The instability this has created has me looking to leave academia as quickly as possible; I'm sure others in similar situations are having the same thoughts. This has wreaked havoc on all of academia.
Sorry to hear that this happened to you. I hope they will provide some way to sort this out soon.
If the dominant ideology changes, it should only affect future grants, not current grants. Ideally, grants that have already been submitted or are close to submission should be evaluated according to the old rules. Otherwise a lot of time and effort will go to waste.
China looks at America and shows its citizens what an alternative fate could be, and it works.
> China looks at America and shows its citizens what an alternative fate could be, and it works.
Not really though. Still, around ~10k PhDs from China get green cards.
I am not sure if it can be quantified.
the US is trying to catch up in that race now. see how they treat their women wrt reproductive health.
What about your allies?
1- NSF budget is about 10 billions, I always had in mind that it is much more. That's about 0.17% of the total federal budget. If we include DOE R&D funding and NIH we will get to 1%. This is the funding for most of research in science in the US. Seems like not a great area to achieve huge reduction in deficit.
2- Even if we ignore the whole point of DEI and say that we need to end support for some of the projects. You do take your time and evaluate projects that needs to take action. You don't stop all the funding and pause critical support for projects and cause huge problems on medium and long term. And it also hurt the reputation of the country and its competitiveness.
3- The current NSF director was actually appointed by the current setting president in his first term.