I wish the title “Republican hostility against science” could be just dismissed at hype. Sadly, that is a more or less accurate description of the situation as is. The annual meeting of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) further highlighted the scientific backwardness of the right end of the political spectrum in the US.
This is how the conference started:
After the anthem (a good, honest rendition with no unnecessary flourish), Virginia gubernatorial hopeful Ken Cuccinelli gets the first enthusiastic applause of the morning.
As it happens, Mr. Cuccinelli, the current attorney general and possibly future governor of Virginia, is not a friend of science. In fact, his history of persecution of scientists is downright creepy. It essentially sends the message that investigators at public universities should continuously look over their shoulders, for the fear that they, and their institutions, can be subjected to witch hunts, if their discoveries inconvenience politicians.
And of course, once the conference got underway, they took potshots at science for the fun of it. We already know Senator Marco Rubio’s views on climate science, and he had this to say at CPAC:
“The people who are closed-minded in our society are the ones who love to preach about climate science” but ignore that “science has proven that life begins at conception.”
Mind to give up a peer-reviewed source for the latter statement, Senator? As it happens, the kind of “logic” was precisely what was used under the Bush administration to freeze funding for stem cell research.
The other star of the show was the creationist neurosurgeon Ben Carson, who is apparently looking at a second career as a conservative politician. Carson, a Seventh Day Adventist, is a brilliant neurosurgeon, but when it comes to biological science his ignorance is breathtaking, and that is directly because of his religious beliefs.
And young conservatives weren’t any better in dealing with climate science.
Which is in marked contrast to young people’s scientific literacy otherwise.
As I have said before, much as Michael Shermer may disagree, there is truly an asymmetry in the political spectrum when it comes to science denial. It is hard to imagine the liberal, with all their flaw, have a freak show like this.
But there is another angle to the story, which people at CPAC likely wouldn’t care to hear. There is evidence that this kind of attitude is already hurting them politically.
Silicon Valley helped turn Obama’s “Yes We Can” into “Yes We Code” this year. And as the campaigns’ veils of secrecy have slowly lifted since the election, it has become clear Republican contender Mitt Romney’s campaign was technologically outclassed, culminating in the spectacular Election Day meltdown of its get-out-the-vote program.
One huge problem for the Republicans: Not only is Silicon Valley overwhelmingly Democratic, but the values, beliefs and culture of the valley often seem incompatible with some of the current stances of the GOP.
“We all work on evidence-based reasoning, and that’s much more of a Democratic mindset than a Republican mindset,” said Johnvey Hwang, 34, a San Francisco software engineer who volunteered with the Obama campaign. “It’s hard to side with a party that’s still trying to reach out to their base of creationists.”
Or denying the contribution of humans to climate change, or opposing embryonic stem cell research. The list goes on.
Republicans, of course, are not willing to admit their hostility to science is costing them.
Veteran California GOP consultant Kevin Spillane, however, said the idea of a “Republican war on science” is just “hype.”
“The problem is in some ways more fundamental. … It has to do with a worldview,” he said. “Technologists are often single, socially moderate-to-liberal, much more secular than the population as a whole, and those demographics are a problem for the Republican Party right now.”
As said in the opening of the post, it were hype. But the list of speakers at CPAC and attitude of those in attendance doesn’t leave much room for doubt. But for Mr. Spillane blaming secularism, he does have a point: those who are scientifically minded tend to be more secular.
Not that this is going to help Republicans any.
UPDATE: If you need further evidence on Republican stance on science, here it is.
