I don’t know if I agree with this statement. If one of the main goals of the fascist state is technological superiority, they’ll prioritize it. Nazi Germany was on the cutting edge of science, to the point that the US hired a bunch of their scientists. They made technology a priority at the expense of other sectors. Luckily, being incapable of trade or producing the resources they needed, they didn’t outstrip the rest of the world, but the same likely can’t be said for the US. I think other factors will get in the way of tech research in the US far more than fascism, like moronic trade wars and disincentives for higher education, which while being enacted by fascists, aren’t necessarily fascist tenets, as proven by history.
A lot of Nazi technology were just useless Wunderwaffe, while technologically impressive, mostly useless in the field. The V2 rocket was an impressive achievement, but not a price effective bombing system. The jet planes came too little too late. The big tanks were impressive, but too few to make a difference.
That may be the case, but they made significant progress on rockets, nuclear, and discoveries in physics. Whether or not they were war effective, the scientific progress was there. Fascism isn’t incompatible with technological progress, but resistance to higher education and anti-science sentiments are. In the long run, the loss of knowledge due to book burning and genocide may have caught up to them, but we thankfully don’t know. The government could have continued to fund and focus on science.
The problem with fascist and other authoritarian states and science is that it no longer becomes scientific when the authoritarians don’t like the evidence.
Chernobyl is an example of authoritarians running science and engibeering. Hiding things they don’t like and refusing to accept reality with the full weight of the government behind it.
I don’t know if I agree with this statement. If one of the main goals of the fascist state is technological superiority, they’ll prioritize it. Nazi Germany was on the cutting edge of science, to the point that the US hired a bunch of their scientists. They made technology a priority at the expense of other sectors. Luckily, being incapable of trade or producing the resources they needed, they didn’t outstrip the rest of the world, but the same likely can’t be said for the US. I think other factors will get in the way of tech research in the US far more than fascism, like moronic trade wars and disincentives for higher education, which while being enacted by fascists, aren’t necessarily fascist tenets, as proven by history.
A lot of Nazi technology were just useless Wunderwaffe, while technologically impressive, mostly useless in the field. The V2 rocket was an impressive achievement, but not a price effective bombing system. The jet planes came too little too late. The big tanks were impressive, but too few to make a difference.
That may be the case, but they made significant progress on rockets, nuclear, and discoveries in physics. Whether or not they were war effective, the scientific progress was there. Fascism isn’t incompatible with technological progress, but resistance to higher education and anti-science sentiments are. In the long run, the loss of knowledge due to book burning and genocide may have caught up to them, but we thankfully don’t know. The government could have continued to fund and focus on science.
Yes, but also who knows what millions of jews who didn’t survive the genocide could have accomplished in science and art if they stayed alive?
That’s what I was referring to from the loss of knowledge due to genocide. Unfortunately, we’ll never know.
The problem with fascist and other authoritarian states and science is that it no longer becomes scientific when the authoritarians don’t like the evidence.
Chernobyl is an example of authoritarians running science and engibeering. Hiding things they don’t like and refusing to accept reality with the full weight of the government behind it.