Quite a lot of the US right-wing is of the opinion that, basically, science is bad and shouldn't happen, or at the very least that only ideologically correct science should happen (for instance see https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doge-mischaracterizes-study-as-... - while part of the story there is that, unsurprisingly, a Musk thing is really incompetent, they were _trying_ to do an ideological purge).
NASA is particularly vulnerable to this because so much of NASA's science is related to climate and weather, and a large part of the US right is still doggedly pretending that global warming isn't happening.
Yes. Despite what others are saying, the people making these decisions are not stupid. This is part of a decades-long, coordinated plan to sow distrust in experts, so people will vote against their own interests to ensure the wealthy & powerful remain so.
It's plainly true that spending several billion preventing climate change now, will prevent having to spend several trillion dollars later. There is no debate about that. But the people with the billions now do not want to give it up, so they have spent decades destroying trust in experts, so people will be tricked into voting for their children to spend trillions later, so that the current billionaires don't have to spend anything now.
It's the same thing pushing anti-vaccine views, even though people getting needlessly sick is obviously bad for the economy. Don't trust your doctor, "do your own research" because you know better than the experts, etc etc. It's all part of getting people to vote against their own interests. A stupid population is easier for the powerful to maintain control over than an educated one.
The people making these decisions are incompetent and unintelligent. But they are also very ambitious and motivated to exact their skewed world view on people.
I actually think it's dangerous to view these people as intelligent, because I really think they believe the things they say. Perhaps, yes, it started out as a way to increase the oligarchy, but I think these people are so far gone that they can't understand any difference now.
> I actually think it's dangerous to view these people as intelligent, because I really think they believe the things they say.
Actually, it's a lot more dangerous to view these people as stupid, because the decisions they make are singularly focused and very, very effective. coldpie is absolutely right, if the policies are intelligent, the policy-makers should be considered intelligent too, so we can focus on the goals and methods pursued by that intelligence.
> but I think these people are so far gone that they can't understand any difference now.
There's no way to be sure, it might be theatrics all the way down... They do gain handsomely from their actions so why call them stupid? It's very unconvincing because it doesn't make sense.
As for the rest of us there's nothing to gain and a lot to lose in viewing the present policies as a string of random stupidity.
NASA is particularly vulnerable to this because so much of NASA's science is related to climate and weather, and a large part of the US right is still doggedly pretending that global warming isn't happening.