I think warning about the other extreme is valid. But the way you wrote your comment it could be perceived as justification of the categorical slashing of grants by the trump administration. Which doesn't seem right either, because the progressive canadian policies are still in place, just less nonsensical.

You comment was also just made invisible due to low rating. Which can be disabled in settings. So my fault thinking it was deleted.

There's a way of saying "we need to acknowledge that it's probably bad when either 'side' does this, due to our commitment to a deeper desire for truth", and the original comment ended up sounding more like "Well, liberals did it too". I think what we aspire to here is the former, which is helpful; the latter is polarizing and gets us further from core principles.

FWIW, I have a few professor friends who are generally liberal but were required to write yearly personal diversity statements by their administrations, and knew they were rewarded for putting pathos and hardship in their stories. They hated everything about it but felt that it would set their careers back to speak out against it. I think it's very valuable to have unpolitical discussions about these things, align on deep values, and come to a deeper understanding of how we can support one another--rather than falling into camps and pointing fingers.

I can still read it; it’s just been downvoted afaict.

But it does seem like a bad comparison if what the other commenter said is true. I mean, here we’re talking about a lot of legitimate research being cut for absurd reasons.

Because it’s a stupid whataboutism

thanks, didn't knew about that.