Why Scientists Shouldn’t Be Apolitical
The 2017 March for Science was the first time in my life that I felt seen.
I’ve always been politically aware. I mean, I minored in political science while majoring in chemical engineering at Rutgers University! But to me, local politics shaped much of my childhood and formative years.
But before that march, I felt like I had to suppress my political side as a scientist. And I felt like I had to suppress my scientific side as a political activist.
I never saw my two worlds collide until then.
And when it did, I felt like everything I had hoped for for the scientific community has started to come to fruition. Now, scientists are more aware, even if they’re not activists. And many are unafraid to speak up and speak out when they see injustices in the world.
It’s beautiful to see.
In my debut book, Necessary Symbiosis: What Happens When Science and Government Work Together (and When They Don’t), I argue why scientists should become politically active and why they won’t lose credibility because of their activism.
Below is an excerpt from my eighth chapter (formatted for Medium). Enjoy!
I believe that politics affects many aspects of daily life, even science. Politics dictates which policymakers and their aides are in charge. Policymakers then dictate which policies are passed, edited, or removed. That means that scientists cannot afford to be apolitical.
Therefore, scientists should become more politically involved. They are already passionate about their research. Just ask any scientist about their research, and we will create a whole course on it. But that passion needs to translate from scientists to the general public to build momentum, increase community outreach, develop better science education policies, and increase federal funding for all kinds of research projects.
Community outreach can help scientists persuade community residents that the research will translate to better policies that directly affect them. Perhaps then, the residents will lobby for scientists. Maybe the residents will help the school districts develop better science education curricula because they understand the importance of basic science education and how that is the foundation for current research projects. Or the residents could even lobby local, state, and federal governments to increase funding for the research projects because they understand how those projects impact their daily life.
The March for Science coordinators know that many of the goals they have will be achieved if non-scientists as well as scientists are passionate about science. It all starts there.
I’m lucky because both my parents are in the STEM fields — Mom is a pure mathematician and Dad is a programmer. So, my love for all things science comes from my parents’ love for learning. They’ve always encouraged that love. When I had a big horse phase, back when I was seven or eight and wanted to be a vet, they didn’t stymie that curiosity even though horses were everywhere: in the books I checked out of the library, in my drawings, in my writing. Each one of my phases were encouraged whenever we went to the library to check out books. And they answered every question they could or told me to find out the answer myself through research.
When they no longer understood what I was researching, we switched roles. I would answer their questions and teach them about my research. When I defended my master’s thesis in August 2017, my parents were there for the public portion of the defense, asking questions and providing support.
Passion for science doesn’t mean that everyone has to understand everything. To me, it just means a love for learning and an openness to change your beliefs.
Another example of science advocacy is Greta Thunberg, a young teenager from Sweden who started a climate change movement by herself. She spoke at the United Nations and scolded the leaders for not doing enough on climate change to protect the planet for future generations like herself. And in September 2019, she inspired millions of people to strike for climate change. Political leaders respond to pressure, and her movement got the world to listen and start taking more actions.(1)
In the US, a 2019 poll found that more than 75 percent of Americans consider climate change a major problem, which is forcing climate change deniers, many of them on the Republican side of the aisle, to take notice. “In an interview with the Washington Examiner, Republican House minority leader Kevin McCarthy acknowledged that his party ‘should be a little bit nervous’ about changing attitudes on climate.”(2)
One girl in a raincoat forced many people to listen to those who have been saying that climate change is a problem for a long time. That level of passion for climate change is admirable. Imagine what celebrating other people with similar passion for different areas of science would do to make this world a better place for everyone.
Over the next weeks, I’ll be sharing excerpts and stories from my book, Necessary Symbiosis, in this article series. My book Necessary Symbiosis: What Happens When Science and Government Work Together (and When They Don’t) is available here: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08PW4XP38. If you want to connect, find me on Twitter (@KarraVyshnavi), Instagram (@karravyshnavi, @necessarysymbiosis), and at www.vyshnavikarra.com.
(1) Charlotte Alter et al., “TIME 2019 Person of the Year: Greta Thunberg,” Time, accessed September 2020.
(2) Ibid.
