The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
"The Peril of Politicizing Science"
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters:

VIEWPOINT

The Peril of Politicizing Science
Anna I. Krylov*
Cite this: J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2021, 12, 22, 5371–5376
Publication Date:June 10, 2021

… I came of age during a relatively mellow period of the Soviet rule, post-Stalin. Still, the ideology permeated all aspects of life, and survival required strict adherence to the party line and enthusiastic displays of ideologically proper behavior. Not joining a young communist organization (Komsomol) would be career suicide—nonmembers were barred from higher education. Openly practicing religion could lead to more grim consequences, up to imprisonment. So could reading the wrong book (Orwell, Solzhenitsyn, etc.). Even a poetry book that was not on the state-approved list could get one in trouble.

Mere compliance was not sufficient—the ideology committees were constantly on the lookout for individuals whose support of the regime was not sufficiently enthusiastic. It was not uncommon to get disciplined for being too quiet during mandatory political assemblies (politinformation or komsomolskoe sobranie) or for showing up late to mandatory mass-celebrations (such as the May or November demonstrations). Once I got a notice for promoting an imperialistic agenda by showing up in jeans for an informal school event. A friend’s dossier was permanently blemished—making him ineligible for Ph.D. programs—for not fully participating in a trip required of university students: an act of “voluntary” help to comrades in collective farms.

Science was not spared from this strict ideological control. Western influences were considered to be dangerous. Textbooks and scientific papers tirelessly emphasized the priority and pre-eminence of Russian and Soviet science.

After WWII, the Soviet Union went through a real chauvinist period where every invention in history — the automobile, the airplane, the whatever — was attributed to some muzhik in a barn in the Volga region. It’s kind of like today’s era in which Joe Biden says, “A black man invented the light bulb, not a white guy named Edison.”

Entire disciplines were declared ideologically impure, reactionary, and hostile to the cause of working-class dominance and the World Revolution. Notable examples of “bourgeois pseudo-science” included genetics and cybernetics.

Similarly, a group of Wikipedia insiders has declared any empirical study of the connection between intelligence and genetic ancestry to be always “pseudoscience,” thus entitling them to delete or rewrite everything touching on the topic on Wikipedia.

Quantum mechanics and general relativity were also criticized for insufficient alignment with dialectic materialism.

The Soviets seemed more highbrow about their crank campaigns than the Woke. I’ve yet to see anyone arguing that George Floyd’s death means string theory must be right (or wrong). But who know what tomorrow will bring.

Most relevant to chemistry was the antiresonance campaign (1949–1951). The theory of resonating structures, which brought Linus Pauling the Nobel prize in 1954, was deemed to be bourgeois pseudoscience.

Marxism is more intellectual than Wokeism, so putting the Marxists in charge means you get opinions (wrong ones) on the theory of resonating structures, while putting the Wokeists in charge means you get op-eds about hair-touching.

Scientists who attempted to defend the merits of the theory and its utility for understanding chemical structures were accused of “cosmopolitism” (Western sympathy) and servility to Western bourgeois science. Some lost jobs. Two high-profile supporters of resonance theory, Syrkin and Dyatkina, were eventually forced to confess their ideological sins and to publicly denounce resonance. Meanwhile, other members of the community took this political purge as an opportunity to advance at the expense of others. As noted by many scholars, including Pauling himself, the grassroots antiresonance campaign was driven by people who were “displeased with the alignment of forces in their science”.

The Soviet auto-da-fe of supporters of Pauling’s famous advance in the science of chemistry was particularly weird because Pauling had become, after Hiroshima, a leading critic of American military power, who was awarded the Lenin Peace Prize in 1970.

This is a recurring motif in all political campaigns within science in Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, and McCarthy’s America—those who are “on the right side” of the issue can jump a few rungs and take the place of those who were canceled.

It seems quite plausible that some bright scientist will someday figure out how to apply Wokeist Theory to some abstract question in the hard sciences in order to get proponents of competing theories cancelled and hog all the grants that should have gone to them, but I can’t think of any examples of this yet outside of the human sciences.

Lots of good hard scientists are getting their careers wrecked by the Woke but that’s either for being white and/or male or not being politically pious enough. In general, the Woke typically aren’t bright enough to care about abstract scientific questions, like the anti-resonance activists.

By the time I studied quantum chemistry at Moscow State University, resonance theory had been rehabilitated. Yet, the history of the campaign and the injustices it entailed were not discussed in the open—the Party did not welcome conversations about its past mistakes. I remember hearing parts of the story, narrated under someone’s breath at a party after copious amounts of alcohol had loosened a tongue.

Fast forward to 2021—another century. The Cold War is a distant memory and the country shown on my birth certificate and school and university diplomas, the USSR, is no longer on the map. But I find myself experiencing its legacy some thousands of miles to the west, as if I am living in an Orwellian twilight zone. I witness ever-increasing attempts to subject science and education to ideological control and censorship. Just as in Soviet times, the censorship is being justified by the greater good. Whereas in 1950, the greater good was advancing the World Revolution (in the USSR; in the USA the greater good meant fighting Communism), in 2021 the greater good is “Social Justice” (the capitalization is important: “Social Justice” is a specific ideology, with goals that have little in common with what lower-case “social justice” means in plain English). As in the USSR, the censorship is enthusiastically imposed also from the bottom, by members of the scientific community, whose motives vary from naive idealism to cynical power-grabbing.

Just as during the time of the Great Terror, dangerous conspiracies and plots against the World Revolution were seen everywhere, from illustrations in children’s books to hairstyles and fashions; today we are told that racism, patriarchy, misogyny, and other reprehensible ideas are encoded in scientific terms, names of equations, and in plain English words. We are told that in order to build a better world and to address societal inequalities, we need to purge our literature of the names of people whose personal records are not up to the high standards of the self-anointed bearers of the new truth, the Elect. We are told that we need to rewrite our syllabi and change the way we teach and speak.

As an example of political censorship and cancel culture, consider a recent viewpoint discussing the centuries-old tradition of attaching names to scientific concepts and discoveries (Archimede’s Principle, Newton’s Laws of Motion, Schrödinger equation, Curie Law, etc.). The authors call for vigilance in naming discoveries and assert that “basing the name with inclusive priorities may provide a path to a richer, deeper, and more robust understanding of the science and its advancement.” Really? On what empirical grounds is this based? History teaches us the opposite: the outcomes of the merit-based science of liberal, pluralistic societies are vastly superior to those of the ideologically controlled science of the USSR and other totalitarian regimes. The authors call for removing the names of people who “crossed the line” of moral or ethical standards. Examples include Fritz Haber, Peter Debye, and William Shockley, but the list could have been easily extended to include Stark (defended expulsion of Jews from German institutions), Heisenberg (led Germany’s nuclear weapons program), and Schrödinger (had romantic relationships with under-age girls). Indeed, learned societies are now devoting considerable effort to such renaming campaigns—among the most-recent cancellations is the renaming of the Fisher Prize by the Evolution Society, despite well-argued opposition by 10 past presidents and vice-presidents of the society.

Most non-Marxist scientists of the first half of the 20th Century were to some degree “eugenicists,” which means you can cancel them. For example, Robert Millikan who won the 1923 Nobel Prize in Physics while a professor at Caltech and went on to be, more or less, the president of Caltech and built it into its mid-century supremacy. But the Millikan Library at Caltech has now had its name taken away for Millikan being associated with eugenics. Nonwhites like it because it reduces the number of famous whites, which they find oppressive, and administrators like it because now they can resell the naming rights to the library.

… However, they demand that the “Shockley–Queisser limit” be renamed. They call for Shockley’s cancellation as punishment for his abhorrent views on issues far outside his domain of expertise, such as race, gender, and IQ. If, for the sake of argument, we divorce ourselves from the charged political content of Shockley’s publications on these topics, we can compare his minimal scholarly contribution in this domain to Pauling’s vitamin C debacle. Should we cancel Pauling for overstepping the domain of his competence and making medically dangerous claims? Which one is the greater misconduct—publishing a paper with eugenic content or promoting vitamin C as a cure for cancer? Note that in the case of both Pauling and Shockley, the Mertonian principle of organized skepticism has already taken care of effectively separating the wheat from the chaff: while Shockley’s detailed balance paper is cited almost 7000 times, his paper on race and IQ has a grand total of 15 citations.

Digging deeper into the Shockley case, many of his biographers attribute his well-documented antisocial traits and behaviors (social withdrawal and paranoia) to a mental disorder and describe him as a high-functioning autist. In his book The Gene, Mukherjee uses Shockley to illustrate the ethical conundrums of gene editing, by pointing out that the same combination of genes can be both “genius-enabling” and “disease-enabling”. What if Shockley’s deplorable views were the result of his mental disorder? Should we cancel him anyway?

That would be ableist!

Or maybe Shockley was just a jerk?

I can think of four great men who knew Shockley well: John Bardeen (the only winner of two Nobel Physics prizes), Robert Noyce (“the mayor of Silicon Valley”), Gordon Moore (Moore’s Law), and Fred Terman (probably the best claimant to the title of “the father of Silicon Valley” although that’s usually given to Shockley). The first three couldn’t stand Shockley, while Terman liked him and gave him a job at Stanford.

… So why should we not humor those who claim to feel differently and rename everything in sight? After all, renaming equations is even easier than renaming cities, buildings, or landmarks.

The answer is simple: our future is at stake. As a community, we face an important choice. We can succumb to extreme left ideology and spend the rest of our lives ghost-chasing and witch-hunting, rewriting history, politicizing science, redefining elements of language, and turning STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education into a farce. Or we can uphold a key principle of democratic society—the free and uncensored exchange of ideas—and continue our core mission, the pursuit of truth, focusing attention on solving real, important problems of humankind.

The lessons of history are numerous and unambiguous. Despite vast natural and human resources, the USSR lost the Cold War, crumbled, and collapsed. Interestingly, even the leaders of the most repressive regimes were able to understand, to some extent, the weakness of totalitarian science. For example, in the midst of the Great Terror, Kapitsa and Ioffe were able to convince Stalin about the importance of physics to military and technological advantage, to the extent that he reversed some arrests; for example, Fock and Landau were set free (however, an estimated ∼10% of physicists perished during this time). In the late forties, after nuclear physicists explained that without relativity theory there will be no nuclear bomb, Stalin rolled back the planned campaign against physics and instructed Beria to give physicists some space; this led to significant advances and accomplishments by Soviet scientists in several domains. However, neither Stalin nor the subsequent Soviet leaders were able to let go of the controls completely. Government control over science turned out to be a grand failure, and the attempts to patch the widening gap between the West and the East by espionage did not help. Today Russia is hopelessly behind the West, in both technology and quality of life. …

Anna I. Krylov – Department of Chemistry, University of Southern California,

It’s an interesting question

 
Hide 155 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Lots of good hard scientists are getting their careers wrecked by the Woke but that’s either for being white and/or male or not being politically pious enough

    It’s very sad, but the problem is, these scientists signaled their weakness decades ago. They’ve always “avoided trouble” with Leftist militants by either remaining silent when the Left said crazy things or by meekly surrendering when pushed.

    It’s not so much their careers I mourn, but all the life-saving breakthroughs we’ll never see.

  2. quewin says:

    “This is a recurring motif in all political campaigns within science in Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, and McCarthy’s America…”

    One of these is not like the others.

  3. the durability and endless official support for wokism and Marxism are due to the fact that they each serve in their time to justify more power for the rulers and their bureaucracy.

    without our benevolent rulers white people would be treating non whites cruelly.

  4. Yet a thousand “Conservatives” could read this (very excellent) Steve Sailer post, but none dare call it Communism*. Partly as a reply to Rob McX from the last post, I’ll state again that it’s not all about ideology, except for some of the die-hard instigators (your Che’s, Mao’s, and Pol Pots, perhaps).

    No, the wokesters don’t know who what the proletariat is and have to go to the internet every time they try to spell Bourgeoisie (just as I do) . They are the same, though – read through Anna’s description of that “relatively mellow” era in the USSR. It’s the same people today. It’s about resentfulness and destruction of traditional society, plain and simple.

    Also, I wondered about Anna Krylov’s part here:

    Just as in Soviet times, the censorship is being justified by the greater good. Whereas in 1950, the greater good was advancing the World Revolution (in the USSR; in the USA the greater good meant fighting Communism)

    I’m not sure if she’s trying to imply something about that last part. YES, Americans WERE fighting Communism for the greater good. (Is she implying censorship on this behalf here? If so, she is full of it.) Unfortunately most of the Americans fighting Communism completely missed the internal war with the Commies. They missed that there even WAS one going on.

    I’m in the middle of the Stanton Evans book Blacklisted by History about Joe McCarthy. Holy crap, there was so much infiltration in the State Department, going back to the 1930s! I had no idea that American Communists played a part in derailing any kind of diplomacy with Japan in 1939-’40 or so, purely so that the Japanese would be too busy fighting the US to fight the USSR, the pet project of said Commies. Yes, Mr. Evans, like the railroaded (by one Millard Tydings) Senator McCarthy, names names. We need to do the same today.

    .

    * Exceptions are the good folks at the Peak Stupidity blog and many at VDare.

    • Replies: @SFG
    , @mousey
    , @ben tillman
  5. George says:

    Antoine Lavoisier, the greatest scientist of the enlightenment.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_Lavoisier#Final_days_and_execution
    Also:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato

    After WWII, during the communist witch hunts.

    The FBI under J. Edgar Hoover had been following Oppenheimer since before the war, when he showed Communist sympathies as a professor at Berkeley

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Robert_Oppenheimer#Security_hearing

    And then there is Julian Assange…

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  6. @quewin

    Thanks, Quewin, I don’t know how I missed that!

    • Replies: @Russ
  7. Gordo says:

    Not even finished reading it and I want it noted that Werner Heissenberg did not lead Germany’s nuclear weapons program and indeed did what he could to retard it.

    He was the target of a campaign in Schwartz Corp, the SS magazine, to put him out of his job because he taught relativity, they called him a White Jew.

    He squeeked out of that one by a personal appeal to his mother’s cousin who happened to by Heinrich Himmler, whom he had never met before that occasion.

    Heissenberg never joined the party and after the war refused to participate in any nuclear weapons research.

    They soil his name because he was a German who stayed in Germany.

    • Thanks: Escher
  8. dearieme says:

    Joe Biden says, “A black man invented the light bulb, not a white guy named Edison”.

    A splendidly chauvinist remark: the first satisfactory incandescent lightbulb was Swan’s work. He won his patent case against Edison with the latter then buying him out.

  9. Hypocritical Zuckerberg Caught Blasting ‘Experimental’ Covid Jabs To Inner Circle

    • Thanks: Je Suis Omar Mateen
  10. Russ says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Thanks, Quewin, I don’t know how I missed that!

    Could’ve been a referee-mandated inclusion.

  11. Cortes says:

    “After WWII, the Soviet Union went through a real chauvinist period where every invention in history — the automobile, the airplane, the whatever — was attributed to some muzhik in a barn in the Volga region. It’s kind of like today’s era in which Joe Biden says, “A black man invented the light bulb, not a white guy named Edison.””

    Sounds like Scotland in the 1960s.

  12. Technology is as technology does. We are hopelessly behind Russia in missile technology.

    And let’s just see whose space presence is hurt more by Russia pulling out of the international space station–ours or theirs?

    • Replies: @hhsiii
    , @AnotherDad
  13. SFG says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I mean, it’s bad, and I hate it, but that doesn’t make it Communism. AIDS and cancer are both bad but aren’t the same thing. They don’t seem really enthusiastic about nationalizing industry (anyone talked about nationalizing Google?) or, really, any of the pro-worker stuff the Commies used to push for. It’s related to Communism from common Marxist roots, but went on its own vile path.

  14. “Russia — home of the elephant!”

  15. Anonymous[156] • Disclaimer says:

    Openly practicing religion could lead to more grim consequences, up to imprisonment.

    That is simply not true. Practically every city had a functional church with regular services. It was definitely very bad for a white collar career to be openly religious but nobody was imprisoned over it in post- Khrushchev era.

    Once I got a notice for promoting an imperialistic agenda by showing up in jeans for an informal school event.

    That’s either bullshit or something quite exceptional. She is slightly younger than I am and I have never heard anything like that. Schools had dress codes but they did not extend to any informal events, even on school property.

    The tendency of many Soviet emigres to exaggerate the hardships of their early lives is very annoying.

  16. @Loyalty Over IQ Worship

    It’s not so much their careers I mourn, but all the life-saving breakthroughs we’ll never see.

    Have you seen the state of research in universities now?

    All the hundreds of billions of research dollars are devoted to the implementation of the total global digital surveillance and control gulag.

    There’s nothing worth mourning there.

  17. @Loyalty Over IQ Worship

    “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines,” stated Dr. Marcia Angell, the former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine. “I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor,” she wrote in a 2009 piece titled “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption.”

    Years later, Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet echoed this sentiment: “… Something has gone fundamentally wrong with one of our greatest human creations … The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.” READ REST: https://www.ecofarmingdaily.com/the-faux-faith-of-modern-science-prescription-drugs/

    MORE:
    “Famous medical-journal editor torpedoes medical journal”:
    https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2017/05/01/famous-medical-journal-editor-torpedoes-medical-journal/
    https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/category/science-fraud/
    https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/category/medical-fraud/
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    “Suppose you learned that a single source in the US, every year, like clockwork, kills 225,000 people. That would be 2.25 million killings per decade. Wouldn’t you think we’d hear about it? Wouldn’t public health agencies make a big, bigger, biggest deal about it? Wouldn’t they call it a pandemic to end all pandemics?

    “Can you imagine the reaction at every level of society? The insane panic? The madness in the streets? The attacks against institutions tasked with preventing such a cataclysm? The collapse of the stock market and the healthcare system? The predictions of the end of the world? The churches on roaring business highs?

    “Well, on July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association published Dr. Barbara Starfield‘s review, ‘Is US Health Really the Best in the World?’” READ REST: https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2015/11/25/dr-starfields-revelations-shock-of-shocks/

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  18. quewin says:
    @SFG

    Cultural Marxism is the retarded cousin of Economic Marxism.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Reg Cæsar
  19. “Krylov is active in the promotion of gender equality in STEM fields, especially in theoretical chemistry.[29][30] She created and maintains the web directory Women in Theoretical and Computational Chemistry, Material Science, and Biochemistry,[31] which currently lists more than 400 scientists holding tenure and tenure track academic positions, or equivalent positions in industry, national laboratories, and other leading research establishments. She has delivered several talks on gender equality in STEM including a lecture at the international symposium in Uppsala, Sweden.[32]”

  20. J says: • Website

    America was always exceptional for its tolerance. The Manhattan Project employed dozens of leftist and dissident scientists to build the first nuclear weapon. After WWII America captured many Nazi rocket scientists and instead of hanging them for war crimes (they killed many innocent Londoners) they were integrated. Intolerance to difference is the royal road to decadence. Pity for this once great nation.

    • Replies: @Anon
  21. J.Ross says:

    While we count genders, the Chinese will actually build stuff.

  22. MGB says:

    Really? So the replication crisis is due to ‘woke’, not corporations funding science?

    • Replies: @PeterIke
  23. J.Ross says:
    @SFG

    It overlaps Bolshevism in the most important sense, which also connects to Steve’s law of female journalism. This is the inferior using their position to make revenge-war on the able. Can you not do physics? But, you can get the physicist fired, using bull&@^%. That’s what communism actually was for most of the history of the Soyuz.

  24. I did not make it through the entire post, its long. What was the punchline?

    Did Anna Krylov offend iSteve for being a dirty ruski immigrant and challenging the Sacred Copyright Property Right of the respected Americans like M. Frisch ? Or what was her sin?

  25. @SFG

    The Left tiptoed away from the American working class starting in the 1960s. Look up the Hard Hat Riot in New York City and the Busing Riots in Boston–there’s some iconic photography out there.

    Basically, the Progressives/Marxists/Liberals/Bolsheviks (I’ll just call them “Marxists”) discovered that the working class was heavily white, straight, armed, religious, and patriotic. So the Marxists re-worked their theories into biological leninism: it turns out the perfect socialist is non-white, queer, mentally deranged etc. (Another Dad terms it “minoritarianism,” which works too).

    When was the last time you heard the Democrats refer to themselves as the “party of the working man? Now it’s the Krazy Kat-lady Koalition, Sailer’s Circular Firing Squad, the black/POC/jewish/homosexual/neurotic female/government employee coalition.

    The white working class Boomers would go on to elect Ronald Reagan in two landslide elections. They had no more than 2 kids each and got old so their country no longer exists. Trump was their last hurrah. Their grandkids will become ethnic minorities in the new country.

  26. Charon says:

    Finally, the U.S. MSM takes notice of Israel’s latest slaughterfest. You’d never know that 1) all the killing has been done by Israel, as usual, and 2) Israel started this with another one of their patented “pre-emptive” strikes. Also as usual: emphasis on civilian targets which (also as usual) they blame on the victims.

  27. Jack D says:

    Quantum mechanics and general relativity were also criticized for insufficient alignment with dialectic materialism.

    That’s funny because the Nazis also had trouble with these same sciences, which they considered to be “Jewish” while Newtonian physics was “German”. Einstein it goes without saying but then they started going after Heisenberg and calling him a “white Jew” even though he wasn’t Jewish at all. (Unzites continue this great tradition to this day by accusing anyone they don’t like of being secretly Jewish). Luckily, Heisenberg’s mother was friends with Himmler’s mother so she wrote to her son and told him to stop being so hard on Wernie and that seemed to have worked.

    I think totalitarians in general want the world to be an orderly place where everyone and everything obeys (their) rules, so that anything that that calls for uncertainty or ambiguity is a threat to their black and white view of an orderly universe where everything has its place. So gays and trannies threaten their view of the sexes , Jews threaten their view of religion , modern physics threatens their view of time and space, etc.

  28. “Today Russia is hopelessly behind the West, in both technology and quality of life.”

    But they pretty much have always been for most of the last century. It’s not like there was a golden age for Russians leading the world in technology and quality of life during the 20th century.

    Ironically, over the last two decades Russian lifespans has been increasing by nearly ten full years. One of the lowest points (especially for men) was during the ’90’s, when Russians averaged early 60’s. Now it’s about early 70’s, so in point of fact they’re starting to catch up to the west in median lifespan, which is one direct factor related to the quality of life.

    Perhaps life for Russians under Putin isn’t as bad as the current administration would have everyone to believe. Certainly it’s greatly improved if compared to the regimes of Stalin and Krushev.

    But Brandon would have it otherwise, and in truth, for Brandon is an honorable man.

    • Replies: @PeterIke
  29. quewin says:
    @Jack D

    “So gays and trannies threaten their view of the sexes , Jews threaten their view of religion , modern physics threatens their view of time and space, etc.”

    Two of these groups cry out in pain as they strike you.

  30. Jack D says:

    I’ve yet to see anyone arguing that George Floyd’s death means string theory must be right (or wrong). But who know what tomorrow will bring.

    No need to wait:

    I describe the phenomenon where white epistemic claims about science…receive more credence and attention than Black women’s epistemic claims about their own lives.

    Making Black Women Scientists under White Empiricism: The Racialization of Epistemology in Physics

    by Chanda Prescod-Weinstein

    https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/704991

    For anyone who doesn’t know, Chanda is a 7/8 white scientist who is “black” for American racial justice purposes. As a white (Jewish) scientist she would be considered mediocre at best but by “black” standards she is a genius. As you can see from this article, instead of actually doing physics she spends most of her time kvetching about how black women are not allowed to do physics.

  31. @quewin

    One of these is not like the others.

    To the Jew it is.

  32. Anon7 says:

    ” We are told that in order to build a better world and to address societal inequalities, we need to purge our literature…”

    Not just literature. For those who play Wordle, an apparently harmless word game purchased by the New York Times, this note is included in their Help section:

    Have you changed the way I play Wordle?

    We are updating the word list over time to remove obscure words to keep the puzzle accessible to more people, as well as insensitive or offensive words.

  33. They call for Shockley’s cancellation as punishment for his accurate views on issues he’s well suited to discuss being a genius indifferent to social opprobrium.

    • Agree: ben tillman
  34. Anonymous[135] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    She is a famous grifter. Note the pendant – I bet it’s a Star of David.

    • Replies: @CCG
  35. @The Anti-Gnostic

    Basically, the Progressives/Marxists/Liberals/Bolsheviks (I’ll just call them “Marxists”) discovered that the working class was heavily white, straight, armed, religious, and patriotic.

    And on the side of South Vietnam and our men fighting there, about which the biggest complaint was “they have one hand tied behind their backs.” For that matter I’ve read the Nixon Administration was surprised to learn the USAF and Navy and Marine aviation weren’t going all out when some new plans were presented or whatever.

    The Hard Hat Riot you refer to was specifically about this issue, per Wikipedia started as a construction and office worker attack on “around 1,000 demonstrators affiliated with the student strike of 1970. The students were protesting the May 4 Kent State shootings and the Vietnam War, following the April 30 announcement by President Richard Nixon of the U.S. invasion of neutral Cambodia.”

    Grew to 20,000 people, 100 injured, 6 arrested but only one of them a construction worker, three weeks later “President Nixon then invited the hardhat leaders to Washington, D.C., and accepted a hardhat from them.” I don’t remember this riot, just a year or two too early for when I became that sort of politically aware, but can attest to the Zeitgeist from my part of what eventually became deep Red state America.

    You can read accounts of “hippies” going door to door in working class neighborhoods and discovering the above to their horror. I can confirm this second hand from a cultural Boomer friend who was in those sorts of social circles but who came from a modest background she didn’t forget or hold in disdain.

  36. @Jack D

    But the Ukraine , you forgot about the Ukraine , what does it threaten for totalitarians? Ah, I gets it: their longing for a stable and lawful society, as opposed to a free Cossack no-man land.

  37. @Loyalty Over IQ Worship

    It’s very sad, but the problem is, these scientists signaled their weakness decades ago. They’ve always “avoided trouble” with Leftist militants by either remaining silent when the Left said crazy things or by meekly surrendering when pushed.

    The watershed moment was late Sixties when several university presidents were forced to step down after they tried to resist student radicals. Other administrators got the message and their modus operandi is instant capitulation.

    Another problem are Republicans who simply don’t know what goes on at universities, what the diversity statements are, what DEI is, etc.

  38. Currahee says:
    @quewin

    She probably has little actual knowledge of McCarthy, but relies on the common hearsay.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
  39. the Soviet Union was preferable in some ways to what’s coming to the US. Soviets were allowed to move engineering forward. there was no homosexual agenda. and they were allowed to remain european, so if they were able to survive communism, they could recover later on.

    that won’t be the case in the US. remaining european is by far the most important part. you can survive a terrible century if you can remain european. if you become Brazil in between here and there, you can never recover from anything ever again.

    Soviets Union people were never productive scientists in general. they aren’t now, with no communism to stop them. very little science comes out of that area, nor will it ever. part of that is due to not paying. science pays nothing over there. engineering, yes. mathematics, yes. science, no. medicine, no. the Soviets allowed 2 parts of STEM, interfered with the other 2 parts. but even without interference, the trends remain the same.

    of course making existing science from other places into communist purity tests does make your own country much worse. when some guy with a gun is saying that growing food works the way the leader says it works, and not the way the biologists say it works, you’re gonna have a problem. the US is entering this phase now with energy. Democrat morons say energy works a certain way, so that’s how it will ‘work’ in the US for a long time, since they’ll mostly have monopoly control.

    • Replies: @Travis
  40. When we were young and strong we should have been forming paramilitaries in preparation for what has come. But who would ever think such a thing in the prosperous, conservative, 85% white 1980s?

    The white Boomers’ grandkids–assuming they have any at all–will grow up as despised ethnic minorities in the land of their birth. Astounding.

  41. Canute says:
    @Jack D

    The problem is that you continue to view modern Judaism as a religion. Modern Zionist movement (i.e., since about 1750) selected the notion of “the chosen” as to be validation for their quest to rule the globe from a kingdom’s home – which would be Jerusalem. Once Jacob Frank’s new religion was supported by Amschel Rothschild and the Jewish leadership of the Scottish rite Masonic Order the great march to global control of all wealth and thought was assembled. All Zionist efforts in the interim have focused on this goal and they now stand within sight of seizing control. Indeed, the entire Covid charade was a means to that final leap forward. It has even been publicly announced by Klaus Schwartz (…..yes, that’s his real name).

    • Disagree: scrivener3
  42. Dutch Boy says:

    Science has been political since scientists became agents of the state dependent on state subsidies for survival. Both corporations and universities are heavily dependent on government \$\$, which means the political authorities decide what is legitimate science. The Covid debacle is a textbook example of this phenomenon, with the scientific and medical authorities falling in line with a ridiculous, murderous, and anti-scientific power grab by the political authorities.

  43. mousey says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Sean McMeekin’s book Stalin’s War covered a lot of that infiltration as well. It was significant.

    • Thanks: Achmed E. Newman
  44. @quewin

    I also noted that bit about McCarthy — and the bit about the evils of fighting Communism and the one about Shockley not knowing anything about genetics and IQ…

    She is clearly not super-woke or an extreme leftist, but she is also not a good person.

    From her wikipedia page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Krylov#Activism :

    Krylov is active in the promotion of gender equality in STEM fields, especially in theoretical chemistry.

    Her wiki page is curiously large, btw, and manages to mention how great she is dozens of times without really getting into why she’s great, except that she apparently came up with something called “the spin flip-method” which isn’t explained and hasn’t got a wiki page. Oh, and she has something to do with a company that writes quantum chemistry software.

    Most of her page is written by two contributors who only worked on her page (and a page or two about quantum chemistry software). What a coincidence.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Rospizd
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jt512

    One of her PhD students also contributed a little (two years after graduation):

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/S.levchenko

    https://faculty.skoltech.ru/people/sergeylevchenko

    • Thanks: ben tillman, HammerJack
    • Replies: @Nicholas Stix
  45. fnn says:
    @quewin

    Yes, the only anti-science campaign in America during the McCarthy era was being waged by “Ashley Montagu.”

    • Agree: ben tillman
  46. Today Russia is hopelessly behind the West, in both technology and quality of life. …

    Not to worry, Western Scientistry, that is the profession of Science as now practised in the West, is every bit as brutal, if not more brutal, than Stalin and Beria when it comes to those who deviate or diseent from the narrative. Case in point: alternative viewpoints of COVID-19 treatments and vaxxes.

  47. @SFG

    The don’t need to nationalise google et al … google et al have assimilated the national governments of much of the Western World.

  48. @Jack D

    A real physicist would know how to put more bounce into that ‘fro.

  49. Jack D says:
    @The Anti-Gnostic

    The white Boomers’ grandkids–assuming they have any at all–will grow up as despised ethnic minorities in the land of their birth

    Only the males ones and only the ones where one of their parents is not from some other ethnic group, so only maybe 1 in 4.

  50. @Jack D

    I’d follow your link and read her article but I probably wouldn’t be able to follow the math.

    • LOL: MEH 0910
  51. Anonymous[357] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    I want to touch her hair so badly. I want to touch her hair so badly. I want to touch her hair so badly…

  52. Sympathetic think pieces are nice, but what is really needed is organization. Increasingly, strongly speaking up against this or that cultural abomination will result in retaliation, up to and including termination and professional ostracism. This is true in a variety of sectors: government, industry, academia, and even free-lancing.

    One potential approach would be to organize something like an alliance of professionals, trade workers, and unskilled employees around the idea of mutual protection against the woke. It would be something like Solidarity in Poland. It could operate in the open doing things like collecting dues, filing lawsuits, organizing strikes and slow-downs, petitioning local governments, and campaigning for candidates when appropriate. Its core purpose, at least at first, would be to provide relief against DIE. (It’s bravado to suggest that individuals storm woke embankments alone.) The Poles managed this against the Communists. We should be able to manage it against the woke.

    The problem, of course, is to prevent the Feds from infiltrating it or the media from demonizing it. At a certain point, that’s a badge of honor, but we are not there yet.

    • Replies: @Undocumented Shopper
  53. @Jack D

    So gays and trannies threaten their view of the sexes , Jews threaten their view of religion , modern physics threatens their view of time and space, etc.

    Attention Deep State handlers, the provocateur writing under the name “Jack D” is making his concern trolling way too obvious. He needs to be called back to the main office for an attitude adjustment.

  54. Anonymous[954] • Disclaimer says:
    @quewin

    “This is a recurring motif in all political campaigns within science in Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, and McCarthy’s America…”

    “McCarthy’s America,” was chocked full of card-carrying Communists, primarily devoted to the destruction of their host country.

    One member, as I recall, assassinated a President.

    Bizarrely, it’s almost as if the author is inadvertently, perhaps reflexively, cow-towing to an old-timey, cult-like political agenda.

    Conclusion: Once steeped in a communist environment, the brain never fully repairs itself.

    • Replies: @That Would Be Telling
  55. MEH 0910 says:
    @SFG

    The Intellectual Roots Of ‘Wokeness’

    Feb 1, 2021

    An explanation of how Marxism was adapted by academics into leftist identity politics to form what we now think of as ‘wokeness.’

    0:00 Intro
    01:11 Marxism vs Liberalism
    08:52 Neo-Marxism
    10:03 Adaptation 1
    14:57 Adaptation 2
    18:03 Adaptation 3
    20:00 What’s The Point?
    23:33 Outro

    [MORE]

    Sources:

    Economic And Philosophical Manuscripts – Karl Marx
    Capital – Karl Marx
    The Communist Manifesto – Karl Marx & Frederick Engels
    Marx’s Concept Of Man – Erich Fromm
    Marxism – Thomas Sowell
    Liberalism – Ludwig Von Mises
    On Liberty – John Stuart Mill
    The Prison Notebooks – Antonio Gramsci
    Traditional And Critical Theory – Max Horkheimer
    Towards A New Manifesto – Max Horkheimer & Theodor Adorno
    One Dimensional Man – Herbert Marcuse
    Repressive Tolerance – Herbert Marcuse
    Words That Wound – Mari J. Matsuda, Charles R. Lawrence III, Richard Delgado, Kimberlé Crenshaw
    Mapping The Margins – Kimberlé Crenshaw

  56. @Jack D

    “so only maybe 1 in 4.”

    Oh, so it’s okay then. You’re just (((fine))) with it.

    And then one morning, for no reason whatsoever…..

  57. Mr. Anon says:

    This is a recurring motif in all political campaigns within science in Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, and McCarthy’s America—those who are “on the right side” of the issue can jump a few rungs and take the place of those who were canceled.

    Yeah – sure – Stalin, Hitler, McCarthy – no difference between them at all. Joe McCarthy had exactly as much influence on America in the 50s as Hitler had on Germany in the 30s/40s or Stalin had on the USSR in the 20s-50s. Absolutely no difference. That’s why it makes sense to speak of “McCarthy’s America”.

    Sounds like Ms. Krylov has already internalized a good deal of that political correctness she warns about.

  58. “The Peril of Politicizing Science”

    The theory of resonating structures, which brought Linus Pauling the Nobel prize in 1954, was deemed to be bourgeois pseudoscience.

    The Perils of Pauling!

    Pauling knew the limits of science. When invited to contribute to the Repository of Germinal Choice (the “Nobel sperm bank”), he replied that the old-fashioned way was best. Certainly more fun!

  59. Anonymous[320] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    That’s funny because the Nazis also had trouble with these same sciences, which they considered to be “Jewish” while Newtonian physics was “German”.

    Indeed funny because the father of quantum physics (Nobel in 1918) was Max Planck, a gentile, as was Lutheran-Catholic Erwin Schrödinger who won the Nobel Prize (1933) for his development of quantum mechanics. Then again both Planck and Schrödinger were strongly opposed to the Nazis unlike Heisenberg.

    • Replies: @CCG
  60. Whiskey says: • Website

    War separates failure from success, and what works is either promoted or the regime is defeated. That is always true. It is why the Wehrmacht allowed and even promoted former Communists and decorated them for bravery, as well as other common soldiers, far in excess of the Imperial decorations and promotions which were largely reserved for the Officer Class. This is why the German Army in WWII far over-performed relative to its equipment, its resources, and its officer class. Ability counts, and in our time when everything gets ever more complex and thus powerful but at the same time vulnerable, ability and iq and dligence counts even more.

    Given that various Neo-Cons, idiots, and those who refuse to learn have provoked a new Cold War with the world’s major manufacturing power (China) for a news cycle win, and the world’s major oil/gas/agricultural power (Russia), the ability of the US as a maritime power is paramount. Only by producing more and more power will the US be able to even exist much less exert dominance over the hostile rivals. This is just fact.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  61. MGB says:
    @Canute

    Nicole Schwab

    Cofondatrice du Projet égalité des genres, Genève*

    Fille du fondateur du World Economic Forum Klaus Schwab, Nicole Schwab (37 ans) a cofondé en 2009 The Gender Equality Project, qui encourage les entreprises à favoriser la diversité. Après avoir étudié à Harvard et à Cambridge, elle a été, de 2004 à 2006, à la tête du Forum of young global leaders, ce cénacle de personnages de moins de 40 ans à l’avenir prometteur réunis sous l’égide du WEF. De formation scientifique, elle a travaillé en Amérique latine pour la Banque mondiale puis pour le Ministère bolivien de la santé. Elle est également membre du conseil d’administration de la Fondation d’entreprise Chanel, qui œuvre pour améliorer la condition des femmes.

    And the apples don’t fall far from the tree. Newtonian physics.

  62. Rob says:

    OT, yo.

    You know one of the stages in the “zoonosis” theory of covid is a passage through snake(s)?

    Passage through snakes is suspiciously consistent with lab leak: Wuhan Institute of Virology-infected mice might have been sold to the wet market/a dealer as snake food. It makes sense. It’s the sort of pennywise pound foolish behavior one sees in Chinese adulterated food scandals. At least, the scandals that make Western news. A lab flunky whose job is euthanizing and incinerating leftover mice sees a side profit to be made, so he makes it.

    If the transmission chain of animals goes bat to mouse to snake to man, I’d call that nearly proof of a lab leak. What are the odds of that particular transmission chain in the wild?

  63. Curle says:
    @SFG

    Cartoon from a New York newspaper circa Bolshevik Revolution. Those people cheering Marx represent Wall Street Financiers. Like Thiel keeps saying; finance wants monopolies. The commies gave monopoly franchises to American firms. Read Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution.

  64. Coemgen says:

    This popped up on my YouTube suggested list this weekend. The comment section for the video is much more interesting than Sagan’s perfectly modulated voice of reason:

  65. @George

    Antoine Lavoisier, the greatest scientist of the enlightenment.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_Lavoisier#Final_days_and_execution

    Oh come on, this minor to medium level figure in chemistry does not hold a candle to Newton.

    After WWII, during the communist witch hunts.

    Except, you know, the witches were real. And Oppenheimer was suspicious from the start, note his brother and what it meant to be a member of the US Communist Party back when it was popular. Brilliant at running Los Alamos through the end of WWII, but the adversaries changed after that, did they not?

    And then there is Julian Assange…

    Who last time I checked wasn’t a scientist.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  66. @The Anti-Gnostic

    But who would ever think such a thing in the prosperous, conservative, 85% white 1980s?

    From the mid 1970s onward there were whites who foresaw trouble–the survivalists. They often moved to remote parts of the country and stockpiled food and weapons. Of course, the ones doing so in 1975 have spent their life prepared for something that has yet to happen.

    Lothrop Stoddard foresaw the problem over 100 years ago, in his book The Rising Tide of Color. From wikipedia:

    The Rising Tide of Color: The Threat Against White World-Supremacy (1920)…is a book about racialism and geopolitics, which describes the collapse of white supremacy and colonialism because of the population growth among “people of color”, rising nationalism in colonized nations, and industrialization in China and Japan. To counter the perceived geopolitical threat, Stoddard advocated restricting non-white immigration into white-majority countries, by restricting Asian migration to Africa, and slowly giving independence to European colonies in Asia (including the Middle East). A noted eugenicist, Stoddard supported a separation of the “primary races” of the world and warned against miscegenation, the mixing of the races.

    In 1920, The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy was positively reviewed and recommended by The New York Times: “Lothrop Stoddard evokes a new peril, that of an eventual submersion beneath vast waves of yellow men, brown men, black men and red men, whom the Nordics have hitherto dominated . . . with Bolshevism menacing us on the one hand and race extinction through warfare on the other, many people are not unlikely to give [Stoddard’s book] respectful consideration.”

    • Agree: Goddard
    • Replies: @Ralph L
  67. @Dutch Boy

    I’m probably telling you what you already know, but here’s what I found out from some family members’ experiences:

    Government awards grants to university professors who basically feed their PhD-candidate students off the proceeds. This trickles down all the way to undergrads doing their little piece of the puzzle for the grad students, who work their theses into the professor’s grant. So the baseline, as you can see, is all sorts of perverse incentives.

    Now we start adding the ideological and outcome-oriented and DIE overlay. Recall that a large part of the job of the NIAID Director (currently Fauci, MD, since 1984) is doling out grant money.

    I think we know now what the Great Filter is: once sentients become smart enough and prosperous enough to advance to egalitarianism, all their surplusage becomes devoted to altruism and Uplift and Democracy. Reproduction becomes dysgenic, institutions become incapable of self-correction, and the engineers frantically automate to stay ahead of the rot.

    Finally, the dysgenics catch up and the stupefied population forgets how to maintain the technology, and the former Masters of the Universe devolve into mad, half-ape ferals slowly going extinct.

    • Agree: Dutch Boy
    • Replies: @Dutch Boy
  68. Curle says:
    @Loyalty Over IQ Worship

    They all believed someone else would do the heavy lifting.

  69. @quewin

    “This is a recurring motif in all political campaigns within science in Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, and McCarthy’s America…”

    One of these is not like the others.

    Yep, there is so much Jewish bullshit about “McCarthism” it has descended into parody. Uh, oh, a few Jewish commies were outed as … Jewish commies and had to write their commie scripts under false names.

    Here’s the deal: The Soviet Union existed. If communism was so wonderful … go there!

    That’s the deal with these people–then and now. No one is stopping them from living as they want. Their desire is to make us like as they want.

  70. Malcolm Y says:

    I don’t know about this Krylov – she obviously is not the original. But there is a fairly famous theorem called the Krylov–Bogolyubov theorem. Shortly. In mathematics, the Krylov–Bogolyubov theorem (also known as the existence of invariant measures theorem) may refer to either of the two related fundamental theorems within the theory of dynamical systems. The theorems guarantee the existence of invariant measures for certain “nice” maps defined on “nice” spaces and were named after Russian-Ukrainian mathematicians and theoretical physicists Nikolay Krylov and Nikolay Bogolyubov who proved the theorems.

  71. vinteuil says:
    @Thelma Ringbaum

    Did Anna Krylov offend iSteve for being a dirty ruski immigrant and challenging the Sacred Copyright Property Right of the respected Americans like M. Frisch ?

    I don’t think that Anna Krylov offended iSteve at all. Why do you think he did?

  72. @aNewBanner

    One potential approach would be to organize something like an alliance of professionals, trade workers, and unskilled employees around the idea of mutual protection against the woke. It would be something like Solidarity in Poland.

    Solidarity implemented on a wider scale methods of its precursor
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_Defence_Committee
    also known by its Polish acronym, KOR.

    It was part an organization of pro bono attorneys, part a networking organization to help those canceled, part a charity, part an underground publishing house.
    And most amazingly, intellectuals and working class activists worked together, no haughty elitism.

    United States badly needs such organization.

  73. Curle says:
    @Jack D

    “I describe the phenomenon where white epistemic claims about science…receive more credence and attention than Black women’s epistemic claims about their own lives.”

    I dunno, I give Missy Elliot’s epistemic claims about her own life plenty of credence. Seems FM radio does as well.

    “DJ please, pick up your phone
    I’m on the request line

    This is a Missy Elliott one time exclusive

    Come on
    Is it worth it? Let me work it
    I put my thang down, flip it and reverse it
    Ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gnaht ym tup i
    Ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gnaht ym tup i

    If you got a big, let me search ya
    To find out how hard I gotta work ya
    Ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gnaht ym tup i
    Ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gnaht ym tup i
    Come on

    I’d like to get to know ya, so I could show yaou
    Put the pussy on ya, like I told ya
    Gimme all your numbers so I can phone ya
    Your girl acting stank then call me over
    Not on the bed, lay me on your sofa
    Call before you come, I need to shave my chocha
    You do or you don’t or you will or you won’t ya
    Go downtown and eat it like a vulture

    See my hips and my tips, don’t ya?
    See my ass and my lips, don’t ya?
    Lost a few pounds in my waist for ya
    This the kinda beat that go ra-ta-ta
    Ra-ta-ta-ta, ta-ta-ta-ta-ta
    Sex me so good I say, blah-blah-blah
    Work it! I need a glass of water
    Boy, oh boy, it’s good to know ya

    Is it worth it? Let me work it
    I put my thing down, flip it and reverse it
    Ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gnaht ym tup i
    Ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gnaht ym tup i

    . . .

  74. Anonymous[510] • Disclaimer says:

    Hey Steve, you mock so-called reality deniers. However the supposed “science” societies you champion aren’t doing a very good job of reproducing themselves.

    If “truth” is “what works,” which societies are closer to truth?

  75. vinteuil says:
    @AnotherDad

    …there is so much Jewish bullshit about “McCarthyism” it has descended into parody. Uh, oh, a few Jewish commies were outed as … Jewish commies and had to write their commie scripts under false names…

    Yup.

    Even guys who I greatly respect still buy into the narrative that McCarthy was a dangerous maniac, next door to Hitler.

    • Replies: @Anon
  76. @Currahee

    She probably has little actual knowledge of McCarthy, but relies on the common hearsay.

    Correct.

    They call for Shockley’s cancellation as punishment for his abhorrent views on issues far outside his domain of expertise, such as race, gender, and IQ.

    And there she goes again, swallowing and regurgitating the woke buillshit without giving it a second thought. She’s aware of the phenomoenon, yet it doesn’t occur to her that she might have internalized some of the lies the phenomenon produces. Dumb.

  77. @Achmed E. Newman

    Read Joseph Bendersky’s “The Jewish Threat” about the purguing of conservatives from the US military beginning in the 1930’s.

    • Thanks: Achmed E. Newman
  78. Off topic:

    I was listening to the Waterboys on YouTube….and all these videos came up about Judith Durham….among other things Judith Durham raised consciousness about ALS….

    Judith Durham…..RIP…

  79. @Thelma Ringbaum

    “The answer is simple: our future is at stake. As a community, we face an important choice. We can succumb to extreme left ideology and spend the rest of our lives ghost-chasing and witch-hunting, rewriting history, politicizing science, redefining elements of language, and turning STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education into a farce. Or we can uphold a key principle of democratic society—the free and uncensored exchange of ideas—and continue our core mission, the pursuit of truth, focusing attention on solving real, important problems of humankind.”

  80. Anonymous[645] • Disclaimer says:

    What they fear is the sciencing or scientizing of politics.

    Certain verified facts lend aid or justify certain political/social/ideological agendas, which may be deemed by official dogma as wrong or even evil.

    But what if there’s science behind the said bad ideology? That becomes problematic as the official dogma has been used to validate the prestige and power(and sense of self-worth) of so many individuals, institutions, and special interest groups.

    In that case, the science must be misconstrued, hidden, or suppressed through displays of righteous rage and terror.

  81. Dutch Boy says:
    @The Anti-Gnostic

    The whole system is rotten. The fraud in medical publishing is rife. It’s been blasted by prominent editors of journals but nothing changes, since the Pharma fox is in charge of the publishing chicken coop.

  82. @Jack D

    Was anyone else alarmed by the enormous hoop earrings?

    Long ago, an older and wiser chum claimed that women who wear large hoop earrings are Trouble with a Capital T. At first, I did not want to believe this, but experience soon taught me he was absolutely right and his few words have saved me a lot of bother over the years.

    Large hoop earrings are nature’s way of saying, “Problem here. Stay clear.”

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    , @MEH 0910
  83. She’ll be apologizing for writing this not long after the journal apologizes for having published it.

    • Replies: @Mike_from_SGV
  84. Anonymous[135] • Disclaimer says:
    @John Derbyshire

    John,

    it’s actually “homeland of elephants”

  85. . I’ve yet to see anyone arguing that George Floyd’s death means string theory must be right (or wrong). But who know what tomorrow will bring.

    In the 80’s I saw a translated Russian particle physics textbook that appealed to consistency with marxist dogma. We found this both laughable and horrifying .

    This was NOT Landau, who appeared quite brilliant.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  86. @Canute

    It has even been publicly announced by Klaus Schwartz (…..yes, that’s his real name).

    Per wiki his father moved from Helvetia to Germany to become director of an industrial organization during Ww2, so vanishingly unlikely he was Jewish.

    • Replies: @Charon
  87. Mr. Anon says:
    @Whiskey

    Given that various Neo-Cons, idiots, and those who refuse to learn have provoked a new Cold War with the world’s major manufacturing power (China) for a news cycle win,…………..

    Were you not in fact, Whiskey, the guy who once haunted this website under the moniker “Evil Neocon”?

    So are you one of those who “refuse to learn”?

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
  88. @Whereismyhandle

    Technology is as technology does. We are hopelessly behind Russia in missile technology.

    Ah, the missile gap. Never heard that one before. You should run for the Senate, or President (aim high!).

  89. @Canute

    Once Jacob Frank’s new religion was supported by Amschel Rothschild and the Jewish leadership of the Scottish rite Masonic Order the great march to global control of all wealth and thought was assembled.

    I’m as conspiracy minded as the next fellow but this one needs a little work. Frank was a quasi-Sabbatian who converted (pretty much entirely insincerely) along with many of his followers to Catholicism in a well publicized mass conversion. Amschel Rothschild on the other hand was an Orthodox Jew in good standing his entire life. While there were groups of nominally Orthodox Frankists in Prague and several other cities, Frankfurt wasn’t one of them. Is there any evidence Frank and M.A. Rothschild ever met?

  90. Anon[213] • Disclaimer says:
    @J

    What about all those German civilians killed by the RAF. Harris, Churchill and the other war time English elite were as innocent as the wind driven snow.

  91. looks like people are missing the important point here. the larger picture about how science works.

    it didn’t matter that the Soviets produced little original science. as soon as anybody in the world produces new science, the rest of the world gets it too. like the entire rest of the world, all the Soviets had to do was sit back and wait for other people to develop new important work. then they absorbed it.

    how much of the modern technological world did China produce? almost none of it. how advanced are the big cities in China in 2022? very. they can chill, drink some beer, then steal every single thing you produce at your expense. worked hard for 20 years to invent something that took a thousand experts to create? thanks. that’s ours new too.

    what’s under attack today are most of the SOURCES of original science production. direct attacks on western university science systems, which produce almost all the original work, means global science production will slow down significantly. this is a MUCH bigger problem for everybody, than say, Soviets allowing Lysenko to deliberately botch their own agricultural science. the rest of the world was aware he was dead wrong, and ignored him.

    • Agree: Rob McX
    • Disagree: loveshumanity
    • Thanks: Polistra
    • Replies: @scrivener3
  92. Anonymous[135] • Disclaimer says:
    @John Derbyshire

    Although the whole “Russia is a homeland of elephants” propaganda campaign was of course ridiculous, it should be kept in mind that strangely large number of inventions have the Russians come up with an idea but doing nothing with it.

    Tsiolkovsky is the most spectacular example probably.

  93. Charon says:
    @Jack D

    Must admit, you sound positively delighted.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
  94. anonymous[125] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dr. Doomngloom

    This was NOT Landau, who appeared quite brilliant.

    Of course he was. He was probably Jewish, not Russian.

  95. Travis says:
    @prime noticer

    exactly true…The Democrats have politicized the science of energy production for decades. Energy costs will continue to escalate for the coming decades due to the political actions taken recently which prohibit drilling on our lands while diverting money into less productive sources of energy.

    This was the result of the great climate change hoax, which is another example of the leftists politicizing the science to push their agenda of bigger government and higher taxes and granting more power to the state.

  96. @John Derbyshire

    For what it’s worth, one category of records that Guinness no longer will recognize is that pertaining to elephant polo.

    Those avatars of white supremacy, PETA, are striving for its elimination.

    • Replies: @International Jew
  97. PeterIke says:
    @MGB

    “ So the replication crisis is due to ‘woke’, not corporations funding science?”

    Corporations are fanatically woke and expect woke results from what they fund.

  98. PeterIke says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    “ One of the lowest points (especially for men) was during the ’90’s, when Russians averaged early 60’s.”

    Thanks, Jewish looters!

  99. Charon says:
    @kaganovitch

    Oh, thank God for Wikipedia (again!)

    Close one, guys!

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
  100. “…Wokeist Theory to some abstract question in the hard sciences in order to get proponents of competing theories cancelled and hog all the grants that should have gone to them, but I can’t think of any examples of this yet outside of the human sciences.”

    It’s not so much a result of Wokeism, but Climate Change is being enforced by many of the same mechanisms

  101. Anonymous[322] • Disclaimer says:
    @quewin

    Cultural Marxism is the retarded cousin of Economic Marxism.

    Is it really so retarded? It is succeeding (so far) in genociding the most talented race on the planet.

  102. OT but Steve, the cool girls of the former left are really begging for acknowledgement. At least tweet them.

    https://www.patreon.com/posts/70199273?utm_campaign=postshare_creator

    6:30 for the now obligatory Steve content.

    On topic…uhh, Anna’s dad was a computer science genius who left the Soviet union.

    • Replies: @Anon
  103. CCG says:
    @Anonymous

    It is a Star of David. Here’s a better photo:

  104. @Reg Cæsar

    If I were that elephant with your saddle tied to a rope that runs over my anus, I’d make it my #1 goal to kill you.

  105. CCG says:
    @Anonymous

    Both Planck and Schrodinger were raised Lutheran, with Planck becoming a deist (although he remained officially Lutheran) and Schrodinger an atheist as adults. Schrodinger’s personal life would have naturally made him opposed to the Nazis, he deserved to have a millstone placed around his neck and pushed into the sea. Planck also had personal reasons to oppose the Nazis, he had lost two sons in the First World War and a third son was executed for plotting to assassinate Hitler.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  106. @Wilbur Hassenfus

    Yeah I’m amazed it was published in a mainstream (ie woke-controlled) journal.

  107. Anon[437] • Disclaimer says:

    The writings of “black” physicists Chandra and Stephon try to connect relativity, dark matter, and jazz to physics, which I could see turning into a Canadian-style “other ways of knowing” pseudoscience.

    OT

    For the second week in a row the ladies at Red Scare brought up “mellow So-Cal dad” “Steve X Clandestino,” a “funny writer and vivid storyteller.” I think they want you to appear on the show, Steve.

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
  108. nebulafox says:
    @CCG

    Finding out that Schrodinger was a pedophile was like going to heaven and figuring out Saint Paul was a methhead.

  109. Ralph L says:
    @Harry Baldwin

    In her mid 80s, my mother’s cousin brought up Rising Tide in conversion completely out of the blue. It may have had something to do with her 3 daughters producing only one grandchild. She was just a girl when it was published, but Eleanor Roosevelt probably gave it new life in the South.

  110. dux.ie says:

    > I’ve yet to see anyone arguing that George Floyd’s death means string theory must be right (or wrong).

    A Flogged Yore.

    • Replies: @Curle
  111. @Charon

    Do you dispute the info regarding his father? Or do you think wiki automatically false?

  112. Anon[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @Whereismyhandle

    Anyone remember when the journalists were begging to interview the alt-right and immediately buried the knives in the backs of their new best friends? Come on, it was just five years ago.

    What are the odds the listeners to this cool, hip, smart, wonderful antifa podcast will learn the home address of one Steve Sailer and proceed to poison his dog?

  113. Anon[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @vinteuil

    Tell your guys, “You know I respect you greatly, but on some topics you can be one credulous [REDACTED].”

  114. Anonymous[954] • Disclaimer says:

    Meanwhile, the Chicago chapter of Communist aficionados are partying like it’s 1949:

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
  115. anon[297] • Disclaimer says:

    is life really getting too complicated?

  116. There are basically two approaches to demonization of sciences (and all mental endeavors) in the modern world:

    a) you don’t like people, or some ideas they espouse, so you vilify them

    b) parts of science fundamentally disagree with your central world-view, you they must be attacked

    In the case of German Physics, it was a coincidence that Einstein was Jewish (after all, Lorentz and Poincare contributed much to SR, and Hilbert to GR). But Einstein was also a pacifist & generally unacceptable, plus prominently Jewish.

    Nazi party had to make ideological somersaults here: in theory, Jews were too materialist & empirical to rise to the heights of German thought (as exemplified by Hegel, or Wagner in arts etc.). Just, in this case Jews were accused of unnecessary abstractions as part of their “racial” spirit- which run contrary to their earthbound empiricism elsewhere.

    So, had the whole relativity structure been built by an “Aryan”, Nazi world-view would have found nothing objectionable in it.

    Here, personal is political. Wokes belong to that category.

    In the case of Stalinism, it was a more serious thing, more than anything personal. Relativity and quantum theory put limits to human knowledge, and that was unacceptable to Marxist-Leninist dogma (for instance, they were staunch Darwinists, which was respectable 19th C science. But, putting limits to knowledge? No).

    The same, or even worse, goes with Lysenkoism. Marxist myth requires something like Lamarckism, preached by Michurin & others.

    In theory, Leninism-Stalinism is, in principle, against anything that limits human knowledge or insists on some pesky laws that go against voluntarism. Science is good if it unmasks old prejudices (religion etc.); it is bad when it goes against self-deification of man.

    This is the case of Shockley. He could have been the sweetest man on earth, but his ideas on eugenics & IQ fundamentally undermine liberal dogmas. In his case- it is more than personal.

  117. @The Anti-Gnostic

    Basically, the Progressives/Marxists/Liberals/Bolsheviks (I’ll just call them “Marxists”) discovered that the working class was heavily white, straight, armed, religious, and patriotic.

    None of these were problems for the Left in the 1960s. The problem was that the American “working class” in the 1960s earned good wages, owned houses and cars, was represented by strong labor unions and consequently had no interest in revolutions. There was nothing left for the traditional left to do so the left got captured by over educated progressive types with no connection to the working class. At least in New England a lot of the Woke left is descended from the progressive wing of the Republican Party. Socially liberal GOPers were once a thing.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  118. Art Deco says:
    @Luddite in Chief

    I had a close relation who favored large hoop earrings ca 1975. Yes, she was trouble. Her daughters remember her fondly, though. She had a heart, but no moral structure.

  119. Art Deco says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    At least in New England a lot of the Woke left is descended from the progressive wing of the Republican Party. Socially liberal GOPers were once a thing.

    Almost no Rockefeller Republicans entered Congress de novo after 1986 and almost none of any consequence were born after 1945. And, no, they weren’t woke and wokism is not descended from them. Liberals and temporizers in the Republican Party were notable for very inchoate and reflexively accommodationist views on just about everything. There were and are no Rockefeller Republican or Modern Republican publications and institutes because they were people who were allergic to systematic thinking about anything. See Wm. Scranton as the echt example of the type. He went into politics because he was bored with the other businesses he’d worked in the previous dozen years or so. See George Bush the Elder. He went into politics because he was a competitive man who liked challenges (and wanted to ace his father). He was all about ‘public service’, but programs were fungible as far as he was concerned. You have to promote starboard programs to keep this or that constituency at bay, you do it. The only thing he cared much about was the capital gains tax.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
  120. I’ve yet to see anyone arguing that George Floyd’s death means string theory must be right (or wrong). But who know what tomorrow will bring.

    There is a connection here that may not be obvious, but it is real nonetheless and should be acknowledged.

    The people who need to hypothesize eleven physical dimensions in order to make their theory work, are just more STEMy, more spergy versions of the people who need to hypothesize vast, invisible clouds of institutional racism in order to explain black underperformance. Those dense academic articles affecting to deconstruct society in the name of racism-this and feminism-that are not mere chatter. The deconstructions are legitimate, at least in the same sense that an impressionist painter “deconstructing” a scene into a flurry of brushstrokes is legitimate. This is why I have in the past referred to Progressive Leftist ideas as “chamber music,” a point which was not generally understood.

    To help clarify things, we might put the matter this way: “Speaking of painting, we can say that given the way that Western art painters have been trained to think about their subject and their medium, impressionism is a sign of decadence in the tradition but it is also at the same time its culmination and its logical endpoint. In creating the illusions of depth, motion, light, and shadows, painters for centuries deepened the techniques that would one day spring forth as impressionism. In fact, impressionism is the final shape towards which this all had been tending all along. The painter, now fully conscious of his means and his mastery, proceeds to take an ironic and cynical eye towards the medium that he had formerly served; and, as it were, stepping into the scene himself as an ego, as a maestro, no longer works to bring out the essence of the subject, but rather lays forth the form itself to show how he can make it swing and dance at his command. Here there is mastery supreme—and therefore nothing else to achieve. ”

    In precisely the same sense, we can say that given the way that Western academics have been trained to think about their purpose—i.e. continuing the immense Western ethical impulse towards individuality and utilitarianism; the West’s bloody political monuments to “liberty” and positive law; its revolutions, constitutions, and lists of rights—Progressive Leftism is both the decadence and the logical endpoint of the Western tradition. Here at last is that “freedom” which the philosophes demanded when they first rebelled against throne and altar. It reveals itself at the last to be freedom from history, freedom from nature, freedom from reality itself.

    Without exception, all Western cultural creations have followed the same path. Politics, assuredly, in propounding its ever-increasing catalogue of “rights” (actually little more than a series of childish demands foolishly enshrined into law without regard for who is supposed to provide them or how), but also painting after Monet, philosophy after Nietzsche, music after Wagner, and physics after Einstein and Bohr. The hard sciences have never been immune from this trend. In fact, in certain ways the hard sciences started this trend, or at least provided it with the intellectual cover it needed to continue.

    Let there be no mistake: The “weirdness” of modern physics is decadence. The bizarre insistence of special relativity that simultaneity be abandoned, the acceptance of nonlocality by quantum mechanics—these are not features of a physical world that can exist, nor are they features of a physical theory that follows the rules of thought. But something broke down at the beginning of the 20th century. The will to exact understanding failed, and the physicists, rather than admitting that there must be something fundamentally wrong at the root of their process, proceeded to put the cart before the horse. They declared that the wacky theories were necessary because the universe simply defied normal understanding. “We were wrong in believing that time and space were consistent,” they said. And thereafter, to balk at this failure of the will was simply to show oneself a nonexpert, a rube.

    Although it has oft been gainsaid, there is a profound and essential relationship between modern physics and progressive politics. Relativity theory is, as it were, the physicists’ Declaration of Independence: “We hold this truth to be self-evident, that all lightspeed is created equal”—and therefore the rest of the universe must bend and warp around this assertion. This is of a piece with the political assertion, contrary to all practical experience, that all people everywhere are identically fitted to the same set of rights and duties.

    Yet, while it is still somewhat easy to point out the absurdity in a progressive’s claim that a man is a woman, the vast majority of people even today will blithely accept the physicist’s claim that a wave is a particle—because Science!™. You must come down either all on one side of these things or all on the other. The West, collectively, has made its choice; but individuals who still yearn for the truth must separate from the West and choose differently.

    • Thanks: Bumpkin
  121. @Bard of Bumperstickers

    Years later, Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet echoed this sentiment: “… Something has gone fundamentally wrong with one of our greatest human creations … The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.

    No respect whatsoever for Horton given his unapologetic publishing of frauds the in rag that The Lancet has been for decades. Also supports “climate change,” uses his platform to attack Israel WRT to Gaza which might be legit but has no place in a scientific/medical journal etc.

    He published the paper that started the “scientific” part of anti-vaxxing; perhaps cannot blame him for publishing it, since the white line fraud including coordination lawyers might not have been visible from the paper itself, it’s what happened afterwards. The other really big one was the Iraqi war casualties paper which was based on clearly bogus survey methods which he also made into personal attacks on Bush and Blair.

    You really want to separate political activism from science if you care at all about the latter. His statement which you quote is also too broad brush; his field of medicine is very possibly that bad, looks like psychology is much worse, maybe as high as 90%, but harder fields aren’t so bad assuming you for example remove from consideration papers from the PRC where the CCP set up a fatally bad incentive system.

    Suppose you learned that a single source in the US, every year, like clockwork, kills 225,000 people.

    Really funny thing about medicine, it’s performed by fallible human beings.

  122. @Anonymous

    “McCarthy’s America,” was chocked full of card-carrying Communists, primarily devoted to the destruction of their host country.

    Lots of people don’t know that in the period prior to “McCarthy’s America” when enough of the country realized the evil of Communism it was very popular, and as always in those sorts of times admission to here the Communist Party of the USA (CPUSA) was selective.

    You didn’t get in without being dedicated to the violent overthrow of the US and a large fraction of its members were tasked with everything from spying to propaganda. Thus every member was a self-declared traitor to the USA, although a number had second thoughts or changed their minds, but trying to withdraw from the party in those years and for a while beyond was dangerous.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
  123. @quewin

    Cultural Marxism is the retarded cousin of Economic Marxism.

    “Cultural Marxism is the [equally cynical and more effective Siamese twin] of Economic Marxism.”

  124. MEH 0910 says:
    @Anon

    Styles of Excellence | Glenn Loury & Stephon Alexander | The Glenn Show

    Jul 26, 2022

    Glenn Loury and physicist Stephon Alexander, author of Fear of a Black Universe: An Outsider’s Guide to the Future of Physics, discuss the racial achievement gap in quantitative fields and how it might be closed.

    [MORE]

    https://bloggingheads.tv/videos/64571

    Fear of a Black Universe | Glenn Loury & Stephon Alexander | The Glenn Show

    Jul 29, 2022

    0:00 Glenn and Steph’s jam session
    2:29 Steph’s adventures in the multiverse
    6:40 The parallels between black art and physics
    12:34 The centrality of self-reference in Steph’s work
    18:26 Is there a racial dimension to how excellence reveals itself in students?
    32:34 How Steph learned to level up
    41:04 Steph’s new book, Fear of a Black Universe: An Outsider’s Guide to the Future of Physics
    48:50 Steph’s admiration for prior generations of Jewish physicists
    56:48 How Glenn and Steph navigate stigma
    1:10:43 What is the Higgs boson?

    Glenn Loury and Stephon Alexander (Brown University, Fear of a Black Universe). Recorded June 29, 2022.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Alexander

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
  125. @Thelma Ringbaum

    Couldn’t make it through your comment.

  126. @International Jew

    No kidding. Someone should write a parody history paper about the ingenious “anus-anchored saddle rig” which, along with the chariot and the plow, greatly advanced civilization.

  127. @prime noticer

    It dosn’t matter how much valid science the rest of the world produces, if it is politically incorrect the results of that science will not be used here. Very few domestic doctors are prescribing hydroxychloroquine. Evidence of its effectiveness will be suppressed here. Pharmacies will refuse to fill your Rx for it. Discussions about it will be prohibited.

  128. @Mr. Anon

    So are you one of those who “refuse to learn”?

    If he’s mocking neocons now , evidently he doesn’t refuse to learn, no?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  129. @International Jew

    If I were that elephant with your saddle tied to a rope that runs over my anus, I’d make it my #1 goal to kill you.

    If the elephant felt that way, he would pluck him off with his trunk and stomp him, no? Is it a question of reach?

  130. @Charon

    Must admit, you sound positively delighted.

    Classic Jack D.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/ripped-from-the-headlines/#comment-5451621 (#101)

    • Replies: @Charon
  131. Art Deco says:
    @That Would Be Telling

    Don’t think it was ‘very popular’, but it had about 100,000 members, was able to rope in enough collaborators that it controlled about 12 trade unions, and had enough influence in Hollywood and in the publishing business to keep anti-communist works from seeing the light of day. And then there were the 149 unidentified cryptonums in the Venona transcripts. We know that among the Soviet agents were a high ranking diplomat and three subcabinet officers.

    • Agree: David In TN
  132. Curle says:
    @dux.ie

    The answer is ‘right’. No argument needed, it is an revealed truth.

  133. @Loyalty Over IQ Worship

    Here is the great Heather Mac Donald on the mind boggling racial corruption of medicine.

    tl:dr; White or Asian doctors only.

    https://www.city-journal.org/the-corruption-of-medicine

  134. @Anonymous

    The CPI opening ceremony apparently liked the Internationale, the national anthem of the 1944 USSR, followed by the USA Star Spangled Banner that was recorded during World War 2.

    In 1944, to honor the Allied victory in Italy, legendary counductor Arturo Toscanini–a refugee from Fascisim in his home country–decided to conduct a performance of Verdi’s “Hymn of the Nations”. “Hymn” is a composition that Verdi orginally built around the national anthems of Britain, France, and Italy. In order to honor all four of the major Allies, Toscanini decided to add “The Star Spangled Banner” for the U.S. and “The Internationale” for the Soviet Union. The music was performed by the NBC Symphony Orchestra, with the Westminister Choir and the great tenor Jan Peerce as soloist; conducted by Toscanini. It was filmed as a featurette to be shown in movie theaters, and was narrated by Burgess Meredith.

    In the early 50’s, at the height of the Red Scare and McCarthyism, U.S. censors excised the portion of this performance that featured the “Internationale”.

    For years the sequence containing The Internationale was considered forever lost. But recently a copy of this missing piece of film was rediscovered in Alaska. So now this rousing rendition of the Internationale–together with chorale and orchestra under the direction of a great conductor–can be enjoyed again.


    [13:20]

  135. Mr. Anon says:
    @kaganovitch

    If he’s mocking neocons now , evidently he doesn’t refuse to learn, no?

    His hasn’t really changed, just his patter.

  136. Bumpkin says:

    We can succumb to extreme left ideology and spend the rest of our lives ghost-chasing and witch-hunting, rewriting history, politicizing science, redefining elements of language, and turning STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education into a farce.

    It already is a farce, just one of a different kind, and the colleges are doomed because of online learning, so it hardly matters which way they fail. Between the idiotic current methods of having career researchers teach undergrads, the ancient lecture and exam formats, or the completely outdated pre-computational math that is taught, current STEM education is already a joke. The woke renaming some theorems and other such gloss is hardly going to make a difference.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  137. Anonymous[381] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bumpkin

    Between the idiotic current methods of having career researchers teach undergrads,

    What is wrong with that? Researchers are the most steeped in knowledge.

    the ancient lecture and exam formats,

    What lecture and exam formats do you recommend?

    or the completely outdated pre-computational math that is taught, current STEM education is already a joke.

    What math should not be taught, and what math should be taught in its stead?

    • Replies: @Bumpkin
  138. Charon says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Wow, I just wasted a few minutes reading the Twinkie/Thomm bitchfest there. Clearly I’m doing the right thing by ignoring the three-digit posts, generally speaking.

  139. Anonymous[233] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Anti-Gnostic

    Well there was a big survivalist movement in the 1970s and 80s, and then the militia movement in the 1990s. Not sure what these folks did next. (Post on internet forums I guess.)

  140. Bumpkin says:
    @Anonymous

    What is wrong with that? Researchers are the most steeped in knowledge.

    I take it you haven’t been taught by STEM researchers in decades? In my experience at a top US engineering school a couple decades ago, they are horrible lecturers, just phoning it in while focusing on the research that was actually what they were hired for and evaluated on. My understanding is they would all fight the dean to lower their teaching load and it showed: I would routinely call out math mistakes in the equations they were often forced to write in chalk up on a board. Every semester, I would attend the first couple weeks of lectures, find that they were horrible or just reading the book to me, and usually not attend the rest of the term, only showing up to turn in homework or take exams.

    Others confirm similar experiences with college STEM researchers teaching.

    Having researchers teach undergrads may have made sense a century ago, when colleges were a small affair attended by an elite few and theory wasn’t so far ahead of undergraduate textbooks. Today, it makes absolutely no sense, as researchers are now highly specialized and far removed from the undergrad fundamentals. You’d be much better off having motivated grad students or other non-traditional adepts teach: they’re closer to the undergrad material and some of them may actually enjoy teaching or want to enlighten.

    What lecture and exam formats do you recommend?

    The lecture format itself was completely outdated at least 50 years ago: ever since printing became cheap in the last century, all classrooms should have been flipped, ie assign readings at home and spend the class time going over it in Socratic discussion, driven by common misunderstandings in the homework (yes, I know many kids don’t want to read: guess what, most of those kids zone out during lectures too). That’s what should’ve been done 50+ years ago but educators are so stupid and traditional, it was never done (I had a few who experimented with such new methods, including the odious group problem-solving, and I’m grateful I got to try those methods that worked).

    Now that we have online learning, forget it, the colleges, universities, and schools will all be dead and gone in the next 10-40 years. It should’ve been well underway already, but education is a weird market: parents buy it for their kids, who are too young to know any better, and the adults are largely too conventional and old to realize the internet allows much better than what they imbibed pre-internet.

    Online learning will allow each person to learn how he does best: some do better with recorded videos, others with reading, maybe some with just audio recordings, and a few may mix it up depending on the subject. I learn best reading by myself combined with some live Q&A for parts I didn’t understand, supplemented by some recorded audio and video as relevant. You may prefer a different mix: the great thing about online learning is that we’ll be able to provide such tailored learning at a fraction of the cost of current education, ie an order of magnitude better and a couple orders of magnitude cheaper. If you think current educational institutions will be able to compete with that, you should have your head examined (current MOOCs and the like are trash, just like the early search engines before google).

    As for exam formats, multiple choice and long written formats will be largely thrown out. I had an innovative Physics class that had us work through homework problems online where you’d only input the final numerical answer and the software would generate problems with different values for each student, so you couldn’t simply copy someone else’s final answer. It would give you automated hints based on common wrong answers. Something like that but evolved much more is likely how students will be tested continuously over the course of a term, sitting for a couple exams is hilariously outdated.

    What math should not be taught, and what math should be taught in its stead?

    I’ve had this argument on this blog before, see my comments in this thread. Basically, the old calculus and other pre-computer analytic math is completely unused in practice now that it’s all done by software, so most undergrads should just learn to use such software and a few may want to learn more deeply the statistical and computational methods that are baked into that software.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  141. @SFG

    Right. That is what gets me when people go on and on about Communism. It’s a conflation of terms. Certainly there are strong totalitarian parallels between Soviet Communism, for example, and Wokeism today.

    There are many possible authoritarian and totalitarian systems which are not Communist although Communism is a primarily economic model of executing that.

    We live in a globalist oligarchy which works hand in glove with the state. The chance that government will nationalize resources and industries and institute Communism are nil. The vested corporate interests would never allow that.

    When people say Communism I suspect that they most often mean totalitarian, but due to strong associations leap to Communism as the descriptor. I find it to be annoying since it obfuscates the terminology and makes it more difficult to accurately discuss the matter.

    • Replies: @Curle
  142. Curle says:
    @Barbarossa

    “When people say Communism I suspect that they most often mean totalitarian, but due to strong associations leap to Communism as the descriptor. I find it to be annoying since it obfuscates the terminology and makes it more difficult to accurately discuss the matter.”

    Yes, plus they lose the point of Antony Sutton’s 1974 book “Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution”.

  143. @Anonymous

    Preppers! I’d like to be one myself but have no place to stash my extra food and supplies right now. Someday soon preppers will rule. Meanwhile my personal drama keeps playing out. Will I start my homestead, fill a pantry full of food I grew and canned and stock up on medical supplies in time to be one of the new elite pioneer class? Will you nerds show up desperate to buy food and home remedies from me? Stay tuned …

  144. Anonymous[159] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bumpkin

    Thank you.

  145. Anonymous[330] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Not sure what these folks did next. (Post on internet forums I guess.)

    I wrote this as a joke, but thinking about it now, yes that’s exactly what happened. Internet activism has replaced real-world activism.

    The kind of people who got into survivalism in the 1970s, and militias in the 1990s, now rack up thousands of posts on internet forums (like this one) instead.

    • Replies: @Barbarossa
  146. @Anonymous

    Internet activism has replaced real-world activism.

    Yeah, I think this is true across the political/ social spectrum. It just proves that Marx hadn’t seen nothin’ yet!

    It also divorces advocacy from real world concerns since the internet allows for such specialized obsessions. It’s also so fractured that it would be very hard to build enough of an IRL coalition to organize around real concrete change.

    The real effect we can generally have in life is on our own families and communities but this gets pushed aside by national political obsessions and armchair activism.

  147. @Peter Lund

    “Her wiki page is curiously large, btw, and manages to mention how great she is dozens of times without really getting into why she’s great, except that she apparently came up with something called ‘the spin flip-method’ which isn’t explained and hasn’t got a wiki page. Oh, and she has something to do with a company that writes quantum chemistry software.”

    Thanks for the heads-up. That’s not an encyclopedia article it’s an advertisement. Then again, that’s how the pretend encyclopedia works–it’s divided between hagiographies and demonographies.

    http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2012/03/american-renaissance-expose-on.html

  148. MEH 0910 says:
    @MEH 0910

    I just found out that Glenn Loury posts a transcript of his excerpted video clips at his Substack:

    https://glennloury.substack.com/p/styles-of-excellence

  149. hhsiii says:
    @Whereismyhandle

    Thanks and apologies for the late reply.

  150. @prime noticer

    Soviet science produced tons of excellent theoretical results. The best results didn’t get turned into technology or \$\$\$ but it does point to how serious Soviet scientists were.

    Ditto for Hungary. Tiny population but amazing theoretical results.

    Science != Technology. Although with enough time, theoretical results can actually become useful in the real world.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
How America was neoconned into World War IV
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement