(2) The Masses: How to 'mobilise' the masses, and how this affected science/tech

(3) The Cold War and the inaccurate portrayal of communism as 'damaging' science; The Cold War forced the construction of false dichotomies!

(4) What did it mean for technology to transfer, especially with regards to across systems with differing political ideologies?

So, this relates to Marxist's conception of the states of history, whereby the ideal end-state of society is communism (revolutions against the capitalist system produces socialism)

Scientific Socialism

• Scientific thinking is dialectical (causes conflict)
• Science must thus also be understood in terms of social relations; rejecting the view that scientific development is a result of pure brilliance/genius
• So, science is understood as a social activity that changes/develops because of conflicts/interactions in social relationships

Impact

• The leftist scientists in Britain were impressed, and saw Marxism as a means to utilising science in a broader and more social context (Needham, Bernal, Haldane)
• A socialised health service?

In the science and activism course, we think about how this congress, and the papers of the Soviets, promoted new ways of conceptualising the relationship between science and society

• Creation of the Old Left in Britain

L2 Graham (Role of Authentic Dialectical Materialism)

• This chapter helps to understand how scientists in the USSR incorporated dialectical materialism in their ideas/scientific thinking
• Graham also explains what exactly dialectical materialism was; noting that in dialectical materialism, there were various levels of nature (so you can't reduce biological laws to social laws)
• The 3 case studies: Prelinguistic thought, the origin of life, and quantum mechanics
  --> To dispel the belief that Marxism was 'bad' or 'damaged' science based on Lysenko alone; to show that there were SUCCESSFUL scientists who produced valuable ideas using Marxist ideologies

"Science can only flourish in the context of democratic societies". True? False?
--> Kojevnikov's reading clearly argues against this notion

• But, also recognising that the USSR purged scientists/engineers too
• So, how did science and scientists find room to advance their work under periods of authoritarian tyranny?

(5) Science can only flourish/progress under the context of democratic societies?

1936 - 1938: The Great Purge/Great Terror:

• To remove political opponents, people who weren't loyal to the ruling party, or people who were not communists/bore Marxist ideologies

Research Organisation

• Separation of universities and academies (academies were places for RESEARCH)
• WWII influenced the growth of science and research in the USSR!

• Technological projects became symbols for the construction of socialism and communism (projection of power) --> Not to say that this was an exclusively USSR phenomenon! The US used the space race for similar objectives/outcomes
  

Chernobyl:
https://unherd.com/2019/06/chernobyl-and-the-meltdown-of-the-ussr/#:~:text=According%20to%20Mikhail%20Gorbachev%2C%20the%20disaster%20at%20Chernobyl,as%20we%20knew%20it%20could%20no%20longer%20continue”.

L1 Kojevnikov

• Argues that Soviet science laid important foundations for contemporary science, and also in STS studies because of how Marxist ideologies emphasised the importance of social constructivism
• Noting that the Bolsheviks really focussed on scientific developments (technocratic visions), and so they massively reformed scientific infrastructure in the USSR!
• For the Bolsheviks, they emphasised that all science was usable (so no pure/applied distinction), and they worked with bourgeois experts because they valued their knowledge/expertise!

L2 Graham (Lysenko)

• Explores the drastic changes to s/t as a result of Stalin's policies, noting that by the end of the 1920s, science itself became bourgeois, rather than interpretations of science --> Allowing Lysenko's ideas to gain prominence!
• Lysenko was a clear opportunist, able to frame his ideas in a politically-favourable manner, such that criticising his ideas became equated with criticising the state
• Attack of the bourgeois intelligentsia in the USSR, decline of genetics during the Stalinist era

L2 Krementsov

• Explains how, during the 1920s in the USSR, science was able to transition from 'little' science to 'big' science, particularly after the Bolsheviks' revolution
• The Bolsheviks adopted a technocratic vision and enthusiastically supported scientists: nationalisation of scientific institutions, supporting the growth of research institutes
• Co-opting with the scientists regardless of class background, and scientists were flexible/smart enough to manoeuvre the political system of the Bolsheviks
• Stalin's rise meant the end of the co-opting policy, and also central control/command of all scientific institutions
  --> We see that Bolshevik USSR was a good time for scientists!

L2 Gerovitch

• Argues that the cosmonaut served as the embodiment of the new Soviet man in the Khrushchev era, as both sets of identities reflected tensions imposed on the individual by the state's visions
• For cosmonauts, the tensions was between how much the flight systems should be automated, and how much agency should the cosmonauts be given
  --> Cybernetics: Suggested that it should be as automated as possible to reduce human error/agency
• The experiences of the cosmonaut paralleled those of the ideal Soviet citizen, meaning that a model cosmonaut was the ideal/exemplary Soviet citizen (pp. 149)

• Direct transfer of theories (Lysenkoism)
• Promoting the reorganisation of research into academies, separating the universities from the academies (the Soviet model)
• Actual technical aid also (hospital medicine)

IMPACT: The Great Leap Forward (1958 - 61)

• Mao envisioned that the PRC should beat the USSR in the race towards communism, so implemented drastic industrialisation and collectivisation policies
• Also came with highly unrealistic production quotas (steel factories, agrictlture etc.)

Dialectical Materialism

• Experts trying to align their work with political orthodoxies (we saw similar trends/development in the USSR too!)
  
  

EG: Tong Dizhou (and embryology)

Self-Reliant Science

• As a result of its isolationism, Mao pushed the PRC to work towards being 'self-reliant' in the sciences
• This self-reliant ideology operated on BOTH the national and communal level, where villages/communities were encouraged to be independent and not rely on the government for assistance all the time
  
  

--> See Schmalzer, L7 of East Asia

There is perhaps something to be said here about the participation of citizens in collecting fossils. You can think of it as citizen science (or similar, to that effect where citizens help collect data for scientific work). But the meaning attached to the endeavour is very different from what we see in citizen science, because there's no real political CHANGE they work for here, rather it's helping to reinforce Maoism!

L3 Ghosh

• Argues that the political climate of the Cultural Revolution influenced the process of demarcating the social science of statistics from the natural science of mathematical statistics
• Mainly, a movement to create socialist statistics to 'account' for the social relationships in society!
• Bourgeois statistics came under fire after 1949, and so many esteemed statisticians like Jin Guobao resorted to self-criticism to maintain their standing in society (so we see how scientists learn to adapt to the political ideologies they exist in)

L3 Rogaski

• Explores China's allegations of US germ warfare in 1952, arguing that the CCP used the allegations to further its political ideologies, and also that these allegations, true or not, laid important foundations for China's 1952 Patriotic Hygiene Campaign
• Patriotic Hygiene Campaign: Masses mobilised to collect the insects/evidence of the germ warfare, and to fight against NATURE (the 4 enemies of nature) and AMERICAN IMPERIALISM
• Also, the programme was about public-specialist cooperation, and the specific employment of the image of 'annihilation' was important, as it allowed Mao to draw the links between political enemies and nature

How the East Viewed the West: The West only used science for death/destruction, ignoring science for the benefits of humanity
How the West viewed the East: The authoritative regimes removed any space for scientists to have individual thought

• Noting that science/technology was able to move across the Iron Curtain (so, the curtain was, to some extent, POROUS)
• Particularly in Eastern Europe, countries at the periphery of the USSR's control

The International Geophysical Year (1957 - 58)

• Bringing the people and scientists of the world together in the name of acquiring knowledge?
• Seeking allies in the decolonised world

GDR and Texas Instruments

• Not all exchanges were cooperative; here we have a different case study of espionage through S/T
• The GDR paid for information surrounding the microchips produced by the Texas Instruments, and passed these to the semiconductor industries

L4 Vargha

• Argues that biomedical science created space for Cold War cooperation across the Iron Curtain, and thereby emphasises the fluidity and multiplicity of the Cold War experience
• Stalin's death in 1953 thawed East-West tensions, and gave space for the cooperation on the Sabin vaccine (was science above geopolitics?)
• Hungary successfully adopted both types of vaccines to eradicate polio much earlier than other countries (even the US!) --> The US was sceptical of the Sabin vaccine because of Soviet involvement
• In polio eradication, there seems to be a suggestion that totalitarian, centralised states were best poised to eradicate it because of mass vaccination campaigns

L4 Liskova

• Argues that science is always shaped by the time and place of its origins. This was especially true for the Cold War, and scientists from East and West were equally afflicted by ideology. Using the 1968 Sexology International Conference in Prague as a case study
• Western sexologists clearly favoured biological explanations (focussing on genetics, hormones), while the Eastern sexologies emphasised social influences and adopted a more dialectical method in research
• Czechoslovakia is an interesting case study, where their sexologists initially adopted a middle ground, but shifted towards the social theory after Prague Spring of 1968 (which caused the implementation of normalisation policies by the USSR to force Czechoslovaks to conform!)

L4 Freeze

• Explains how the BD200 emerged in a market that was indifferent to market forces, and how such a technology spread across the Iron Curtain
• The cotton research institute in Czechoslovakia had attracted Moscow's attention, as it could meet the demand for textiles, and Moscow's hunger for technical prestige
• For development of this, the researchers were organised into cross-disciplinary teams (working on different approaches to the same problem)
• Note also that collaboration with Courtlads (a British company) was mutually beneficial to both parties and helped overcome the problems of technology transfer across different cultural contexts

NOTE: The emphasis on contradictions is Mao's expression of dialectical materialism! Dialectical materialism to Mao was essentially the study of contradictions in the material world

• And in expressing contradictions, Maoism was focussed on the concept of human will, not so much about historical materialism

L2 Bailes

• The case of Vernadski, the esteemed earth scientist, and how, despite his open anti-Communist views, he escaped Stalin's purges
• Vernadskii made a lot of significant practical contributions to Soviet research and the military, and perhaps this, plus his national and international esteem, protected him!
• He was very critical of Stalin's purges, and had a vision of good science that was completely contrary to the way science was controlled/conducted in Stalin's USSR

NOTE: Useful pointers about what limited East-West scientific collaboration during the Cold War:

• The geopolitical climate
• Political compatibility
• Commensurability of S/T standards/developments/expectations

L4 Bouillon

• French and Romania as 2 countries vying for independence from the hegemony of the US/USSR --> This created a good context for the expansion of collaboration (France wanted friends, Romania wanted to break free from the USSR)
• France had to convince the US that the agreement would benefit the Western bloc (Recruit Romania as an ally)
• Funny thing is the French knew that Romania was sending spies into France and was willing to still sign this agreement
  --> They felt that they had sufficient measures, and also used cost-benefit analysis
• The collaboration showed French diplomats the possibilities and limitations of using S/T to promote French interests and French detente in the Cold War!

Dialectical materialism and Hessen's paper produces a social constructivism view of science (i.e. scientific knowledge is created and advanced because of social conditions)

Case Study: Lamarckian Principles of Acquired Inheritance vs Mendelian Inheritance (the USSR vs Nazi Germany) --> Proctor Ch 1

• In the USSR, Lamarckian principles were championed by Lysenko/Pavlov --> It was in accordance to ideas of DM (one could be influenced by their external conditions, acquire new characteristics, pass these onto their offspring)
• It was useful in the construction of a 'new Soviet man'

So, WO2L manifested in various forms depending on the scientific discipline involved --> Not everything can simply involve the participation of the masses!

• Here, WO2L was not about the direct involvement/participation of the masses
• Rather, WO2L here entailed a more indirect sort of participation of the masses!

*Fan also makes the case that what we see here isn't simply 'popular' or 'citizen science'

• It is far more politically loaded, and is meant to explicitly involve the integration of FOLK knowledge with technical knowledge
• Whereas in citizen science you get the sense that citizens are trying to acquire the tools/language of the experts

Basically, if the question just vaguely says 'in the Soviet Union', you must probe!! Soviet Union can mean Lenin, or Stalin, or Khrushchev...

• Usually you can define it as Lenin and Stalin periods as these were the earlier periods that set up many of the foundations (eg. the academy-university model that was created by the Bolsheviks still existed in the Gorbachev period)

But also noting how the IUD technology was allowed even though it was developed in the US - suggesting that it wasn't simply a complete/wholesale rejection, technologies WERE adopted where necessary

Important: In Lenin's 1909 Materialism and Empirio-Criticism he does articulate the view that one should draw a line between science, as it is, and the TYPE of interpretations of science

• But then again, the term 'technocratic' has been used to describe the Bolsheviks/Lenin... so you need to consider what this means for your argument
• Is it an anomaly... is it because of a willingness to forgo certain communist principles/ideologies to achieve the vision of the state?

The case of physics and physicists being special/unique relative to other fields?