When science is held hostage

Stay tuned for the rather tedious start of the following.

Concordia University wishes to fill a Canadian Research Chair in Nanomaterials for Sustainable Energy.

• Listen to Joseph Vacal’s column with Benoit Dautrezac on QUB Radio:

The recruit becomes a professor and researcher in the Departments of Physics and Chemical Engineering.

The post states that you want someone with a PhD in physics or engineering in this field, and has a large list of publications in reputable scholarly journals.

Standards

Where is the problem you will tell me?

Then the problem comes.

The poster then invites interested persons to explain how their “professional development and experience have prepared them to provide education relevant to Canada’s diverse, multicultural and contemporary society.”

Do you see the deal coming?

I remind you that we are looking for a physicist or engineer – and therefore a scientist Difficult Specialist in nanomaterials.

Let’s continue reading the call for candidates:

“Invite them, for example, to describe their experience or projects related to: Teaching about underrepresented populations; Instructing students from underrepresented backgrounds.”

So a physicist or engineer, as if he were a community worker in an Aboriginal setting or in a hot, multi-ethnic neighborhood, must show that he is socially committed behind the good cause.

Wouldn’t this be, as you might ask, the employer’s desire rather than a consistent demand?

In the department Qualifications and Strengthsclearly written:

“The important history (sic!) of promoting equality, diversity, and inclusion in science and/or engineering is also an enormous asset.”

In short, a distinguished scientist, from MIT or UCLA, who judges his work is mostly done in a lab and leaves the activity to others, is likely to come after someone from a background. A second-class university, but which would have a perfect fighter career get up.

A colleague gives me a delicious note.

Imagine if the posted job said something like, “We will give priority consideration to applicants who can demonstrate a commitment to advancing science consistent with Christian and conservative belief, etc.” “

Imagine that the cry is fully justified.

But if political commitment is on the safe side, that’s fine.

In fact, it is not fair to pass. It’s honestly the hiring standard.

I can multiply the examples my bewildered colleagues flooded me with.

deviation

All this shows two things.

The first is that Wokizme It has all the characteristics of a sect, but unlike the Marxist-Leninists of the 1970s, the Wokizme Rise to the very top of the academic world, from where leads are pulled.

The second is that we are no longer delirious that affects only sociology, anthropology, or literary studies.

These are all disciplines, all sciences that we are trying to turn into purely ideological goals.

I keep the best in my future column.