Science In The Political Crosshairs

Undermining Democracy and Eroding Scientific Integrity

A. J. Li

THE POLITICISATION OF SCIENCE has marred the reputation of what was once a beacon for objectivity and empirical investigation. It has become increasingly more common for science to become entangled in a web of political agendas, with identical sets of data often being cherry-picked and misconstrued to paint two pictures, each the antithesis of the other. This unpleasant melange of science and politics has far-reaching implications, weakening the very foundations of democracy while simultaneously compromising the credibility and progress of scientific research. Do we now live in an age where science has metamorphosed into the most powerful form of propaganda?

Some of the most topical issues in political and scientific discourse currently are those that grapple with environmentalism. The Left often advocate for more progressive policies, exaggerating scientific studies and modest figures to draw urgency to their cause and justify their position of a higher moral ground. Stories of mass ocean extinctions, to exponential increases in air pollution from forest fires, paint an apocalyptic future for humanity and the ecosystem. More often than not, these alarming concerns claim to be backed by scientific models. But this is not entirely true. Many of these scientific models, while certainly drawing upon data collected at the present, do not have the capacity to predict with great accuracy, events that are sometimes centuries in the future. These apocalyptic events are often predictions based on gross extrapolations of data that also fall prey to predicting a future that gets too hot, too fast. 

Indeed, U.N. Climate  Report authors have repeatedly stated that researchers should avoid drawing conclusions from such alarmist models out of fear of undermining credibility for climate change research. The engagement in fear mongering by the Left through the use of exaggerated and cherry-picked models is, in the end, not conducive to fostering productive discourse and solution finding, instead, resulting in science falling prey to partisan interests.

On the other end of the political spectrum, the Right are often accused of dismissing or downplaying scientific findings when they contradict their positions. Indeed, it is not uncommon to find conservative politicians expressing scepticism surrounding climate change, if not outright denying it – ostensibly using science to justify their conclusions. Perhaps one of the most perpetuated ideas by the Right is that climate change is natural and normal, having occurred at many other times in history. This is often backed up by a graph that depicts periodic rises and falls in the atmospheric carbon dioxide level throughout history.

Such arguments are often easily dismissed simply upon further analysis of the actual data. For example, the graph above clearly shows a sharp spike far higher than previous peaks in history occurring  right now. There is no doubt that humans are emitting greenhouse gases like CO₂ at a rate far higher than ever before, yet many conservatives continue to express scepticism and seemingly prefer to swim in an ocean of complacency, revealing an ultimate level of hypocrisy which destroys the credibility of science.

What is most concerning, however, is that all these scientific studies aim to draw attention and elucidate real issues to humanity. Yet they can be so misconstrued so as to act as fuel and propaganda for both sides of the political spectrum. This highlights a grave issue for democracy where this politicisation undermines the very foundations upon which it was built. If science can be manipulated to propagate a certain agenda through the dissemination of false or non-contextualised evidence, this impedes the ability for individuals to make well informed decisions and compromises the democratic principle of a well-informed electorate. Those in power need only to disseminate the most alarming or virtuous scientific evidence in order to remain in power, purely due to the perceived objectivity of science, thus further weakening the democratic process.

This then leads to the erosion of scientific integrity itself. The intrusion of political interests into the scientific domain poses a significant risk to the integrity of scientific research. Pressure to produce results that align with certain ideologies can lead to biased studies and the misrepresentation or suppression of inconvenient data. Such practices erode the very essence of scientific inquiry, which is based on unbiased observation, experimentation, and peer review. The disturbing outcome is that science will be relegated to the back of human progress should this politicisation continue to run rampant, and blur the line between fact and fiction. If science no longer endeavours to truthfully answer humanity’s questions and work towards the betterment of humanity, then what purpose does it serve?

It is hard to envision a world where science is untangled and distilled from politics back into its purest form of progress, yet it cannot stand that science be reduced to another form of propaganda for the masses.