5 ms·
There's a reason the Americans discovered how to make atomic weapons first and it's because their researchers were living under a less oppressive state that was
by panarchy 1y ago
There's a reason the Americans discovered how to make atomic weapons first and it's because their researchers were living under a less oppressive state that wasn't motivated by anti-intellectualism and dumb ideology.
- pokstad 1y agoBut the Soviets made them second…
- epistasis 1y agoNot because they trusted their scientists to be able to do it though. They used the plans stolen form the US instead.
- eastbound 1y agoThe Soviets had the first flying object in space, the first animal in space, the first human in space, first spacewalk, first woman, first space station. I doubt those plans were all in the US, and if they were, the US didn’t use them.
- wolfgangK 1y ago> The Soviets had the […]first woman,[…] That is quite the claim !
- cheaprentalyeti 1y agoClaim? It's a matter of history. Her name is Valentina Tereshkova, and she's still alive. [0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentina_Tereshkova https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentina_Tereshkova
- MattPalmer1086 1y agoWoosh! It's clearly a joke. "first woman" vs "first woman in space".
- defrost 1y agoIt's somewhat more complicated given that much of the significant work passed on by Klaus Fuchs to the Soviets that they acknowledge was responsible for the first Soviet fission bomb was Fuchs own work .. he shared with the British, the Americans, the Canadians, and the Soviets .. who were all ostensibly allies at the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_Fuchs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_Fuchs Adding to @eastbound's comment the Soviets were also responsible for the first remote operated "robot" on the moon.
- epistasis 1y agoWhat is the complication to my story here... Allies do not share all secrets. Not sure what relevance the space race has to this topic either!
- pokstad 1y agoWell then maybe it is easier to let someone else do the heavy lifting first
- igor47 1y agoThis is complete moral bankruptcy. You're saying it would be better, rather than developing excellency, to instead become a parasite. I understand that in a world where winning is all that matters, this might be a viable strategy... For a while, until everyone adopts it or you otherwise kill your host. But this is not what being a human is about. I wouldn't want you near anything I care about
- jacquesm 1y agoMoral bankruptcy is probably a bridge too far here: in weapons, especially with weapons of such power, espionage should be expected. Besides, upon first use you advertise the possibility and that alone will be an enabler, an existential proof that something is possible but you don't know how is a completely different story than groping in the dark while wondering if a thing is possible or not. Any kind of lead will surely be sooner or later be squashed. Note that nobody thought that using the patent system to get IP protection on the Atomic Bomb was a good idea: our friendly ways to establish who gets to make bank on an invention like that would simply fail and would actually pass valuable information to the perceived opponents. When applied to medicine that same attitude becomes parasitic: you may be able to make much more money by restricting the distribution of the knowledge that could save people or prevent their suffering. This is where Martin Shkreli and other such characters come in to play.
- defrost 1y agoBut they didn't. An Australian nuclear scientist working for the UK Rutherford (New Zealander) labs | Tube Alloys | MAUD program told them how to. It took a while to convince the US scientists who were mainly interested in making big hot piles for power. The actual building of atomic weapons (Trinity, Fat Man and Little Boy) took place under a fully authoritarian ultra secret State directed militarily controlled program that cost a significant chunk of national GDP. The example you chose appears to be both incorrect and the very opposite of whatever point you wanted to make. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tube_Alloys https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tube_Alloys * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Oliphant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Oliphant
- panarchy 1y agoInteresting. How about we replace the USA (I mostly highlighted the US because that's where this site and the population that use it is based) with the Allies. And being authoritarian isn't about having secretive or highly controlled group (which makes sense given what they were working on and the stakes), but rather the general cultural interpretation of freedom perceived by those who are likely to be doing research. And while you can argue that the USA had authoritarian overtones then as well, the key point is that they weren't as overt as having to greet everyone with good tidings for your supreme leader and keep all your opinions strictly in line with the party's. Notes released from the German scientists (I think Heisenberg comes to mind?) revealed they weren't highly motivated by the regime's philosophy despite supporting it outwardly while those who were the most invested into the Nazi ideology never published much of note.
- themafia 1y agoThe jingoist dream of America is falling apart. It must seem, to some who are very dependent on it existing, as if the sky actually is falling. Perhaps it's just a good opportunity for them to study history that has been untouched by North American propaganda. Anyways, we have the Internet, I'm not sure it matters _where_ innovations are created anymore. It certainly does not seem to be stopping China on any level. America is going to have to give up the "World Police" (a.k.a. The Military Industrial Complex) badge and move into it's relative political middle age with a little more care and aplomb than the last 6 decades have allowed for. The haze of WW2 is far behind us now.
- joules77 1y agoGo deeper - why does anti-intellectualism emerge?
- toomuchtodo 1y agoNationalist populism sacrifices academics and intellectuals to create a divide between “the people” and the presumed said “elite,” which is then weaponized for political gain by the actual “elite” (political, economical, etc). These movements rely on emotional resonance and simplified narratives, as opposed to educated, informed discourse. My crude take on the underlying root cause is resentment, discontent, and similar feelings. Happiness is reality minus expectations, and a whole lot of folks are unhappy life did not turn out how they thought it would. https://warwick.ac.uk/news/pressreleases/researchers_point_to/ https://warwick.ac.uk/news/pressreleases/researchers_point_t... https://academic.oup.com/isagsq/article/1/1/ksab002/6185295 https://academic.oup.com/isagsq/article/1/1/ksab002/6185295
- panarchy 1y agoIt also does this so that when intellectuals call out their bullshit they can more easily dismiss it as hysteria.
- toomuchtodo 1y agoIndeed, but that’s why humiliating them is so effective as a response (think South Park’s latest season). Their outlet for the humiliation and resentment they feel is anger and attempts at grasping power, and when that doesn’t lead to the desired outcome, they have no way to cope with the consequences of not reaching the expected status outcome. They demand respect and control, and to deny them that is to deny them their validation and belief of their value. A bully or authoritarian without control is like a dethroned monarch; still convinced of their right to rule, but forced to live in a world that no longer bends to their demands.
- whotheywut1 1y agoThis is circumlocution. Who is they? Them? What? You're just reciting words. What dialectic is this? Ok let me try in random generalization speak... Nothing in physics requires us to buy into the political documents; if the average person isn't owed anything under the rules, no one is. Either we're science driven where only politics makes someone special and we should then moderate that because in reality, they are not special, just a button pusher, just a signature. Or we're a bunch of idiots living in a trailer park. Seems you subscribe to the whole "everything is a mystery to politics" when it's just biology self-selecting and we should fucking moderate that. With violence if necessary. Because fuck them. They aren't owed anything either, they're just manipulating politics.
- Jimmc414 1y agoWhile I agree in spirit on the concern about political interference in science, the Manhattan Project was actually one of the most secretive, tightly controlled government programs in US history. In addition many scientists involved (like Oppenheimer) later faced political persecution during the McCarthy era. American atomic research succeeded despite, or perhaps because of, intense state control and funding
- thisislife2 1y agoAnd it was an international project - the British were involved too, before the Americans suddenly cut them off.
- panarchy 1y agoYeah it probably isn't the best project to highlight the sentiment, but it was well known one and immediately came to mind in a period that had the contrasting factor. I don't particularly think that the secrecy or control of a single group really reflects on the overall culture however. We wouldn't call phreakers authoritarian just because they weren't publishing their exploits in the newspaper or letting any new person fully into their circle. Also the prosecution and harassment of communists/leftists and minorities in the US during that era is why I stipulated less oppressive rather than unoppressive.
- seanmcdirmid 1y agoYou can’t just look at the Manhattan project without looking at the research output that led up to it.
- HelloNurse 1y agoThe "raw material" of the Manhattan Project was a flourishing community of researchers, including many European exiles; "secretive, tightly controlled" management is simply the only reasonable way to run such a military program. Consider that at the same time the Third Reich also had a nuclear weapons research program, and it went nowhere.
- m4rtink 1y agoWell, many of the researchers would have been killed if they stayed in Germany. It kinda helps being alive when researching how to build a nuclear bomb.
- WillPostForFood 1y agoDo you really think WWII America was a less oppressive state? Do you know much harder it was to get porn back then? Or be a trans? Japanese internment? Food ration cards? Office of Censorship? Smith Act? The draft? Curfews and blackouts?
- jonny_eh 1y agoAll that stuff was bad, especially Japanese internment, but this feels like a whole different category. It's a full-blown ceding control of the country to one man.
- Ancapistani 1y agoFDR had and exercised far more authority than Trump ever dreamed of. It was so centralized, we effectively had Eleanor Roosevelt as acting President much of the time.
- bee_rider 1y agoThey meant less oppressive in comparison to Nazi Germany.
- panarchy 1y agoI'm glad someone gets it. The level of dumb, missing the point pedantry people do on this site would be impressive if it wasn't so sad.
- msgodel 1y agoLol what? At the time that was done we were drafting people to fight in foreign wars, taxes were extraordinarily high (after having zero income tax just recently) and those weapons were built specifically to support that.
- thrown-0825 1y agoThis is propaganda. The Manhattan project succeeded because it was consuming a significant portion of the US GDP at the time, the scientists were forced to live on site with their families and every word they said was monitored.
- jacquesm 1y agoProjects such as these consume large sums of money no matter who funds them. But the scientists that worked on it were not forced to work on it, a large number of them were refugees from exactly the kind of regime that the OP contrasts the United States with, which at the time, side-by-side would definitely be favorable for the US. Military projects, especially making the most powerful weapon in history for use in the largest war up to that point, are always done with as much secrecy as is feasible. Living on-site was also practical: the reason the site was as isolated as it was was in part because of secrecy, the families being there was both to improve security and for convenience. Finally, yes, every word they said was monitored. But they were scientists and their families working on top secret machinery of war, which ended up changing the course of history in a significant way, they quite literally ushered in a new age. They knew they were monitored and that this was one part of the price to pay for working on that project. In contrast with that age: now all our words are monitored, even inane ones that are exchanged between people who would have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
- sillyfluke 1y ago>This is propaganda. The Manhattan project succeeded because it was consuming a significant portion of the US GDP at the time. I'm confused, are you claiming the enemy was not consuming a significant portion of their GDP on their weapons program? the "necessary but not sufficient" concept applies here.
- tremon 1y agoNice revisionism you got there. It wasn't Americans that discovered it. It was mostly German scientists working in the US after they fled their own more oppressive state.
- BobaFloutist 1y agoPeople that flee their own, more oppressive state to build a better life in America are Americans. That's the whole point.
- yencabulator 1y agoThat does not sound like an opinion the current administration shares.