In this chapter, we review the literature on the relations between community and citizen science, present a novel conceptual distinction between them, and argue for its transformative effect on the structure, dynamics and boundaries of academia-society interactions. We argue that a universalist research perspective dominates the realm of ‘citizen science.’ It aims to address all individual citizens and researchers and thus typically backgrounds the distinctions within and between its various participants. Conversely, in ‘community science,’ we argue that a particular community (or community of communities) is at the focus of any research, thus endorsing an inherently localist, heterogenic, and pluralist research perspective. Analyzing these universal-particular and individual-collective conceptual distinctions explains—at least partly—why community science holds a heightened potential for awareness and/or pro-active resistance to social, environmental, and epistemic injustice. Such activism emerges from its participants’ co-creation and co-ownership, which leads to mutual trust and local expertise recognition and, thus, an inherent inclination towards pluralism and structural sensitivity. Observing and modeling structures directs one’s attention to different kinds of interactions; consequently, community science tends to notice, and often resist, unjust hierarchies. To empirically illustrate the link between community science and activism, we briefly describe a real-life example, “Town Square Academia” (TSA), unfolding its deeply collaborative methods, their scientific and social relevance, and their impact on a peripheral region. Given the substantial role of particular community activism in TSA, we end by asking if ‘community science’ is ‘science’ at all. And answer affirmatively.