The conglomerate of visions and economic interests that drives Trumpism is very diverse. Today the politically dominant line is the one that tunes most directly with Trump's personality and which I venture to call retro. It is the one that places tariff policy at the center, the one that – fostered by the abundance of natural gas in the US – bets on the internal combustion engine and on an industrial policy of gas and oil, the one that disparages science and wants to erode the independence of public research funders – the NSF and the NIH – while financially strangling them, the one that denies climate change and is skeptical of vaccines. Even the spirit of the program to return to the Moon has an air of the past. If in our days we can think of obtaining significant scientific and economic returns from exploring the Solar System, it is because we have sufficiently advanced robotic technology. The justification for trying to have humans do what machines can do better can only be that of the sporting spirit (winning competitions), that of preparing for space tourism, or what I believe to be the case: that of following the tradition that to occupy territories and mark borders, humans are needed planting flags.
It is interesting to observe that in practically all the aspects mentioned – including space exploration – the great rival of the US, China, has a more future-oriented policy. Perhaps helped by the fact that it does not have oil or gas, its bet on the electric car is very strong. The same goes for many other advanced technologies, such as robotics and biotechnology. The investment commitment to science is spectacular, and the results are following. If the governance of the US were as monolithic as that of China, we should anticipate that China will win this race. But it is not. The US has a great non-governmental asset: the technology industry, which is of a disposition more like Xi's than Trump's. It promotes the electric car and has been the protagonist of all the waves of digital innovation, culminating for the moment in the gigantic one of AI. Of course, it knows the value of science. Its companies are the US's great asset for not losing the race with China.
The business collective of this industry was mostly for Obama and the Democrats. But today it is very aligned with retro-Trumpism (a convergence that will not be stable). Let's ask ourselves why.
emerged from universities? They know it, but they believe –let’s hope they are wrong– that they no longer need them. They have, or can obtain, a lot of money and do the research themselves. And, incidentally, avoid the danger of having to share it.
A complementary reason is greed: many of the super-rich that Silicon Valley has generated intensely dislike paying taxes. For them, Trump is a godsend. They think their wealth is the product of talent, and they give no weight to having been in the right place at the right time. Among them, traditional philanthropy –the kind practiced by W. Buffett and B. Gates, the kind of super-rich who inspire my respect– is for the rich with complexes.
Finally: why doesn't industry mobilize in defense of open and publicly funded research? Don't they know that AI based on neural networks and machine learning emerged from universities? They know it, but they believe –let’s hope they are wrong– that they no longer need them. They have, or can raise, a lot of money and do the research themselves. And, incidentally, avoid the danger of having to share it.
