The Growing Tide of Anti-Intellectualism

There is an undeniable, politically-supported growth of denial — and even hatred — of learning, facts, and the educated. Greed (and, most likely, fear of minorities) feeds demagoguery. Demagoguery can lead to harmful policies and thereafter to mob actions.

I’ve written on this topic here before. I also have cited an excellent essay from Scientific American about how the rising tide of anti-intellectualism threatens our democracy and future (you should read it).

What prompts this post is a recent article about a thinly-veiled political probe of the National Science Foundation, combined with the pending national election in the US. (Some of these issues apply elsewhere in the world, but this is a US-centric post.)

This view is also reinforced by my current experience — I am on a combined speaking tour and family vacation in Poland. I recently visited a memorial to the Katyn massacre, remembering when Soviet NKVD killed 22,000 captured Poles, many of whom were included because they were educated “intelligentsia.” Later today, I am visiting Auschwitz-Birkenau, where intellectuals were taken as well as Jews, Romani, the handicapped, and other undesirables, over a million of whom were subsequently executed. The Cambodian killing fields were filled with the bodies of educators, scientists, and doctors — even simply people who wore glasses — and their families, because they were viewed as enemies of the ruling belief system who could point out inconvenient facts and fallacies in the pronouncements of the leaders. History is filled with examples of shuttering of universities, burning of books, banning of lectures, and mass executions of the educated. The death sentence on Socrates is a canonical example of the problem.

I will admit to my own partisan (in the US) leaning here — which is steadily increasing as I observe prior cutbacks to NASA, NSF and basic science (e.g., here), claiming made-up medical evidence to attack women’s health choice issues (e.g., this and this), denial of climate change (e.g., here), denial of evolution, attacks against the EPA in favor of big-money polluters, promoting incorrect history books in for secondary school education, rhetoric about shutting down the Department of Education, perpetuating predatory student loan rates and other examples.

There is a clear and growing bias against education and even basic facts, primarily promoted by the GOP. Worse, they are finding widespread social support for these biases. Hiding behind claims of saving taxpayer money (so it can be spent on the military) and promoting religious freedoms (but in practice, only a select set of religions) has become their standard practice; those involved who don’t promote it either tolerate it or attempt to justify it. by picking a few counter-examples or cases of ignorance by other political entities.

For instance, if you read the above examples and were mentally making a list of “That citation is biased” or “All politicians are equally bad” or “But what about when that Democrat said….” then you are almost certainly part of the problem — denying the bigger picture by cherry-picking counterexamples. I won’t debate individual items, because that is to ignore the very clear overall pattern.

Socially, we are seeing the impact — for example, the popularity of Fox “News” stories that continue to present false information, candidates who are lying publicly despite being called out on it because the electorate doesn’t respond (Colbert’s “Truthiness” was a brilliant way of labeling this), the rise of one-issue deniers….

The recent scare-mongering and reactions to the spread of Ebola shows a combination ignorance of science, a political motivation (the GOP claims to want an “Ebola Czar” to make it look like they are doing something, but has been blocking the appointment of a Surgeon General and cutting funds to NIH for years), and even a racial component (1 death and 2 infections in the US is a crisis; thousands dying every week in West Africa merits not a mention).

Another case of malleable facts for political ends? Arguments for voter ID laws are specious and even evil (a veteran GOP US judge called it), but are being justified by made up facts so as to help keep voters disenfranchised who might threaten GOP candidates. (Look at the history of such laws — they are always proposed and passed in GOP-led state legislatures).

I don’t mean to condemn everyone who leans towards the Republicans, nor am I absolving any Democrats of their many peccadillos and faults. Politics tends to breed a certain level of corruption, and people with nuanced views are often unelectable.

However, I am deeply concerned with the direction in which we are headed, spearheaded by one political party, where dumb is considered “statesmanlike,” facts are inconvenient, religious mythology trumps science, and any observation of this is treated as if all views are equally valid. As Neil DeGrasse Tyson is alleged to have responded when creationists demanded equal time to present their view after the airing of Cosmos: A Space-Time Odyssey on TV: “You don’t talk about the spherical Earth with NASA, and then say let’s give equal time to the flat Earthers. Science is not there for you to cherry pick.”

Beliefs may be equal, but science and history are not “beliefs.” You can choose your beliefs, but you cannot choose facts.

If you have read this far, you are likely educated and capable of thought. You should be concerned about the trends, too. Don’t buy in to “All political parties are the same” because some research into this issue will reveal they are not, at least on this topic. Don’t excuse anti-intellectualism as simply “ conflict of competing belief systems.” Understand it for what is is. Speak out about it. If you are a fan of the GOP’s views on smaller government, immigration, or defense — fine, speak out in GOP forums on issues of science and truth, and make those a priority in your decision-making.

Perhaps more importantly, vote. Urge others to vote. Support candidates of any party who do not deny science, do not belittle education, do not make up their own version of the facts. Get others to vote, and educate them about the candidates. We want the smartest, best-educated people leading the world — not the dumbest, most biased, and most dishonest. Don’t vote solely by political party, although I encourage you to think about the above pattern if you don’t have any other information at hand.

Pastor Martin Niemoller is credited with the famous saying “First they came for the Sociaists, and I did not speak out….Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me.” Let us not be the ones left, for whom there is no one left to speak. Let us seek to ensure that our descendants live in a world where knowledge is valued, truth — even difficult truth — is sought, and idiots are not given public acclaim.

And don’t forget to vote!

(Update: a few hours after I originally posted this, Borowitz came up with an appropriate news parody article in the New Yorker.)

Another kind of attack on science

A few months ago, I wrote about some of my concerns with anti-science behaviors and beliefs. I received several responses I did not approve for posting, from people who displayed the same ignorant biases I wrote about. I received only a few items in support. That may be a reflection of my readership, or it could be further evidence of the problem.

In the months since then we have had a number of things pop up that have reinforced my concerns. One example was the amendment  introduced by Senator Coburn to the Federal budget that curtailed some of the funding for the NSF in social sciences. Another is the recent indication that Representative Smith is trying to change the fundamental mechanisms of funding for NSF to exclude science he (or his political cronies) don’t understand or don’t like. Many other bloggers have written about the attacks on science, such as this one in Slate.

There is now news of a much more insidious attack, and one that represents both the increasing cultural hostility towards inquisitiveness and extreme paranoia about “terrorism.” See this article and this article for an overview of the details. In summary, a young woman tried an ad hoc chemistry experiment, based on something she viewed online. An older version of this would have been putting baking soda into vinegar; this version was some toilet cleanser and aluminum foil. It basically popped the container it was in. Some school administrator saw this and called the police. She was charged with felonies similar to what one might use against a terrorist, and expelled from school — all for something that most of us have done as children.

There is a petition open at on this issue. I have signed it. I encourage you to consider also signing.

However, I went a step further and sent email to three of the decision makers in the process: the school principal (Ronald Pritchard), the school superintendent (John Stewart), and the Polk County Sheriff (Grady Judd). My letter is enclosed. You might wish to send your own letters. Or not.

[Update: the email address for Grady Judd does not appear to work any more.]

My letter:

From: Eugene H. Spafford <>
Date: May 2, 2013
Subject: What a terrible message you are sending….

Gentlemen, I am a senior faculty member at Purdue University. I hold patents and international awards for my research. I have been an advisor to the President of the US and testified before Congress.

As a child I was interested in science, particularly in chemistry. I conducted ad hoc experiments in my yard, and via my school. Those activities encouraged me to ask “why” and investigate further, leading to a career of science-based activities.

What you have shown, with your blind application of law and regulations to Mr. Kiera Wilmot, is not only a significant lack of common sense, but a lack of appreciation for curiosity and initiative. This was not a case of someone with a handgun shooting up the school, or creating an explosive device out of a pressure cooker. It was a young girl trying (perhaps unwisely) an experiment she found online. This is barely different from experimenting with combining baking soda and vinegar in a pill bottle — something you yourself may have done as children.

Ms. Wilmot’s curiosity suggests potential for a future in a STEM discipline — and our country (and the world) need more experts in these fields. Ms. Wilmot, as a minority female, is especially rare among my colleagues in the sciences. Your actions not only may quash her interests, but serve as a severe inhibitor of curiosity by any other young people in your area. Rather than being educators and promoting your community, you are serving to stamp out curiosity, ambition, and learning.

Your proper course of action would have been to explain to Ms.Wilmot the dangers of trying such experiments without permission (and presumably, without safety considerations, such as goggles), and then used the incident as a teaching opportunity for her and her peers. Not only would you have deflected other such ad hoc activities, but you would have been directly addressing your mission of education…if indeed that is the mission you see for Polk schools.

Simply stated, you have overreacted in the extreme and made yourselves the butt of pointed comments around the world. You have also hurt that young woman and her future, and initiated a ripple of damage to your community. Shame on you.

You still have an opportunity to make things right: rescind the expulsion order, drop all legal charges, and make an effort to encourage Ms. Wilmot’s interest in science, rather than to punish her for curiosity.

Eugene H. Spafford, Ph.D., Sc.D
Professor and Executive Director
Fellow of the AAAS, ACM, IEEE, ISC^2, ISSA

Disclaimer: Purdue University is listed for identification purposes only. My opinions do not necessarily represent any official or public position of the university or any of its personnel other than myself.

Paranoia or Pattern Recognition?

Last year, I wrote this post about the increasing danger posed by fundamentalism in the U.S.A. — not Islamic fundamentalism, but so-called Christian fundamentalism, and its threat to science. (And here are some supporting thoughts published via Scientific American and the UK Guardian.)

This morning, as I finished my second gallon of coffee :-), this post set me off: Blind, severely disabled boy forced to take standardized test. That was on top of the news from yesterday that Senator Coburn had finally succeeded in getting one of his attacks against NSF included in a funding bill.

I can’t help but wonder if these kinds of things aren’t continuing salvos in a deeper agenda — one that not all of itds supporters may have even thought about. Then again, maybe I’m feeling especially paranoid and caffinated today, but….

First, think about the ideological attacks on public school teachers as moochers and incompetent (think: Wisconsin as a glaring example, and here’s a good explanation of the phenomenon). The thrust of these efforts is to drive their pay and benefits so low that the profession is completely unattractive to anyone with competence (let alone, excellence). Coupled with this are passage of laws that threaten their pensions and prevent them from using unions to resist.

More or less concurrently, the laws have been set up to penalize schools based on testing — forcing every student to take tests that they are set up to fail, thus depressing the scores to provide “proof” that public schools are “failing.” (As an aside, if only we had similar evaluation of the legislators passing these laws based on scores rather than financed, partisan elections…..)

Another step is to open up voucher programs and make them easy to get for parents who want to opt out of public schools. This further erodes the resources for public schooling. It also boosts the attendance at schools that teach crap creationist “science” and revisionist history (think: the fairy tales that Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin spout). The adults educated as children in these schools will almost certainly tend to vote for the know-nothings who are engineering the destruction of real education, and will want their own children to attend these New World madrassas rather than be exposed to reality.

So goes the spiral as secular, scientific, reason-based education circles the drain.

Couple this with the mantra of “must eliminate the debt and big government” that are used as excuses to cut research (Senator Coburn’s vendetta against NSF is one example, and shuttering NASA programs another), cut early education and child support, continually reduce higher education support and scholarships, and block appointment of any Federal judges many of whom show evidence of understanding separation of church and state,… hmmm, what else? Concentrate the wealth and thus much of the political power in the hands of an elite that are largely separated from average people. Mix in the advocacy of increased military spending. Paint Islam and China as looming threats. Extrapolate from those data points, and many more you can add in.

Let’s see. Cut away at good secular education, deny advanced education for any but the dogmatic, undercut chances at economic freedom, the privileged are “more equal than others because they work harder,” promote an agenda of extreme ideals, and beat the drum for “vigilance” against heretical foes. What comes to mind? Orwell’s 1984, Nazi Germany, the early Soviet Union, North Korea… and the USA of 25-35 years from now? Foster ignorance, economic stagnation, and rabid ideology, and it is simple to move to totalitarian control.

All this is coming from one end of the US political spectrum, and one political party. Is it surprising to anyone if they might have delusions of the US as a sectarian military power dominating the world with their ideals? If not, ask yourself — what threatens that vision? What is “under attack” according to their rhetoric? How could they change the U.S. to be more suitable to their view of domination? And is that inconsistent with what has been happening?

Am I getting all that from 1 report of insane rules overapplied to a child in Florida? Nope. But I’ve seen so much of this in the last few years, and especially this week (the Coburn move against NSF being the most irritating) that, coupled with too much coffee, here’s my rant.

I can guess at some of the people who will read this far and who will denigrate everything about it. Sadly, those people are almost certainly aligned with the ones helping perpetrate the decline, perhaps even without thinking about where it all might lead. The most dogmatic are the ones who are most easily misled and who most quickly rise to their defense.

If we care, we need to push back. Push back against Senator Coburn, and Governor Scott Walker, and Reps. Paul Ryan and Michele Bachmann, and all the other demagogues who would happily push us into the world of The Handmaid’s Tale.

Even if I’m not paranoid it doesn’t mean that the know-nothings aren’t out to destroy all teaching of science and history they don’t like (which the rest of us can call “reality” for short). It doesn’t mean they won’t try to push their religious views on us. And it doesn’t mean they won’t seek to hobble — economically and politically — everyone who doesn’t agree with them.

All it takes for those ideals to win out is for the rest of us to allow those demagogues to keep getting elected and spouting their nonsense on radio and TV without correction (e.g., that “reality” stuff). Does it matter to you, or are @lolcats, “The Batchelor” and “Jersey Shore” all you really care about? Based on response from three different classes this week, less than 10% of even the best educated are bothering to keep up with the news — they didn’t know about the cyberattacks in South Korea, that the President was in Israel, that China had elected a new premier, the financial crisis in Cyprus…. but wow, several of them certainly knew about who was on “Dancing with the Stars” and which teams were in the NCAA basketball tournament. I’m beginning to wonder if the forces of ignorance have not already won. 😦

The Road to a New Dark Age in the US

This rant was triggered by a news article. I posted a link to it in my Twitter feed. I received several fatuous, smug responses. The combination prompted me to write what follows. We’ll get to the article eventually.

Consider that the US led the world in science and technology for decades. We created atomic power, put humans on the moon and in the deepest ocean trenches, we discovered the most fundamental subatomic particles, and have imaged the most distant galaxies. We have constructed immense skyscrapers, we communicate with light, and we can predict (usually) the weather. We can put almost the entire sum of recorded human knowledge on charged bits of silicon, and calculate with numbers larger than the number of atoms in the universe. We can take apart cells and put them together again to form new ones, and we have extended our average lifespan by decades through improved medicine. Working with others around the world, we have eradicated terrible scourges (smallpox) and nearly eliminated others (polio, the Guinea Worm). We have done amazing things, and there is more yet to be done than we have barely imagined.

We have accomplished all this through engineering, technology and especially science: the process of forming hypotheses, conducting experiments to verify or refute them, and then refining those same hypotheses. All of science is theoretical, in the sense that all theories are open to refinement when we obtain new data. Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation was simply a theory with lots of confirmation of the usual case, which was refined when Einstein came along. The atomic model of matter is a theory, and it is refined and retested with each new means to break apart atoms to find constituent parts. The “Luminiferous Aether” was a theory for light propagation until Michelson and Morley’s experiment showed it to be false. The “four humors” was a theory of medicine before we began to understand biology.

Science is based on theories. Theories with massive bodies of repeated experiment and confirmation are often labeled “laws” but are still theories. The Law of Gravity is actually a theory. So is the Theory of Evolution. Both have undergone repeated trials by independent experiment, with the results very critically analyzed by others. Those theories have been confirmed again and again by the vast majority of trained observers. That is how science advances. We construct experiments to test our theories, and each successful experiment confirms its associated theory a little more, while each unsuccessful experiment drives us to ask “why?” and seek further refinement. If there is something that cannot be tested by experiment, then it is not something that can be known to science — it is not a verifiable fact, and can only be supported by belief.

Human advancement stumbles when ideology trumps knowledge. We refer to a period in the past in Europe as “the Dark Ages” as a time when inquiry was constrained by religious dogma; it is no accident that what followed was called the Enlightenment, a word we also use for gaining knowledge. During those dark ages, learning was treated with suspicion, and those who accomplished what the common person did not understand were sometimes killed as witches or tortured by religious authorities, seeking to make them “repent.” Lysenkoism in the Soviet Union crippled agricultural development and biological research for decades, as well as resulted in the death of many leading scientists in prisons, and their work destroyed. Whether it was the destruction of the House of Wisdom by the Mongols, the Nazis burning books that did not support their ideology, the Catholic Church’s censoring knowledge with the Index Librorum Prohibitorum, or any of hundreds of other major acts of suppression of knowledge — including extremes such as the mass genocide of the educated in Cambodia’s killing fields by the Khmer Rouge — darkness is brought about by those who would suppress knowledge, education, and inquiry.

It is no surprise that many of our nation’s leaders are focusing on increasing STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering & Math) research and education, both to keep our economy competitive, but as a matter of national security. The US has been losing ground in these fields, as has been pointed out time and again in major studies (two of which are the Rising Above the Gathering Storm report, and its successor). Our ability to compete as a nation, to meet future economic challenges, to improve our health care, and to maintain our national defense all depend on our ability to innovate, and that requires education and scientific advances based on inquiry unfettered by superstition and myth.

So, given the proven history of scientific advancement (and the grim negative examples), and the obvious needs for foundational aspects of that advancement in education and infrastructure, it should be clear that it should be a national priority, right?

Well, no. We have seen a rising political movement over the last few decades, and it is destructive, yet not often mentioned by those in positions of leadership. After all, angering religious fanatics who are sure they have the blessings of heaven and who are unswayed by logic or reason is not without its vexations. Yet, to be silent is to let the darkness increase.

What darkness?

The darkness of ignorance and the unbending dogma of those who are united in their belief: science is wrong, facts are not to be believed, religion is the overriding (or only) truth. This is a growing problem that we have seen get worse over the last few decades. It has been obviously manifest in the last few national elections, and only becomes more pressing.

We have increasing numbers of the population denying evolution, refusing to acknowledge climate change, avoiding immunizations (and thereby endangering the rest of the population as the “herd immunity” is lost), and similar while being openly contemptuous of scholarship and scholars. Denial of foundational science in biology, physics, and geology is frequently made. And it has probably had a side-effect on our public, a significant fraction of whom don’t know (for example) that New Mexico is part of the US, cannot name a single Supreme Court justice, don’t know the difference between Iran and Iraq (and don’t even begin to ask about Sunni vs. Shia), have no idea how to figure a 17% tip, and many of whom think the Sun orbits the Earth! After all, when some facts are hotly denied, why bother learning any? (Although, to be fair, this great public ignorance may well be the cause of an increasingly dogmatic population, and not the effect.) It will cripple future generations if they are prevented from learning things known to be true, especially in the sciences. That was Bill Nye’s message, too, that has caused some controversy by those who fail — or refuse — to understand it.

From a public policy perspective, this trend is leading to (directly and indirectly) cutting funds for research, cutting funding for public universities, cutting back on student aid, vilifying teachers, and even threatening Big Bird (PBS). The adherents clamor for vouchers and home schooling so they can perpetuate their ignorance and superstition. (To be fair, some vouchers and home schooling is intended to provide a quality alternative to underfunded public schools; this is a feedback loop.) It is an anti-intellectual movement that has been encouraged by some demagogues, primarily in one political party, because they have sought to use the votes for influence, but it has further emboldened the fringe elements. Heck, even an official with the campaign staff for their candidate for President said that facts don’t matter, and one state’s party convention adopted a position against critical thinking! This all evidences actual contempt for knowledge. (There are many more examples, including many with our 43rd President, but this post is already too long.)

Want more evidence? Take a look at this news article. Go ahead, I’ll wait. Yes, this is the one that started me off on this. 🙂

This guy is running for reelection, unopposed in a district that includes a major university — the University of Georgia (as a Georgia Tech alumnus, I will forego some obvious comments), so this is even more disheartening.

Note especially that Rep Broun is on the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. So is Todd Akin, the fellow in Missouri who made the incredibly inane comments about women not getting pregnant from “legitimate rape.” These are only two of many such people that our fellow citizens somehow think are qualified to represent them, but are overtly nescient. They are among the leadership and oversight, making decisions on our national programs of science and technology. Is it any wonder that, the rest of the world is gaining on us as a nation? There are many more like these folks running for office in national, state and local races, too.

Of course, this phenomenon is not limited to the U.S., nor to only one religion, nor only at this time. We have seen instances of the Taliban destroying buildings, burning schools and books, and killing others who do not share their beliefs. We see news of Ultra Orthodox Jews in Israel pushing restrictions on those who do not share their beliefs. We see stories of clashes with some militant Hindu nationalists. All of the holy wars and crusades, the Inquisition, and the destruction of many civilizations because the populations were “heathen” are indicia of the tradition of suppression of any knowledge but their own. Despite this history, there are almost no places in the world where so many people actively seek to degrade and deny science and science education as in the U.S. now; in many places, such as China, Korea and Russia, they are doing everything they can to promote education, and it shows in their growing capabilities.

Actually, the parallels are really quite obvious if you look for them. We have many religions where fundamentalist adherents believe their holy writ is direct from above, their particular religion is the only “correct” one, their holy book and leaders are infallible and unquestionable, they send their children to religious schools to ensure they are brainwashed educated without exposure to open inquiry and secular thought — or perhaps to be schooled only in their religious texts — and they believe there is no question that the government’s laws should support their point of view — after all, theirs are the views of heaven! Our U.S. fundamentalists are ideologic twins of those in the Muslim world who want to roll their countries back to the 13th century caliphate, with the major difference being that those in the US are not believers in Islam. Yet, make these comparisons and you will get strong pushback (from both sides)– after all, the adherents of that other religion (whatever it is) are damned for believing the wrong thing; only we are the enlightened ones…exactly like every other religion, past, present, and future. No irony there.

Does all that mean that faith and science cannot coexist? Not at all! There is a clear distinction between the two, but not an opposition. Science is based on the body of theories that can be proved or disproved by anyone repeating a defined experimental procedure. They are subject to repeated and new experiments, and theories may be replaced. Faith is the remainder of belief: it is those things that can never be proved or disproved, but are merely believed (or not) by each person. Many, many, many people are able to abide their faith yet be open to the processes of doubt, inquiry and learning. They understand that anything of this world is precisely that — of this world — and divinity is to be experienced through one’s acts, not the pages of a book or through the self-serving pronouncements of a hierophant. They reject dogma and think for themselves. Those people view the process of inquiry as expanding their knowledge of the world in which they function and believe — rather than as a challenge to their beliefs. After all, no religion has a deity so weak and questionable that true faith can be shaken by honest questions and discoveries in the world of that deity’s making, does it?

The 14th Dalai Lama put it very nicely for Buddhism; it can (and should) be applied in other religions:

If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change. In my view, science and Buddhism share a search for the truth and for understanding reality. By learning from science about aspects of reality where its understanding may be more advanced, I believe that Buddhism enriches its own worldview.

There are many axes along which one may organize one’s life. Encouraging ignorance, stifling open inquiry, crippling dreams, hindering education, embracing dogma, and advocating against science are the traits of darkness, even if committed with selfless intent. We condemn those acts when we see them practiced in other countries and other times. We need to condemn them when we see them here and now. And we need to stop electing people who are agents of neo-Lysenkoism before they steer us all into a new Dark Age.

U.S. elections are November 6th. Be an agent of enlightenment when you vote. (And if you need some guidance, there’s my previous blog post.)

Religion may simply be another word for ignorance

We have had many a report from learned commissions one after another about how the US is declining in innovation and science, and how our STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) abilities as a nation are slipping away (e.g., “Rising Above the Gathering Storm”). We see fewer people entering engineering professions, a huge shortfall of students in computing, and general math abilities are so poor that the nation is in a economic meltdown because, in part, too few people seemed to understand how interest works on credit cards and mortgages.

Meanwhile, we have people muttering about how that “atheist, communist” country China is emerging as a powerful leader in these same fields. “It must be espionage and theft” we conclude.

Tonight, as I read the article linked in below (and not the first such one I have read) it occurred to me that perhaps the biggest and most pernicious threat to the US and parts of the West is that of fundamentalism. No, I don’t mean Islamic fundamentalism, although that is one aspect of the threat. I mean religious and political fundamentalism right here in the US.

How can we expect our children to innovate and lead when their early education is shaped by the spiritual descendants of Trofim Lysenko?   

How can we decry the Pakistani madrassas when we allow US schools to be shaped by some of the same forces — those who believe that religion defines what should be taught?

More and more I worry that the future may be less “Star Trek” and more “The Handmaid’s Tale.”
(And, ironically, many of the people I worry about won’t even understand the reference to Lysenko, madrassas or Atwood’s novel because those may not agree with their religious or political viewpoints and will thus never be explored.)

Ironic, also, that the “Godless Chinese” may end up dominating the future because they are simply that –“godless.”

%d bloggers like this: