Trofim Lysenko, the APA’s new hero, preaching to Stalin as he
destroyed Soviet plant research, persecuted anyone
who disagreed with him, and caused famines that killed millions.
They’re coming for you next: John Staddon, a retired and well-published scholar and researcher, was banned from an email discussion group run by the American Psychological Association (APA) for daring to question the modern leftist concept that one can chose one’s sex.
Staddon was deleted from the listserv for allegedly violating the division’s code of conduct. “The division leadership has received complaints about some of the posts that you have sent to the division listserv,” wrote Jonathon Crystal, an Indiana University Bloomington provost and professor of psychological and brain sciences, on behalf of the division’s executive committee.
“I do not want to get into the particulars of the range of complaints over the years, but I will note that a number of members of the executive committee and others have voiced concerns publicly on the listserv in an attempt to make you aware of how readers of the list might view some of the posts,” Crystal wrote. “The executive committee views the use of the division listserv as a privilege and has voted to remove you from the listserv. I am writing to inform you that your email address has been removed from the listserv,” Crystal wrote, adding Staddon can use “other outlets to share your views.”
And what was Staddon’s evil conduct? This is what he had written:
“Hmm… Binary view of sex false? What is the evidence? Is there a Z chromosome?”
He readily admits that his comments were sometimes somewhat flippant, but since when did sarcasm against stupid ideas become forbidden? Moreover, Staddon says that his comments never attacked or insulted anyone. The comments, like the one above, attacked the ideas he found foolish.
In addition, allowing others to complain and get Staddon banned, simply because they didn’t like what he wrote, is the worst standard to use for determining what can or cannot be said. This is bowing to the heckler’s veto, and goes against the very heart of freedom of speech, which requires offensive speech to be allowed. Yet, this is now the standard being used by the APA. Make a complaint about someone for daring to express ideas you disagree with, and you can get them blacklisted.
Finally, while the listserv certainly has the right to enforce its own code of conduct, I guarantee that these thugs will not do anything at all to anyone who aggressively expresses leftwing political positions on this listserv, even if hundreds complain about it. No, freedom of speech demands that these ideas must be allowed. Other ideas, not so much.
Note that the APA, which runs this listserv, is supposed to be a scientific organization that claims on its website that its “mission is to promote the advancement, communication, and application of psychological science and knowledge to benefit society and improve lives.”
Hah. Not a chance. It now is clear that this organization no longer tolerates open and free debate. Any research that comes from it must thus be treated with strong skepticism, as it is very likely that it either will not be vetted properly or will be designed to advocate specific political agenda of the left.
In fact, by these actions the APA appears to be mimicking the Soviet Union and Trofim Lysenko. In the 1920s and 1930s Lysenko advocated crackpot ideas about farming and agriculture in the Soviet Union.
[He]e believed that plants and seeds could be trained to follow socialist organizational principles. His theory, which would eventually be dubbed Lysenkoism, stated that crops could be trained to conform and produce vast yields almost from out of thin air. According to what he called “the law of the life of species,” seeds wouldn’t compete with one another, but rather they would cooperate with each other in a near-sentient fashion — like humans.
Applying the Marxist principle of materialism, in which the conditions surrounding an individual dictate its behaviors and responses, Lysenko believed that plants and animals, too, could be reshaped as needed.
Such idiocy would not have mattered except that Lysenko became a favorite of Stalin and his communist government and was given by them dictatorial powers. Not only did Lysenko and the Soviet government forbid any opposition — arresting and destroying any scientist who dissented — Lysenko used his powers to force his agricultural ideas on the nation. The result: millions died from famine.
What happened in Russia was no different then what is happening now at the APA. Ideology, politics, and the misuse of power are being made more important than the scientific method that is dedicated solely to the search for truth, no matter what that truth might be.
The future is truly grim if our scientific organizations adopt such Soviet-style thinking.