This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
The libertarian Cato institute points out that the US has been losing international scientists in recent years whereas not only has China gained but so has "non-US OECD" countries. The latter is code for Europe and AU/NZ/CA.
The immediate cause is probably the misguided and arguably racist "China initiative" which essentially led to a witch-hunt against ethnic Chinese people. But I suspect domestic factors in China and Europe are also responsible. Both have been ramping up R&D spending in recent years and visa policies in Europe are often more favorable for researchers than American policies are. Easier to get and easier to stay.
It is no exaggeration to say that most of STEM innovation in US academia is now being carried out by foreign-born people. So this development should worry Americans. I also think many people in the West underestimate how much genuine innovation there is in China. Viewing data from the Nature Index, which tracks elite science production, it isn't clear that China is far behind anymore. If at all. In areas like EV batteries, China is now ahead of the West. Progress in their semiconductor industry has been faster than even many insiders had expected.
I still think the US has a series of unique advantages over its competitors, but falling prey to scare-mongering campaigns and McCarthyite tactics isn't going to capitalise on them.
If I am a scientist that has an option to work in China or in the US, what would be my incentive for the US? I guess money can be an incentive, but China could match that if they wanted now, they're not poor anymore. Living in a free country and not being subject to the whim of the oppressive fascist regime and having to censor one's speech and scientific inquiry constantly - could be a huge factor. And there was time where the US held a huge advantage on that. But combined air of suspicion (may be in some small part even justified) towards Chinese-born scientists and widely-publicized cases of wrongful prosecution, with the general air of ideological conformity (of a different kind, but similar fervor) in the academia in general, where liking a wrong tweet could get you hunted by the mobs and fired from your job - makes one question, how big is the difference now? Sure, there is some, you won't be jailed yet for saying men can't get pregnant (though many members of Congress are already writing "hate speech" laws which would make it happen), but you can very well be made unable to work as a scientist - the distance is decreasing rapidly, and with increased politicizing of science, one may reasonably conclude that the choice is not between freedom and political control anymore, but between two forms of political control. So, if the US is no longer the shining beacon of freedom on the hill, it comes back to who could offer more. And I imagine, to some people China would be willing to offer more.
On the other hand, by working in the US you get to live in a quirky but very pleasant first world country in which you can generally do whatever you want. By working in China, you get to live in a middle income industrial zone(you will notice that industrial zones in the US are not very popular places to live) under a brutal dictatorship, where the sky is literally blotted out with pollution.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link