Wednesday, September 21, 2022

NewScientist Magazine is Against Free Speech

Left-wing science journals are now opposed to free speech. From a NewScientist article:
It turns out that information overload is just as toxic to democracy as censorship is. We need to chuck out the US myth that bad speech can be “cured” with more speech. Without moderation, ground rules for debate and thoughtful regulation in our digital public squares, it is impossible for us to reach agreement on anything.
Wow. When does Science ever require that we reach agreement?

There is no consensus on covid-19, global warming, causes of crime, or the interpretation of quantum mechanics. Nor should there be. The vaccine might be good for you, and not someone else.

Nor does democracy require consensus. Democracy is rule by a 51% majority.

It is increasingly clear that the Left wants to impose its program on everyone, with no dissent. Allowing free speech to express alternative views will wreck their plans.


  1. Oh dear, another scientist who didn't take basic United States History or Civics. How sad and embarrassing that he didn't know we don't live in a democracy, and we never have. The United States has always been 'and too the republic on which it stands...', and this is why precocious children should be forced to learn the pledge of allegiance, even if they are clever pin heads.

    Our country was designed that even the majority has limits on its ambitions, and powerful have checks and balances and established limitations, which are just a few of the significant differences between our country and other 'parliamentary democratic lite' nations.

    I also find it amusing that the author didn't mention 'who' should moderate, Everything is hidden behind an ambiguous 'we', which is a very leftest tactic to leave out the whole 'who has power' when they are discussing bossing folks around.

  2. Politics is about garnering consensus. Science is about what we can logically demonstrate about what we know, regardless of how popular or unpopular it is.
    If you are primarily concerned about your 'feelings' and self esteem, virtue signaling, etc., science really isn't the shoulder you should try to cry on. Science is a harsh mistress, and she doesn't smile on emotional incontinence.

    If the trend for politically manipulated scientific inquiry inside academia and the mainstream continues...those who actually wish to know will start to do so elsewhere. It's happened before... and will again.