Getting Harder to Hide to Partisan Agendas Behind the “March for Science”

Poor Jerry Coyne.  The atheist activist is struggling mightily about the March for Science.  He wants to attend the march, although he doesn’t know what it is supposed to accomplish.  But he’s having a hard time closing his eyes to the fact that the March for Science is a March for Post-Modernism and Identity Politics.  As I pointed out back in early February, the March for Science is The Extreme Left’s Trojan Horse.  It’s a way for the post-modernist activists to a) cloak their agenda with the cultural authority of science while b) extending their tentacles into the scientific community itself.  It’s a double win for them.

Coyne’s struggles seem to revolve around two things.   First, there is a story by STAT News circulating around the internet that documents some of the infighting among the activists.  Predictably, it’s the social justice warriors asserting more control over the march that is causing the problems.  Interestingly enough, the March for Science FB page has completely ignored the STAT story.  Apparently, while the MfS organizers have pledged to strengthen the bonds of mutual respect and communication between scientists and the public while opposing any attempt to censor the sharing of data, the MfS people aren’t too keen on the public knowing the data about their internal infighting.

Secondly, Coyne’s upset about the new Anti-Harassment Policy for Online Platforms found on the MfS webpage.  Here’s part of it:

The March for Science does not tolerate hate speech, bigotry, or harassment within or outside our community. Targeting individuals or communities with violent language, including statements that reflect racism, sexism, ableism, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia, or any form of bigotry, will result in banning and/or blocking. Personal attacks based on religious affiliation or lack of religious affiliation will also lead to banning and/or blocking. To flag an issue, please contact a March for Science administrator on the relevant social media platform.

Given that the New Atheist Movement has long engaged in “personal attacks based on religious affiliation” (Dawkins mocking religious people as “faith-heads” or Harris’s personal attacks on Francis Collins), the MfS has now positioned itself such that it categorizes much of New Atheist rhetoric as “hate speech.”

Anyway, it is interesting how the social justice warriors are becoming more emboldened as we get closer to the march.  Consider this article from Vox (the title says it all).

The March for Science is forcing science to reckon with its diversity problem

Science has a long been a white men’s club.

Or check out this article from the Union of Concerned Scientists, an official partner of the March:

When I March for Science, I’ll March for Equity, Inclusion, and Access

Y’gotta love this excerpt:

History shows us that who has access to science, what questions are asked, and how science is used have always had political dimensions. Early scientists butted heads with the religious establishment. And who were most early scientists?  Any mainstream history book will tell you that this was mostly white men. And that’s the first problem: Because of who controls history books, the history we hear about tends to focus on white male Europeans. And just as important, access to science was largely unattainable for others, and those that did break though often didn’t get credit for their work. You may have seen the recently resurfaced story of  19th-century Irish doctor Margaret Ann Bulkley, who became James Barry, concealing her born gender for 56 years in order to practice medicine.

Sure.  The reason students learn so much about Newton and Darwin at the expense of learning about Bulkley is because the former were “white male Europeans.”  Get the feel what science education is going to be like once the social justice warriors control the curriculum? 😉

And then there’s another article using the MfS as a reason to push identity politics: Codes of Conduct Around Inclusion and Harassment Are a Sadly Necessary Trend

We’re also seeing more of the raised, Left fists:

I suspect the social justice warriors are feeling so emboldened because they have accomplished what they needed to accomplish – luring in multiple mainstream scientific organization to endorse their partisan march.  Now that the endorsements are in, it’s time to do what activist do – run for the cameras to get the face time to exploit all the free publicity that they can.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in activism, March for Science, post-modernism, Science, Social Justice, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Getting Harder to Hide to Partisan Agendas Behind the “March for Science”

  1. FZM says:

    Early scientists butted heads with the religious establishment. And who were most early scientists? Any mainstream history book will tell you that this was mostly white men. And that’s the first problem: Because of who controls history books, the history we hear about tends to focus on white male Europeans. And just as important, access to science was largely unattainable for others, and those that did break though often didn’t get credit for their work.

    Yes, I can see that it is surprising and/or sinister that history books written by white Europeans in European languages aimed mainly at a reading public in Western and Central Europe, where until very recent times a vast majority of the population was both white and European, focused on the achievements and work of white Europeans.

    And, for whatever combination of reasons, Western and Central Europe was the area where many of the ideas and studies that turned out to have great importance for the development and emergence of modern science were worked out and carried out, by white male Europeans. So this should be a source of guilt for white European males.

    People who lived outside Western and Central Europe were denied access to the science and research of White male Europeans, written and published in European languages in Western/Central Europe, because they lived in areas distant from Europe, were unfamiliar with European languages and (naturally) were much more focused on and familiar with the activities of those in their areas who wrote in languages they could understand. Another source of guilt for white Europeans.

    The reason students learn so much about Newton and Darwin at the expense of learning about Bulkley is because the former were “white male Europeans.”

    Isn’t it clear that the achievements of Newton and Darwin are only treated as important and given so much coverage because Newton and Darwin were white, male and European?

  2. SteveK says:

    hah!

    ‘March For Science’ Not Sure They Want Bill Nye To Lead Them – Because He’s A White Guy

    “I love Bill Nye,” said Stephani Page, a member of the March’s board, who was critical of what she considered the March’s lack of diversity. “But I do feel comfortable saying to you what I said to the steering committee: He is a white male, and in that way he does represent the status quo of science, of what it is to be a scientist.”

    Source: http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/march-for-science-not-sure-they-want-bill-nye-to-lead-them-because-hes-a-white-guy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s