Not every country fucked up their scientific community like the US did with their main focus on grants and star power but even with their educational system kneecapped by capital the US is still a scientific power house because of the thousands of people that do honest work and get ignored by biased and self-righteous comments like yours.
Science, like all institutions of the West, has been turned against its own population and is working to destroy them and all of Western Civilization because that's what the people who are paying for science want.
As a scientist, it is fascinating to watch developed societies slowly but surely chomp down at the very hand that feeds them.
The U.S. is the world leader in scientific research, and what they do, others follow. The absolute gutting of the NIH and other institutes, along with the ruthless exploitation of extremely talented graduate students in a nefarious pyramid scheme, does not bode well for the future of scientific research.
Make no mistake, the scientific method is the only thing that separates homo sapiens from the plethora of majestic flora and fauna on this fragile planet. Only through arduous devotion of driven individuals carried out over hundreds of millennia have we reached our current, almost unfathomable state of knowledge which has conferred upon us unprecedented control over our environment.
There is a lot of statecraft behind governments promoting this myth, so I wouldn't be reading into it too much. The countries listed want as high as possible of a population of scientists, and they will forecast doom and gloom to try and convince anyone with a passing amount of patriotism to work in those fields. There never was a clear proof that we needed more.
Most western countries are "flunking" science because it's hard work, lacks prestige, pays poorly, and you're unlikely to discover anything new even if you put in the necessary hours.
As we discover more and more about the world the more dedication it will take to make progress in a field. So it makes sense that you want fewer and more dedicated people.
Does Hollywood caricature scientists? Of course. But Hollywood isn't exactly know for its nuance. Business men are always evil (unless the business is failing, in which case the owner is the sympathetic underdog). Politicians are corrupt or incompetent. Is Hollywood to blame for the general indifference to science, I doubt that.
To summarize:
1. fewer people devote their life to science. I don't think this is a bad thing.
2. (young) people are indifferent about politics, the world, science, and most "stuff that matters". This probably is bad, but it certainly does not have a simple identifiable cause.
reply