Re: <nettime> Why I won't support the March for Science

[Felix Stalder <felix@openflows.com>]

On 2017-04-25 13:49, Florian Cramer wrote:

> In other words, if anti-scientific populism is one (right-wing) hell,
> evidence-based policies and regulations is the other
> (neoliberal-technocratic) hell.

This a more double-edged sword. I remember lots of policy discussions
and proposals in the area of copyright where a central demand was to be
more evidence-based, meaning the copyright maximalists should provide
evidence that an extension of copyright would benefits artists. Or, the
other way round, that the overwhelming evidence that it doesn't should
be taken into account. of course, it wasn't.

So, yes, evidence-based an contribute to the over expanding nightmare of
neo-liberal quantification and micro-management, but the enemy here
should be neo-liberalism, not evidence..


On 2017-04-25 11:34, Eric Kluitenberg wrote:

> Let’s march for the politicisation of science!

I'm not sure about this. I don't think we should politicize science,
that is, make it depended on the demands for particular outcomes. We
already have may too much of that thanks to corporate/military funding.

However, we should bring the scientists and the way the speak for, say,
the ozon layer, into politics. Latour has been talking about this for
years with his Parliament of Things and all of this.

Felix


-- 

 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| http://felix.openflows.com
 |OPEN PGP: 056C E7D3 9B25 CAE1 336D 6D2F 0BBB 5B95 0C9F F2AC

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: