Great piece. I will definitely listen to the podcast. Chris Hedges has a lot to say about this. You should interview him at some point.
Unfortunately, I could have written a very similar article on science. Despite all the talk about academic freedom, research funding is highly political. We are free to do the research the rich and the powerful want us to do. The reason why there is so much research done on carbon capture is not that anyone believes in the idea but because the oil lobby desperately wants it to work and therefore provides a lot of research money. The largest funding agency for applied research in Switzerland only funds research with a reasonable “business idea.” Unless you want to develop a product that can be sold with a profit, you are not going to get any money. In other words, almost all research money in the world is spent on destroying the planet. And the scientists are only “doing their jobs” and “obeying orders.” That was never a good excuse.
It would be worth an article. The title could be "Scientific Prostitution" -- scientist are paid to do research they do not believe in and pretend they like it. What I find particularly annoying is that we would actually need a lot of exciting research to feed 8 billion people on a finite planet. I do not even know if it is possible. However, if funding is based on the ability to add value to the economy, this research will never be carried. out. Again, it is a question of power and money. Cui Bono?
"the vanguard of public discourse". A great phrase! And and important call to focus.
There is journalism as "writing history as it is being made". This kind of journalism is not equal to the challenge of climate, because climate history is still in the future.
There is a kind of journalism that reports on ideas from "the vanguard of public discourse". This kind of journalism is critical to climate action to avert climate catastrophe.
Imagine if we had a new moneyed ally for journalism from the vanguard of public discourse that had the mission, the duty and the scale to take action on climate and other challenges in our changing times that require humanity to take action at the scale of climate and in the time of climate, as Earthlings living together on one shared Earth.
Imagine if that new moneyed ally was accountable our shared global common sense as new 21st Century Global Citizens in a new 21st Century Global Commons, as the sense is articulated through public discourse at the vanguard.
Imagine that new Global Commons is Fiduciary Money.
That's a very badly written article, Rachel, or else nobody proofread it. I love your stuff, and it was a very good interview … one could tell you were fully into the topic, you know a lot about it, and it's your profession … but I wouldn't share your newsletter, not unless I wanted to diss you.
Great piece. I will definitely listen to the podcast. Chris Hedges has a lot to say about this. You should interview him at some point.
Unfortunately, I could have written a very similar article on science. Despite all the talk about academic freedom, research funding is highly political. We are free to do the research the rich and the powerful want us to do. The reason why there is so much research done on carbon capture is not that anyone believes in the idea but because the oil lobby desperately wants it to work and therefore provides a lot of research money. The largest funding agency for applied research in Switzerland only funds research with a reasonable “business idea.” Unless you want to develop a product that can be sold with a profit, you are not going to get any money. In other words, almost all research money in the world is spent on destroying the planet. And the scientists are only “doing their jobs” and “obeying orders.” That was never a good excuse.
I'd love to read that article! Had no idea about that funding agency...wonder if it's worth an article!
It would be worth an article. The title could be "Scientific Prostitution" -- scientist are paid to do research they do not believe in and pretend they like it. What I find particularly annoying is that we would actually need a lot of exciting research to feed 8 billion people on a finite planet. I do not even know if it is possible. However, if funding is based on the ability to add value to the economy, this research will never be carried. out. Again, it is a question of power and money. Cui Bono?
"the vanguard of public discourse". A great phrase! And and important call to focus.
There is journalism as "writing history as it is being made". This kind of journalism is not equal to the challenge of climate, because climate history is still in the future.
There is a kind of journalism that reports on ideas from "the vanguard of public discourse". This kind of journalism is critical to climate action to avert climate catastrophe.
Imagine if we had a new moneyed ally for journalism from the vanguard of public discourse that had the mission, the duty and the scale to take action on climate and other challenges in our changing times that require humanity to take action at the scale of climate and in the time of climate, as Earthlings living together on one shared Earth.
Imagine if that new moneyed ally was accountable our shared global common sense as new 21st Century Global Citizens in a new 21st Century Global Commons, as the sense is articulated through public discourse at the vanguard.
Imagine that new Global Commons is Fiduciary Money.
That's a very badly written article, Rachel, or else nobody proofread it. I love your stuff, and it was a very good interview … one could tell you were fully into the topic, you know a lot about it, and it's your profession … but I wouldn't share your newsletter, not unless I wanted to diss you.
There was a repeated transcribed par—it's edited now. Share away!