A new perpetual motion machine

Laura Snyder, a science historian and professor of philosophy, has stated that the word “scientist” was used for the first time 180 years ago at a meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, on June 24, 1833. Has it been only 180 years?

Prior to this time those who pursued “scientific” endeavors, mostly gifted amateurs, called themselves natural philosophers. All this gradually changed as deductive reasoning ( testing hypotheses and theories) became a key component of science, along with the creation of new scientific institutions, external funding for scientific projects and a growing belief that science ought to be for the public good.

Patenting of nature

Fast forward 180 years and we currently have a case before the U.S. Supreme Court that deals with the very structure of life itself. It's unlikely that the majority of Americans and most people on the planet for that matter have the slightest idea what is being debated and the potential outcome, regardless of the Court's ultimate decision.

In simple terms, the case before the Supreme Court is whether or not a company can patent human genes. This is a case that could effect everyone—because it involves DNA, the blueprint for life.

What constitutes a new gene? Will research be stifled and the flow of information impeded? How does a company recoup its investment, sometimes millions of dollars? Who will have access to affordable new tests and procedures as a result of any genetic breakthroughs? These are only a few of the questions that will have to be debated--publicly--and which go way beyond the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Joe Barton's rule

Joe Barton, a conservative Republican congressman from Texas and strong supporter of the fossil fuel industry, once apologized to BP (the company that caused the worst oil spill in U.S. history) because the White House demanded that the company pay millions of dollars for the clean up of the Gulf.

While the congressman claims that climate change does exist, he has consistently denied that there is any human connection to climate change. He cites the great flood in the Old Testament, before humankind burned hydrocarbons, as proof that the climate certainly changes, but humans have nothing to do with it.

Congressman Barton clearly has every right to his beliefs and he can certainly cite the Old Testament as “proof,” but it has nothing to do with modern science, and that is a big problem and not just for Americans.

Magical thinking

If you were to Goggle “perpetual motion machines” you would uncover a colorful history going back to at least the Middle Ages. Hope springs eternal. The pmm is a machine that continues to do work forever without acquiring energy from an external source. The problem is that it violates all the laws of known physics, like conservation of energy, thermodynamics and Newton's laws of motion. But people keep trying. It's the Joe Barton rule and that is a big problem.

The ecological economist Herman Daly has said that it's “politically impossible to stop growth,” while at the same time it's “biophysically impossible to continue it ad infinitum.” We may need another 180 years.

The clear and present danger of mandatory broccoli

A lot of us who love your country [America] do not see where change can come from. We see all the barriers you have now to structural and fundamental change. It feels like you've lost your amazing ability to adapt politically.

(Jon Johansson, political scientist, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand)

The creaking system

It was the “official” story shrouded in cobwebs that came to mind as I listened to some of the audio recordings of the recent Supreme Court debate on the health care law. I am neither a lawyer nor a constitutional scholar, but it was hard not to conclude that some of the justices were clueless about the reality of the American health care system, among other things.

One of the justices in particular stood out. Antonin Scalia, nominated by Ronald Reagan in 1986 and one of the better known proponents of Originalism or New Originalism, depending on your tolerance for minutia, came across as smug and arrogant. He wondered sarcastically if Americans would be forced to eat broccoli next and then proceeded to put on his “legislative” hat to muse about the votes in congress.

More Americans may by now have warmed up to the idea that revolution and upheaval cleans out the societal rot. After all, it was Thomas Jefferson who talked about the “tree of liberty” needing to be”refreshed” periodically. But a lesser known aphorism by our third president observed that an “ignorant” nation cannot be free.

It is however not blood in the streets or some Syrian style apocalypse that needs to be flowing at the present time in the U.S. but a new story, one that's true and reflects a 21^st century world. We're way overdue.

Who gets to decide

The narrative needs to say that liberty, freedom, fairness and social justice must all be present if we are to have a country worth caring about. You don't get to choose the one or two items that you like and discard the rest.

Yes, millions of immigrants arrived in America in the early 20^th century seeking “freedom,” but America was also founded on genocide and slavery and only one form of slavery ended in 1865.

We had a good chance after the Civil War to get closer to the ideal but failed to do so. Ozark Reflections, an American Story.

We're clearly at a crossroads today and accepting the fact that the cavalry isn't coming and George Washington, Abraham Lincoln or FDR won't be arriving to make it better may be the most difficult concept for Americans to come to terms with. As well, a new story is of course threatening to some.

I would not lead you into the promised land if I could, because if I led you in, some one else would lead you out. You must use your heads as well as your hands, and get yourself out of your present condition.

(Eugene V. Debs, American Labor Organizer, in speech in 1910)

Additional Reading:

“A Drunkard in the GutterIs Just Where He Ought to Be”

How billionaires destroydemocracy

The Horrors of an Ayn RandWorld

Don't follow the US onhealth care

States with the most laxanti-corruption laws