Wokeism Will Destroy Science

Science could die by D.I.E. – Diversity, Inclusion and Equity.
Even Darwinians worry about re-definitions of these wholesome words.

Try this exercise. Take any neutral or wholesome word, like “safety” or “fairness,” then imagine it in a policy that justifies evil. Politicians are good at this. It’s not so much the word that makes the difference between good and evil, but how it is defined – what the speaker means by the word. Politicians routinely take innocent words and use them to sell programs that can be harmful. This practice uses the power of a propaganda tactic called euphemism, the “substitution of a mild, indirect, or vague expression for one thought to be offensive, harsh, or blunt.” Our Baloney Detector gives examples of euphemisms in the category “Loaded Words.” For instance, arch-Darwinist Ernst Haeckel used the term “self-redemption” for suicide, the act of ending one’s worthless life to prevent a drain on resources.

Three of the most widely used euphemisms today are diversity, inclusion, and equity. They are innocent, even commendable words. Diversity is a neutral word that scientists use, like in biodiversity, meaning the number of species in a habitat. Inclusion is another neutral word that scientists might use to describe particles inside a cell membrane. Equity is an ethical term about general fairness or justice; it can also mean the value of monetary assets minus debt. Now try to imagine these three words fomenting a social revolution, and you see what scientists are up against. These three words are at the forefront of the “woke” crowd – radicals who want to overthrow the civil order, destroy it, and rebuild it into a communist utopia championing the most vague euphemism of all: “social justice.” Some radicals calling themselves “social justice warriors” (SJW) believe it is equitable to burn down businesses based on the owner’s skin color. Others have noted that the adjective “social” contributes nothing; there is only justice or the lack of it.

Oppressive Ideology

The most dangerous practice in wokeism is dividing the world into two perennially inimical groups: oppressors and oppressed. This leads the SJW to feel justified in rioting, burning and destroying the properties of the “oppressor” class in order to rectify the lack of “equity” in society, so that those with “diversity” [skin color, gender, or sexual orientation] who have been denied “inclusion” in the power structures can get their “fair” share of “privilege.” In this line of thinking, the current rash of flash-mob lootings is an act of “social justice.” To the SJW, equity for BIPOCs (blacks, indigenous and people of color), includes release from prison for violent criminals and waiving of bail for those arrested. In these cases, one can see the power of euphemism to rationalize evil. Another example is accusing the “oppressors” of “colonialism” by pointing out selected cases of powerful interests expropriating the properties or ideas of the oppressed (which has, indeed, happened at times) and using the emotional reaction to such instances to push for redistributing “privilege” from the powerful to the oppressed.

Another euphemism is the term “indigenous” which is used to rationalize use of the loaded word “colonialism.” It leads to a false dichotomy of “colonizers” vs “indigenous” that is hard to justify historically. Every “native” American, in fact, was originally from a colonizing group (mostly from Asia), and among those colonizers were groups that enslaved, exploited, or warred against other so-called “indigenous” groups. The history of great empires is a long record of colonization and exploitation on every continent. Consider the case of Alexander the Great; he overran nations all the way to India in his push to establish the perceived values of Hellenism. This tended to unify much of the civilized world with a common language and culture. The Romans, further, brought roads and technologies to much of the known world through conquest; “should” they have done that? The current batch of woke SJWs, however, rants only against “imperialist” practices of western civilization, predominantly comprised of white Europeans and Americans that pushed westward. They ignore the equally “colonial” activities of other people groups. BIPOCs, for sure, have no claim of innocence historically, as the history of much of Africa has shown. Muslim invaders and indigenous black tyrants were enslaving their fellow Africans before Europeans established a foothold. Similar accounts from South America and Asia can be cited.

Can Science Be Woke?

Wokeism is now invading science, and the results are predictable. It will die under the banner of D.I.E. wherein these words have been redefined to justify attacks on western civilization, rationality and truth. How can science endure if it is viewed as a white supremacist platform for colonialism, oppression and racism? Some SJWs are even claiming mathematics is racist.

Underlying the woke trend is the assumption of postmodern relativism. Postmodernism discounts the existence of objective truth. A text means no more than what the reader interprets it to mean in his or her own contextual space. A text can be anything: a work of art, a book, or a scientific paper. But if it can mean anything, it means nothing that people can agree on. Another assumption of postmodern wokeism is that all ideas are equally valuable. One cannot judge some ideas as better than others. To the extent this is believed, science can wave good-bye to peer review. Merit-based research would have to stand down to give space for input from BIPOCs in a form of “redistribution of wealth” for “truth equity.”

Disclaimer: In the following examples, CEH condemns any unrighteous taking of goods from indigenous people illegally, as could be determined by an unbiased court of law. CEH also condemns any overt attempt to undermine or repress the valuable scientific contributions of non-whites. The issue at hand is the existence of objective truth. Science cannot endure in a postmodern culture that judges everything by race, gender and “privilege.” To the extent that rationality is judged to be a product of white European colonialism, it will stumble. A woke version of Big Science will elevate the teachings of witch doctors to be on an equal plane with Newton.

Example: Defining Science as Colonialism

Decolonizing geoscience requires more than equity and inclusion (Nature Geoscience). What could be more apolitical than geoscience? Don’t geoscientists collect rocks with hammers and examine them under microscopes? Not any more. All fields in Big Science must now submit to the bar of social justice.

In an act of penance before the SJW confessional, this secular journal prints a “world view” tract by SJW shaman Max Liboiron, who accuses geoscience of colonialism promulgated by oppressors. Max defines “colonialism” as “access to Indigenous land and the replacement of Indigenous ways of knowing and living.” Focus on that word “knowing.”

Science has long played an integral role in colonialism. Since the European Enlightenment, research on tropical and Arctic climates, diseases like malaria, and on soils and the cultivation of plants, among other topics, was required to prepare “new” lands for settlers and settlers for those lands. At the same time, science was considered a gift that imperial powers brought to colonies, part of what was seen as a civilizing mission. The replacement of local forms of knowledge with Western science was considered a mark of success.

Can it be that Max wishes that scientists retreat to Neanderthal caves? He has just indicted the whole western tradition of science and the Enlightenment! He can’t be serious, can he? Well, partially at least; he saves some space for western (“colonial”) science to continue, as long as it is done by BIPOCs. They may or may not tolerate some continuation of European practices. “Anticolonial science is not only possible, but is being created by both Indigenous and non-Indigenous people today.” If you are a white European, the descendant of a long line of other white Europeans, you have now been re-classified as “non-Indigenous.” That sounds nasty.

Max proceeds to indict western science with card stacking episodes of theft and takings from indigenous peoples, including mining and collecting on native lands. This has undoubtedly occurred (and China is now one of the worst of the “colonizers” working to gain access to resources on indigenous lands; no word from Max about that). More ethical methods of gathering data should be encouraged, such as free market trade and win-win agreements. But Max goes further. The scientific worldview itself is a manifestation of an oppressor class.

As a dominant system, colonial relationships with land, life and knowledge have become mundane. Dominant systems stay dominant, in part because they dictate what counts as common sense: what seems normal and even natural. Colonialism continues through the assumed universal superiority of civilized, Western ways of knowing and doing. Local and Indigenous ways of knowing are considered insufficient or simply heritage. Science camps for Indigenous youth taught by settler teachers aim to lift youth out of their underdeveloped local settings and into bright futures, a trajectory that takes them further and further from Indigenous ways of knowing, language and community teachers. Academic scientists sometimes advocate for Indigenous participation in science through citizen science. This is seen as development and success.

A more slanted presentation of scientific practice could hardly be imagined. Max sees absolutely no good in the search for truth by the scientific method. He equates “indigenous ways of knowing” (recall the fallacy in the word indigenous) to the development of rational thought since the dawn of philosophy. If he is right, the teachings of witch doctors should be elevated to the findings of those with PhDs in geoscience who go out and do field work and test theories by observation and experimentation. He speaks of indigenous “expertise” as if it must be deemed equal to scientific expertise.

Selective Rage

Max gives a blind eye to the good that science has done, lifting so-called “indigenous” youth out of poverty, giving them opportunities for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Would he be satisfied to leave them in the darkness under teachings of shamans? Is superstition equal to science? Would he excuse the taking of rhino horn to combat evil spirits if it makes rhinos go extinct? To him, it would have to qualify as another example of indigenous “expertise” because he does not qualify indigenous “knowledge” in any way.

Liboiron also ignores the suffering of indigenous peoples, who often toil in misery under dictators. He fantasizes about indigenous peoples living in natural paradises with their expertise. He imagines that indigenous expertise has allowed people to live for centuries or millennia on their native lands with their own kind of “knowledge.” To an extent, this is true; westerners are sometimes impressed with natives’ knowledge of plants and animals in their vicinity. Some scientists are very interested in some (but not all) “folk medicines” that sometimes work. But Max overlooks the wars that tribalism has brought. His teachings would consign many indigenous peoples to lives of poverty, darkness and suffering under their own oppressors.

Without ignoring its flaws, western civilization has been the greatest force for prosperity, health and liberty the world has ever known. Western science, often mediated by Christian missionaries, has brought healing from devastating “indigenous” diseases. Max wants to tear down all this “colonialism.” But then, he betrays hints of his own radicalism. He calls CRT (critical race theory, or anti-racism), a “positive action” even though it is the latest manifestation of blatant racism (judging persons by their skin color) that is being used by communist activists to foment political revolution.

Being specific about what we mean by colonialism in science is essential if we aren’t to mistake other positive actions for anticolonialism. Inclusion, respect, anti-racism, equity, finding common ground, environmentalism and diversification are essential, but they do not usually address colonialism.

Since western science is “colonial” in his definition, he advises Nature Geoscience to simply “Stop” doing it. Science must become more than un-colonial; it must become anti-colonial. That means that “anticolonial science requires us to treat Indigenous knowledge as expertise, rather than culture.”

So give the witch doctor “equity” with Newton. In fact, give witch doctors more “inclusion” than ever before as punishment for past colonialism. And unless invited by indigenous peoples, keep off their lands. They have their own expertise. They have their own truth.

In the next article, we show how evolutionary biologists are reeling over the effects of wokeism on science. Too bad they don’t have any authoritative response. We will offer one.