A Paradox: Some of Our Science Leaders Actually Despise Science
Those of you living outside the U.S. needn’t be told that this country has gone somewhat crazy. The way I like to explain this to you “foreigners” is as follows: we have all known for a very long while that there are some ignorant, hateful people living here. But what we didn’t know, or at least I didn’t, is that there is a humongous number of these people, and that they vote with great regularity, electing leaders with extremely warped views on things like humanitarianism and science.
As a result, we now have enormously powerful efforts in Congress who are trying to do things like ban abortion, block all progress towards a sane US immigration policy, cut spending on public education and other social services, cripple organized labor, stifle efforts to reform campaign finance, obstruct attempts for even the most minor levels of gun control, introduce text books in our schools that teach creationism as science, restrict or remove environmental regulation that holds polluters accountable, and build support for the fossil fuel industry.
These problems are exacerbated by the fact that our Congress has become monstrously corrupt due to special interests (chief among them: fossil fuels). This has resulted in bizarre phenomena like the promotion of a rabid climate denier Lamar Smith from Texas to lead the House Committee on Science. (If it strikes you as odd, or even Orwellian, that the chairman on science should disbelieve in climate science, you’re not alone.) Now, Smith is attacking our Securities and Exchange Commission for its investigation into ExxonMobil’s apparent lies about what it knew about climate change and its inevitable consequences. Previously, he had harassed all organizations investigating ExxonMobil’s culpability in this case by forcing them to turn over all their internal emails.
“Ignorance is strength,” as Orwell pointed out.
I am not sure I would agree that ignorance is a strength, but having a simple world view can be empowering. If you are part of an organization that only believes what the pundits tell you, it is possible to escape the mental gymnastics required by the world’s uncertainty. You can then shake your fist and shout like a true believer.
I don’t see such an arrangement as necessarily bad but it does have a seeming flaw. The mind that avoids complexity is not necessarily the best tool for picking the right pundits. So children don’t necessarily “pick” their parents but they do tend to follow them until such time as their mental facilities begin to question the world. We don’t tend to refer to children as ignorant so much as innocent. Some may never quite grow up.
When I look at the picture above he looks a bit like a kid who could laugh or cry at any moment. Perhaps we could say this is a result of gutting education expenditures for 60 years.
Craig,
Sometimes in a passionate defense of your own ideals, you risk becoming the flip side of that which you are criticizing.
The error in pursuing such a wide agenda of unrelated goals and attacking all those who disagree with such vehemence, is that your focus becomes dissipated.
You also lose credibility for some causes by espousing the dubious virtues of others.
By labeling many, in fact the majority, of your fellow citizens as “ignorant” “hate-filled” or “crazy” , only deters people who may support your advocacy on one issue because they don’t wish to encourage your advocacy on unrelated issues.
This has been a world wide problem for the Green-Left. People who are attracted by the environmental message, become disillusioned by extraneous political activism involving left-wing ideology and extremist propaganda.
That’s the problem with a “crusader’ “winner take all” agenda. It becomes very difficult to broaden support beyond a small group of ineffective “true believers”.
But the real danger is a loss of perspective. While your small group busily reviles your enemies, Joe public observes how similar you have become to those enemies. Naturally, Joe Public examines your sincerity and political motivations, especially any covert political agenda.
Thus the Green Parties which were once so welcomed, especially by the young and idealistic, are slowly becoming marginalized as the general public begins to see beneath the veneer and identifies them as simply pursuing the old socialist agenda.
I guess I’m what used to be called a “conservative progressive” .
If I were an American citizen, I wouldn’t be a supporter of Lamar Smith, but neither would I support the politically motivated, legally dubious, persecution of Exxon. Lamar Smith is doing his job by exposing the dubious methods pursued by opponents of Exxon.
The idea of an individual castigating Exxon as “evil”, while filling his gas tank from an Exxon pump, strikes me and Joe Public as ludicrous and not just a little hypocritical.
But it’s also impractical, politically disastrous and dissipates the focus of real environmental progress away from positive achievements, into useless, counter-productive bickering.
Last year, I had the privilege of again meeting Elon Musk. It’s no secret that I’m a long time supporter and admirer of Elon Musk. I believe he’s one of the planets most remarkable individuals. (I’m an early Tesla shareholder).
Later that night some of his people were curious about my negative views on Elon’s determination to challenge the US laws in 48 states regarding franchised dealers. I was astonished to learn how little his largely young (but well educated) advisors knew of the history of the legislation, or of the “realpolitic” they were confronting.
Elon Musk’s view has some merit, but also has weaknesses. His young, highly motivated advisors come from an urban, highly educated, tech savvy, internet generation. They have little in common with the dynamics of the political battleground they are confronting.
In their world it all seems so easy ! After all, no one likes car dealers or car salesmen! In the world of Tesla supporters aninternet petition with 2 million signatures should easily win the day, especially with a well funded army of fanatical Tesla fans !
The problem for the Tesla strategists was a lack of respect or understanding of their opponents. They also began to believe in their own propaganda.
The David v Goliath image worked for a little while, until Joe Public realized Tesla is a $ 50 billion corporation v some relatively small businessmen.
Likewise, the claim by Tesla that oil companies and car dealers were trying to stop EV’s being sold was successful, until people realized that GM, Nissan and BMW seemed to have no difficulty selling EV’s through franchiseed dealers .
Tesla simply didn’t understand the forces against them. Their enemy wasn’t the Auto industry (who actually would like to see and end of the franchise system) or “Big Oil” who couldn’t care less about how cars are sold, but that Tesla was thinking on a national scale, where the dealers focused their efforts on local state representatives.
The political math was always there to observe. On a local scale, throughout the towns and suburbs of each state, Franchised car dealers are often a family owned, corner stone of the local business community.
The franchised car dealer is a member of the local Chamber of Commerce, Lions, Rotary etc, they sponsor, little league, local sporting and cultural groups. There support is crucial for surrounding small business including local TV and newspapers.
I asked if the Tesla people had compiled any statistics on how many local dealers held local public office, or had relations holding public office including Mayors, councilmen, sheriffs, school board, hospital board, volunteer fire fighters etc.
How many of dealers were members, even executive of local political party selection committees, how many had relatives, or long time support for local legislative candidates ?
Too my amusement, the importance of such research ad been discounted. I explained why their polls were inaccurate. It’s one thing to ask, “do you trust car salesmen ?” , but another to ask ” ” Do you trust your Uncle Phil, brother-in law, guy you went to school with, team mate etc”.
Tesla claimed it wants to sell cars in shopping malls. But many communities, although they may patronize giant shopping malls associate malls with all the evils destroying American life.
I use Tesla’s campaign as a mild example of losing focus, listening to a small group of like minded people and thinking because they are ‘enlightened’ they can contemptuously over ride the “herd”.
In so many ways, the guys at Tesla are definitely the smartest guys in the room, but not always !
Craig, I know it must be maddening to have a critic like me urging you to practice restraint and moderation. That’s the price we all must pay to broaden the reach of influence beyond a small group.
It’s unfair, but focusing on what’s important is crucial. Extraneous issues that confuse or dissipate the message should be forgotten.
If I were advising Exxon, (and I’m not) I would encourage a televised debate with an advocate like yourself. In response to your attack, I would simply reply,
“How did you get here tonight?” You have been aware of the “evil’ of global warming etc, for years, and yet you you will leave this studio and fill your car with diesel or gasoline !”
“do you think the government can do without the Trillions of dollars it derives from tax on Oil products each year ? “Do you want to destroy the lives of 40 million American workers dependent on the oil industry ? Do you want to fund the entire American retirement and superannuation industry from your taxes?”
“Aren’t you just a hypocrite, wanting to further destroy America’s ability to proper and employ American workers ?”
Joe Public might not like Exxon any better, but he would respect the honesty and reality. In one brutal hit, support for all environmental issues would be deminished if Joe Public detects hypocrisy and a dishonest or covert agenda.
I say unfair, but is it really ? After all, oil companies and Donald Trump types don’t claim the high moral ground, so the public cuts them more slack. Environmental advocates must always be very careful to maintain focused integrity as the message is held to a higher ethical standard.
But that’s just my opinion.
It’s not maddening to have a critic like you–or anyone else. You’re free to voice your opinions.
And you make an excellent point about the public perception of morality, i.e., that many people really don’t care. Trump supporters are the textbook example. He’s a repulsive human being, a disgrace to our nation, and a threat to everyone living on this planet. Their reaction: so what? Now if you want to talk about something maddening, that’s a good place to start.
Craig,
Yet Donald Trump has many supporters despite his obvious undesirability, because his opponents are perceived as equally arrogant, self-righteous, sanctimonious hypocrites !
Donald Trump appears to many a refreshingly honest and candid about his feelings and emotions. He says what many people would like to say from time to time, without the fear of political correctness or opprobrium for clumsily phrased speech.
He come across as an every-man, representing all those forgotten Americans who feel ignored in their own country. These are the people who believe the American dream is dying before their eyes.
Yelling at these people “you’re stupid” , isn’t helpful or productive. Calling Donald Trump and his supporters “deplorable” “disgraceful” or ” despicable” isn’t helpful.
Clinton will certainly win, but to what avail? in all likelihood she will prove to be a tawdry, divisive and weakened President. It’s very unlikely that she can counter the destructive forces in US politics, since she is part of the problem.
HC is most unlikely to rally those millions of Trump supporters and inspire a renaissance of US bi-partisan renewal and reform.
Watching both Presidential debates was a most unedifying experience. Neither candidate was inspiring or what America needs at this important time.
It’s my prediction that the voter turnout will be very low, the only reason HC will defeat such a poor candidate as Trump will be because she is the lessor of two evils, with more campaign funding and better organization.
The real loser in this campaign is the American people. Those on the left shouldn’t rejoice at the downfall of Trump and his supporters. The dissatisfaction Trumps exploited won’t go away, it will just return with a more plausible, likeable and shrewd populist candidate.
The shrewdest thing I’ve heard any politician say for a long time, came from a Australian conservative politician, who observing his governments near defeat commented;
“while it’s true the lies told by the opposition did considerable damage, lies from the opposition are nothing new. Instead of being outraged about their behaviour, what we must ask ourselves is, ” what is it about us that people would believe such lies ? ” ” How have we failed to gain so little trust and confidence that we only won because the electorate dislikes us a little less than our opponents ?”
Perhaps it’s time all American politicians started asking themselves the same questions.
But is it just the politicians’ fault ? American politics and US media seems to have become a sort of blood sport, where tabloid style journalism rules the day. Image is everything, and the smallest human frailties become the subject of hypocritical finger wagging entertainment.
Has it really come to the stage where Americans politics has become so bereft of talent, that the only candidates are of such poor quality ?