Of course, if the think tanks ask for funding themselves, it looks really transparent, so we here at the SDMB have to play the role of a think tank.
I’ve always thought the economy of ideas is more important than the economy of goods, which is why the government already subsidises things like PBS. But if you really want to influence policy for a small sum of money, a think tank is an even better option even than a media outlet. By buying out a relatively small number of people, you can reach more of the people who actually make decisions in Washington. That’s why these tanks disproportionately tend to be of the conservative variety: large corporations “donate” to them in the hopes that they can influence policy.
It’s easy to see how, for instance, the ideas of the Project for a New American Century became incorporated into the “Bush Doctrine” which was a main justification for the Iraq war. Making ideas like that is a valuable public service - so valuable that it’s in the government’s interests to make sure it’s recieving unbiased advice.
Since I know this’ll probably get a good reception here, I’ll add a little dilemna. Would you support cutting off funding for PBS and NPR to fund these institutions?
Well, there are several reasons why think tanks are more efficient than government analysts. For one, when private organizations are doing the analyzing, it’s easier for people to move in and out of the field, meaning more people see the same things (= a greater diversity of opinion). Also, it often makes more sense to group people according to overarching philosophy instead of seperating them by department.
You could use the same logic to argue against a free press. The government already has enough intelligence, why do they need private agents to do the same thing? The reason is that if they see a problem they don’t just have to complain to their superiors, they can make it public for the world to see.
Upon looking at this thread more I should have put a “Resolved:” in the title, or else phrased it as a question.
RAND, the first think tank, was funded by the government. And no one should be embarassed to have a hand out.
SDMB as a virtual, distributed, multipolar, grid based think tank? Someone with experience in grant writing (I only review - I have some standards ) should be able to do something with that - course they’d have to throw in a few more buzz words. Posters with over 1,000 post in GD get free membership, and the hamsters will eat well.
I like it.
I’ve highlighted the key problem. I’m not sure how you would plan on overcoming it. And, even if you could, unless those who actually make the decisions actually listen to and heed their advice, it will get you nowhere.
It wouldn’t solve it, but they would certainly be less biased than if they’re funded by corporations.
Universities create ideas, but they don’t disseminate them (besides to their students). A strong university system doesn’t create a free press, for the same reason.