The hyper-politicization of science and medical journals has contributed substantially to the public’s loss of trust in expert institutions. When ideology drives professional discourse, how can we fully trust the studies that are published as being objective or have confidence that scholarly reports reaching contrary conclusions to the beliefs of the editors will not be rejected based on politics alone? We already know that such editorial biases undermine objective scientific scholarship.
A new editorial in The Lancet illustrates the extent to which woke activism in the journals pollutes the intellectual ground as the editors claim that “far right” political beliefs harm the public health. From, “The Far-Right and Health: An Evolving Political Crisis:”
Across Europe and North America, racism, xenophobia, and far-right nationalism have become normalised in public and political discourse, leading many people to feel anxiety and fear of violence, discrimination, and hatred. This developing political crisis is having a pervasive and devastating impact on the health and wellbeing of health workers and scientists, as well as the general population.
In other words, populist conservative political thought is a virulence.
The editors nod to 10/7 and mention both anti-Semitism and “Islamophobia” as increasing. But then, it is back to pummeling conservative belief:
White Europeans are also experiencing xenophobic attacks from far-right political parties who favour ethnic nationalism and are opposed to policies that foster European or global collaboration. These developments, together with anti-migrant sentiments across much of the West, have produced a perfect storm. Racism, xenophobia, and discrimination are fundamental determinants of health and contribute to an array of health inequities. In this volatile political climate, it is important for the medical community to acknowledge this public health threat—and respond.
Zero attempt to understand the reasons people might be turning to the right. No mention of the harm caused by gender ideologues and their push for surgeries and puberty blockers in children. Not a word about the Muslim rape gangs that victimized so many girls in the U.K. over years and the cover up by law enforcement and politicians that amounted to complicity. A complete failure to grapple with undermining of societal infrastructures and the cultural tensions caused by mass illegal immigration.
No mention of Antifa and other hard leftwing subversives and rioters. No mention of assassinations and attempts against conservative public leaders such as President Trump, Justice Kavanaugh, House Republicans, and Charlie Kirk. No concern expressed about the suppression of free speech in the U.K. and some other European countries where dissenters who peacefully complain about the changes in their cultures on social media are literally imprisoned. Nor is there any acknowledgement how such authoritarianism adds to societal tensions the editorialists decry.
The authors claim that “the NHS was built by migrants,” (Really? Back in the 1950s?) and that “Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) are foundational to science and health.” And here I thought educational excellence and depth of experience — regardless of one’s ethnicity, race, sex, or other invidious identifiers that the left deploys to divide people — were and are the essentials to a properly functioning health-care system.
The editors object to peaceful protestors flying the British flag!
At The Lancet, we have diverse international teams. Some of us in the UK from minoritised backgrounds have been deeply shaken by the recent hate speech, far-right and anti-migrant demonstrations, and swathes of English flags hung near where we live and work. Our fears of intimidation, discrimination, and being subject to violence are very real.
It seems to me that such thinking reflects a separatist mindset that sparks the very societal responses the editorialists decry.
It’s time to take a stand!
Medical and science communities cannot change societies alone. But we can set standards of behaviour and create value systems that resist corrosive social and political forces. We must take a stand against racism and prejudice. Scientific academies, medical associations, and scientific journals should make clear statements opposing the normalisation of racism and discrimination in political discourse, lead anti-racist activism, and make equity a defining goal of their mission.
Not good science. Equity. That says it all.
Here’s a suggestion for The Lancet editorialists and their ilk in other professional journals: Publish more objective science and fewer political screeds. That — not DEI — is the best path to restoring public trust in our important medical and scientific institutions, advancing public health, and furthering social comity.