The academic position that political science
becomes too didactic for scientific neutrality
when political scientists are too pro-democratic climate/culture
v theocracy, plutocracy, etc.
too cooperatively enthusiastic about economic health,
too positive about empathic trust as our ecopolitical vocational polypath
toward politically inclusive healthy hope and faith and love advocacy,
Are unlikely to also take the position
that therapeutic and medicinal sciences best remain neutral
about health v pathology,
at least when it comes to investing
in our own egocentric health insurance.
The idea of scientific neutrality taking the position
that terrorists and fascists and racists,
and other forms of rabid monoculturalism,
are political-choice neutral about effective powers of climate governance,
evaporates when the scientist is choosing community
and family economy
and national climate of personal preference.
Exception to this rule
might be political scientists
who enjoy teaching macho-tyranny within their own homes and not-so-extended families.
I look forward within this postmillennial time,
when one could hardly become an effective political evolutionary scientist
or healthy public policy designer of climate therapies
or become an actually nominated and elected-selected legislator,
governor of self and others,
judge or jurist,
outside a litmus test commitment
to LeftBrain DNA with Elder RightBrain RNA co-intelligent design
of healthy fractal-fertile bio- and ecosystems,
co-empathic nondual trust
in dialectal therapeutic political merits
of multicultural Basic Attendance,
steeped in polypathic waters
of radically cooperative eco-normative consciousness.