How to recognize a far- leftie
- Thread starter danmand
- Start date
Agreed, on all points.
Those who think that throwing more money at an issue will eventually solve it, are delusional, but this seems to be top priority in the left's playbook. There are now people who make six figures, working for those charities, that the government sends ridiculous amounts of money to. And yet the problems never seem to have an end or even a glimmer of hope that they're working, so let's pump more money into it. This has to stop, the business of charity with no end in sight. There has to be a better way, one that shows results.
Under the current structure, there is no incentive for those people to solve the problems. It would put them out of a job.
I never once had this issue growing up in school. Nor did we ever refer to the bathroom as “boys room.” Let’s be real here this cartoon above is just hyperbole and lies to push a false narrative
wrong
the fact so many ridiculous cheques are being identified should have told you that
the watch dogs apparently have not been doing a good job.
There is tremendous waste and abuses occurring within govt spending.
You are a denier
regulation needs to be applied prudently and intelligently for the benefit of the country, not for political / ideological reasons
Gerald Butts / Trudeau regulated our resource sector with the ideologically driven madness of shutting it down
Ironically now the Liberals are suddenly figuring out we do need pipelines.
The permitting process for some projects now takes longer to complete than the actual construction
Companies look at the regulations, and say " we can not invest our money in Canada "
Billions are wasted on filling out regulatory documents that sit in a que, waiting for some government bureaucrat to review and send to his boss's que
Biden issued drilling permits so he could brag he was supportive of oil and gas, but he quietly put regulation in place that would not let the connecting feeder pipelines be built. No point in drilling if you can't get the product to market
Boarder agents hands are tied where ever someone cries "Refugee".
Small business have to spend huge amounts of time and money meeting regulations instead of servicing customers and growing the business
you want to business in Quebec, you need to do everything in French and English, now simultaneously
you clowns over regulated
for ever action there is a reaction
that is pure loonie left nonsense
are the democrats freaking because they view the treasury as their turf to loot ?
It was $100 MM for condoms in Gaza
right name, wrong country
If world wide birth control is the US taxpayers responsibility , best to let them know. they may have domestic priorities, like paying their rent/ bills
I am curious if Trojan received the PO for its US condom manufacturing facility or if some corrupt officials in Mozambique pocketed much of the $ and then went to the drug store for a 12 pack of rubbers
Last edited:
there is a huge difference between:
helping others to get back on their feet , providing assistance to hep others acquire productive skill sets or to break an addiction
vs.
making them a govt dependant
We Tried to Warn You
Preliminary List of Articles that Attempted to Warn Academics and Other Scientists that their Politicization of Scholarship, Teaching, Funding, Hiring and Promotions Was a Slow-Moving Train Wreck
This thorn in my side
Is from the tree I planted
-Metallica, Bleeding Me1
We warned you. This post documents the extent to which we warned you, over and over for at least2530 years. At the end, it presents over50(2/13 update, 70+ and still counting2) references documenting the historical attempt of dissident academics to warn the rest of academia that this could come if they did not get their house in order. Now its here.
The Trump administration is crushing many of the norms of academia. Some might argue that it is crushing academia. First, it is seeking to extirpate DEI. Second, it drastically cut indirect costs on grants which fund a lot of discretionary programs in academia. Third, it has paused making decisions on funding most new grant proposals. Only the gods and Trump’s inner circle know what is coming next.
Why are they doing this? Probably lots of reasons, but some are:
- Academia became a club for those on the political left, including plenty on the far left.
- Many academics embraced and advanced the politicization of academia in everything from research to teaching to bureaucracy (DEI!) as if it was some sort of good thing.
- People have become hyper-polarized, especially affectively polarized. That means that they hate the other side more than they actually disagree with the other side. Academics are on the left to far left, and many on the left/far left hate Republicans and especially Trump.
- Trump and the Republicans know this. I do not know if they actually hate us per se, but they know most of us hate them, and they are ready, willing, and able to wage relentless political war to crush the far left activist wing of academia. And if academics scream about how dangerous and misguided some of their policies are, why should they care? Why should they bother to listen? We have completely delegitimized ourselves in the eyes of vast swaths of the country. We have set ourselves up as their hostile opponents. We have demonized them relentlessly. Half the country voted for Trump. Half. And many academics think they are racists and fascists.
A few weeks ago, I received this in an email from the Rutgers AAUP. That’s the union. It “represents” the faculty.
I think the sort of sentiment in the red circle is representative of much of academia.
Tell me again why Trump and the Republicans should care one iota about what academics think? Or why they should want to richly fund playhouses for radical activists and their enablers?
We Tried to Warn You
For decades, dissident academics had been trying to warn the rest of academia that their infusion into their professional responsibilities of left-to-radical politics, including but not restricted to “social justice,” was a slow-moving trainwreck.3
I was one of them. From my paper on the scientifically narrow and politicized nature of "diversity" in psychological science accepted by Klaus Fiedler in 2022 for publication in Perspectives on Psychological Science:
But instead of heeding the warning, they became obsessed with the "racism" of the editor who accepted it and with delusions of racist mules. And of course they did. That was 2022. The Summer of Floyd was still fresh in many people’s minds. DEI had marched through the institutions like Sherman marching through Georgia, complete with scorched earth policy. Except the scorched earth of DEI was more of a scorched lives policy: In academia, and for many outside of it, those who criticized DEI or BLM, or who simply ran afoul of social justice sacred narratives risked being mobbed, ostracized and punished, up to and including losing their livelihoods.
So of course they came after my paper. And of course, their thundering hallucinations of racism rendered them incapable of even hearing, let alone heeding, the warning.
I was doing this long before the Attack of the Racist Mule. This paper is from 2012.
That was 2012, but it was by far not the first paper to raise the warning flag. Much has been written on this before me, by academics, though the pace of such dissident warnings did start picking up around 2012. I keep saying academics, because, this means the people giving the warnings shared much of the same training and expertises as those who were warned. You might think all this scholarship could have had some impact on how academia functioned. Silly you.
They were warned. They did not hear it. They did not want to hear it. They were so full of moral self-righteousness, how could they have heard? “Oppression” hijacked every last auditory neuron.
In an alternate universe, academics took to heart the early warnings about why politicizing their scholarship, teaching, and bureaucracies was a really bad idea. People who politicized their work anyway were deemed incompetent and treated accordingly; their articles were rejected, their grants never funded. As a result, most could not get tenure track jobs. In this alternate universe, the federal govt never took any steps to depoliticize academia or defund it because there was no need. And so there was no risk of federal policy being implemented recklessly, like the proverbial bull in a china shop.
But back in our real world, things unfolded quite differently. Academics were warned, they did not listen, and now the bells are tolling for much of what they hold dear about academia. They might even be the bells not of reform, but of vengeance.
In the rest of this post, I begin documenting the extent to which they were warned by their own colleagues in academia. What appears below is a list of every academic publication that I could find5 that was available to them and which tried to warn them. Cumulatively, they should have been recognized decades ago as a small smoldering flame and stamped out. But it was not recognized. Over the years, the flame grew and grew until it became a five alarm fire. And like a story of old, academics sat there, fiddling their righteous lies, delusions, and propaganda until it was too late.
Academics could have put out the early fires with some water. But they refused. So the people of the United States of America voted for a different fireman. And he is not just going to bring a few fire engines; he is unleashing a flood.
This list is preliminary. It is a work in progress. I plan to periodically update it.
Books
Note: Edited books are listed here only if many chapters in them addressed the problem from a different angle. Some of the chapters are listed separately.
Journal Articles and Book Chapters
- Crawford, J. T., & Jussim, L. J. (Eds.). (2017). The politics of social psychology. Psychology Press.
- Dreger, A. (2016). Galileo's middle finger: Heretics, activists, and one scholar's search for justice. Penguin books.
- Eppard, L. M., Mackey, J. L., & Jussim, L. (Eds.). (2024). The Poisoning of the American Mind. University of Virginia Press.
- Frisby, C. L., Redding, R. E., & O’Donohue, W. T. (2023). Ideological and Political Bias in Psychology: Nature, Scope, and Solutions (pp. 1-14). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
- Maranto, R., Redding, R. E., & Hess, F. M. (Eds.). (2009). The politically correct university: Problems, scope, and reforms. Rowman & Littlefield.
- Pinker, S. (2003). The blank slate: The modern denial of human nature. Penguin.
- Pluckrose, H., & Lindsay, J. A. (2020). Cynical theories: How activist scholarship made everything about race, gender, and identity—and why this harms everybody. Pitchstone Publishing (US&CA).
- Smith, C. (2014). The sacred project of American sociology. Oxford University Press.
Essays, Op-Eds, and Blogs
- Abbot, D., Bikfalvi, A., Bleske-Rechek, A. L., Bodmer, W., Boghossian, P., Carvalho, C. M., ... & West, J. D. (2023). In defense of merit in science. Journal of Controversial Ideas, 3(1).
- Abramowitz, S. I., Gomes, B. & Abramowitz, C. V. (1975) Publish or politic: Referee bias in manuscript review. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 5(3):187–200. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1975.tb00675.x
- Bailey, J. M. (2019). How to ruin sex research. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 48(4), 1007-1011.
- Bartels, J. M. (2023). Indoctrination in introduction to psychology. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 22(3), 226-236.
- Clark, C. J., & Winegard, B. M. (2020). Tribalism in war and peace: The nature and evolution of ideological epistemology and its significance for modern social science. Psychological Inquiry, 31(1), 1-22.
- Duarte, J. L., Crawford, J. T., Stern, C., Haidt, J., Jussim, L., & Tetlock, P. E. (2015). Political diversity will improve social psychological science1. Behavioral and brain sciences, 38, e130.
- Eagly, A. H. (1995) The science and politics of comparing women and men. American Psychologist 50:145–58.
- Eitan, O., Viganola, D., Inbar, Y., Dreber, A., Johannesson, M., Pfeiffer, T., ... & Uhlmann, E. L. (2018). Is research in social psychology politically biased? Systematic empirical tests and a forecasting survey to address the controversy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 79, 188-199.
- Efimov, I. R., Flier, J. S., George, R. P., Krylov, A. I., Maroja, L. S., Schaletzky, J., Tanzman, J., & Thompson, A. (2024). Politicizing science funding undermines public trust in science, academic freedom, and the unbiased generation of knowledge. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 9, 1418065.
Frontiers | Politicizing science funding undermines public trust in science, academic freedom, and the unbiased generation of knowledge
This commentary documents how federal funding agencies are changing the criteria by which they distribute taxpayer money intended for scientific research. In...www.frontiersin.org
- Finseraas, H., Midtbøen, A. H., & Thorbjørnsrud, K. (2022). Ideological biases in research evaluations? The case of research on majority–minority relations. Scandinavian Political Studies, 45(3), 370-381.
- Hilton, E. and Wright, C., 2023. Two Sexes. In Sex and Gender (pp. 16-34). Routledge.
- Honeycutt, N., & Jussim, L. (2020). A model of political bias in social science research. Psychological Inquiry, 31(1), 73-85.
- Honeycutt, N., & Jussim, L. (2023). Political Bias in the Social Sciences: A Critical, Theoretical, and Empirical Review. In C. L. Frisby, R. E. Redding, W. T. O’Donohue, & S. O. Lilienfeld (Eds.), Ideological and Political Bias in Psychology: Nature, Scope, and Solutions (pp. 97–146). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29148-7_5
- Inbar, Y., & Lammers, J. (2012). Political diversity in social and personality psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(5), 496-503.
- Jussim, L. (2012). Liberal privilege in academic psychology and the social sciences: Commentary on Inbar & Lammers (2012). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(5), 504-507.
- Jussim, L. Diversity is diverse: Social justice reparations and science. Perspectives on Psychological Science 19, no. 3 (2024): 564-575.
- Jussim, L., Crawford, J. T., Anglin, S. M., & Stevens, S. T. (2014). The politics of social psychological science II: Distortions in the social psychology of liberalism and conservatism. In Sydney Symposium on Social Psychology and Politics.
- Jussim, L., Crawford, J. T., Stevens, S. T., & Anglin, S. M. (2016). The politics of social psychological science: Distortions in the social psychology of intergroup relations. Social psychology of political polarization, 165-196.
- Jussim, L., Crawford, J. T., Stevens, S. T., Anglin, S. M., & Duarte, J. L. (2016). Can high moral purposes undermine scientific integrity?. In The social psychology of morality (pp. 173-195). Routledge.
- Jussim, L., Finkelstein, D., & Stevens, S. T. (2023). Uncertainty, Academic Radicalization, and the Erosion of Social Science Credibility. In The Psychology of Insecurity (pp. 329-348). Routledge.
- Jussim, L., & Honeycutt, N. (2023). Psychology as science and as propaganda. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 22(3), 237-244.
- Jussim, L., Honeycutt, N., Careem, A., Bork, N., Finkelstein, D., Yanovsky, S., & Finkelstein, J. (2023). The new book burners: Academic tribalism. In The Tribal Mind and the Psychology of Collectivism (pp. 227-246). Routledge.
- Jussim, L., Honeycutt, N., Paresky, P., Careem, A., Finkelstein, D., & Finkelstein, J. (2023). The radicalization of the American academy. The Palgrave Handbook of Left-Wing Extremism, Volume 2, 343-366.
- Krylov, A. I. (2021). The peril of politicizing science. The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters, 12(22), 5371-5376.
- A.I. Krylov and J. Tanzman. Fighting the good fight in an age of unreason—a new dissident guide. A chapter in The Free Inquiry Papers book edited by Robert Maranto, Lee Jussim, and Sally Satel, and published by AEI , in press (2024)
- A.I. Krylov. G. Frenking, P.M.W. Gill. Royal Society of Chemistry provides guidelines for censorship to its editors. Chemistry International 44, 32 – 34 (2022) Abstract Full text
- A.I. Krylov and J. Tanzman. Critical Social Justice subverts scientific publishing. European Review 31, 527 – 546 (2023) Abstract Full text Preprint
- A.I. Krylov, J.S. Tanzman, G. Frenking, P.M.W. Gill., Scientists must resist cancel culture. Nachrichten aus der Chemie 70, 12 – 14 (2022) Abstract Full text
- Lupia, A. (2023). Political endorsements can affect scientific credibility. Nature.
- Martin, C. C. (2016). How ideology has hindered sociological insight. The American Sociologist, 47, 115-130.
- McNally, R. J. (2024). Is Clinical Psychological Science Infected by Racism and White Supremacy? Journal of Controversial Ideas, 4(2).
- Paresky, P., & Campbell, B. (2023). Psychology’s language and free speech problem. In C. L. Frisby, R. E. Redding, W. T. O'Donohue, & S. O. Lilienfeld (Eds.), Ideological and political bias in psychology: Nature, scope, and solutions (pp. 149–172). Springer Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29148-7_6
- Peters, U., Honeycutt, N., De Block, A., & Jussim, L. (2020). Ideological diversity, hostility, and discrimination in philosophy. Philosophical Psychology, 33(4), 511–548. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2020.1743257
- Redding, R. E. (2001). Sociopolitical diversity in psychology: The case for pluralism. American Psychologist, 56(3), 205.
- Redding, R. E. (2013). Politicized science. Society, 50, 439-446.
- Rothman, S., Lichter, S. R., & Nevitte, N. (2005, March). Politics and professional advancement among college faculty. In The Forum (Vol. 3, No. 1, p. 0000102202154088841067). De Gruyter.
- Savolainen, J. (2024). Unequal treatment under the flaw: Race, crime & retractions. Current Psychology, 43(17), 16002-16014.
- Sokal, A. D. (1996). Transgressing the boundaries: Toward a transformative hermeneutics of quantum gravity. Social text, (46/47), 217-252.
- Stevens, S. T., Jussim, L., & Honeycutt, N. (2020). Scholarship suppression: Theoretical perspectives and emerging trends. Societies, 10(4), 82.
- Tetlock, P. E. (1994). Political psychology or politicized psychology: Is the road to scientific hell paved with good moral intentions?. Political psychology, 509-529.
- Walsh, A. (2022). Ideology and Intolerance: The Case of Colonialism. Journal of Ideology, 41(1), 5.
- Zigerell, L. J. (2019). Left unchecked: Political hegemony in political science and the flaws it can cause. PS: Political Science & Politics, 52(4), 720-723.
Other
- Bikfalvi A, Ideology-Based Investigations, Myths, and Blind Spots in Academia and Society NOV 17, 2024
- Bikfalvi A. The Open Society and its Enemies 2.0. APR 28, 2024https://hxstem.substack.com/p/the-open-society-and-its-enemies
- Bikfalvi A., Kuntz M. International Scholars Must Resist the American Campaign to Inject Racial Tribalism Into Science 2020. https://quillette.com/2020/08/21/international-scholars-must-resist-the-american-campaign-to-inject-racial-tribalism-into-science
- Bork, N., Maranto, R. & Bradley-Dorsey, M. (2024). Preventing the Next Wave of Progressive Radicalism---Before It Arrives. Quillette, August 26, at https://quillette.com/2024/08/26/preventing-the-next-wave-of-academic-progressive-radicalism/
- Burgess, M. (2024). It’s time to stop the double talk around diversity hiring. Chronicle of Higher Education.
- Burgess, M., Pielke Jr., R. (2023). Partisan science is bad for science and society. Heterodox Academy.
- Coyne JA, Krylov AI, The ‘Hurtful’ Idea of Scientific Merit, The Wall Street Journal.
- George, R. & Krylov, A. The Ruthless Politicization of Science Funding, The Chronicle of Higher Education.
- Haidt, J., & Jussim, L. (2016). Psychological science and viewpoint diversity. APS Observer, 29.
- Jussim, L. The reality of the Rise of a Radical and Intolerant Left on Campus. Areomagazine.
- Krylov AI and Tanzman J, Academic ideologues are corrupting STEM. The silent liberal majority must fight back. Quillette , (2021) Abstract Full text
- Krylov AI, From Russia with Love: Science and Ideology Then and Now, HxSTEM;
- Maranto, R. (2024). Saving American Political Science and Saving America: Reflections and Recommendations to Restore Pluralism | American Enterprise Institute - AEI, March 25.
- James Meigs (2021). How Alan Sokal Won the Battle but Lost the ‘Science Wars.’ Commentary Online.
- Paresky, P. (2015). How Making Colleges 'Safe Spaces' Makes Us All Less Safe. Psychology Today.
- Paresky, P. (2017). The Savage Empathy of Safe Spaces. Psychology Today.
- Paresky, P. (2018). Harvard Study: Trigger Warnings Might Coddle the Mind. Psychology Today.
- Paresky, P. (2022). Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Commitment or Cult? Psychology Today.
- Paresky, P. (2022). A Bad Sign for the Future of Higher Education. Psychology Today.
- Paresky, P. (2023). The Credibility Crisis in Psychology: A Tragedy in Four Act. Substack.
- Paresky, P. (2023). Yoel Inbar and the Credibility Crisis in Psychology. Psychology Today.
- Pluckrose, Lindsay, Boghossian. 2017. Academic Grievance Studies and the Corruption of Scholarship. Areomagazine.
- Pluckrose and Lindsay. Why Scholar-Activists made everything about identity and why this goes so badly wrong, posted on December 18, 2020 as https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2020/12/18/why-scholar-activists-made-everything-about-identity-and-why-this-goes-so-badly-wrong/
- Stanovich, K. (2021). The Social Science Monoculture Doubles Down. Quillette.
- Wright, C.M. and Hilton, E.N., 2020. The dangerous denial of sex. Wall Street Journal, 13.
Footnotes
- Honeycutt, N. (2022). Manifestations of political bias in the academy. Dissertation, Rutgers University. https://doi.org/10.7282/t3-2y4z-7009
- Honeycutt, N. (2024). The Politics of University Faculty. Preprint. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/dnxqh
- Honeycutt, N. (2024). Faculty Evaluations of DEI Statements for Academic Hiring. Preprint. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/mwt5r (manuscript under review)
- Honeycutt, N., & Jussim, L. (2022). On the connection between bias and censorship in academia. https://psyarxiv.com/4f9va/ (likely forthcoming as a chapter in an edited volume).
- Kaufmann, E. (2021). Academic freedom in crisis: Punishment, political discrimination, and self-censorship. Center for the Study of Partisanship and Ideology, 2, 1-195.
1
Thorn in my side. I thank Toviah Moldwin who retweeted my tweeting of this post framing it with this quote.
2
Count of articles. I thank commenters here, several folks I contacted via email, including the entire set of SOIBS founders, and folks on X for identifying additional articles. I plan to keep adding articles, as relevant, as they come in.
3
Slow moving trainwreck. It did not help that they were charging exhorbitant prices for driving a rickety train on tracks that had been maintained poorly. The tracks were coming apart at the bolts and the train had malfunctioning brakes. This lent credibility to “waste and fraud” charges that are much of the rhetoric of Trump and DOGE. See Ioannidis’s famous article about biomed research, Why Most Published Findings are False. See my recentish Unsafe Science post, ~75% of Psychology Claims are False:
We Tried to Warn You
Preliminary List of Articles that Attempted to Warn Academics and Other Scientists that their Politicization of Scholarship, Teaching, Funding, Hiring and Promotions Was a Slow-Moving Train Wreck
unsafescience.substack.com
Last edited:
That triggers you, doesn't it? You guys are so fragile. If this dude is happy dressed like that why the fuck do you care?
Twins. They say real life is scarier than fiction.
Doesn't trigger me at all, seems that the post triggered you.
I really don't care, as long as they don't compete with women and they go to mans jails when they commit crimes.Exactly! And when you make no headway in alleviating the problem, except for asking for more money and expanding your fiefdom, then you've lost all direction.
