I agree that there should be research for the sake of research, but I don't think there's anything wrong with speculating about what practical benefits may accrue from the research, as long as it isn't argued that the research is conducted solely for those practical reasons. We can look for them, and even try to anticipate what they may be, but we must not allow them to become the raison d'être for research.

As for the humanists, their subject of study just isn't all that popular with people. Familiarity breeds contempt, as they say. ;)

Il faut se dépêcher d'agir, on a le monde à reconstruire

He wrote astronomers and particle physicists as well don't produce much more useful results, but are excellent at selling their work as important, while humanists lack any good PR for their subject.

Except for the economists - arguably not so human at all, but easily the most successful of the humanities.

PR is usually seen as 'public education' - it's not usually acknowledged that it has a direct influence on research funding and future research directions.