Who will inherit the stars? It’s a question that sounds like the plot of a sci-fi novel, but it’s becoming a very real—and contentious—issue. Billionaires are already staking their claims, but what about the rest of us? In October, at a tech conference in Italy, Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon and Blue Origin, boldly predicted that millions of people will be living in space within the next couple of decades. His reasoning? Robots will handle most of the work, making it cheaper to send humans into orbit for leisure rather than labor. But here’s where it gets controversial: just weeks later, at TechCrunch Disrupt in San Francisco, Will Bruey, founder of Varda Space Industries, offered a starkly different vision. He claimed that within 15 to 20 years, it will actually be cheaper to send a ‘working-class human’ into orbit for a month than to develop advanced robots. Is space the next frontier for exploitation, or a chance for humanity to redefine work and ownership?
This seemingly innocuous disagreement raises deeper questions: Who will these workers be? What conditions will they face? And who gets to decide? To explore these issues, I spoke with Mary-Jane Rubenstein, dean of social sciences and professor of religion and science and technology studies at Wesleyan University. Rubenstein, whose book Worlds Without End: The Many Lives of the Multiverse inspired the 2022 film Everything Everywhere All at Once, has been examining the ethics of space expansion. Her take on Bruey’s prediction is both sobering and thought-provoking. ‘Workers already struggle on Earth,’ she notes. ‘In space, their dependence on employers for basic survival—food, water, air—will be absolute.’
But worker protections are just the tip of the iceberg. The bigger question is: Who owns space? The 1967 Outer Space Treaty declared that no nation can claim sovereignty over celestial bodies, but the 2015 U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act created a loophole, allowing companies to own resources extracted from the moon or asteroids. Is this a modern-day gold rush, or a violation of humanity’s shared heritage? Rubenstein compares it to saying, ‘You can’t own the house, but you can take the floorboards and beams.’ And this is the part most people miss: the moon’s resources are the moon. There’s no separation.
Companies like AstroForge and Interlune are already positioning themselves to mine asteroids and extract Helium-3 from the moon. But these resources aren’t renewable. Once they’re gone, they’re gone. The international community has pushed back, with Russia calling the 2015 Act a violation of international law and Belgium warning of global economic imbalances. In response, the U.S. created the Artemis Accords, bilateral agreements that formalize its interpretation of space law. But here’s the catch: while 60 countries have signed on, notable absentees include Russia and China. Is this a collaborative effort, or a power play?
Rubenstein’s solution? Hand control back to the UN and its Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS). She also suggests repealing the Wolf Amendment, a 2011 law that restricts U.S. collaboration with China in space. ‘If we can imagine housing thousands in a space hotel or sending a million people to Mars,’ she argues, ‘surely we can imagine the U.S. and China working together.’
Her broader concern is how we’re choosing to use space. Are we turning the moon into a ‘cosmic gas station’ or establishing warfare capabilities in orbit? Or can we use space to reimagine society, as speculative fiction often does? Are we repeating the mistakes of colonial conquest, or can we chart a different course?
One area where cooperation might be possible is space debris. With over 40,000 objects orbiting Earth at 17,000 miles per hour, we’re on the brink of the Kessler effect, a runaway collision scenario that could render orbit unusable. ‘Space garbage is bad for everybody,’ Rubenstein notes. ‘This is one issue where everyone’s interests align.’
She’s now working on a proposal for an annual conference to bring together academics, NASA representatives, and industry leaders to discuss ethical, collaborative space exploration. But will anyone listen? Congress recently introduced legislation to make the Wolf Amendment permanent, further entrenching restrictions on China. Meanwhile, startup founders predict major changes in space within a decade, and Bruey’s vision of blue-collar workers in orbit remains unanswered.
So, what do you think? Is space humanity’s next great adventure, or a new frontier for inequality? Should we prioritize profit, or collaboration? Let’s hear your thoughts in the comments.
