Opinion | Totalitarian Science in the White House | Common Dreams
By: Common Dreams
Donald Trump is a clear and present danger to American Science remaining competitive in the future. He has gutted the scientific establishment because he doesn't like what the scientists are telling him. He has succeeded in removing the scientists from positions where they could tell him what the facts are and replaced them with idiots who are antithetical to science-based research because they will tell him what he wants to hear, not what is needed to guide the country well.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
As he sat in his Kremlin office in autumn 1948, Joseph Stalin faced hard decisions about the dangers facing Soviet science. Spies threatened to steal state secrets. Agents of capitalist ideology promoted false research paradigms. With the stroke of a pen, Stalin dictated real Soviet science. He endorsed the bogus theory of "Lysenkoism" with its rejection of genetics. He oversaw the firing, arrests, and imprisonment of biologists. He next identified so-called materialist state physics that repudiated relativity theory—Albert Einstein was a Jewish theorist, after all. And Stalin shut down cybernetics, which waylaid the development of computers into the 1990s.
Under Hitler, too, the Nazi state imposed restrictions on science owing to prevailing racist, antisemitic ideas. What had once been the world's greatest scientific establishment was destroyed by ideological interference even before its physical devastation in World War II. Nonpareil U.S. science arose in the postwar years on the foundations of scientific freedom and extensive funding.
Shockingly, U.S. President Donald Trump also pursues pseudoscience through false proclamations. He hopes, with the stroke of a pen, to abolish transgender people, vaccinations, and climate change. To manage research and development, Trump has turned science portfolios over to singularly unqualified ideological agents. And he has adopted authoritarian tactics to control science in two major ways.
Trump once said he wanted the generals that Hitler had. He's certainly working on getting the science that Hitler and Stalin had.
First, Trump has purged thousands of scientists. Firings have been promoted as a way to cut waste in the federal government, but reflect the desire of the White House to halt research that Trump and his minions reject ranging from sickle cell medicine to obstetrics and gynecology; from ecology to climate change; and from vaccinations to Alzheimer's investigations. Trump, still bruised from his failed attempt to force Hurricane Dorian to follow the path of his Sharpie, not scientific forecasts, fired 880 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientists.
Like under Stalin, no bureaucracy is free from interference: the Food and Drug Administration (to prevent a range of medicines from being used), National Institutes of Health (to cut research on gender, health equity, and environmental justice), U.S. Fish and Wildlife (to limit the enforcement of the Endangered Species Act), the Department of Agriculture (to close down the battle with avian flu), and the National Nuclear Security Administration (to weaken the nation's nuclear arsenal). The wanton firings include researchers, physicians, nurses, clinicians, and even park rangers and foresters, putting the nation's natural heritage at risk.
Second, the Trump administration is censoring scientific speech and publication. Such world-leading publications as Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reportwere temporarily shut down. Federal scientists whose work uses "gender" and other suspect words are being required to withdraw in-press articles, and are being prevented from submitting future work using these terms. Zealous Trump acolytes have cleansed Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) websites of information about immunization, contraception, racism, and health. Others have removed data on climate on which farmers and others rely. A French university in Marseilles is offering a research haven to U.S. scientists who worry about censorship of their work.
Federal scientific agencies have been told in recent weeks to remove such words as nonbinary, woman, disabled, and elderly from their purview. Only in the 1990s did U.S. scientific administrators and researchers began to redress the heavily skewed underparticipation of women in clinical studies, and the inattention to women's health issues in the national research agenda. Trump administration policies will return women and minorities to being outsiders in R, D, and employment. Indeed, as in Nazi Germany there are natalist, racial, and homophobic overtones to current Trump scientific protocols, not the least in implicit prohibitions against research involving LGBTQ individuals. Trump's Health and Human Services Secretary Bobby Kennedy asserts that Black people should follow a different vaccine schedule than whites on the basis of his false claims that Blacks need fewer antigens.
The Stalinists, similarly, slowed scientific publication through a censorship bureau called Glavlit. As a result of this censorship, Soviet science failed to perform well by many measures: scientific citation indices, Nobel, and other major international prizes.
To achieve censorship, Trump is pursuing scientific isolation. The Communist Party prevented scientists from attending international conferences from the 1930s until the 1980s, stultifying the development of Soviet science. In the U.S., the White House has embargoed travel funds. The president has closed down conferences and prohibited such groups as an independent expert vaccine panel from meeting which at the very least delays the funding of cutting edge research in all fields. Not content with the natural sciences, like the Stalinists in the 1940s, the administration has turned on the social sciences as well, for example, closing the Federal Economic Statistics Advisory Committee.
The impacts are already being felt. Trump has long accepted baseless anti-vaccination propaganda. As a result, the CDC ended a successful flu vaccination campaign, while Trump signed a dictate to prohibit federal funding for Covid-19 vaccine mandates in schools. Yet, according to the World Health Organization, over the past 50 years, vaccination against 14 major diseases has directly contributed to reducing infant deaths by 40% globally and saved over 150 million lives. Meanwhile, the worst measles outbreak in Texas and New Mexico in the last 30 years has sickened 125 people, most of them children; measles can lead to pneumonia, encephalitis, and death. In a throwback to the medical nonsense suggested by the president to downing bleach to cure Covid-19, Bobby Kennedy is proposing drinking cod liver oil to combat the outbreak.
Engineering is similarly being hit with a funding cudgel, with programs in wind and solar power and high-speed trains cancelled. This can only lead to the end of U.S. scientific priority in a variety of fields, the closing down of promising research directions, and damage to strategic national interests. Personal whims play a role here. Embarrassed by the success of the Chips Act (2022) that rejuvenated the U.S. semiconductor industry, Trump plans to destroy the "horrible, horrible" program.
If Trump seeks contemporary examples of authoritarian interference in modern science, he can look to Russia again. Under President Vladimir Putin, the security police have arrested scientists on accusations of espionage; several have died in custody. In May 2001 the Russian Academy of Sciences ordered specialists to report all their foreign contacts to the authorities for monitoring. Universities followed suit. Next the FSB closed down NGOs. And Russian scientists are again isolated.
Stalin purged his officer corps on the eve of World War II, severely handicapping the Red Army against Nazi Germany. Stalin published a book in 1948 called Marxism and Linguistics to establish himself as the leader in the field. Trump, apparently hoping to be recognized as a scientific expert, recently pontificated on "transgender" mice; of course, he does not understand the value of transgenic research with applications for human health from asthma to chronic wounds to heart disease any more than Stalin fathomed linguistics. But this utterance is in keeping with his firing of military personnel from leadership positions based on pseudoscientific notions of lower intelligence for soldiers of color. Trump once said he wanted the generals that Hitler had. He's certainly working on getting the science that Hitler and Stalin had.
Be nice. You know, like your grandma were here.
All content deemed not nice will be deleted at the seeders discretion.
Tags
Who is online
86 visitors
As I was stumbling around the internet this morning I came across this article via a link from the New York Times .
This seed, as well as the article that it is linked from, are both accurate in their parallels that they draw between Trump, authoritarians, and the scientific deficit that they have and will continue to advance if left unchecked.
5 years ago, government public health officials told us it was okay to join in large groups to protest racism but not to attend funerals or anything else.
That ended their credibility. Everything since is entirely predictable after that self inflicted wound.
First off, make sure that you read the seed before responding.
Second, thank you for your brilliant deduction of one petty issue (not related to the article) condemning all of the scientific research that follows. /s
Do you actually have a comment on the article?
The anti-intellectualism is really disappointing. If you wanted to build a building, you’d get the best architect. If a pipe broke, you’d call a plumber. If you wanted to win a war, you’d get military experts. But suddenly with health, we’re gonna go check with Jim Bob at the trailer park for some of his home spun common sense wisdom.
I think that the administration is deplorable in it's disregard for basic scientific accuracy and numeracy. I am not sure how long they think they can pull the wool over their own eyes.
until the sheep wake, know cents inn change, thus Y we remain damn stupid and strange
Trump has demonstrated how easily an irresponsible PotUS can damage this nation in multiple dimensions. This anti-science aspect of the GoPTRUMP is disturbing. With tariffs screwing up international relationships and imposing a consumption tax on USA consumers, coupled with the attacks on scientific progress, Trump is unnecessarily making the nation worse for the average citizen.
In particular, his brain-dead-stupid move to kill climate change science and then doing the exact opposite of what is needed to provide for future generations illustrates his psychopathy.
Well, at least the left has abandoned their misguided focus on fascism and now include Stalin. That may be a sign of progress or desperation. What's the latest polling data?
Why is scientific research needed for gender, health equity, and environmental justice? Is this research intended to expand human knowledge? Or is it just a political effort to create the language and justifications for social engineering? Science in pursuit of politics is not a virtue.
The enshittification of Federal science began during the Clinton administration. Bill Clinton was the President that started the use of executive orders and regulations to bypass a divided Congress. Clinton shifted the emphasis of Federal science toward supporting and justifying regulation. Science that did not support regulatory efforts to reshape society didn't fare well during the Clinton administration.
Bill Clinton is responsible for opening the Pandora's box of "follow the science" inanity. Federal science was transformed into a political tool used to justify regulatory mandates and indoctrinate the public according to political priorities. We're beginning to witness the consequences of "follow the science" politics resulting in stagnation of science.
Trump is shifting the political priorities in a way that could depoliticize science. Clinton unintentionally screwed up the practice of science in the United States. And the only common sense, realistic correction at this point is to remove government from science.
Who is 'the Left'? Who speaks for 'the Left'? Always fascinating when people speak of 'the Left' as if it were some unified entity with a single viewpoint and some form of sentience.
In the use of the requisite ‘broad brush’ argument, it applies to anyone or anything at anytime…as any issue devolves into deflection, denial and/or dishonesty.
Considering we're standing on a sphere, if you go left far enough you end up on your right...
Of course, that's only true if you believe in science and physics and have at least an elementary school education, so it's unlikely many Trump supporters will agree with me.
Chuck Schumer. Hakeem Jeffries. Bill Clinton. Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton. Kamala Harris. Everyone with social influence, everywhere, that has advocated for liberalization of government authority to impose mandates and regulations controlling social attitudes, speech, arbitrary measures of equity, and the notion that the needs of the few far outweigh the needs of the many.
The left has found a place to unify within the Democratic Party. But we're told the party of slavery, white supremacy, Jim Crow, and segregation has forsaken its autocratic past and now only pursues absolute control over society for the good of humanity.
The left tells us they could have controlled both Hitler and Stalin through government bureaucracy, regulations, mandates, and unchallenged control over society.
'the Left' is an amorphous perception unique to each individual. For those who view 'the Left' as categorically bad, everything they view as bad in ideological or political terms is lumped up into this silly boogeyman they refer to as 'the Left'.
You asked for an answer. Now you want to substitute your preferred perception (opinion?) for the answer you were provided?
The fact remains, 'the left' tells us they could have controlled Hitler and Stalin through government controls. 'The left' really does advocate for institutional governance rather than for democracy. 'The left' has unabashedly told us that democracy is only a pathway to power over society.
I do not agree with your answer so I gave you my view.
There is no 'the Left' (or 'the Right' for that matter), that is simply a label you, et. al. use to refer to a set of concepts of your individual choosing.
Really?
President Richard Nixon's Message to Congress on the Environment
The fact is that American rivers, lakes and streams were filled with the pollution from unregulated industries back then and protecting the environment used to be a bipartisan issue with both sides wanting clean air and water. Sadly, now that many corporations spent a lot of money convincing the poorly educated that their lack of manufacturing jobs are because of environmental laws. That's why there has been a growing divide between those who want to support the science and environment and those who want to use stupid moronic anecdotes to claim the science shouldn't be trusted and it's all a hoax, which of course is exactly what a corporation ready to strip mine or frack some resources needs them to believe in order to get rid of any environmental protections that might reduce their profits. Will the dumb shits they convinced the science isn't real actually benefit and get a job? Nope, but the corporations will profit and local residents might be able to use their drinking water to cook their food over as well...
If by "depoliticize" you mean completely eliminate any actual benefit to American citizens, then perhaps you're right. Why should Americans need science and math and facts and knowledge anyway? According to Trump they're supposed to just shut up and sit down and do what he says so why bother thinking for ourselves anymore, right? That seems to be what the MAGA crowd is demanding.
For Trump, he's always the smartest man in the room, but that's not because he's very intelligent, it's because he removes anyone he suspects of being smarter than him which is why he has worked towards getting rid of all the scientists and health professionals who might challenge the Presidents lie-based rightwing white nationalist conservative agenda. It's what totalitarians do, and Trump is at the very minimum a wannabe totalitarian.
Yes, really. The Clinton administration deliberately politicized science to justify executive orders and regulations that bypassed Congress. You are pointing to Nixon speaking to Congress about legislation. But Clinton didn't legislate; Clinton regulated.
Are you suggesting that science cannot benefit American citizens without government control? If government steps back, science will collapse? We'll enter a new Dark Age without government?
Explain why science has become so dependent upon government? Tell us how science dependence upon government promotes scientific freedom and academic independence?
Has Trump ordered science to do the research he wants? Has Trump ordered science to deliver the results he wants? Trump is not interfering with science. Scientists can still pursue science; they're not barred from their laboratories. Trump is withdrawing government funding and influence over science which can only lessen the influence of politics on science.
Yes he has, in that by defunding research and erasing data, he has told scientists what to study as well as what not to. In addition by removing the approvals for projects well underway, he is in effect controlling what commercial activities can be started. He is fucking this nation over because he is an ignorant, petty asshole without a clue.
The rest of the world is embracing the technological future, while the current administration is living in the 1950's. There is a whole world of money out there waiting to be made and he just chopped off Americans at the knees with his short-sighted and pig-headed policy choices, all to consolidate power in his hands.
Targeted government funding and using government to disseminate preferred information doesn't politicize science? Using "follow the science" as a political mandate to overrule pubic and moral concerns is the appropriate use of science?
And the Trump administration isn't? Trump has been promoting the idea of manufacturing that technology in the United States. Trump has promoted the idea of securing the country's supply of critical minerals needed for that technological future.
Science has not overcome insecurities in the supply chain. And our technological future depends as much upon ability to produce the technological innovations as it does upon scientific research. A scientific advance that never becomes available to the public has limited social or economic value.
While the rest of the world moves on, you can remain planted firmly in the past.
As much as I would love for scientists to be able to pursue their various whims wherever the scientific muses lead, every scientist has to deal with policy and politicians on some level. Further, the politicization of science is largely outside of their control because politicians use pseudo science to backup their proclamations of how it is, should be, or will be, regardless of what science and the scientific method establishes. This happens. So getting politicization out of science is never going to happen as long as we have politicians willing to take matters out of context and build a fantasy world around a kernel of truth.
The problem with "follow the science " in the pandemic was that we were all learning in real time about the new virus. Add onto that the fact that people didn't want to do what the government said to do and the presence of massive amounts of incorrect information put out by quacks, and it was difficult to determine just how we should proceed.
But as a general rule of thumb I believe that it is to our benefit to follow the science. It is providing the facts about issues, and if you are culturally incompatible with those facts, that is just tough. Right now there is a overall consensus that man made global warming is occurring. I believe that reaction to this is an incredibly profitable occurrence, and the administration is hamstringing progress on this front.
As far as the HHS Secretary goes, I feel that he is a detrimental to science-based claims and research. He is a conspiracy ttheorist and just plain fucking wacko who never should have been confirmed. He does not reflect in any way an actual appreciation for facts and has done a world of damage to not only our credibility, but to our abilities to do research in the medical field as a whole. He is not merely incompetent, he is malignant to the future health of the United States.