{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01875532821824382, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.644230769230769, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Pussycats, Weasels or Percherons? Current Prospects for Social Science Under the Reagan Regime

The purpose of this paper is to make an assessment of where the social sciences stand today in Washington, D.C. and what this standing means for the kinds of things social scientists will be able to do that depend on the existence and strength of a flow of funds from federal agencies. I emphasize the social sciences because, the diversity among social scientists notwithstanding, we are all being lumped together. The interdisciplinary variance is great, as we all have experienced, and the gulf is also large between applied social science and basic social science. But we are all being hit by the same solid waste matter nonetheless. Clearly, these are not the best of times, but neither are they the worst of times. Although liberal social scientists no longer sit close to the high tables in Washington, there are some spiritual compensations; seated at those high tables are characters with whom one might not want to associate too closely in any event. So there is some good and some bad in the present situation, as well as some encouraging signs, as I will point out.