A Radical ’70s-Era Group Is Relaunching to Help Scientists Get Political Under Trump
By Rebecca Onion,
Slate
| 08. 29. 2018
Advocates of science are in a bad place right now. Some days, in this Second Year of Trump, scientism—a blanket defense of science as a virtuous and almost holy exercise of objectivity and rationality—feels like the only natural response to the rising darkness. But, tempting as it might be, cheerleading for capital-S “Science” can’t be the answer. Science—as historians of science and practitioners of science and technology studies readily argue—is not an objective refuge; it’s shaped by politics just like any other human endeavor. How can we acknowledge that fact while still arguing for science’s authority and value?
From 1969 through 1989, the group Science for the People tried to do just that. Its members took “science has a politics” as a philosophical starting point and then used that understanding to push for radical change. Early on, the group protested weapons labs. Members worked with the Black Panther Party, helping with their free health clinics, and with the Young Lords Organization, assisting them in offering free lead-poisoning testing services. They sent equipment to Vietnamese scientists and helped Midwestern farmworkers...
Related Articles
By Editor, ReproTech Truths | 04.10.2019
In the last few years, ASRM has aggressively courted RESOLVE, once a purely grassroots group of women helping women get support for infertility. RESOLVE’s grassroots nationwide membership was its crown jewel.
Eager to gain access to RESOLVE’s membership, Big Pharma,...
By Drew Harwell, The Washington Post | 04.10.2019
Like millions of women, Diana Diller was a devoted user of the pregnancy-tracking app Ovia, logging in every night to record new details on a screen asking about her bodily functions, sex drive, medications and mood. When she gave birth...
By Karen Weintraub, Scientific American [cites CGS' Marcy Darnovsky] | 03.13.2019
A group of 18 prominent scientists—including some who helped develop CRISPR–Cas9, the current leading tool for gene editing—issued a call Wednesday for an international moratorium on gene edits to eggs, sperm or embryos, and for establishing a process to discuss...
In the months since He Jiankui first announced the birth of gene-edited twins, there’s been a steady stream of revelations and reactions from scientists, bioethicists, and others. We’ve learned quite a bit more about He’s actions, who he worked with, and who knew—but said nothing about—what he was up to. There’s one area where we still know next to nothing: how twin girls Lulu and Nana are faring.
In February, Chinese authorities released results of their preliminary investigation into He’s...
