The system (at least with regards to the sciences) worked well during the cold war because we had some higher goal to focus on, now with that gone, it's just a bunch of hacks looking to line their pockets. Speaking as someone with a PhD the whole system needs to be razed to the ground and reconstructed in another way. Its disappointing also private industry doesn't step in and fund more greenfield work (i.e. where is the 21st century's bell labs?)

razing and reconstruction applies to more than just academia...the entire system is a sham... all we can do now is hope for some sort of peaceful collapse similar to what happened to the Soviet union 3 decades ago

That collapse certainly wasn't peaceful within the nations of the former Soviet Union. There was no military uprising but thre was utter chaos among the civilian population.

MS Research? Google’s many moonshot companies?

MS research is an interesting case. From my memory they did support some theoretical research in non-linear stat mech a few years back (i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oded_Schramm worked there and he was certainly doing pure research), they also let https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Freedman spend time doing his topology research even though it probably aint going to lead to a quantum computer :) Google however seems mainly to support research in ML/DL with applications the end result, yes it's research, but I wouldn't call it greenfield research like what occurred at Bell Labs (i.e. discovery of microwave background radiation).

Google is also paying for things like Calico which are pretty speculative and unconnected with AI/ML.

Bell labs was funded by Bell's monopoly position at the time right?

Yes. It seems only monopolies or near-monopolies engage in substantial amounts of greenfield research. Everyone else is too busy competing to spend a dime on anything that won’t help next quarter or next year if we’re lucky.

> I've seen this pattern throughout educational & science systems, & seems I'm not alone.

This pattern is pervasive in any professional setting. A while ago there was a newspice on how Google had too many people for too few projects, and most of the people working at Google were scrambling to create redundant services with the explicit goal of furthering their career.

It's no surprise that people who desperately want to land a prestigious and coveted job try everything at their reach to get a foothold and pull ladders behind them.

Where is there not careerism? Seems like moving from academia to private industry, it just gets more blatant. Heck, it’s not even a vice anymore, simply a consequence of good career development.

I read the OP slightly differently. I think there's an expectation that science is about a pure-ish pursuit of knowledge. In that context, careerism works against the philosophy and goals of the effort. In growing commerce/industry, the expectations might look different (competition, plus ingenuity or high EQ, or both). In large companies (Google, MS, Ford, JPM) and government, expectations collect around careerism, managing perceptions, and stability/predictability.

working as a freelancer or for small companies.

It is a universal law: any organization is overrun by people who use it for their own purposes sooner or later (academic institutions, corporations, churches, states -- nothing is immune).

It is a sort of Salarial Flynn Effect. §

People learn how to get promoted, and the hierarchy is rife with cronyism.

§_ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

Realizing this could also mean (at least it means to me): To stay. If everyone with a 'better' mindset leaves academia, where will this lead?

This is what keeps me from pursuing a Ph.D. No patience or acumen for that kind of nonsense.