He is doing what they want. You perceive that as destroying America, which is why you didn't vote for him. But they think that this is good for the country. Polls suggest that they would return him to office a third time, given the chance.
(and just to preempt the inevitable "both sides" whataboutism - no, my quarrel is currently with the party currently and rapidly destroying our country)
The simple answer is that they are corrupt and want to be authortarians with complete control and dumbing the population goes a long way to that goal. So is controlling the "truth"
Why don't people retract their Representatives for not representing them?
An innumerable amount of hurt has been borne by 'good' people that hung in there when they should have walked away.
Previously discussed on HN,
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36531485 ("How the great firewall of China detects and blocks fully encrypted traffic [pdf] (gfw.report)" — 285 comments)
kashunstva•9mo ago
While I no longer live in the U.S. and would never return, I grew up there & did benefit enormously from access to public academic institutions and to the Federal grants in science research that allowed them to thrive. Seeing this whole apparatus dismantled and sold-off for scrap is beyond sad. Finally the party that has striven for so long, since at least the late 1950s, to eliminate public education - and perhaps the whole academic enterprise is on the verge of achieving results beyond its wildest imagination. I hope that they are satisfied now; but doubt they are.
bitxbitxbitcoin•9mo ago
bboygravity•9mo ago
I get that it's what media are screaming at the top of their lungs (orange man bad etc), but there must be more behind this, no?
Then again, they did put JFK jr. in charge of making infectious disease research impossible. I couldnt think of a worse person for that or politics in general.
natbennett•9mo ago
ipython•9mo ago
This is my frustration - there is clearly no plan, but smart people will assume that there must be one, because they bring their own biases of how they approach problems and project that onto trump.
matwood•9mo ago
jfengel•9mo ago
So no, I don't think there is any kind of strategy beyond "cut any budget item that my constituents don't care about, especially if it makes liberals angry".
rat87•9mo ago
deepsun•9mo ago
The question is still open whether it actually saves the announced sums, or whether it saves anything at all.
adra•9mo ago
avs733•9mo ago
I feel like “don’t make them follow policy” and “we’re going to lie about the access they have” is pretty telling as to whether there’s more behind this
shermantanktop•9mo ago
dmvdoug•9mo ago
pl_trw•9mo ago
The spread of opinions in a mathematics department on social issues should reflect the general populations. Yet the few foolish enough to express conservative views can expect to be terminated.
I hope the next generation of institution builders keep this lesson in mind: you need buy in from all tax payers when you're spending their money.
Edit: Responses in this thread give me little hope for American academia correcting course before it is destroyed. One can hope something better comes from its ashes.
matwood•9mo ago
mindslight•9mo ago
nemo•9mo ago
jltsiren•9mo ago
For example, conservatives tend to prioritize wages and stability when making career choices. Liberals are more likely to choose jobs that are inherently interesting but don't pay that well relative to the risk. If you let people make their own choices, liberals are more likely to try to become professors. And once a profession becomes associated with a particular group, people outside the dominant group may be reluctant to enter it, as they may be afraid they wouldn't fit in.
If you find that problematic, you could try to fight it with regulation. For example, you could institute quotas. Maybe 40% of all software engineers in every company must be female and 40% of all nurses in every hospital must be male. That may even work if there are enough qualified candidates available. But if the pool of candidates is already skewed, quotas can be a recipe for disaster.
If regulation is a too blunt tool, you may get better results with programs that encourage underrepresented groups to enter a field. You could have support networks for conservative professors, female software engineers and male nurses. You could have outreach programs targeting kids in those groups. And you could prioritize them in education and recruitment.
Vilian•9mo ago
The only course that need to be corrected is the one destroying it right now, any other issue you pointed out is straight up anti-intelictualist