Attacks on the Ivory Tower, and Real-world Consequences for Progress

In the Arizona Republic, Helen Rummel recently reported on the reaction of education leaders in our state to potential and actual cuts in federal research funding. She noted that there was still quite a bit of optimism about weathering these storms. I admit to being less sanguine. While I have no experience with the Arizona system, my federal research grants at Berkeley supported many students and postdoctoral fellows, so I have strong feelings about this topic.

In a recent blog piece, I had a bit of fun with the absurdity of the anti-DEI obsession of the Trump administration. The critical work of promoting Diversity, Equity and Inclusion had been transformed into a different DEI: a return to more Discrimination by people with huge Egos despite clear evidence of Ignorance. I recognize, though, that the consequences of this obsession are anything but fun. Aside from the direct harm to women and people of color, this topic is being used as an excuse to attack the country’s primary research centers at universities.[1]  I don’t claim that this is the most important harm being done by the bullies in charge, but it is in an area with which I’ve had a lifetime relationship. So, I thought I’d write about it.

International students are a critical part of American research

In Berkeley, I was fortunate to work with outstanding international colleagues. Many of them ultimately pushed the research envelope at American companies. International visitors have done this for decades; some now lead major organizations. For many of these folks, despite coming from other advanced countries, the U.S. was THE place to go. And often, this was the launching pad for a career that benefited our country immeasurably.  

I have no way of knowing the extent to which the current attack on universities is based solely on an ideological aversion to DEI policies and how much of it is based on a deep antipathy to institutions that the right wing sees as bastions of liberal thought. Regardless of the motivation, the actions taken to reduce federal funds for student support will mean fewer new researchers will be needed to generate future progress in America, particularly in Arizona. Some of the best senior researchers are looking elsewhere, while fewer outstanding international researchers may be coming here.

Those focused on privatizing everything may think that companies will replace universities as the trainers of the next generation of STEM researchers. Indeed, some of the biggest companies (e.g., Google or Microsoft) have helped train some researchers through internships. But they can’t replace universities. In schools, we can afford to have short-term inefficiency. We can allow and even encourage curiosity-driven research. And it’s this wide-open exploration that often provides the path to progress; the road to discovery is rarely linear.

Federal support is the backbone of research

When I think of my graduate students over the years, most of them would have been unable to complete their studies without federal government grants. Industrial internships greatly helped students to connect to what is happening out there. Still, for the most part, the federal government was fueling the development of outstanding student researchers.

I hope that the current anti-academic madness is temporary. But I fear that it is not just due to a Mad King but also reflects an anti-intellectual trend in our society.

I hope that we are not heading toward Idiocracy. We have enough other problems to deal with in Arizona.

---

^[1] I should also note that fighting antisemitism is also being used as an excuse to cut research funding. While there is no excuse for this most ancient form of racism, punishing research faculty and students for unrelated incidents makes no sense.