In the ball of balls that voted out a host of political-economic power in 2018, although there is no detailed estimate of the academic scientific vote, it can be inferred that there is a clear preference for this community in favor of headed by Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador.
Unfortunately, in the first moments, a series of unexpected aggressive actions appeared in the field of general science, by a certain group of the regenerative movement. The proposal for an unsustainable and unconsulted science law, the denial of universal science in its content, has led to an unprecedented convulsion and conflict in the science sector, whose historical political engagement has seldom been in turn anti-government and rather was. College student.
Misdemeanors are not only about the essence of science but generally unfairly and unreasonably offend the alumni academic community.
In addition, the official assigned to him, without being structurally the head of the scientific sector and in contrast to the rhetoric of the executive, had disorganized, inconsistent, authoritarian political behavior, and a lack of position to promote consensus, and dialogue among peers. The answer, with its individuality, contemplative and not necessarily representative, was swift.
No one advocated the unprecedented confrontation between community groups facing political power and against community groups in support of the president, as well as the interest group within the renewal movement.
During this confrontation, the adolescence in Mexico of scientific culture was evident, which to businessmen, politicians, and, as revealed himself, the CEO himself, who contributed to the unnecessary and sudden confrontation, I want to think of it because of his loyalty to the honest collaborator but without political position and contradictions with science Himself.
But it also suffers from a political culture on the part of public actors of disagreement with the government because of its position on institutional scientific scaffolding. It is hard to understand why they had to ally, intentionally or unintentionally, with groups whose history represented the radical and open opposition to public, secular, and free education; Fighters against freedom of gender choice, gender relations, the fight against early termination of pregnancy that women freely choose, superhero promoters (like taking Jaime Maussin to Congress for keynote speeches) and professed coup plotters! In the internal affairs of Mexico and against a democratically elected government by vote.
There is no homogeneity within the movement and no political party. It can be seen that the CDMX Secretariat of Science, in its participation in the Open Forums, delivered a speech in opposition to the President of Conacyt and its Support Group, a speech based on a skeptical global science consensus, evidence-based peer-reviewed and validated and not exclusive.
But she is not the one who advises the CEO on science and researchers. As he repeatedly emphasizes at his conferences, and even before the heads of state of the G-20: we do not know everything.
But, then, where is your Undersecretary Lopez Gatell in other sciences that are not those of health, but are on par with the reliable, universal and strategic sciences of the state?
Inevitably, political mistakes and confrontation have unintended political consequences for all involved. Science journalist (my friend and co-worker) Javier Flores deduces from indirect estimates that the high probability that in some CDMX delegations there was a significant vote to punish the president by academic researchers (Nexos 06-21-2021) although it is unlikely that the coalition Those who choose to punish them will serve to promote a scientific culture.
* Science Communications DGDC UNAM-Ensenada