Science vs. The Oppressive Colonialism Of Intellectual Property

     In this day and age where everything seems to be accused of being White Supremacy from milk to mini-sombreros, science is of course targeted as oppressive and colonialist. Science has been declared to be sexist, and even a form colonialism when it comes to exploring unliving rocks in space.   Sadly, even many on the Right deride and fear science they do not understand, and would rather—much like the Left—substitute it with their own ways of knowing.

     Ironically, many of those who deride the Western Civilization evils of science are themselves associated with actual science.   Now, even the once vaunted journal Science has an editorial (by non-scientist, if their credentials are anything to go by) railing against the oppression and global inequity of scientific research and development by attacking the very Western concept of intellectual property rights.

“The legacy of colonialism in scientific research includes an intellectual property system that favors Global North countries and the big corporations they support. This unfairness shows up in who gets access to the fruits of science and raises the question of who science is designed to serve or save. […]

“[…] The commitment to capitalist exploitation that powered much of European colonization persists in science and continues to cost lives. If vaccines had reached the Global South in an equitable and timely manner, half the deaths that occurred might have been averted. Although efforts are being made to bring the technology to Africa, the mRNA platform is largely controlled by the Global North and Big Pharma, undermining vaccine development against a variety of diseases. These same power dynamics and actors also derailed the pandemic accord, which aims to ensure equity.”

     These “scientific” minds are deriding the right to the fruits of one’s own cerebral labor.   This is basically the intellectual property equivalent of Marx’s “from each according to their labor; to each according to their need”.

     Developing technological breakthroughs and innovative medicines for the goodness of mankind isn’t cheap and requires resources and the manpower of brilliant minds (not to mention the sheer exponentially rising regulatory cost of it all). The free market and the protection of intellectual property allow for the voluntary amassing of money and talent to invest in the creating of life-saving medicine and medical devices with and expectation that they will be able to use that profit to generate even more life-saving medicine and medical devices. This is true of science and technology in general, where people who are free and have the right to the intellectual property that they labored to create are more likely to develop groundbreaking science and technology than in kleptocracies and bureaucratic hellholes.

     The editorialists even cite the U.N. Declaration of [so-called] Human Rights to demand that the “oppressed” who produce nothing be the ones to dictate what those who do can do at their own expense!

“The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) stipulates that ‘everyone has the right…to share in scientific advancements and its benefits.’ This declaration must be reaffirmed by all scientists and countries because lives depend on it. For this right to be realized, science must no longer be an enterprise that privileges profits and the elite. Communities most affected by problems must help drive the agenda on what science gets conducted, by whom, how, and who benefits the most from it. […] Those who have been historically marginalized, including Black and Indigenous people, people of color, and people in the Global South, must refuse to be seen as passive recipients of charitable and trickle-down science, and demand equitable partnerships.”

     Perhaps the one of the main reasons why most of the innovations in medicine and medical technology—and innovation in general—is that the First World advanced nations still have an emphasis on the scientific method rather than reliance on witches throwing lightning bolts. Those countries that “decolonized” were the ones who suffered from their own choice while countries that early and often embraced the “colonial” oppression of science and the motivating benefits of intellectual property and the free market (such as Japan and South Korea) have done so well in not only advancing science and technology, but in concomitantly rising the standard of living for their own people.

     But, in true socialist fasion, the editorialists at Science invision a future, like the type out of an old-fashioned sci-fi story or futurist magazine in the early post-WWII years, where science if controlled and directed collectively (as directed by the “meritocratic” elite, of course) for the common good.

“Scientists must collectively advocate for reforms to how science is funded, who is funded, how governments define intellectual property regimes, and how scientists are incentivized. […] All funders must do this. And scientists everywhere must be trained to see equity, access, and justice as key values in their work. This is starting to happen in global health and medical research, but must become universal.”

     All this science and innovation directed towards the world’s behalf for the sake of the common good… by people who aren’t scientists and don’t innovate. It’s the cry of the new Nomenklatura.

     The full editorial can be found here, or below:

Science Should Save All, No… by ThePoliticalHat

     Hat Tip: Wesley J. Smith.

Tweet