據組織者介紹，今年4月22日“為科學游行”活動當天，全球600多個城市共有幾千名科學家和活動家走上街頭。和其他大游行一樣，游行參與者的動機也多種多樣。但以往盡量遠離政治的社會活動家和科學家群體聯合發聲，能看出當今美國社會分裂程度日益加深。

今年學界人士參加“為科學游行”源于特朗普政府提出削減科研經費，并且下令限制政府機關的科學家發表公開講話。外界普遍認為，特朗普的封口令是壓制氣候變化研究手段的一部分。

而許多“為科學游行”的參與者表示，游行也不是完全為了針對特朗普政府，更重要是強調政府資助科研和基于科學依據做決策的重要性。他們認為這是不存在黨派之分的議題。其實特朗普政府上臺前決策時科學依據下降的問題就已存在。

此外，這次游行也凸顯新變化。今年1月宣布發起“為科學游行”后，組織者修改了活動的使命，同時呼吁科研工作者多元化。新加入的訴求讓此次游行更傾向左翼政治勢力，可能使右翼保守派孤立，也可能削弱游行科學家對政府否認氣候變化的抗議力度：比如美國共和黨人原本就極不信任宣稱全球變暖的科學家。

一些評論人士甚至聲稱，科學行為努力尋求的并非放之四海而皆準的真理，而是受科學家社會背景影響的理論。言下之意是，性別、性向和種族會影響科學家的信仰，導致偏見。某些歷史問題上科學的作用確實存在爭議，比如所謂“科學”的種族理論就曾被種族主義利用。懷疑氣候變化發現的人也喜歡一再強調科學本質上存在歧視。

總之，今年許多人會上街游行大聲呼吁科學，強調科學對世界的意義。同時還有很多人關注為何科學未能制止社會問題影響擴大。參與者見識開闊或許可以大為提升本次游行的影響力，但公開游行通常存在的問題依然沒解決——游行者回家后還是弄不清鬧騰半天到底為了什么。（財富中文網）

譯者：Pessy

審稿：夏林

The March for Science will bring thousands of scientists and activists to the streets today in, according to organizers, more than 600 cities across the world. Like any mass demonstration, participants will attend with a wide range of motivations. But the mingling of the activist community and the science community, which often tries to distance itself from politics, has produced a specific kind of public fragmentation.

Motivation for the March has come from proposed cuts to research funding by the Trump administration, and administration orders restraining government scientists from making public statements. That gag order has been widely seen as part of an administration agenda to restrict climate change research.

But many involved in the March say its goal is less to tar the Trump administration than to highlight the overall importance of science funding and evidence-based policymaking, which they see as a nonpartisan agenda. The undermining of scientific evidence is, undeniably, an issue that far predates the Trump administration.

But another focus has also emerged. Since it was first announced in January, organizers have revised the March’s mission to also include calls for greater diversity within the scientific community itself. That agenda pulls the March further to the left of the current political landscape, potentially alienating right-wing conservatives. That could be damaging to the March's efforts to push back against climate-change denial in particular: American Republicans, for instance, overwhelmingly distrust scientists and their claims about global warming.

Some commentators have gone so far as to describe science as an endeavor that seeks, not universal truth, but a truth shaped by scientists’ social context. That implicitly includes their beliefs and biases on gender, sexuality, and race. Science has a distinctly mixed track record on these issues, having for instance lent considerable support to ‘scientific’ theories of race. The idea that science is subject to bias is also frequently reiterated by those who doubt its findings on climate.

In short, many marchers today will be on the street celebrating science and its importance to the world. At the same time, others will be focusing on science’s failure to resist certain broader social problems. While that breadth of vision may have helped make the March such a huge phenomenon, it also presents a risk all too common for public demonstrations – that after the marchers go home, no one will be entirely sure what it was all about.