Slashdot Mirror
The Canadian Government's War On Science
FuzzNugget writes "A contributor at ScienceBlogs.com has compiled and published a shockingly long list of systematic attacks on scientific research committed by the Canadian government since the conservatives came to power in 2006. This anti-scientific scourge includes muzzling scientists, shutting down research centers, industry deregulation and re-purposing the National Research Council to align with business interests instead of doing real science. It will be another two years before Canadians have the chance to go to the polls, but how much more damage will be done in the meantime?"
What are you doing? You were my escape plan all during the Bush years - where am I going to go when the right finally tanks the US?
If there is one thing that conservatives all agree on, it's that you should change the facts to match your agenda, not the other way around.
Great warrior...hrmph! Wars not make one great.
A large portion of that list doesn't look anti-science. Business deregulation? Firing regulatory officials for "lack of leadership"? Discontinuing a mandatory census? Rolling back environmental regulations? Withdraw from Kyoto Accord? Changes to fisheries regulations? Procedural changes for public hearings on pipeline work? And so on... These are not "anti-science" changes. They are anti-liberal, anti-environmentalist, and pro-business political moves. Think there might be some political bias by the author of this list?
I am a geek attorney, but not your geek attorney unless you've already retained me. This is not legal advice.
Go read the list, and see if you think more than a small minority of those items affect real science in any real way.
There are a few, to be sure, but most of them are trimming of non-science paper-shuffling jobs, a shocking number
of which seem to only employ journalism majors.
Closing a Downtown Vancouver coast guard station? Really?
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
This is just a liberal laundry list masquerading as an 'objective' assessment of the conservative government's attitude toward science.
What is actually happening here is called "balancing the budget". The funding of many programs have been cut --from sports to science. Why scientists feel their programs should be immune to budget cuts when governments the globe over are practicing austerity is a mystery.
after public funds. The author uses the word science, but in reality what this boils down to is a political viewpoint not popular with the current politicians controlling the purse strings. I'm sick of seeing the removal of public funding for something being called a "war".
The conservatives in power at the federal level in Canada have been figuratively rounding up all the intellectuals, scientists, educators, and scholars who do not toe the line. It is disgraceful and eerily familiar to historians, who BTW are about to undergo a government investigation of how Canadian history is to be taught since the conservatives do not much recognize anything but their own mythology.
I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
This statement assumes that canadians will not re elect the conservatives again. Unfortunately, most of my fellow countrymen only care about one thing - the economy. Witness the recent election in BC where the BCliberals (really conservatives, just liberal by name) were super corrupt (head of party resigned in shame) and most people agree are doing a bad job, were re-elected. Why? They ran on the platform of creating more industry jobs, ignoring the effects of climate change, and selling off resources to china which they say will make us and our children rich.
Unless the housing market collapses, and takes the broader economy with it, before the next election, the conservatives will most likely win again. There are many theories as to why this is, but the fact is people have been led to believe that the government having closer ties to business equals a better economy. Thanks in no small part to the shit ton of propaganda (economic action plan = propping up construction sector) that reinforces this belief and glosses over reality. Science is facts, and the conservatives hate fact based policy. They base policy on ideology and authoritarianism. Its stupid and backwards, but thats been the state of canada since 2006.
As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
in favor of their own clear and true vision of paisley pink skies and money trees in the gardens of "job creators."
facts frequently are at odds with their vision/religion.
I use the terms "fact" and :"science" here in the dictionary sense, that which has been proven through rigorous and repetitive testing and discovery.
falling off your barstool after a night of swilling "Old Reaganomics" and getting an epiphany, or something, when your butt hits the tiles is not a fact.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Bingo. Eisenhower warned about the Military-Industrial Complex, but everyone seems to forget his other warning in the same speech about the government-science complex.
At least 90% of the results I see from government-funded 'science' look to be a total waste of my tax dollars.
The other 10% form the foundation of our economy. Most of them were unintentional. Which is why anyone who responds with the above just looks like an uninformed fool.
a handful of selfish greedy people are no match for millions of selfish, greedy people -u4ya
Then the evidence must be suppressed.
- *sigh* this got ranty and unfocused, not goint to fix it now -
Example#1
This governments plan is to "solve crime" with a "hard on crime" agenda that is being acknowledged in Texas as not being the correct solution. The government also claims to be fiscally responsible.
So if you claim to be fiscally responsible yet want to setup and plan that is expensive and has been proven not to work you must deny the science.
The Harper Government has many many plans that ran counter to science. They slashed the census program which gathered data that was used for planning by all levels of govenment. Why they claimed it was because people complained, on file about 2 complaints in 15 years. Really it was if you want to throw money at pet projects you don't have to validate it against actual facts if the facts don't exists.
So yes this is a deliberate attack on science and it is required because they want to "govern from the gut".
In Canada our Government is Psychotic, and the general question is why have people lost faith in government? Well is because the government operates on faith and not facts.
Yeah, let private industry do their own wild life and fish surveys and use the data to self regulate. What could go wrong?
Ever been in an ICU recently? All that remote monitoring technology was "government science" developed for space travel. This internet? Yup, More government science money. Use a microwave oven? Yup, government money!
Basic science research is needed to develop ideas and test theories that could later be developed into mass use products!
CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
I would propose this solution:
Show that the Canadian conservatives are just following what the American conservatives are doing.
If there's one thing that Canadian politicians don't want to be accused of, it's acting like (or taking direction from) Americans.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
There are other reasons why the Conservative Party got that majority; it would be an exaggeration to say we elected them.
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
A big one that is missing is AECL, or the Atomic Energy of Canada Limited.
Back in 2011 they sold off most of it to SNC-Lavalin. For 15 Million. They might as well sold it for 1$ dollar.
Hundreds of engineers and nuclear scientists.
Official:
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/media-room/news-release/2011/57/2138
CBC:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/06/29/aecl-sale.html
In case you are wondering who SNC-Lavalin is, Google them and see how many scandals they have been in the last few years, most of them to do with corruption and governments.
Ironically some of the scandals were in India, and guess where we sold most of our Candu reactors over the years.... India!
Anyway this isn't about Lavalin, its about Harper basically dumping our national atomic R&D. Remember Chalk River and the international shortage of radiological isotopes for medical use because it had to shut down? Yeah we kept the liability of that, but are not doing any research or design as to how to replace those 50+ year old facilities.
And on the tinfoil hat side of things: Despite what all the touchy feelies might think, we need atomic energy for our electric grids. Guess what the only replacement is for those things? Solar, wind, puppies, and positive thinking? Nope. Oil and Gas. Funny that. Alberta should like that.
The first four paragraphs of the second linked story consists of the author basically rationalizing her terrible journalism. She makes a terrible error in misquoting a Candian official: “Scientific discovery is not valuable unless it has commercial value.” instead of: “A new idea or discovery may in fact be interesting but it doesn’t quality [sic] as an innovation until it’s been developed into something that has commercial or societal value.” which is closer. Never mind though, the author doesn't skip a beat and goes directly onto jumping innocent conclusions in a dark cyber-alley.
Why is this article one of the (just) two lemmas in the submitter's argument that Canada's current government is trashing publicly funded research?
--"You are your own God"--
The whole right, left perspective is an illusion. When are you people going to wake up?
That is so lazy intellectually. Some politicians are power hungry pathalogical liars (e.g., Issa). Some politicians are plain old cranks (e.g., Inhofe/Bachmann). Some politicians really believe in things and fight for them, and are often indistinguishable from cranks (e.g., Rand Paul). Some politicians really believe in things and fight for them (e.g., Paul Ryan).
The trick to understanding politics is sorting out the grand-standing from what people really believe in. The GOP is currently defined by hatred of all things Obama. They don't care about deficit/debt reduction (they could have it if they wanted it). But you gotta believe that if Obama supported traditional marriage, a ban on stem cell research, or tax cuts of the super wealthy, then the GOP would be all over it in no time.
So you see, they do believe in things, and there really are differences.
If you're pro-life, or a homophobe, tax-cuts-for-the-rich, then the GOP will represent you. If you pro-choice and pro marriage equality, and want a progressive tax system, then the Dems will support you.
So what do you support?
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
why would one group of people (the regulators) be better at deciding what another group of people should do (those who are being regulated)?
So you're arguing that we should deregulate murder because politicians aren't any better at deciding what people should do than murderers are?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
At least 90% of the results I see from government-funded 'science' look to be a total waste of my tax dollars.
Given a randomly selected tax-funded scientific research project, 99% of us aren't qualified to say whether it is or isn't a waste of tax dollars.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
The 1930s happened and easy interstate transport meant cross border criminal gangs taking advantage of uneven law enforcement and juristictions. Now it's today, and for some reason people have forgotten that lesson and think it's unlikely that criminals will drive for an hour to get a gun.