5 ms·

After Trump and his gang are finished gutting the EPA, there will be a much wider purge of scientists and intellectuals from all facets of the executive branch.

After Trump and his gang are finished gutting the EPA, there will be a much wider purge of scientists and intellectuals from all facets of the executive branch. The only rational response is an organized campaign to convince American citizens to remove Trump from office as soon as possible.

rfrank 10y ago
> The only rational response is an organized campaign to convince American citizens to remove Trump from office as soon as possible. Why is that the ONLY rational response? What removal mechanism do you propose?
skybrian 10y ago
Midterms happen first. Seems like these folks have a plan: https://swingleft.org/ https://swingleft.org/
- anigbrowl 10y ago
  That's a good link, but midterms are 18 months away. What do you mean they 'happen first'? Do you mean they have to take place so impeachment proceedings become possible? I disagree with that contention.
  - maxerickson 10y ago
    The Republican congress might impeach the president if a huge scandal became impossible to deny. They aren't going to impeach the president for doing things they largely agree with.
    - plaguuuuuu 10y ago
      Reminder that if Trump is impeached, next in line is Mike Pence.
    - anigbrowl 10y ago
      They will if people make their lives miserable enough.
    - mullen 10y ago
      > The Republican congress might impeach the president if a huge scandal became impossible to deny. No way. Republicans would burn down this country rather than admit they have a bad president.
  - wtf_is_up 10y ago
    You generally need grounds for impeachment before proceedings can start.
    - learc83 10y ago
      The constitution is so vague on what constitutes and impeachable offense that it's pretty much whatever congress decides at the time. There is enough of an argument that he's violating the emoluments clause that if congress wanted to they could almost definitely use that as grounds for impeachment.
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > You generally need grounds for impeachment Grounds for impeachment are whatever the House decides are grounds for impeachment.
    - anigbrowl 10y ago
      Obviously some people consider those to exist, while others disagree.
devrandomguy 10y ago
First, you have to convince them that science is a good thing. I have a friend, who literally believes that scientists are either evil people, who's primary goal is to gain power over others by outsmarting them, or, willfully ignorant tools of a predatory political / economic system. To him, big-S Scientists represent a threat to his way of life. I reminded him that many of my own family members, people that he trusts, work in scientific endeavors; a marine biologist, for example, who has dedicated his life to the wellbeing of the various Pacific salmon species, for the sake of our food supply and forest health. He just lumped me into the second category, insisting that salmon are only managed for profit. That the funding for wild salmon research was being redirected towards improving the yield of fish farms, to the detriment of both the forests of western Canada, and to the detriment of the families and communities that live off of the wild salmon fisheries. We don't talk much anymore. In order to convince people like this to support science, instead of attacking it, we must convince them of two things: that "real, working" scientists have a conscience, and that they have the power to follow their conscience without losing their status as real, working, scientists.
- alphonsegaston 10y ago
  Convincing people this far gone down the rabbit hole of ideology is actually not politically effective or expedient. You're just as likely to convince an Objectivist that Maoism is the way to go. The more effective strategy, which Trump employed, is to find people on the edge of indecision in opportune areas and tailor your message to their interests.
  - devrandomguy 10y ago
    Yes, that is what I do. Like I said, now that him and I have made our positions clear, we no longer attempt to communicate with each other. I can only hope that he discovers the value of rational thought on his own, and I imagine that he is hoping that I will someday choose loyalty to my peers over cold logic.
    - imchillyb 10y ago
stupidhn 10y ago
>The only rational response is an organized campaign to convince American citizens to remove Trump from office as soon as possible. There was plenty of opportunity 6 months ago during the election, when Trump presented it as part of his platform. Are you surprised he is doing what he said he would do to the environmental agencies? What makes you think the people who voted for him are not happy with his policy implementation so far? There may be some surprised faces come midterms...again. I'm not a Trump fan, but he's doing some interesting things re: the economy (free trade only works if everyone plays fair, so he's trying to bully people). If the economy takes off (which could happen despite his economic policies) it will "trump" any of the terrible things he does to these agencies. Remember, standard Republican playbook is "government is bad", so the base doesn't really mind seeing the EPA things gutted.
- wahern 10y ago
  Remember, standard Republican playbook is "government is bad", so the base doesn't really mind seeing the EPA things gutted. That's a critical point. If your narrative is that government is intrinsically broken, then you already have an excuse for when you fail at governing. The GOP has turned into a permanent opposition party, incapable of governing. IMO, anybody who earnestly casts a vote should vote for a Democrat, or some candidate willing to caucus with Democrats. Even if you're a classic small government, low taxes kind of person. Even if you're libertarian. Even if you're a conservative culture warrior. Americans who vote for the GOP are like Venezuelans who vote for the United Socialist Party (of Maduro and Chavez). Both parties have crafted a political narrative that effectively immunizes them from criticism, even as they sink the country into political chaos. Anything they do wrong can be blamed on the opposing side, and the base largely accepts it, or at least acquiesces. Things won't turn around until the leftists in Venezuela hold their noses and vote for the capitalist "elite". Likewise, things won't turn around in the U.S. until those on the right hold their noses and vote for the leftist "elite". And in both cases they need to do so for as long as it takes for the broken party to re-internalize notions of compromise and power sharing. People need to put their ideology on the back burner for a few election cycles and focus on rebuilding civic society. If you agree with that then I think your choice in the next election is an easy one. Don't listen to the rhetoric or campaign promises: focus on the past 30 years of legislative outcomes and political strategy. One major American party more than any other has systematically worked toward destroying, both rhetorically and in actuality, efficient governance and the legitimacy of political compromise. To do so they've had to attack the fundamental legitimacy of science, but science is just one of many victims along their path to power.
gavinpc 10y ago
You mean like https://impeachdonaldtrumpnow.org/ https://impeachdonaldtrumpnow.org/ ? I wholeheartedly agree that we need to work together to wield whatever power we have, using all of our creative resources. We need a cultural change. This is good news in that we know the long tail of society's critical judgement is, well, very long. Cf ads for pointless junk. "All we need to do" is provide something more compelling than what the machine is providing. We need new art. We need new music. We need new mainstream values. And by "values" I mean what is esteemed, and what is reviled. We'll never solve this as long as teachers are not paid and regarded as professionals. (This is about "convincing people," right?) We need to "fail 90% of the time" 10 times a day at trying anything that could possibly work. We need an Uber for activism. We need to forge a world where it's imaginable that a hunter in rural south Louisiana can be a globally-minded environmentalist without risk to his social standing. We need to suck it up and dump Facebook, or at least turn it against itself. The anti-intellectuals have changed normal, and we need to change it again. The good news is, we know how fast normal can change. If we can indeed claim the mantle of rational truth, then we need to use that to our advantage in every thinkable way. Break your bad habits, and help your friends break theirs. Eat better. Sleep better. We'll never win this if we're leaving anything on the table. I'm sick of feeling powerless and letting this go on. I know I'm not alone. We need to figure out how to channel this feeling into useful, radical action, and fast. And by radical I mean, unexpected, lateral, risky, uncomfortable. Conservative people like me (and I'm very risk-averse) need to get over ourselves and think of our children. I have two. At this point, we are leaving them a weaker democracy, a meaner society, and a metastasizing corruption. We make systems, we have resources, let's effing Xerox PARC this thing. I'll write code, I'll pay for hosting, I'll canvass. What? What do we need to do? How can we get together and change this game?
- wtf_is_up 10y ago
  Setting up one of these campaigns with a nice Donate button seems like an easy way to part delusional Trump haters from their money.
  - gavinpc 10y ago
    You're right.
booleandilemma 10y ago
After Trump and his gang are finished gutting the EPA, there will be a much wider purge of scientists and intellectuals from all facets of the executive branch This is baseless fear-mongering.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
profalseidol 10y ago
Sounds like McCarthyism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism
ohthehugemanate 10y ago
Or you could set a somewhat more attainable bar, and support non government organizations to take over the good work the EPA did. Every administration has pressured the EPA to get the "right" results - or equivalently, to do the right studies - for the administration's political agenda. Hopefully this spurs people who believe in science, like you and me, to protect future science from nutjob politicians.
- ehvatum 10y ago
  I agree. Therefore, I am donating at least $25,000/yr for basic medical and scientific research that is essentially otherwise unfunded. It broke my heart seeing my PI waste every waking moment writing grant proposals, most of which I doubt were even read. I was crushed when my best friend was driven to suicide by the pressures of this hyper-competitive, ultra-PC environment where funding is scarce and new $100,000,000 building construction is outpaced only by the unchecked growth of administrative overhead. If you want politics and PC agendas out of research and scholarship, you have to fund it yourself.

rfrank 10y ago

> The only rational response is an organized campaign to convince American citizens to remove Trump from office as soon as possible. Why is that the ONLY rational response? What removal mechanism do you propose?

skybrian 10y ago

Midterms happen first. Seems like these folks have a plan: https://swingleft.org/ https://swingleft.org/

anigbrowl 10y ago
That's a good link, but midterms are 18 months away. What do you mean they 'happen first'? Do you mean they have to take place so impeachment proceedings become possible? I disagree with that contention.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  The Republican congress might impeach the president if a huge scandal became impossible to deny. They aren't going to impeach the president for doing things they largely agree with.
  - plaguuuuuu 10y ago
    Reminder that if Trump is impeached, next in line is Mike Pence.
  - anigbrowl 10y ago
    They will if people make their lives miserable enough.
  - mullen 10y ago
    > The Republican congress might impeach the president if a huge scandal became impossible to deny. No way. Republicans would burn down this country rather than admit they have a bad president.
- wtf_is_up 10y ago
  You generally need grounds for impeachment before proceedings can start.
  - learc83 10y ago
    The constitution is so vague on what constitutes and impeachable offense that it's pretty much whatever congress decides at the time. There is enough of an argument that he's violating the emoluments clause that if congress wanted to they could almost definitely use that as grounds for impeachment.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > You generally need grounds for impeachment Grounds for impeachment are whatever the House decides are grounds for impeachment.
  - anigbrowl 10y ago
    Obviously some people consider those to exist, while others disagree.

devrandomguy 10y ago

First, you have to convince them that science is a good thing. I have a friend, who literally believes that scientists are either evil people, who's primary goal is to gain power over others by outsmarting them, or, willfully ignorant tools of a predatory political / economic system. To him, big-S Scientists represent a threat to his way of life. I reminded him that many of my own family members, people that he trusts, work in scientific endeavors; a marine biologist, for example, who has dedicated his life to the wellbeing of the various Pacific salmon species, for the sake of our food supply and forest health. He just lumped me into the second category, insisting that salmon are only managed for profit. That the funding for wild salmon research was being redirected towards improving the yield of fish farms, to the detriment of both the forests of western Canada, and to the detriment of the families and communities that live off of the wild salmon fisheries. We don't talk much anymore. In order to convince people like this to support science, instead of attacking it, we must convince them of two things: that "real, working" scientists have a conscience, and that they have the power to follow their conscience without losing their status as real, working, scientists.

alphonsegaston 10y ago
Convincing people this far gone down the rabbit hole of ideology is actually not politically effective or expedient. You're just as likely to convince an Objectivist that Maoism is the way to go. The more effective strategy, which Trump employed, is to find people on the edge of indecision in opportune areas and tailor your message to their interests.
- devrandomguy 10y ago
  Yes, that is what I do. Like I said, now that him and I have made our positions clear, we no longer attempt to communicate with each other. I can only hope that he discovers the value of rational thought on his own, and I imagine that he is hoping that I will someday choose loyalty to my peers over cold logic.
  - imchillyb 10y ago

stupidhn 10y ago

>The only rational response is an organized campaign to convince American citizens to remove Trump from office as soon as possible. There was plenty of opportunity 6 months ago during the election, when Trump presented it as part of his platform. Are you surprised he is doing what he said he would do to the environmental agencies? What makes you think the people who voted for him are not happy with his policy implementation so far? There may be some surprised faces come midterms...again. I'm not a Trump fan, but he's doing some interesting things re: the economy (free trade only works if everyone plays fair, so he's trying to bully people). If the economy takes off (which could happen despite his economic policies) it will "trump" any of the terrible things he does to these agencies. Remember, standard Republican playbook is "government is bad", so the base doesn't really mind seeing the EPA things gutted.

wahern 10y ago
Remember, standard Republican playbook is "government is bad", so the base doesn't really mind seeing the EPA things gutted. That's a critical point. If your narrative is that government is intrinsically broken, then you already have an excuse for when you fail at governing. The GOP has turned into a permanent opposition party, incapable of governing. IMO, anybody who earnestly casts a vote should vote for a Democrat, or some candidate willing to caucus with Democrats. Even if you're a classic small government, low taxes kind of person. Even if you're libertarian. Even if you're a conservative culture warrior. Americans who vote for the GOP are like Venezuelans who vote for the United Socialist Party (of Maduro and Chavez). Both parties have crafted a political narrative that effectively immunizes them from criticism, even as they sink the country into political chaos. Anything they do wrong can be blamed on the opposing side, and the base largely accepts it, or at least acquiesces. Things won't turn around until the leftists in Venezuela hold their noses and vote for the capitalist "elite". Likewise, things won't turn around in the U.S. until those on the right hold their noses and vote for the leftist "elite". And in both cases they need to do so for as long as it takes for the broken party to re-internalize notions of compromise and power sharing. People need to put their ideology on the back burner for a few election cycles and focus on rebuilding civic society. If you agree with that then I think your choice in the next election is an easy one. Don't listen to the rhetoric or campaign promises: focus on the past 30 years of legislative outcomes and political strategy. One major American party more than any other has systematically worked toward destroying, both rhetorically and in actuality, efficient governance and the legitimacy of political compromise. To do so they've had to attack the fundamental legitimacy of science, but science is just one of many victims along their path to power.

gavinpc 10y ago

You mean like https://impeachdonaldtrumpnow.org/ https://impeachdonaldtrumpnow.org/ ? I wholeheartedly agree that we need to work together to wield whatever power we have, using all of our creative resources. We need a cultural change. This is good news in that we know the long tail of society's critical judgement is, well, very long. Cf ads for pointless junk. "All we need to do" is provide something more compelling than what the machine is providing. We need new art. We need new music. We need new mainstream values. And by "values" I mean what is esteemed, and what is reviled. We'll never solve this as long as teachers are not paid and regarded as professionals. (This is about "convincing people," right?) We need to "fail 90% of the time" 10 times a day at trying anything that could possibly work. We need an Uber for activism. We need to forge a world where it's imaginable that a hunter in rural south Louisiana can be a globally-minded environmentalist without risk to his social standing. We need to suck it up and dump Facebook, or at least turn it against itself. The anti-intellectuals have changed normal, and we need to change it again. The good news is, we know how fast normal can change. If we can indeed claim the mantle of rational truth, then we need to use that to our advantage in every thinkable way. Break your bad habits, and help your friends break theirs. Eat better. Sleep better. We'll never win this if we're leaving anything on the table. I'm sick of feeling powerless and letting this go on. I know I'm not alone. We need to figure out how to channel this feeling into useful, radical action, and fast. And by radical I mean, unexpected, lateral, risky, uncomfortable. Conservative people like me (and I'm very risk-averse) need to get over ourselves and think of our children. I have two. At this point, we are leaving them a weaker democracy, a meaner society, and a metastasizing corruption. We make systems, we have resources, let's effing Xerox PARC this thing. I'll write code, I'll pay for hosting, I'll canvass. What? What do we need to do? How can we get together and change this game?

wtf_is_up 10y ago
Setting up one of these campaigns with a nice Donate button seems like an easy way to part delusional Trump haters from their money.
- gavinpc 10y ago
  You're right.

booleandilemma 10y ago

After Trump and his gang are finished gutting the EPA, there will be a much wider purge of scientists and intellectuals from all facets of the executive branch This is baseless fear-mongering.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

profalseidol 10y ago

Sounds like McCarthyism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

ohthehugemanate 10y ago

Or you could set a somewhat more attainable bar, and support non government organizations to take over the good work the EPA did. Every administration has pressured the EPA to get the "right" results - or equivalently, to do the right studies - for the administration's political agenda. Hopefully this spurs people who believe in science, like you and me, to protect future science from nutjob politicians.

ehvatum 10y ago
I agree. Therefore, I am donating at least $25,000/yr for basic medical and scientific research that is essentially otherwise unfunded. It broke my heart seeing my PI waste every waking moment writing grant proposals, most of which I doubt were even read. I was crushed when my best friend was driven to suicide by the pressures of this hyper-competitive, ultra-PC environment where funding is scarce and new $100,000,000 building construction is outpaced only by the unchecked growth of administrative overhead. If you want politics and PC agendas out of research and scholarship, you have to fund it yourself.