[CamperBob2]

The idea isn't that Oppenheimer was a saint, but that the government he served well and faithfully -- at the expense of his soul, some would argue -- turned on him viciously as soon as he dared to question their agenda.

As you suggest, it is easy to imagine Altman in the same hot seat. Never mind his sexual orientation, which the Republican theocrats will eventually use against him as surely as the knives came out for Ernst Röhm.

[msabalau]

It's a bit simplistic to personify complex organizations of millions of people like "The Government" or "The Market" as if they were a living, breathing persons with a single mind.

There were people working in government who successfully attacked Oppenheimer for personal and/or policy reasons, people who stood by, and people who unsuccessfully supported him, voted to clear him, or condemned the proceedings.

Oppenheimer still paid the price, and arguably, the risks to someone like him today are considerably higher, as the current administration isn't exactly like Eisnehower's.

Nevertheless it's reductionist, reifying sentimentality to talk about "the government" turning "viciously" on someone who "served them well" because they are defying its agenda. The government isn't a character in Game of Thrones. The responsibility lies with the specific individuals who attacked him, and those who stood by.

[CamperBob2]

Nevertheless it's reductionist, reifying sentimentality to talk about "the government" turning "viciously" on someone who "served them well" because they are defying its agenda. ... The responsibility lies with the specific individuals who attacked him, and those who stood by.

I'm sure that was of great comfort to Oppenheimer, as it will be to Altman and/or Amodei. "It's not you, it's us."