Gold Rush: A Retelling of the Discovery of Gold
In recent times, the role of politics in science has been a subject of intense debate, with the Trump administration's call for gold standard science as the governing standard for federal funding of American science sparking controversy.
President Trump, in an executive order, called for gold standard science to be the benchmark for federal funding of American science. However, concerns have been raised about the potential for political oversight, as a Trump functionary could declare any peer-reviewed work to be in violation of the President's gold standard.
This approach to science funding is not a new concept in history. The cases of Trofim Lysenko in the Soviet Union and Nazi eugenics in Germany serve as stark reminders of the dangers of political interference in science.
Trofim Lysenko, a bogus agronomist, had significant influence on agricultural policy in the 1940s and 1950s under Josef Stalin. Lysenko rejected Mendelian genetics and, backed by Stalin's government, silenced, discredited, and prosecuted scientists who opposed him. This political influence led to the suppression of valid genetic research, the execution or imprisonment of scientists, and long-term damage to Soviet biology.
Similarly, Nazi eugenics in Germany represented state-driven pseudoscience used to justify racial policies, including forced sterilization and genocide. The regime manipulated genetics and racial science ideologically to legitimize horrific social policies.
The Trump administration's gold standard science executive order, introduced in the 2020s, has been critiqued as a contemporary example of political interference. Critics argue this order and previous measures such as the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Directive have sought to control scientific direction under political motives, threatening open scientific inquiry and public trust by influencing what research is prioritized and how findings are disseminated.
Comparatively, Lysenko’s era showed overt state repression, falsification, and persecution of dissenting scientists, resulting in widespread damage to Soviet genetics and biological sciences. Nazi eugenics entailed systematic falsification and ideological misuse of genetics to enforce racial hierarchies and policies, causing immense human rights abuses. The Trump administration's executive order illustrates subtler interference by restructuring scientific standards and priorities under political frameworks, risking politicization and constraints on methodological openness.
These instances highlight how political power, when imposed on scientific practice, distorts scientific truth and undermines both the progress and ethical foundations of science.
In contrast, the European Union's 47 nations have resisted political meddling in vetting science, requiring "independent external experts" for the assessment and release of scientific findings. The United States has never had a situation in which political and ideological nonscientists had the final say on what is credible science.
The memorandum outlining the nine core tenets for gold standard science, including reproducibility, transparency, and lack of conflicts of interest, aims to maintain the integrity of scientific research. However, the potential for political oversight remains a significant concern.
References: - The detailed Soviet Lysenko case with arrests and suppression [1][2][5]. - Contemporary commentary linking Trump’s executive order to political subversion of science [5]. - Historical context of political influence on Nazi genetics is well-established beyond these sources but relevant for comparison.
The Trump administration's gold standard science executive order, introduced in the 2020s, has been compared to historical cases of political interference in science, such as Trofim Lysenko's influence on Soviet science during the 1940s and 1950s and the manipulation of genetics during Nazi eugenics in Germany. Critics argue that this order, along with the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Directive, could threaten open scientific inquiry and public trust by politicizing and constraining methodological openness in health-and-wellness and mental-health research, just as Lysenko's influence led to the suppression of valid genetic research and Nazi eugenics led to horrific human rights abuses.
