SOURCES AND NATURE OF RESISTANCE TO SATELLITE POWER SYSTEM (SPS) DEVELOPMENT William E. MacDaniol Ass't. Prof, of Sociology., Niagara University, New York 14109 Although the Satellite Power System (SPS) holds the potential for providing alternative solutions to some of the most serious problems confronting terrestrial man, the decision to implement such a system will engender considerable opposition on the part of individuals and groups from all societal levels. Two general types of resistance must be considered: direct opposition and indirect opposition. Direct opposition will arise from organized groups whose interests are in conflict with, or are not furthered by, the SPS program, and from ad hoc groups that are formed in response to some aspect of SPS that is believed to be threatening. Indirect opposition is that which results from lack of support for SPS on the part of people who are indifferent, who lack knowledge, or who simply fail to take a position; i.e., the uncommitted group. This uncommitted group is likely to constitute a significant part of the general public. Direct opposition by organized groups will usually be motivated by a rational concern for achieving specific goals, while ad hoc group direct resistance is more likely to stem from emotional bases; both groups, however, are likely to appeal for support from within the uncommitted group and such appeals are likely to be emotional in nature, appealing to fears rather than to rational concerns. Direct opposition from organized groups is likely to be most significant during the early stages of SPS planning and is likely to be aimed at preventing approval of SPS, or allocation of funding, by the U.S. Congress. Indirect opposition and direct opposition by ad hoc groups is likely to be more significant after approval and during those phases of the program that provide clearly identifiable targets toward which opposition can be directed; it is this type of opposition with which this paper is primarily concerned. Individualism and self-preservation are among the strongest values held by our people. Altruistic self-sacrifice, a value that is competative with individualism and self-preservation, also holds a high position in our value hierarchy but the motivation power of this value is inversely related to the social distance between the individual making the sacrifice and those who benefit therefrom; it is probably for this reason that we are not noted for our collective thinking and are more likely to act in ways that are advantageous at personal levels, or at levels which are delineated by community concerns, than to be motivated by national or worldwide concerns. "How will I benefit from SPS?” ''Why should I suffer some disadvantage from which others will benefit?" These questions are more salient to our people than are questions concerning benefits to the nation or the world as a whole. Such personal concerns are likely to give rise to a variety of ad hoc forms of direct opposition and are likely to constitute tKe key to activation of significant numbers of the uncommitted group. Implementation of SPS is undoubtedly going to require some degree of self-sacrifice on the part of a
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==