[lq9AJ8yrfs]

Neither US political party has a monopoly on Lysenko-style academics, unfortunately.

At least one of them seems to have an introspective capacity, at some level. So that's nice?

Genuinely I wonder if this would make for good charity? Where can I donate to promote political introspection? I'll consider any mainstream spot on the political spectrum.

[jjk166]

The fact that any party can implement Lysenko-style academics means the system has failed. We don't need political introspection so they more benevolently interfere with scientific progress, we need a system where they don't interfere, where they can't interfere without an impractical degree of effort.

Science is beneficial for progress, it makes sense at a 20,000 ft level for the government to encourage it, but politicians deciding which grants to offer, guidelines for what can be published by grant recipients, being able to make serious threats against universities and other such research institutions with few restrictions - there is no argument for a government to have such power. Either publicly funded research institutions should have strong protections in place for their academic integrity, or some alternative to government funding for these institutions should be the norm.

[insane_dreamer]

But only one party is halving scientific funding and withholding billions in research grants