To be fair, we need to examine two realities. The first is that historically it hasn’t been particularly beneficial to be the last to a “new world,” the potential long term ramifications to balance of power in one world power establishing operations in uncharted and invalided lands and potential resources can’t be be undersold. It’s a “what if” game where what if the US had established a lunar colony or bases? What if when we got to the moon we found an abundance of resources and such or a strategic advantage? By 67 there was already a treaty concerning outer space but you must remember a treaty is just a piece of paper largely followed for convenience and disregarded when it doesn’t suit or there is sufficient advantage. Doubly so when the other party literally has no real way to know if you are following the treaty or really to stop you. It all sort of goes out the window anyway when people start showing up. Maybe the moon doesn’t belong to anyone- but get even a few thousand…
Maybe as few as a few hundred people living there and fast forward to where their children and perhaps their grand children have been born and grew up there. South Africa, America, etc. we have examples where a non indigenous group has an indigenous identity. Wherever their ancestors came from, this place is the home they know and the only one they have right? So questions like “who owns the moon” or mars go to pot when you have a population claiming home there. The logistics of getting even hundreds to earth from the moon are crazy to start, but add the psychological bits and it’s a non starter. If a countries citizens live on the moon, regardless of if that country owns the moon they can argue jurisdiction and protection of the people, and by extension a right to control and protection over things like the land and structure people need to survive. So getting an early foot hood even in a “no man’s land” can be advantageous if there is strategic importance to the location.
The moon may or may not one day serve as a source of strategic resources, over time thoughts on that have come and gone and come and gone again- but the location is in theory strategic, especially if long term space habitation and colonization were realized. The moon serves as a “rest stop” between earth and our neighboring solar system. Its micro gravity and other aspects make it potentially an ideal spot for constructing and servicing ships for longer solar voyages and acting as a transit station from earth. While some of these ideas are unrealistic in the conceivable future or present, at various times they’ve been explored and taken seriously. It’s generally better in “land grabs” to get the land and then worry about how it might be useful. The purchase of the Yukon territories by the USA shows an example where a “barren” land became very strategically and economically important for a nation.
Treaty or no the moon could in theory be a pretty important military asset with or without interstellar travel. Of course it has potential as a weapons platform or for other overt tactical use in theory, but it’s pretty remote. Especially in the 1960’s the moon might seem the sort of place that it could be very easy to do things you didn’t want other people to know about or see. Coupled with the general prospects of space based research and such, the moon has some inherent scientific value.
But let’s say you disagree with all that and see no way that in the 1960’s you could make a credible argument that the moon might have value. Ok. Consider this- what came from the space program? Any guesses? A lot. See, in science, the destination often doesn’t matter. You try to make a heart pill and make an erection enhancer. You try to create abundant power and make a weapon, you try to make a weapon and create a kids toy. The destination in science is sort of secondary. What you learn along..
.. the way is of primary importance. Radio equipment produces radiation. A guy working on radio equipment noticed his candy melted in his pocket. That observation led to the microwave cooking oven. That technology has also led to advanced communications, counter communications, materials science breakthroughs, and even weapons and defensive systems. So if you try to reach the moon in earnest you’re going to probably learn a lot. Advancements in physics, mathematics, life support systems, materials, propulsion, guidance, computers, understanding of the human body, food science, nutrition, all sorts of things.
Knowledge from the space race has led to new treatments for diseases and conditions, aids for those with disabilities and different abilities, organizational improvements- materials for clothing to better survive extreme environments on earth, foods that last longer, more efficient buildings, safer more advanced transportation, modern telecom and more.
The applications we have used knowledge from the space race for are vast and many are quite important. Of course the economy and comfort or survival for civilians was enhanced. Across the globe people have survived extreme temperatures thanks to things like jackets and blankets and such that are ultimately a result of space exploration, but as far as the military goes… a major issue with the Nazi invasion of Russia was simply lack of means to endure Russian winter. The impact of climate on a military forces ability to fight can’t be sold short. Technologies that can give advantage to survival and readiness of soldiers on extreme cold, improved nutrition for soldiers in the field, better ability to communicate between military assets and so forth are just some of the advantages of technology born from the space race. Smaller, more robust electronics with enhanced energy storage or use, and much more. Informing of course the advantages to… rockets.
Most are aware- the Nazis used long range rockets in WW2 and post WW2 this knowledge was adapted and incorporated into various projectile weapons systems such as vehicle mounted missiles and propelled ordinance, jet engine air craft, and of course, long range large payload missiles. The ICBM technology developed with an intention of allowing nuclear ordinance delivery Fed the space program and in turn, discoveries from the space program led to better intercontinental ballistic missiles. Recent events remind us the Cold War and the threat of global nuclear war are not distant memories. A renewed interest in higher speed nuclear and conventional payload delivery vehicles has brought us all the news of “hypersonic missiles.”
It isn’t pure coincidence that nations with substantial technology in such fields happen to also tend to correlate to nations which have participated in space Exploration.
It also isn’t a coincidence that for almost half a century the most powerful nations on earth participated in the space race. In the modern day it’s easy to forget that thing like GPS and internet and more that underpin everyday life and modern warfare and security rely on are tied intrinsically to space through satellites and other means as well as technologies stemming from the space race. Nations that participated in early space exploration and their allies benefitted early and pretty extensively from it in the coming decades and even into the modern age.
The second point to consider is that it isn’t like, despite what some would want people to believe or how some remember it, it isn’t like the 1960’s and 70’s were great. The 70’s in particular sucked. America had a TON of things to do with that money too. America had people starving. America had people living below poverty. America. Had a massive problem with racial inequity and disparity and the economy was going poorly. Crime rates surged through the 1970’s and there is a reason so many 70’s and 80’s movies focussed on apocalyptic futures and super gangs and such. If you traveled in NYC or went to Central Park in the 70’s it was a lot more like a scene from the warriors or escape from New York than it was like modern NYC. Civil unrest and crime gripped many urban centers and SF could be quite seedy and dangerous as could LA. Movies were big and LA had glam but at that time SF was a major drug and sex hub and was the dominant US producer of adult content.
So I mean- many argued at the time as they have argued since (which is in part to blame for defunding or de prioritizing space programs) that America had better uses for money as well. It is a bit of an abstract concept- what is more important, feeding people today or advancing human technology or enduring national prosperity for potentially decades or centuries to come?
To the people who are starving today comes first, but we are short sighted- eat today at the cost of retirement savings, then we get to the age we need that savings and it isn’t there and the things they needed years ago seem less important maybe and the things they need today are important. So what’s the answer? It’s not that easy. There’s a balancing point between today and tomorrow.
The USSR had a lot of problems, and honestly the moon wasn’t likely to happen for them. The Soviets and the Russian Federation after them possessed a talent for leveraging masses of people and will power to brute force their way through. America or Japan or Europe might have a problem that with technology and care would take 3 years to rush done and the Soviets could do it with less technology in a year by throwing humans at it.
That doesn’t work for going to the moon so much. You can leverage people to build rockets or such, but you run into the problems that you can’t stack bodes to the moon and a mob of sacrificial workers usually isn’t suited to fine and precise tasks.
It goes back to computers and WW2. The Soviets were “out of the loop” as the US made leaps in computer technology. The Japanese were given access to American research and they began to innovate and outpace the Americans in many computer fields like semi conductors.
It wasn’t that the Soviets lacked smart people. Soviet or Russian computer scientists and mathematicians have made critical and cutting edge breakthroughs. The problem largely was in how the Soviet leadership managed and handled their technical personnel and programs. Heavy politicizing and other issues worked against advancement. A toxic culture for technical innovators along with negative political attitudes towards academia didn’t help.
The Russians fell behind in computer technology and as a result started to fall behind in overall technology.
The leadership made a critical decision that instead of trying to reverse engineer Russian designed machines off foreign advanced technology that they would simply resort to copying foreign machines. Machines they didn’t have support for or understanding of. Machines they were embargoed from getting components and parts for and lacked the technology to always reproduce. Because they were copying foreign machines that also meant they were often behind the foreign countries because they had to wait for the next technology and then to find a way to smuggle it into the USSR and turn around and copy it. With the pace of advancement that left the USSR at a near constant deficit in critical fields.
So technologically the USSR was often playing catch up or just trying not to be left behind. There was constant fear in communist countries and non communist countries the “other side” was going to gain some advantage, and then you’re playing catch up.
So the USSR wasn’t going to get a lot of help from China or Cuba etc. on developing technologies derived from the space program and we weren’t exactly sharing advanced technology from the space program with the Reds.
But let’s say you disagree with all that and see no way that in the 1960’s you could make a credible argument that the moon might have value. Ok. Consider this- what came from the space program? Any guesses? A lot. See, in science, the destination often doesn’t matter. You try to make a heart pill and make an erection enhancer. You try to create abundant power and make a weapon, you try to make a weapon and create a kids toy. The destination in science is sort of secondary. What you learn along..
Knowledge from the space race has led to new treatments for diseases and conditions, aids for those with disabilities and different abilities, organizational improvements- materials for clothing to better survive extreme environments on earth, foods that last longer, more efficient buildings, safer more advanced transportation, modern telecom and more.
It also isn’t a coincidence that for almost half a century the most powerful nations on earth participated in the space race. In the modern day it’s easy to forget that thing like GPS and internet and more that underpin everyday life and modern warfare and security rely on are tied intrinsically to space through satellites and other means as well as technologies stemming from the space race. Nations that participated in early space exploration and their allies benefitted early and pretty extensively from it in the coming decades and even into the modern age.
To the people who are starving today comes first, but we are short sighted- eat today at the cost of retirement savings, then we get to the age we need that savings and it isn’t there and the things they needed years ago seem less important maybe and the things they need today are important. So what’s the answer? It’s not that easy. There’s a balancing point between today and tomorrow.
That doesn’t work for going to the moon so much. You can leverage people to build rockets or such, but you run into the problems that you can’t stack bodes to the moon and a mob of sacrificial workers usually isn’t suited to fine and precise tasks.
It wasn’t that the Soviets lacked smart people. Soviet or Russian computer scientists and mathematicians have made critical and cutting edge breakthroughs. The problem largely was in how the Soviet leadership managed and handled their technical personnel and programs. Heavy politicizing and other issues worked against advancement. A toxic culture for technical innovators along with negative political attitudes towards academia didn’t help.
The leadership made a critical decision that instead of trying to reverse engineer Russian designed machines off foreign advanced technology that they would simply resort to copying foreign machines. Machines they didn’t have support for or understanding of. Machines they were embargoed from getting components and parts for and lacked the technology to always reproduce. Because they were copying foreign machines that also meant they were often behind the foreign countries because they had to wait for the next technology and then to find a way to smuggle it into the USSR and turn around and copy it. With the pace of advancement that left the USSR at a near constant deficit in critical fields.