The Political Weaponization of Medicine, Part VI: Unmitigated Academic Insanity

The inmates are running the asylum. Literally.

The Political Weaponization of the Medicine Full Article

The Political Weaponization of Medicine Part I: Introduction

The Political Weaponization of Medicine, Part II: Activists First, Doctors Second

The Political Weaponization of Medicine, Part III: Medicalizing Gun Control

The Political Weaponization of Medicine, Part IV: Medicalizing Racism

The Political Weaponization of Medicine, Part V: Medicalizing Climate Change

---

There are two papers that I want to highlight to illustrate a crucial point, which is that a limitless intellectual and moral derangement has taken root in academia that goes well beyond conventional political activism in the academic world generally. Even calling this irrational doesn’t quite capture the full measure of insanity, as we are about to see.

The inmates are clearly in full control of the academic asylum:

1. Glaciers, gender, and science: A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0309132515623368

This one is probably the looniest study I have ever seen, which is definitely saying something.

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

YOU ARE ENTERING THE TWILIGHT ZONE

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

This gobbledygook is indecipherable even to seasoned academics, who are unlikely to make it past the second sentence, where they encounter phrases like “the relationships among gender, science, and glaciers”, or “epistemological questions about the production of glaciological knowledge”.

And just what the heck is "feminist glaciology” pray tell? Is there “feminist chemistry”? What about “feminist math”¹?

And then there is “gendered science”. Is gendered science different from “feminist glaciology”? Good question.

Then we get what appears to be the mission statement of this incoherent academic albatross:

“Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.”

At least this paragraph can be said to be avant-garde, transformative even. Until now, we had the Turing Test to determine if a machine could imitate a human well enough that a human would not be able to tell if he was conversing with a machine or person. This unique scholarship is unambiguous proof that the converse is true as well: a human can imitate an algorithm. These distinguished academicians have synthesized a work of art that is indistinguishable from a product of the SCIgen program that can conjure up an academic paper by cobbling together random scholastic-sounding sentences².³

Moving past the abstract, we find the following:

This is would seem to be straightforward and uncontroversial. After all, from a scientific perspective, ice is ice, nothing more.

Alas this is not what follows:

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Next comes this little tidbit:

Nüsser and Baghel (2014) also reject the ‘ice is just ice’ assertion. Glaciers, they argue, ‘have increasingly become contested and controversial objects of knowledge, susceptible to cultural framings as both dangerous and endangered landscapes’ (Nüsser and Baghel, 2014: 138).

Reject the “ice is just ice” assertion. Really now. This is even more intellectually deranged than the growing number of genders expanding faster than the physical universe.

Oh, and for the record, what they mean by “susceptible to cultural framings” is that we need to incorporate indigenous people’s mythologies about glaciers into scientific knowledge, something to which they later refer to by way of “folk glaciologies”.

🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

More inverse-Turing test material this is.

And finally, we have…

*Folklore Is Science*

That’s right, we need to integrate *folklore* into science, such as mythical “ice-gods”.

This would make Orwell proud.

2. On Having Whiteness

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34039063/

This study abomination written by one Donald Moss - a white guy, by the way - is the most intellectually and morally deranged paper I have ever seen. Ever.

This deplorable filth was actually published in the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. Guess we at least know that JAPA is a load of psychobabble.

Instead of the twilight zone, we are heading off to Racist Reich-stan:

Ask yourself: just how rotten does the culture in academia have to be for an actual journal to publish the rabid deranged rantings of an unhinged lunatic? (Just imagine if someone tried to publish this sort of vile screed about “Jewishness” or “Blackness”...)

Let’s see a few more ‘treasures’ from Donald Moss:

This is the stuff of genocidal regimes, which is not an exaggeration. Dehumanization and portraying a group as a mortal peril to society are recognized as key steps toward the eventual perpetration of genocidal extermination. The Nazis are famous for getting this down to a science.

Unlike covid, the babies are not safe from this ‘disease’:

And of course, it’s basically incurable:

You have to wonder just what nutty culture has infested academia that someone could write this vile screed in the first place.

Donald Moss is a repulsive Nazi wannabe and a demented evil sociopath⁴.

You have to wonder how many other Donald Mosses are entombed within the halls of the Ivory Towers of academia.

Conclusion

What I have marshalled here is but a drop in the ocean of academic activism and political partisanship. The culture rot visible in the abovementioned sources has poisoned every level of every discipline of medicine and replaced the ancient medical ethos with an ideological perversion of healthcare that has no place in a civilized society. One need look no farther than the subjects having to do with sexuality or lifestyle, where radical activists have succeeded in suppressing and censoring all scientific research in order to maintain the numerous fictions necessary to propping up their tangled and conflicting mess of incoherent and contradictory conceptual frameworks (something brilliantly demonstrated by Matt Walsh’s recent documentary “What is a Woman”).

The primary takeaway I hoped to impart is that the totality of the observations presented here make it irrefutably clear that the medical community is an insular ideological fraternity populated by a bunch of partisan political activists who believe they have a moral and ethical imperative to wield medicine as a political weapon so their ideological views prevail upon the rest of society, and that they are willing to sublimate the formerly foundational ethos of medicine to achieve this.

---

The Political Weaponization of the Medicine Full Article

The Political Weaponization of Medicine Part I: Introduction

The Political Weaponization of Medicine, Part II: Activists First, Doctors Second

The Political Weaponization of Medicine, Part III: Medicalizing Gun Control

The Political Weaponization of Medicine, Part IV: Medicalizing Racism

The Political Weaponization of Medicine, Part V: Medicalizing Climate Change

---

The Weaponization of Medicine, Introduction

The Weaponization of Medicine, Part I

The Weaponization of Medicine, Part II

The Weaponization of Medicine, Part III

The Weaponization of Medicine, Part IV

1. I suppose if math can be racist, then it follows that it can be feminist as well. Unexplained is why or how objective mathematical knowledge is racist, but whatever.

2. Let’s not forget the Sokal Affair (taken from Wikipedia):

In 1996, Sokal submitted an article to Social Text, an academic journal of postmodern cultural studies. The submission was an experiment to test the journal's intellectual rigor, specifically to investigate whether "a leading North American journal of cultural studies—whose editorial collective includes such luminaries as Fredric Jameson and Andrew Ross—[would] publish an article liberally salted with nonsense if (a) it sounded good and (b) it flattered the editors' ideological preconceptions."[2]

The article, "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity",[3] was published in the journal's spring/summer 1996 "Science Wars" issue. It proposed that quantum gravity is a social and linguistic construct. At that time, the journal did not practice academic peer review and it did not submit the article for outside expert review by a physicist.[4][5] Three weeks after its publication in May 1996, Sokal revealed in the magazine Lingua Franca that the article was a hoax.[2]

The hoax caused controversy about the scholarly merit of commentary on the physical sciences by those in the humanities; the influence of postmodern philosophy on social disciplines in general; and academic ethics, including whether Sokal was wrong to deceive the editors or readers of Social Text; and whether Social Text had abided by proper scientific ethics.

3. SCIgen wreaked havoc for some time, extracting significant casualties from a variety of journals:

Real Nature paper: Publishers withdraw more than 120 gibberish papers

Conference proceedings removed from subscription databases after scientist reveals that they were computer-generated.

(Yes, that’s *more* than *120* papers withdrawn. That were total gibberish. Like the ramblings of Fauci or Eric Feigl-Ding or famed Eugyppius “mentally vacant covid astrologer” Eric Topol.)

So did this precipitate more careful peer review that involved at least one real person actually reading a submission before accepting it?

Nope. That would be too much work:

Springer and Université Joseph Fourier release SciDetect to discover fake scientific papers

At least they were nice enough to offer it free of charge to the entire scientific community though:

The new, open source software is publicly available for free to the scientific and publishing communities.

4. It is important to pry open the Overton Window to articulate with moral clarity that this sort of phenomenon is unambiguously a depraved evil.