Science, often celebrated as the ultimate neutral and objective pursuit of knowledge, has in fact been shaped and controlled by elites throughout history, manipulated to serve the interests of those in power. Whether through imperial ambitions, capitalist expansion, or military control, the naming, division, and prioritization of scientific fields have reflected the political, economic, and social goals of dominant groups. This phenomenon, named elite capture by Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Georgetown University, occurs when powerful elites seize control of institutions and resources meant for the public good and redirect them for their own benefit. In the case of science, this capture has led to the exclusion of marginalized voices, the commodification of knowledge, and the reinforcement of systems of oppression.
Understanding the capture of science by elites is crucial to recognizing how the structure and organization of scientific inquiry have been co-opted to reinforce existing hierarchies. In this essay, we will explore how elite capture manifests in the sciences, from the historical divisions of knowledge to the control of scientific institutions, and propose pathways for reclaiming science as a force for liberation.
The Origins of Scientific Divisions: Power, Imperialism, and Control
The categorization of science into distinct disciplines—such as physics, biology, and chemistry—did not arise from pure intellectual curiosity but from the needs of emerging nation-states and empires. In early modern Europe, scientific inquiry was closely tied to imperial expansion, with fields like geography, cartography, and anthropology mobilized to map and categorize lands and peoples, facilitating the expropriation of territories and resources. Scientific exploration, framed as neutral, was in fact a tool of domination, used to legitimize European colonial claims and erase indigenous ways of understanding the world.
These divisions also reflect the prioritization of certain types of knowledge that directly served state and capitalist interests. Physics and mathematics, for example, were advanced because of their utility in military technology, navigation, and empire-building. Theoretical sciences, often considered more prestigious, were funded by governments for their potential military applications, while applied sciences—such as agriculture or public health—were marginalized despite their direct impact on human well-being. This hierarchy of knowledge reveals how scientific divisions have been crafted to reinforce elite power and serve the needs of empire, capital, and state control.
Elite Capture of Scientific Institutions: Funding, Commodification, and Exclusion
Scientific institutions—universities, research centers, and funding bodies—have long been influenced by elites who control the direction of research through funding and governance structures. Corporate donors, wealthy benefactors, and government interests shape what kinds of research are prioritized, often directing funding toward areas that promise financial returns or serve military or industrial purposes. This process diverts resources away from critical fields that address global challenges, such as climate change, public health, and social inequality.
The commodification of knowledge further entrenches elite capture in science. In a neoliberal economy, science is increasingly treated as a commodity, with research driven by profit motives rather than public needs. Pharmaceutical companies, for example, invest in treatments for chronic conditions that guarantee long-term profits, while neglecting diseases that disproportionately affect marginalized populations, such as malaria or tuberculosis. This capture of medical research perpetuates global health inequalities, as the needs of the most vulnerable are sidelined in favor of profit-driven research.
Moreover, the exclusion of alternative knowledge systems—such as indigenous knowledge, feminist perspectives, and anti-colonial approaches—from mainstream science is another form of elite capture. These perspectives, which emphasize sustainability, interdependence, and collective well-being, challenge the dominant Eurocentric, capitalist framework of science. By marginalizing these voices, scientific institutions perpetuate systems of inequality and reinforce the power dynamics that have historically oppressed marginalized communities.
Science as a Tool of Justification: Racism, Eugenics, and Social Control
Throughout history, science has often been manipulated by elites to justify systems of oppression and exploitation. By providing a veneer of objectivity and rationality, scientific theories have been used to legitimize violence, dehumanization, and the denial of rights to marginalized populations. From scientific racism to economic theories of inequality, these distorted uses of knowledge have served as intellectual scaffolding for power.
1. Scientific Racism and Colonialism
One of the most notorious examples of science being used to justify oppression is the development of scientific racism. In the 18th and 19th centuries, European scientists sought to classify human populations based on physical characteristics like skin color and skull shape, establishing racial hierarchies that placed white Europeans at the top and non-European peoples at the bottom. Figures like Carl Linnaeus, who developed a taxonomy of human races, and Johann Blumenbach, who posited the idea of a "Caucasian race" as superior, contributed to the belief that race was a biological reality with inherent moral, intellectual, and physical differences.
These pseudo-scientific racial categories were used to legitimize slavery, colonial conquest, and genocide. For example, in the United States, the notion of Black inferiority was used to justify the transatlantic slave trade, the brutal treatment of enslaved Africans, and the denial of their basic human rights. In the colonization of Africa, Asia, and the Americas, scientific racism provided a framework for European powers to dehumanize indigenous populations, viewing them as “less evolved” or “primitive.” This allowed European colonizers to frame their exploitation of these populations as a “civilizing mission” rather than an act of violence and expropriation.
2. Eugenics and Social Engineering
The eugenics movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries is another example of how science was wielded to justify oppression. Originating with Francis Galton, eugenics sought to "improve" human populations by encouraging the reproduction of people deemed "desirable" and discouraging or preventing reproduction among those considered "undesirable." These categories often mapped onto existing social hierarchies, with the wealthy, white, and able-bodied being deemed more “fit,” while people of color, the poor, the disabled, and immigrants were labeled as “unfit.”
In countries like the United States, forced sterilization programs were implemented as part of state-sponsored eugenics policies, disproportionately targeting Black women, indigenous people, people with disabilities, and the poor. In the infamous Buck v. Bell case of 1927, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of these sterilization laws, with Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. writing that “three generations of imbeciles are enough.” This pseudo-scientific belief in hereditary “defects” provided intellectual cover for gross violations of human rights.
The eugenics movement reached its most extreme form in Nazi Germany, where it provided the ideological foundation for the Holocaust. The Nazis drew on eugenic theories to justify the extermination of Jews, Romani people, disabled individuals, and others deemed racially or genetically "inferior." This genocide was presented as a scientific effort to "cleanse" the Aryan race, highlighting the devastating consequences of using science as a tool for social control.
3. Criminology and the Criminalization of Race
In the field of criminology, racialized theories of crime have long been used to justify the over-policing, surveillance, and mass incarceration of Black and brown populations. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, figures like Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso developed theories of “born criminals,” positing that criminal tendencies were hereditary and could be identified through physical characteristics like facial features or skull shape. These ideas were particularly applied to non-European populations, reinforcing the belief that people of African or indigenous descent were inherently prone to criminal behavior.
In the United States, the legacy of such racialized criminology is evident in the War on Drugs, which disproportionately targeted Black and Latino communities, leading to mass incarceration. The supposed scientific legitimacy of theories associating race with criminality gave cover to discriminatory policing practices like stop-and-frisk and "broken windows" policing, which disproportionately affected communities of color. These practices continue to shape the criminal justice system today, where Black Americans are incarcerated at rates far higher than their white counterparts for similar offenses, reflecting the enduring influence of racialized criminology.
4. Psychiatry and the Pathologization of Women and LGBTQ+ People
In addition to race and class, science has been used to justify the marginalization and control of women and LGBTQ+ individuals. In the 19th and 20th centuries, the field of psychiatry pathologized behaviors and identities that deviated from the normative social order. Women who defied gender roles or exhibited signs of mental distress were often diagnosed with “hysteria,” a supposed psychological disorder rooted in female biology. Treatments for hysteria, which ranged from rest cures to forced institutionalization and lobotomies, served to reinforce patriarchal control over women’s bodies and behaviors.
Similarly, psychiatry was used to pathologize homosexuality, classifying it as a mental illness in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) until 1973. The medicalization of LGBTQ+ identities led to the widespread use of “conversion therapies” aimed at “curing” homosexuality through electroshock therapy, chemical castration, and other inhumane practices. These treatments, grounded in a scientific framework, legitimized the social, legal, and religious persecution of LGBTQ+ individuals, framing their identities as aberrant and in need of correction.
5. Economics and the Justification of Inequality
Beyond the natural and social sciences, economic theories have also been used to justify social and economic hierarchies. Classical economic theories like those of Thomas Malthus in the 18th century posited that poverty and inequality were inevitable and even necessary for societal progress. Malthus’s theory of population growth suggested that the poor would always outstrip their resources, leading to famine and social collapse unless they were subjected to control measures like population checks. This "scientific" perspective provided a justification for the harsh treatment of the poor during the Industrial Revolution, including the establishment of workhouses and poor laws that treated poverty as a moral failing rather than a structural issue.
In the 20th century, neoliberal economic theories advanced by figures like Milton Friedman have been used to justify policies that exacerbate wealth inequality. By promoting deregulation, privatization, and austerity measures, these theories present market forces as natural and inevitable, obscuring the role of political power in shaping economic systems. The use of economic “science” to justify cuts to social welfare programs and the concentration of wealth in the hands of the elite reflects another form of elite capture, where economic knowledge is used to maintain and reinforce systemic inequality.
Restructuring Science for Liberation: Democratization, Accountability, and Interdisciplinary Approaches
To reclaim science from elite capture, it must be radically restructured to serve the common good rather than the interests of the powerful. This involves democratizing the production of knowledge, ensuring that marginalized voices are included in scientific inquiry, and reorienting research priorities toward addressing the most pressing global challenges.
Decolonizing Knowledge Production: Indigenous, feminist, and anti-colonial perspectives must be integrated into the foundation of scientific research. By embracing these alternative ways of knowing, we can challenge the dominance of Eurocentric, capitalist frameworks and develop more sustainable and equitable solutions to global crises. This requires creating space for marginalized communities to lead scientific inquiry and ensuring that their knowledge is valued on equal terms with traditional scientific disciplines.
Restructuring Funding and Governance: The elite control of scientific institutions must be dismantled by shifting funding away from military, corporate, and profit-driven research and toward fields that address social justice, environmental sustainability, and public health. Scientific institutions should be governed democratically, with decision-making power shared among researchers, community representatives, and marginalized voices to ensure that the direction of research serves the public interest.
Breaking Down Disciplinary Boundaries: The artificial divisions between theoretical and applied sciences, hard and soft sciences, must be dismantled. These distinctions reflect the priorities of elites rather than the needs of humanity. By embracing interdisciplinary approaches that integrate insights from the social sciences, humanities, and indigenous knowledge systems, we can create a more holistic understanding of the world and develop solutions that promote human flourishing and ecological sustainability.
Ensuring Accountability in Research: Researchers and scientific institutions must be held accountable for the social and political implications of their work. Ethical guidelines that prioritize human rights, environmental justice, and social equity must be developed to ensure that scientific research contributes to the common good rather than reinforcing systems of oppression.
Reclaiming Science from Elite Capture
Science, as it stands today, has been captured by elites who have shaped it to serve their own interests, diverting it from its potential as a force for the common good. From the commodification of knowledge to the exclusion of alternative perspectives, elite capture has distorted the structure and organization of scientific inquiry. To reclaim science as a force for liberation, we must dismantle the systems that prioritize profit over people, challenge the hierarchies that govern scientific knowledge, and open up the process of knowledge production to marginalized voices.
In this reimagined vision, science would no longer serve the interests of empire, capital, or patriarchy. Instead, it would be guided by the principles of justice, equity, and collective care, with the pursuit of knowledge aimed not at controlling or exploiting the world but at understanding and protecting it. Only by reclaiming science in this way can we hope to create a future where knowledge serves the interests of all humanity, not just the powerful few.
For further reading, I recommend Professor Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò's new book Elite Capture wholeheartedly.
