In a poignant article inkeel Physicist Lawrence Kraus attacks the Trump administration's policy of cutting vital science budgets, warns of serious harm to national security and the economy, and calls for protecting science beyond political considerations.
“The culture wars in American universities have damaged teaching and research – but the Trump administration’s new policies, which directly harm the country’s scientific infrastructure, could be far more destructive,” writes renowned theoretical physicist Lawrence M. Kraus in a scathing article published on July 16, 2025, on the website keel, a website affiliated with the moderate right and critical of the left. This time, its writers are also joining forces to defend universities from harm by the Trump administration.
He says that while academia needs reform, the solution is not to “destroy the best parts of the university in the process.” Kraus, president of the Origins Foundation and host of the podcast that bears its name, warns of the effects of massive cuts to scientific research budgets in the US – led by the National Science Foundation (NSF), which will be reduced from $8.9 billion to just $3.9 billion, a cut of almost 60%.
The cuts also affect other scientific agencies that are at the forefront of American research:
- NASA: Its scientific budget will be hit, including the cancellation of projects such as the Rome Space Telescope and participation in the LISA gravitational wave observatory.
- National Institutes of Health (NIH): An institution leading biological and medical research will be forced to reduce essential programs, including researcher training.
- Department of Energy (DOE): Cuts will affect research in renewable energies, theoretical physics, and civilian nuclear technologies.
- Goddard Space Flight Center NASA's - where the lion's share of astrophysical research conducted in the US is concentrated - could close completely.
- Unique scientific infrastructures Like the LIGO laboratory, which won the US a Nobel Prize, are expected to close due to lack of funding.
- NSF itself It recently canceled hundreds of grants without individual review, including those of leading scientists who had received continuous support for decades.
According to Kraus, in parallel with these cuts, the budget National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) – responsible for maintaining the US nuclear weapons – will increase by $11 billion. “That’s more than the total new budget of the National Science Foundation, and it makes no sense – especially when national security also depends on vibrant physics research,” he argues.
Kraus also expresses concern about moves to bar foreign students and researchers from entering the United States – a move that could seriously harm the continued existence of a productive scientific community. “In the past, many of these students – including Elon Musk – stayed and led American innovation. Today, they may choose to study and live in other countries.”
He goes on to quote physicist Robert Wilson, director of the Fermi accelerator, who was asked in Congress whether the particle accelerator helps national security: “It has no direct connection to the defense of the country – except that it makes it worth defending.” Kraus adds: “Science must not be subordinated to political goals. The damage is already enormous – and if we do not stop the trend, it may be too late to fix it.”
For the full article: Trump's War on Science – Lawrence M. Krauss – Quillette
More of the topic in Hayadan:
2 תגובות
It won't work. In the age of artificial intelligence, there are a lot of surprising collaborations with the social sciences and humanities.
The solution is to establish an alternative university institution to the existing universities. An institution that conducts research solely in a manner that is committed to evidence-based empirical science. Indeed, this is a reduction in academic freedom. Of course, in the existing regular universities, full academic freedom will remain in all fields, including natural science, but also the so-called humanities and social sciences. No politician will hesitate to approve support for the new institutions. And support will naturally decline in the existing universities. Indeed, there is a price for Wakism. Now all that remains is to come up with a name for it. Maybe an empirical university?