Relative-activism

“It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities to give validity to his convictions in political affairs.”
-Albert Einstein

the amount of latent or non-existent activism there is amongst the chemistry student body has always bothered me. you’ll be hard-pressed to find a chemistry grad student picketing at a human rights march. i can name a a few people who are actually intimidated by the teaching assistant student union recruiters.

i refuse to believe - however - that this aversion to activism is an inherent quality you will find in the minds of any scientist. i’ve been pondering over this behavior and came up with a theory (scientific process…it works, bitches): that this reluctance to take part in humanist endeavors outside of academia stems from preexisting stigma revolving around the scientific community and it’s past involvement in what can only be considered “anti”-humanistic projects. after all, in an otherwise altruistic endeavor to probe the correlation between time, matter and energy, Einstein’s discoveries were ultimately used (and - to quite a few people - remembered solely) as a tool of war rather than a key to understanding. in light of this, i think it’s popular for most students (and professors) to disregard the repercussions of their work. or the fact that there is a market for such work in the first place. after all, Einstein was fully aware of the horrors his research ultimately saw through, and it haunted him until his dying day. that’s not to say that all academic thought is purely philanthropic; some would gladly turn a blind eye to the rest of the world in lieu of a six-figure sum (corporate mentality).

but about those of us who aren’t vain, inconsiderate assholes (bitter)… are we scared? are we scared of being labeled as hypocrites? can a synthetic chemist who works for big pharma be an active proponent of universal health care? (answer: yes…and yes…..and also, yes).

throughout history, significant scientific discoveries have either been vehemently shunned or shamelessly exploited. i - myself - saw this pattern as a caveat and to get myself involved in research that would be the least likely to make me ashamed of my field (organic photovoltaics can be used to power soldiers’ tents in iraq, sure, but my guess is that it will benefit modern society much more significantly). for all other chemists, engineers, biologists, etc. i think it’s imperative that they not stifle their moral beliefs; otherwise i fear that the process of discovery will always allow itself to be dictated by the greed of investors instead of the passion for knowledge.
activism is about change; science is about change. i know an effin’ creationist biologist with the chutzpah to continue their research in lieu of their moral beliefs; but at least it provides a different perspective. to hell with being a hypocrite. think like you wanna.

as a reminder: i still plan on starting a bar with my PhD. (haaaaaaa).