 |
Universities and the Military
how
does your university tie in?
The University-Industrial-
Academic Complex:
Institutional and Interpersonal Links
University Profiles
|
|
Universities and the Military (part 5)
The Reagan administration echoed these words with its introduction of
the University Research Initiative of the 1980's. University science
was guided into fields of applicability, not knowledge, force, not energy,
power, not understanding, and here it remains today. The fields have
developed under these assumptions. Within electrical engineering the
discipline became more focused on quantum electronics, solid state physics,
applied science rather than pure science going so far as to impact the
theoretical foundations.
Many scientists have described the structure
of research within American universities as tending to force one into
the arms of the military. Professors are responsible for obtaining
the majority of their funding through grants. This money supports both
their research, and graduate students. When upwards of 70% of the available
funds are distributed by the military, professors tend to compete by
moving their research toward more obvious, and much of the time directly
applicable topics of interest to the Pentagon.
The Mansfield Amendment
of 1970 was intended to stem the military control of research by
limiting DoD fuds to projects of direct relevance and application to
the military. It was believed that such a law would decrease academia's
reliance on DoD funds, which at the time supported much of the basic
(non-applied) research within American universities. Instead, the law
had the effect of transforming science itself into applied and military
oriented topics. Military funding is structural component of the university,
the individual researcher, departments, and entire fields of study must
to fit into this structure, or at least modify themselves as to gain
some degree of advantage. In 1987, the American Mathematical Society,
the largest association of university mathematicians took up the topic
of military funding and control over knowledge through a mail referendum.
The text read:
"The AMS is concerned about the large proportion of military
funding of mathematics research. There is a tendency to distribute
this support through narrowly focused (mission oriented) programs,
and to circumvent peer review procedures. This situation may skew and
ultimately injure mathematics in the United States..."
The subsequent vote was 5000 to 1300 in favor of increasing the fraction
non-military funding in hopes of staving off a militarization of math
(which had unfortunately occurred long before). Physicist Edward Gerjuoy
and Elizabeth Baranger of the University of Pittsburgh conclude of DoD
funding in the physical sciences that, "research directions are
being skewed, department hiring and promotion policies probably are being
influenced, and top level administration policies and recruiting may
be influenced as well". Thus is the military-university relationship.
Attempts to wean scientific research from military funds have failed
because they do not attack the root of the problem - the military.
The historical relationship outlined above continues to this day, the
military continues to fund and guide science, especially technological
research, the assets of the university remain at the disposal of the
warfare-state, and the quest for ever more destructive weapons continues. Continued: Page 1 | Page
2 | Page
3 | Page 4 | Page
5
|
|