, extra effectively than the individuals who did it final. And Musk stumbles in the end on this superb concept of constructing rockets which might be reusable. And we’ve to provide Musk and SpaceX their flowers as a result of it’s an incredible firm. He was in a position to determine methods to construct rockets cheaper, extra effectively. If it meant shopping for instruments on eBay so as to construct a rocket, he was keen to try this. If it meant slicing steps out of the method, he was keen to experiment with that – and he was keen to take dangers that different individuals weren’t keen to take. And so he failed loads in his early years. And his tolerance for failure meant that he was in a position to persevere when others weren’t
MOSLEY: And the federal government at the moment was additionally sort of enamored by this sort of move-fast, break-things method of tech entrepreneurs as a result of for years, as you write, they’d sort of been working with different behemoth firms that had their very own bureaucracies to deal with, like Boeing and Northrop Grumman. So I am simply eager about that because it pertains to your reference to the Nineteen Sixties and ’70s, the place we have been seeing NASA make errors in actual time and get via them. This was one thing that was sort of interesting to the federal government. It is the beginning of why Musk obtained so many contracts early on.
FOER: Proper. So if we consider this as a play in three acts, within the first act, the federal government is ready to develop experience of its personal. Within the second act, it turns to those protection contractors, who’re sort of enmeshed within the army industrial complicated, who’re in a position to do massive issues, however they’re additionally clunky bureaucratic entities. After which within the third chapter, the federal government turns to Musk as a result of he’s the scrappy startup who’s the promise of doing issues cheaper, sooner than these protection contractors. And as you say, that is occurring within the 2000s. SpaceX just isn’t a product of Donald Trump. It is a product of the Bush administration. It is a product of the Obama administration. And of their frustration with the protection contractors and of their need to have one thing service the Worldwide House Station as they start to retire the clunky program that’s the house shuttle, they’ve to show someplace new.
And Musk and his rockets provide this promise that they’ll construct and function rockets that may trip between Earth and the house station with out having to depend on these outdated protection contractors, with out the federal government having to construct its personal rockets. The federal government can simply be a passenger on Musk’s rockets.
MOSLEY: Let’s take a brief break, Franklin. When you’re simply becoming a member of us, my visitor is Franklin Foer, employees author for The Atlantic. His newest story for the September challenge is named “The Man Who Ate NASA”. We’ll proceed our dialog after a brief break. That is FRESH AIR.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)
MOSLEY: That is FRESH AIR. I am Tonya Mosley. And at the moment, we’re speaking to Atlantic employees author Franklin Foer. His newest story, “The Man Who Ate NASA,” traces how the U.S. authorities’s deepening dependence on Elon Musk and his firm SpaceX has reshaped the mission and identification of America’s house program.
You talked about that final yr, SpaceX dealt with 95% of all rocket launches in america, which sounds additionally like a staggering quantity. However I am attempting to place this in context of NASA counting on personal contractors for many years up till that time. Form of put that quantity in context for us.
FOER: Proper. So this isn’t nearly Musk’s relationship with the federal government. It has to do with the truth that at a sure level within the historical past of his firm, he involves this realization that launching issues into house for the federal government is rarely in the end going to be that worthwhile. It is by no means going to get him sufficient cash to have the ability to do the factor that he desires essentially the most of, which goes to Mars. And so he decides that he’ll create an organization inside SpaceX the place he’ll launch satellites which might be going to offer web again to individuals right here on planet Earth. And so numerous the satellites that he is launching are a part of Starlink, this firm that he is created that’s a part of SpaceX. And so I feel that that accounts for the large variety of rockets that he is launching.
However there’s one different factor to be stated, which is that a part of SpaceX’s dominance out there has to do with the truth that it’s launching stuff on a regular basis, not like different firms. So you are taking Blue Origin, the Jeff Bezos firm which is theoretically a rival to Elon Musk. He has adopted a sort of a go-slow method the place he does not launch issues all that usually. However as a result of Musk and SpaceX are continuously sending issues into house, they’re studying much more than his rivals. They’re gathering all of this knowledge. They’re hiring the most effective engineers as a result of the most effective engineers, you understand, wish to be at a spot the place they’re continuously concerned on this thrilling venture of sending issues into house on a regular basis. And so it is created this virtuous cycle for SpaceX the place due to the amount of its launches, its dominance simply continues to speed up.
MOSLEY: I imply, Starlink – it appears to be indispensable for the army and for communications functions. Just a few years in the past, we have been speaking in regards to the conflict in Ukraine. In these early days of the invasion, SpaceX rushed to produce Ukraine with Starlink terminals, serving to them to interchange their communications techniques. What makes this alarming is that it looks as if Musk can resolve at any time – proper? – to close down Starlink, and we’re so depending on it. Is the federal government mainly at his mercy?
FOER: I imply, I feel it is in all probability slightly little bit of an exaggeration to say the federal government is at his mercy. However he is clearly demonstrated that on this one occasion in Ukraine, the place he wished to show off Starlink so as to form the course of a conflict, he was in a position to try this. It isn’t simply people speaking, too. It is armies speaking – that house has change into this most necessary area in warfare due to the existence of satellites.
And it is this manner through which Musk’s dominance and the significance of house find yourself simply compounding over time, which is that the extra satellites that we put into house, which change into indispensable to armies speaking with each other, to the power of the federal government to surveil its enemies or to trace ballistic missiles, house simply turns into an increasing number of necessary, which makes SpaceX and Musk an increasing number of necessary. Many of the contracts that SpaceX has with the federal government are, you understand, in the end via the Pentagon or the Nationwide Reconnaissance Group. Numerous them are categorized, so we do not truly know the complete element. So it is onerous to essentially wrap our minds round this important place that Musk holds.
MOSLEY: OK. So that you stated me saying that the federal government is at his mercy may be an exaggeration. However what would occur proper now if Elon Musk have been like, I am out? You understand, like, if he threatened to tug Starlink satellites or stopped…
FOER: Yeah.
MOSLEY: …SpaceX, like, what would occur?
FOER: Nicely, because it occurs, we’ve slightly little bit of a check case right here, which is that Donald Trump and Elon Musk had this bromance, which…
MOSLEY: Yeah.
FOER: …Ended up crumbling. And it crumbled, and really acrimoniously, with all kinds of accusations, the place Trump threatens to probably deport Elon Musk, who was born in South Africa, the place Musk threatens to cease supplying the Worldwide House Station. And Trump says, I will lower off all your contracts. Nicely, the federal government went and so they checked out all of their contracts with SpaceX. And I feel that they decided that they could not actually break up with Elon Musk even when they wished to as a result of they’re so entangled. They’re so dependent. And there’s no actual rival that might change the important companies that SpaceX supplies.
MOSLEY: Our visitor at the moment is Franklin Foer, employees author with The Atlantic. His newest story for the September challenge is titled “The Man Who Ate NASA.” We’ll be proper again after a brief break. I am Tonya Mosley, and that is FRESH AIR.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)
MOSLEY: That is FRESH AIR. I am Tonya Mosley, and at the moment we’re speaking to Atlantic employees author Franklin Foer. In his newest story within the September challenge, he traces NASA’s transformation from an emblem of public achievement to a accomplice and now, as Foer places it, a passenger in Elon Musk’s privatized imaginative and prescient for house. This piece is named “The Man Who Ate NASA.” Along with being a employees author at The Atlantic, Franklin Foer can also be the creator of a number of books, together with “The Final Politician: Inside Joe Biden’s White Home And The Battle For America’s Future.”
Franklin, you open this piece with this fantastical story. It is sort of a sci-fi prophecy about Elon Musk’s identify and a German engineer who was referred to as the godfather of NASA. Are you able to briefly share that story?
FOER: Proper. So Wernher von Braun was this German rocket engineer who labored for the Nazis and was constructing rockets for them utilizing focus camp labor. And america determined that his experience was so precious that they recruited him. They introduced him right here. They in the end parked him at a base in Alabama, and he started constructing rockets for america. Von Braun was, like Musk himself, very monomaniacal, very obsessive about going so far as we may into house. And actually, the most important prize that engineers like Musk and von Braun think about goes to Mars.
And within the late Nineteen Forties, von Braun wrote a novel referred to as “Challenge Mars,” and he imagines what life can be like on the crimson planet, and he describes the federal government that will take maintain on the crimson planet. And it is essentially the most weird factor. However when he describes the beneficent dictator who he imagines will run Mars, he provides him a title, and that title is the Elon. And Musk’s father, Errol, I feel, sort of speciously – as a result of I am unsure how he may have came upon about this – likes to say that one of many causes that he bestowed this identify on his son is as a result of he had encountered it on this ebook. Nevertheless it’s a very unusual coincidence as a result of I feel Elon Musk, when he thinks about his future, he clearly imagines being the Elon that Wernher von Braun wrote about in his novel.
MOSLEY: What’s his imaginative and prescient of life on Mars?
FOER: First, we must always say life on Mars, objectively, would in all probability be fairly horrible.
MOSLEY: Yeah.
FOER: It is a fully uninhabitable planet. Any individual at his firm confer with it as a fixer-up planet. And that is actually sort of a hilarious understatement as a result of at night time, the temperatures plunge to minus-225 levels Fahrenheit. When you walked round on the floor of the planet and not using a house swimsuit, your pores and skin would begin to peel off. Inside 30 seconds, your blood would begin to boil. Even should you have been sporting an area swimsuit, we’ve not engineered an area swimsuit that’s hermetically sealed sufficient to forestall radiation and the small particles that exist on the planet from seeping in. Life on Mars can be totally depressing. However for Musk, it will be extremely chic as a result of it is this opportunity to begin over once more. Yeah.
MOSLEY: You say reengineer humanity.
FOER: It is humorous, when Musk talks on this type of means, he is echoing a imaginative and prescient that his grandfather had. His grandfather lived in Canada and started to fret in very crankish, racist methods in regards to the decline of Christian white civilization, and he moved to South Africa to begin over. So this concept of confronting civilizational collapse and going to a brand new place to begin over is baked into the way in which that Elon Musk thinks in regards to the world. It’s his inheritance, if you’ll.
And, you understand, he thinks that we may use know-how in a really social Darwinistic solution to create a brand new species. And that is one thing that he talks about in different firms. His firm Neuralink imagines creating direct communication between the human mind and computer systems, which might be this new species, this new cyborg species. And by going to Mars, he is very indirect in the way in which that he talks about it, however he has talked about selectively reproducing so as to create a species that’s higher tailored to a Martian atmosphere. And this isn’t…
MOSLEY: That can also be based mostly on his personal picture.
FOER: Precisely. This can be a idea that he truly lives in his personal life, that he is very nervous that the individuals who have the very best intelligence aren’t reproducing shortly sufficient. And so he set about doing this in his personal life. He, in keeping with The Wall Avenue Journal, has 14 youngsters unfold throughout at the least 4 completely different moms, and he is decided to personally do his half to regenerate the species by replicating his personal intelligence.
MOSLEY: There’s additionally this line that is simply very chilling in your piece. You say, he desires to create on Mars a spot the place colonists will probably be insulated from the ravages of conflict, local weather change, malevolent AI and all of the unexpected disasters that may inevitably crush life on Earth. So it is a very dystopian future that he’s getting ready for that’s very similar to his – as you talked about, his grandfather. He does not use racist language, however this selective engineering signifies that he is speaking a couple of species that may be very a lot, as you stated, in his picture.
FOER: Proper. He is sort of flirting with eugenicist ideas right here. And there is a slippery means that he has of speaking the place he hints at sure issues. There’s at all times an impish wink when he says a few of these issues as if he is simply saying them so as to provoke. However the factor that is clear is that this. He is borrowed from science fiction this concept that humanity is doomed, that there is going to be some apocalyptic state of affairs that is going to befall planet Earth. We do not know what it’s. It may be a malevolent AI. It may be local weather change. It may be that the Earth simply abruptly explodes. It may be nuclear conflict. However humanity must create this security valve for itself within the type of a Martian colony. Since we do not know when Earth goes to vanish, we have to urgently start constructing this now so as to preclude that worst-case state of affairs.
MOSLEY: Let’s take a brief break, Franklin. When you’re simply becoming a member of us, my visitor is Franklin Foer, employees author for The Atlantic. His newest story for the September challenge is named “The Man Who Ate NASA.” We’ll proceed our dialog after a brief break. That is FRESH AIR.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)
MOSLEY: That is FRESH AIR. I am Tonya Mosley. And at the moment, we’re speaking to Atlantic employees author Franklin Foer. His newest story, “The Man Who Ate NASA,” traces how the U.S. authorities’s deepening dependence on Elon Musk and his firm SpaceX has reshaped the mission and identification of America’s house program.
You talked in regards to the origin of NASA with our President JFK – how initially he wasn’t significantly keen about house exploration, however modified his thoughts through the Chilly Conflict. The House Race, as you stated, was about international status – a zero-sum competitors with the Russians. I additionally, although, wish to speak to you about sort of the opposite facet of that as a result of I feel that it truly is necessary to consider, like, the entire different opposing forces of the house program over time. There have been numerous social and political forces within the early ’60s and actual pushback from some People. Are you able to speak in regards to the critique of the house program at the moment? What have been individuals saying about how nationwide sources and a spotlight have been getting used?
FOER: To get to the moon, we spent an insane amount of cash. It was in all probability one thing like $28 billion in Nineteen Sixties cash, which quantities to $300 billion in at the moment’s {dollars}. And there was a phrase that the sociologist Amitai Etzioni popularized, decrying this expenditure, the place he described a moon-doggle. And I feel particularly amongst civil rights organizations, there was a way that this was simply an unjust expenditure as a result of on Earth, there was a lot struggling. And $300 billion and all of that authorities experience, if it had been spent on that struggling, would have finished actual long-term good, versus this ephemeral achievement of getting gone to the moon. And by the point the Nineteen Seventies roll round, that turns into one thing near an entrenched piece of standard knowledge – that we could not proceed that huge expenditure indefinitely into the longer term.
MOSLEY: In his memoir, Lyndon B. Johnson wrote, quote, “if we may ship a person to the moon, we knew we must always be capable to ship a poor boy to highschool and supply respectable medical look after the aged.” And what’s outstanding, Franklin, is that imaginative and prescient tied house exploration – it actually did tie it sort of to the broader public good. As we speak that dialog feels very completely different. You talked about Jeff Bezos’ firm Blue Origin. They not too long ago despatched Gayle King and Katy Perry and others on this 10-minute house tourism flight, and Elon Musk is concentrated on colonizing Mars. It sort of feels like a giant departure from the unique spirit of the house program.
FOER: Johnson is absolutely fascinating ‘trigger he views the – sort of the organizational mission of NASA, simply undertaking all these tremendously onerous issues, as proof of idea for the Nice Society – that individuals doubted the power of presidency to do massive, formidable issues. However by proving that authorities can do the most important and most formidable factor of all of them, he felt as if he was establishing a template that may very well be utilized to different areas of American life. And that turned out to be perhaps the empty promise of New Deal, Nice Society liberalism that – you understand, Kennedy would say, we do onerous issues as a result of they’re onerous. And he would speak about how he would bear any burden in a means that was very round logic. And it wasn’t one thing that we may actively transpose to the home, social, terrestrial realm.
MOSLEY: Franklin, what does the reshaping of America’s house program imply for different applications all through the world?
FOER: So america proper now is definitely engaged in a second House Race with China. And I feel that that’s the factor that’s driving an enormous quantity of the funding that even the Trump administration is making into NASA – that there is a race proper now to return to the moon so as to plant a flag there, to get there earlier than China will get there, to have the ability to create some type of everlasting construction there. And I feel that is all being finished in a really completely different tone than the way in which that America engaged within the Chilly Conflict House Race – that within the Chilly Conflict House Race, we actually have been attempting to show one thing to the remainder of the world about our beneficence, that we got here on behalf of all mankind. And there have been treaties that have been signed that house would not be militarized, house would not be commercialized.
And proper now, on this present House Race that we’re engaged in the place, you understand, Musk is on the forefront of America’s efforts, we actually are engaged in one thing that’s philosophically fairly completely different – that United States is extraordinarily excited in regards to the prospects of commercializing the heavens, of exploiting the heavens for uncommon earth minerals, for unlocking the economic prospects of house. That in the case of militarization, we actually do wish to set up dominance within the heavens. That we perceive that the following huge conflict may very well be fought in house. So relatively than creating this literal house above us the place there was the chance that we may do higher than we had finished on our personal planet, we’re merely replicating numerous the worst components of what we have finished to this planet. And we have ceded any sense that there may very well be this utopian chance for ethical evolution within the heavens.
MOSLEY: Are we headed in the direction of a future the place your entire house program is privatized?
FOER: While you have a look at the preliminary finances that Donald Trump submitted and the applications that he wished to cancel, there would have been some extent within the not-so-distant future the place america authorities was not engaged in proudly owning and working vessels that might take us to house, and that there can be a interval the place all the pieces would section out and the one believable entity left can be SpaceX. And over the horizon, if you have a look at the priorities for the American house program, we’ll return to the moon. That is occurring. That is a venture SpaceX is concerned in, nevertheless it’s not completely a SpaceX program. However in the case of attending to Mars – which is the factor that the president dedicated to in his inaugural handle, and it is now a bipartisan piece of American coverage because it pertains to house – there’s actually just one particular person, one firm that is growing the vessel that will get us to Mars, and that’s SpaceX. It is Starship. It will be essentially the most highly effective rocket ever constructed. And he hasn’t demonstrated that it is totally operable but, however he is making use of the complete sources of his firm to make it occur, and he is nearly keen it into existence.
And when that occurs, whether or not the federal government is on board with this system of attending to Mars or if it is only a Musk-driven factor, there will probably be this vessel that may journey to Mars. And will probably be owned by Elon Musk and operated by Elon Musk. And NASA and america is usually a passenger on that rocket if it so chooses. And if it chooses to not be a passenger on that rocket, then, you understand, there’s this chance that Musk may independently attempt to construct this colony on Mars absent authorities assist or blessing.
MOSLEY: You understand, given how uninhabitable Mars is, I imply, how severely ought to we take each Musk’s ambitions and doubtlessly the U.S. authorities’s ambitions to go there?
FOER: Proper now, it is not technologically believable – proper? – for us to get to Mars. Musk has not constructed a rocket that’s able to doing it. To ensure that a flight to Mars to occur, we’ve to attend for the orbits of the planets to align so that it is the shortest distance between the 2 orbs ‘trigger in any other case, it turns into implausible. It requires an excessive amount of gas, it requires – and even then, it will take eight months to get from Earth to Mars. I discover the concept of colonization to be wildly implausible. It is under no circumstances engaging to me. That stated, human beings pursue wildly implausible ends so as to fulfill utopian desires on a regular basis. And so I take severely this concept that Musk is pursuing it and that he is doing so doubtlessly with sturdy backing from america.
MOSLEY: Franklin Foer, thanks a lot on your reporting, and thanks on your time.
FOER: Thanks.
MOSLEY: Franklin Foer is a employees author for The Atlantic. His new story seems within the September challenge. It is referred to as “The Man Who Ate NASA.” Arising, rock critic Ken Tucker commemorates the fiftieth anniversary of the discharge of George Clinton’s album, “Mothership Connection.” That is FRESH AIR.
(SOUNDBITE OF PRINCE SONG, “DELIRIOUS”)
Copyright © 2025 NPR. All rights reserved. Go to our web site phrases of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for additional info.
Accuracy and availability of NPR transcripts could differ. Transcript textual content could also be revised to appropriate errors or match updates to audio. Audio on npr.org could also be edited after its authentic broadcast or publication. The authoritative document of NPR’s programming is the audio document.
