Dear list,
I feel the need to speak up to this as well. Disclaimer: I am a young ex-researcher (I recently decided to quit my PhD position), and also I do not currently reside in the US. However, I feel like there are some things that were overlooked in Scott's email earlier which I would like to address.
I do not want to get into the debate over the political leadership in the US on a broader level, because my personal bias would greatly influence that. Regardless, I do want to comment on the issue of cutting research funding. As someone who has always felt drawn to foundational research in cognitive science, I have spent a good part of the last 10 years thinking about which scientific questions are worth pursuing - and therefore worth funding.
I once had the pleasure of attending a lecture by Nobel laureate Sir John Gurdon. I do not remember the exact words (as this was almost 10 years ago), but I was particularly impacted by his view on foundational research. He said that when he was starting to research nuclear transplantation, he was unclear on the potential future applications. This research would later contribute to his being awarded the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine, shared with Shinya Yamanaka. He pursued it out of curiosity. Decades later, his findings are the basis for turning differentiated somatic cells into pluripotent cells, which (to my non-biologist understanding) was a major development in stem cell research, and this in turn holds great promise for medical treatments. The takeaway for me was that in order to have the basis for applied research, we need researchers who try to understand how things work, even when the application is not yet clear. Unfortunately, when public research funding is cut, it follows that essentially only commercially viable projects remain. Regrettably, if we continue down this path, I believe that applied research will no longer be able to keep innovating as there will no longer be new insights feeding into new ideas. There is still plenty more to understand about this world, and the past century has shown how drastically quality of life can improve when we understand more of the world.
So to those of you whose research is related to medical, cognitive and psychological research: I see your struggle! I believe your research is important! Unfortunately I also do not have the power to initiate big changes. But it wouldn't have felt right not to respond to an email that was telling you otherwise.
Sending all the emotional support I can,
Elisabeth
Dear Scott, dear list,Yes, I agree that empathy and patience is more needed than ever, but suggesting to act individually is the worst advice I have read in a long time. Sorry.The US democracy could have reached a dead end, for sure. It is vital to reestablish the divide of powers between legislative, executive, and judicative, simple as that. To that end, people need to stand together, equally peacefully and decisively. Otherwise, it looks inevitable that society and science are doomed.Yes, I like this list for all its scientific discussions and information. I cannot wait to resume to that. But how?I recently visited Mittelberg-Dorau, where an engineer and SS-officer named Wernher von Braun sparked the idea to build facilities in a mountain by slave workers in order to continue building the V1 and V2 missiles in the 1940s, when Peenemünde was no more safe. In the first six months of this operation 6000 out of 12000 workers died in horrible circumstances due to 8 degrees celsius, 90% humidity and no appropriate nutrition and clothing for their 12 hour shifts, not to mention fresh air in the mountain. Wernher von Braun and the villagers in Nordhausen must have witnessed that. von Braun was there several times, photographed in SS uniform. In this camp, many more people suffered and died. The fumes and smells of the crematory must have been noted all around.Note that his role in the concentration camp Mittelberg-Dorau (a satellite camp of Buchenwald) is not mentioned in the English wiki, but in the German oneunder 2.3. It is also well documented in the Museum in Mittelberg-Dorau. Visits are free of charge.Instead the English wiki propels the narrative of fear that prevented Wernher von Braun from turning against the Nazis. Far from that. He was a Nazi by conviction. There is no single case documented of even a Nazi guard refusing to do his work was ever severely punished. That narrative is just wrong.Wernher von Braun was so successful that the US hired him later to run the Apollo program as we all know. And now, 80 years later, we must realize that one to-become-fascist regime liberated another fascist regime. What an irony!Cheers,GunterAm So., 23. März 2025 um 05:24 Uhr schrieb J. Scott Merritt <alsauser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:I am saddened to see the Auditory List devolving into a political battleground. If additional political "discourse" is needed, there is certainly no shortage of other places on the web where it can be found.
From my perspective, the -central- problem with US politics is the increasing polarization of the electorate. Gone are the moderate statesmen/women that seek a fair compromise acceptable to most. I put the blame for this situation firmly at the feet of modern media - where all of the incentives are singularly aligned with increased "engagement" of their viewers.
Given that view point, I disagree with the premise that each side should put as much effort as possible into organizing their resistance and further arguing their points. Instead, I believe we need more people to listen carefully, with patience and empathy, to the grievances of all sides in hopes of finding a middle ground that works for all.
I would venture to say that the majority of the US electorate would agree that the massive debt that US has run up is a significant problem, and would further agree that reduced scientific research funding is an appropriate (albeit small) step to address that problem. As such, it would be hard to argue that reduced scientific research funding, by itself, is an assault on American democracy.
It can certainly be argued that the methods apparently being used to reduce funding are crude and not well prioritized, with an emphasis on haste rather than wisdom. Unfortunately, I fear that this will remain the case while the electorate is so heavily polarized and we careen viciously to the left or right after each election.
So ... my suggestions is NOT to "put as much effort as possible into organising resistance to this coup" ... but rather to engage -individually- with those of differing viewpoints, with patience and empathy, in hopes of reaching a better shared vision and understanding.
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 08:25:25 +0000
Petter Kallioinen <000001c5645d28b7-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I am writing from Stockholm following what I take to be the fall of American democracy. My advice is to not the resist the urgency of this situation and not hope for the best. What I would suggest is for everyone to minimize their ordinary work on a stable level and put as much effort as possible into organising resistance to this coup. Everyone!