blog

I ran across this “perspectives” piece: CSPO - Consortium For Science, Policy & Outcomes - Perspectives by Daniel Greenberg, currently at the Brookings Institute.

Rather, despite their persistent grousing, mainly in private, about the follies of scientifically illiterate politicians, scientists have no stomach for electoral political combat. Taking the lobbying route, and shunning the ballot box, they focus on maximizing federal money and minimizing federal regulation…

I think this has some truth to it, but I heard many, many comments in the last year that “this election was too important not to do something” at science conferences. Many of these comments mentioned that they were contributing to various campaigns and political organizations, or active in some way with organization and volunteering.

I also disagree with Greenberg’s claim that science inactivity in politics is based on concern for negative repercussions on science budgets and lack of political unanimity across science. In the end, I suspect there are still elements of science academia that want to believe in the “purity” of basic scientific research–away from concerns such as industrial applications, political upheaval, and the like. They would much rather pursue the quest for new knowledge than worry about the nitty-gritty of political action.