Leopoldina member Michael Esfeld is taking a hard line with politics and his academy.
His accusation: Merkel and Co. misuse science for their own purposes.
Munich - In a statement dated December 8, 2020, the National Academy of Sciences, known as the Leopoldina for short, called for a hard lockdown in order to get the infection rate in the corona pandemic under control again.
A few days later, the federal and state governments decided on the second hard lockdown.
With a little delay, this causes severe criticism from within its own ranks.
It is “a very clear example of the political abuse of science”, criticizes Michael Esfeld.
In the
Bild
newspaper, the professor of economic philosophy takes a hard line against the politics of Angela Merkel, Markus Söder and Co., but also with the Leopoldina itself, of which he is a member.
Merkel's Corona experts under fire: Leopoldina member issues violent reprimand - "Not giving up science"
It is not the job of science to demand a lockdown, says Esfeld.
“Science can find out that there is a causal link between smoking and lung cancer.
But to conclude that nobody should smoke anymore is not the task of science, ”the 55-year-old is quoted as saying.
Esfeld goes even further.
In any case, the government is currently only seeking advice from those scientists who also say what the government wants to hear.
The dispute is linked to an incident from Bavaria to Bavaria: The business ethicist Christoph Lütge was thrown from the Bavarian Ethics Council after repeatedly criticizing the Free State's corona policy.
Corona policy in Germany: economic philosopher railed against Leopoldina colleagues - "harnessed for propaganda"
Esfeld says of other colleagues: "These scientists let themselves be hired by the government for propaganda." That damages the reputation of science and leads to populist backlashes.
Many people could turn away from science because of this, he says.
In December, the Leopoldina should have "mapped the state of the debate" instead of specifying the direction of the march, Esfeld explained to the
picture
- thus also taking into account positions that focus on the protection of risk groups.
But the federal government is instrumentalizing the advisory experts to determine public opinion.
The Chancellery "could never have enforced the corona policy in Germany in a transparent, public and critical discourse (...)," said Esfeld.
(ma)
