671–676 of 676 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
This is a lesson I've learned over thirty years. If the GOP says "the Democrats are doing X" then you can be assured the winning Republican plans to do X (or already has.) It inoculates them. Crushing academic free speech is just one of several X's.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Russia is a de-jure democracy, just like the US. In fact I'm not sure what difference there is between them.
Russia at this point has no functioning democratic institutions, and even political institutions - for example at this point no document inherited or signed by the regime is worth anything. That's why they're considered a rogue state at the moment. So at best you can say the Russian regime claims Russia is a democratic, that's not de jure, because for it to be de jure you'd need institutions to make sure it was in fa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does science need to be through the government? Irrespective of the proposal, science research is just as open after this change as before so long as it's funded by private citizens who can control the channels through which they donate to this work. On the other hand, if we can't get private citizens to donate to science research, then they are not likely to vote for it either--polls don't register much of a con…
Screw that mentality. I already paid more than enough in my tax dollars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Screw that mentality. I already paid more than enough in my tax dollars.
What do you mean by that?
I want a competent government who directs the funds in an appropriate way. Not one who sets up a shush fund, using my (tax) money, to pay their private army of thugs.
A return of Lysenkoism. Nice!
I'm betting in that particular time and place you couldn't privately conduct scientific research under Lysenkoism. It had to be approved by the government to exist at all. I'm no historical expert nor USSR expert though. If these rules go into effect, is it not true that individuals, state governments, and non-governmental organizations could still fund scientific research that the federal government won't fund? Of c…
This administration’s actions towards Harvard and other schools would suggest not. If a state or university is doing verboten research, the federal government can make them stop. Previously, that didn’t happen - it was unthinkable. Now, it’s forever on the table.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Science" can do as much science as it wants on its own dime then. Public funding should be guided by public oversight, not career bureaucrats.
Unless you're advocating for mass direct democracy, with public votes on everything under the sun, a certain level of delegation is inescapable at scale. You say "career bureaucrats" as if they can't be fired or controlled, but that's obviously wrong (since they're being fired and/or controlled right now). QED, they ARE still under public oversight. (1) Voters vote for (2) elected officials who oversee (3) agency bur…