I think that depends on a lot of factors. E.g. will there be a turn around in the US, and if so how fast? Will Europe and other nations increase science funding to account for all the new talent that wants to come? Will that funding be permanent, not just a one time effort?
Also, if the US restores their democracy and also decides to value science again, will the salaries for scientists abroad compete enough to prevent scientists moving back.
To maintain a sustainable lead the money and investment has to be substantial and long term.
Europe isn't the one to watch, IMO. It's China. China has already significantly increased it's R&D funding and in some areas, particularly solar and battery tech, it's world leading.
China also has been playing the long game with the build out of it's technology capabilities. I could very easily see them doing the same for medicine. They aren't afraid of losing money on investment for a particularly long period of time. They are currently thinking in decades and not quarters.
I agree that China is a science superpower and will only improve. That said, I would prefer living under a wester democratic system, so I really do hope that the west picks up what the US drops. I'm totally fine if the west is merely close to equal to China in terms of science.
China also likes to claim it is a democracy because it holds elections.
It is fair to say that the USA is still a democracy, but not because of elections. Elections have little to do with democracy. In fact, if the majority of the population hold the view that elections equate to democracy, you don't have a democracy.
I wouldn't say that elections have little to do with democracy, they are necessary. Though I agree that merely having an election isn't sufficient. A lot of modern dictatorships have "elections". And that's not to even begin to get in to how representation works.
> I wouldn't say that elections have little to do with democracy, they are necessary.
Elections are a useful tool, but not strictly necessary. Obviously in the small scale the people in a democracy can simply communicate directly. As things scale up you do need to, for all practical purposes, introduce a messenger[1] to carry what the people at the local level have decided upon, to compile with all the other local levels. But that does not require elections either, only trust that the message will be delivered accurately and in good faith. Elections are a really good way to select who you trust, which is why it is the norm in a representative democracy, but if in some hypothetical world where someone naturally became trusted by the people and became the messenger out of simple happenstance, that would be just as democratic. The only signifiant feature of a democracy is that the people hold control[2].
[1] Now that you no longer need to travel thousands of miles to talk to another person it is questionable how necessary that remains. However, we've never successfully developed a trust model without face-to-face interaction. As such, we willingly retain a trusted messenger to offer the face-to-face presence.
[2] Which is why the USA is oft said to not be a democracy. Few people in the USA actually get involved in democracy, which then makes it look like a small group hold control over everyone else. However, there is nothing to suggest that anyone is prevented from getting involved if they want to. Choosing to not participate is quite different from not being able to participate. And thus it is rightfully still considered a democracy.
For now. US science is still in decline. Major works by places like Moderna have been denied permission to continue, for example. You can't assume that funding will not continue to decrease at a rapid rate in the US.
lol no it's Europe dude for the same reason they are lagging in everything they will lag in this why would you think otherwise.
On a more serious note any of the freedoms people are talking about disappearing in the USA were either already long gone or a decade further down the road of dying in Europe. Hell they are routinely jailing people for speech now.
For all the recent hand-wringing about the U.S. becoming less welcoming to immigrants, the U.S. is still far, far ahead of any European country in terms of immigration opportunities. If you're qualified to come to anywhere in Europe, you were qualified to come to the United States years or decades ago.
