Republicans Not Anti-Science, Just Pro-Politics

darwin evolutionIt’s not easy denying evolution while championing Social Darwinism. The Republicans have a delicate two-step to perform: pro-some-Bible and pro-some-science. Despite a global scientific consensus on evolution, Republican politicians embrace a literal interpretation of the Bible when it comes to how we all got here. But their reading gets suddenly metaphorical when it comes to the parts in the Bible about helping the poor.

Citing the Bible as an authority, the current incarnation of Grand Old Partiers tell Americans modern science doesn’t have enough evidence to prove things like evolution or global warming. But further tax cuts for the super rich? The Bible is pretty clear about it being easier for a camel to pass through an eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven. And the Republicans are pretty clear on ignoring that part.

Liberals dismiss Republicans as Know Nothings and simpletons – not true. This anti-some-Bible and anti-some-science dance is very complicated.

There’s a lot of nuance that can be summed up like this: The GOP is skeptical when it comes to things with which they disagree.

Simple? Not at all.

See, when Republicans talk about the “free market” and how the “greatest” is chosen by this fabled marketplace – that’s what Charles Darwin described in 1859 as “natural selection” in his book, Origin of the Species. So when evolution-denier former Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) said she wanted to repeal socialist Obamacare with “free market” solutions, she’s pleading for competition. A competition that, naturally, selects winners and losers.

charles darwinRepublicans are not anti-science entirely, they’re anti…sometimes.

How anti-science can you be with an iPhone in your pocket? It does take some specialization. A bit of partisan specialization. Like having seven out of eight GOP candidates proudly deny evolution as just a theory while debating in the hangar of Reagan’s Air Force One; never questioning aerodynamics or gravity —which are also, technically, just theories.  Texas Governor Rick Perry proudly proclaims his belief in vaccinations to thwart cervical cancer – a very science-y stance — but not in laws to thwart climate change.

Like I said, Republicans are not all-in on being against science. The GOP treats science as their illegitimate love child. They deny its existence for political purposes, while quietly funneling child support to it.

The Republican Party is not trying to be Amish. Republicans are not Luddites. Republicans are for technology. They don’t want to actually live in the 18th century; they just want to idealize it. Those tri-corner hats were bought on the Internet. They boast proudly of having a bigger/better presence on Twitter and Facebook than Democrats. This is the party that sees endless uses for Predator drones and embraces all innovations with military applications. How exactly do you drug test welfare recipients without science? You don’t! How does one “drill, baby, drill,” frack or remove the tops of mountains without employing someone who knows their way around the periodic table? You don’t.

Then, of course, they treat the Bible as their political wife dutifully standing by their side in photo ops, nodding in support of everything they say.

tina dupuyAnd as much as the GOP has a reputation for pandering to churchgoers, their platform contradicts biblical teachings.  Jesus was not a banker or a CEO. He was labor. He was skilled labor at that (think AFL-CIO). But Republicans claim a monopoly on Christianity and use it (as we saw with Perry’s Texas prayer rally) as a prop. It’s part of the stagecraft for their political image. But just like science, when the Bible has something in it they don’t like, they just deny it and move on.

So Republicans do believe in science and they also believe in the Bible. They just believe in politics first.

Tiny Dupuy
Taking Eternal Vigilance Too Far


  1. Shane says

    Too bad that the Laws of Aerodynamics are proven FACTS, and testable through scientific methods, which means your “Educated” statement that these are mere theories is incorrect. I do not dislike science I dislike the fact it has been hijacked by people with an agenda, who change the data to suit their needs rather than accept it for what it is and admit their theory is wrong, Evolution for example has many holes in it, one of the biggest is that the Fossil record does not support it. Despite cries that they have found the missing link, they need to find a missing chain. The fact that buried in a document on DNA and animal relatives trying to prove a link between Hamns and Apes they claim a 3% difference between them, and that sounds so close, however, if the actual difference were measure in Miles the difference would be Humans were here on Earth and the Ape was out around Jupiter of course that assumes the 3%, scientists now say that it is more like 10% and that puts those Dirty Apes out around Pluto. You don’t want me to go into the how far the National Debt is just under Obama

  2. says

    Dear Tina

    I loved your article–excellent insights.
    Note: You spelled “hangar” (airplane hangar) wrong–although I can imagine an airplane dangling from a coat hanger.

  3. Marie says

    I love the comparison Tina Dupoi states that Republicans deal with Science – as their illegitimate love child.
    and the Bible – their political wife ..

  4. says

    While the Origin of the Species is about the biological competition for survival that involves change it is not a capitalist treatise on the free market which incidentally is not free at all with advertising that creates markets or distorts them etc. The use of Darwin as a way to cover for the market and capitalism was developed by others after Darwin died. On the other hand the continued development of the theories of development that Darwin put together and popularized has lead to a large realization to the fact that cooperation as much as the competition leads to evolutionary change and the survival of species just as there is differentiation and the development of variety within species. This must all be considered if one is to understand the Origin of Species. Last year with the 100th anniversary of the publication of the Origin I read this great work and also the Voyage of the Beagle. I would suggest all free thinkers and religious people too read this seminal work and begin to understand that our species, one of many, will survive through cooperation as we move along the path of evolution.

    • Marie says

      Yes, our species most likely will survive, that is some of rhem. And that does not nescessarily depends on wealth; but more on endurance and intelligence.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *