The Deadly Rise Of The Science Enforcers

The Deadly Rise Of The Science Enforcers

The woke must needs have enemies. If they do not have them, they will create them. Their identities—and the woke are all about identities which create for them “lived experiences”, which always means “fantasized experiences”—have an absolute need to see themselves battling against powerful forces that are ever on the brink of destroying them.

This gives them the excuse to crush those enemies. Without mercy. This lack of pity follows from their premise that their enemies are holding back Utopia, which is the bliss-filled land where the greatest good for the greatest number shall be perpetual. Because science.

Enter woke scientist Peter Hotez. He is a little fella, the shape of a Butterball turkey with a constant corn-kernel grin. He is the famous author of, and I promise this is true, “Crafting your scientist brand“, a 2018 peer-reviewed paper in PLOS: Biology.

Crafting your scientist brand? If that sounds more about making science about propaganda and personality than about truth, well, that’s because it is.

Hotez said making science about people and not science is necessary because there has been an “abrupt rise in well-funded and organized antiscience movements”.

If he means by this the rise of the Woke Regime, with its vast resources, and its capture of all professional organizations and universities, and its endless ability to print money to fund its “science” fancies, why, he is exactly right. The Regime’s machinations in and manipulations of science are well known and greatly to be regretted.

Example besides the usual, you ask? It appears the Australian Experts who rule their medical institutions will recommend putting men who enjoy sodomy on antibiotics. Permanently. Perpetually. To “avoid sexually transmitted diseases.” Why would that be necessary, one wonders? One cannot say. Not without getting in trouble.

Dear reader, does your sexual partner have a uterus?

Hotez was also allowed recently another outlet for his propaganda, this time in an organ known for it, the LA Times: “Scientists have become sitting ducks. We need leaders to step up and defend us.

He isn’t happy some refused his beloved covid vax, claiming they died because not taking it:

The dead were victims of what we too often label as “misinformation,” as though these victims succumbed to random junk on the internet. This was not always the case. The unvaccinated were targeted by a well-financed and newly politicized anti-vaccine movement.

Does he include in that “misinformation” the continuous stream of lies told by Experts and rulers that if you got the vax you couldn’t get covid, couldn’t pass it on, and wouldn’t have any adverse events?

No. But he does repeat his case that his enemies are out there, and growing in power. Which is, of course, false.

Just before CPAC, another prominent Freedom Caucus member had disparaged vaccinators as “medical brown shirts,” meaning Nazis, and she later attacked me and other scientists by name on Steve Bannon’s podcast. Other caucus members regularly made unsupported and spectacular claims about the benefits of hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin as COVID treatments, while disparaging COVID-19 vaccinations.

Funny that Hotez forgets the vaccine passports, and the many, many people who were fired for not taking the vax, people forced out by a brutal, panicked Regime. And he forgets when HCQ and ivermectin (“horse paste”!) were outlawed in some locales, and people cancelled for recommending them.

Yet now, the Mayo Clinic advises HCQ for covid.

Is there any truth to the “conspiracy theory” that rulers had to ban all these alternate treatments, because if there were existing treatments they couldn’t have got emergency authorization for the forced vaccinations? Hotez doesn’t say.

Hotez next tells his good joke:

During the 1930s, Joseph Stalin’s rise to authoritarian control relied on exiling or imprisoning prominent scientists. This had catastrophic consequences for Soviet productivity, especially in agricultural science.

He did, too. The Soviet State, a full-bore Expertocracy, decided all The Science. Those who opposed it were executed, sent into exile, or fired. Which, except for the executions, so far, might sound familiar.

He claims “A 2021 survey found that 15% of scientists who engage with the news media about COVID-19 have received death threats.” Sure, some of them might have got threats from cranks, and some are probably lying about it. Anybody in the public eye our of vibrant democracy routinely has to deal with idiots venting their spleens. Ahem. But his claim that “almost 40% of COVID-19 scientists report experiencing at least one confrontation either online or in person” is more revealing.

Confrontation. Experts do not like to be questioned. Which is what is meant by online “confrontations”. It is enough, to them, that they have spoken. When they speak, you are meant to listen passively and follow orders. You, dear reader, are not an Expert and thus uncredentialed and unworthy of having an opinion. When you express one, directly to an Expert, they feel threatened. They really do.

What Expert was fired for their lies during the panic? Which were fired for being wrong? Which were fired for expressing over-certainty? As far as I know, the answer is exactly none to all these questions. Yet the “body count” of Regime critics to The Science is high, high.

If Hotez is really worried about “anti-science rhetoric”, he’d fire himself.

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card click here. Or use the paid subscription at Substack. Cash App: $WilliamMBriggs. For Zelle, use my email:, and please include yours so I know who to thank.


  1. Gunther Heinz

    Those damned Nazis!! Nazis fought with Russia against Ukranian freedom fighters in World War II. I learned that in college in Canada!

  2. Briggs



  3. Hagfish Bagpipe

    ”The woke […] have an absolute need to see themselves battling against powerful forces that are ever on the brink of destroying them.”

    They made a religion out of being victims. It justifies, in their mind, destroying these “powerful forces” first, no matter what. It’s nuts, and crazy destructive, but the weird thing is they get other people to buy into it, too. They sell victim franchises! Being a victim is a popular source of power. It not only excuses one’s failures but you also get to destroy your enemies, lie, cheat, steal, murder, etc., AND be morally superior. Amazing superpower! Hence the need for “enemies” — without them the religion doesn’t work.

  4. john b()

    The UK Parliament has now made it safe to go online

    Briggs … are you safe?

  5. JH

    As Noam Chomsky said, my (political) OPINIONS are just as good as his, but he just has the privilege of being heard and taken seriously. Great! I always take other people opinions, woke or not, political or not, lightly.

    Truth needs to be known though.

    Is the recommendation for men only? Aren’t sexual partners with a uterus also cisgender females? The recommendation seems to imply that men, who have sex with men who have female partners who unfortunately had a hysterectomy for some medical reason, are not susceptible to STIs. (Not so.)

    Now I am feeling old for not being able to keep up with new terminologies. And the fact that English is not my native language is showing now. Aging is not fun. Darn.

  6. Joy

    Johnby, no, Briggs is dangerous and he knows it.

    You should see what he put on Twitter yesterday!
    I can’t believe my government is letting him do it.
    Just beastly.

  7. JH

    Joy, Twitter? It is X now. Keep up! 🙂

  8. john b()

    JH: Now I am feeling old for not being able to “keep up” with new terminologies. And the fact that English is not my native language is showing now. Aging is not fun. Darn.

    Joy, Twitter? It is X now. Keep up!

    JH, Is that an example of the pot calling the kettle something? ?

    Why didn’t ‘X’ take a cue from “the artist formerly known as Prince”

  9. JH

    Hi john b(),

    JH, Is that an example of the pot calling the kettle something?

    LOL. It is more like “are we in the same boat?”

    All I know is that when I clicked the X button, the thing just wouldn’t close.

  10. Joy

    I am confused!
    JH, Yeah, “X”, sorry, Love that Elon’s changing it all and upsetting stick in the mud types.
    X is like some dodgy site. Posting is more sensible than tweeting.

    I was joking about Briggs.
    English isn’t your first language? OMG *an X person would say.

    You mean US English again? as opposed to (real) English like me?
    Gobsmacked if English isn’t our first language.
    I won’t hold it against you.

  11. I’m grateful to you for pointing out the absurdity of putting an entire “risk group” on prophylactic chemotherapy for life. I’ve been critically covering PrEP (although not DoxyPrEP yet) for “HIV prevention” extensively on my substack this past year. It’s honestly even creepier than you think. Here are a few links. The first one is a repost on Naomi Wolf’s Daily Clout. Please check these out—the parallels between PrEP and the Covid vaccines are eerie. (I also suspect the intersection of populations on PrEP and those who’ve had their third booster is near total.)

    I will point out that what we hear about PrEP’s “efficacy” in the wild is not reflected in the clinical trial data. Nowhere can be found results near “99% effective” at “preventing acquisition of HIV.” One of the biggest and most often cited studies, the iPrex study, showed I think a 43% reduction (30 some seroconversions in the PrEP group and 60 something in the placebo group of a total about 2000 participants — hardly a perfect prophylactic). Also note that the ads never put a number on it, choosing instead to say PrEP “may reduce your chances of getting HIV through sex.” That’s because the FDA doesn’t have a number on it either. The 99% was derived using statistical trickery, calculating drug concentrations in dried blood spots and inferring what the efficacy would be given perfect “adherence” (another creepy word)—again, this is entirely theoretical, and ignores the fact that MANY people quit these drugs because the side effect profile is grim. (See the Truvada links.) The picture that’s been painted about PrEP in the media is impossible because if it were true, this would be the first time a medication worked dramatically better “in the wild” than in trials.

    Here’s one on PrEP FOR CHILDREN:

    It becomes even more of a problem because the most commonly prescribed PrEP drug, tenofovir (Truvada) is currently being sued by 26,000 litigants who have experienced osteoporosis, kidney failure, and even death. (Also, Truvada is not “specific to HIV.” It is also used for hepatitis B and off label for CFS and “long Covid.”) The lawsuits have been happening since 2018 but the powers that be have done their best to censor information about these lawsuits, effectively preventing victims from reaching attorneys. It’s one of the craziest censorship stories and has largely flown under the radar. Weirdly, the NYT broke the silence on this story in July:

    And then POZ:

    This post summarizes everything I’ve covered on the Truvada disaster:

    For some more absurdity: (Ridiculous ads for PrEP)

    Thank you for bringing this topic to your audience, and I’d say I’m sorry for the long comment (I’m half Canadian so sorry is a knee jerk for me), but I think that you or some of your readers might find these stories interesting. You NEVER hear anything negative about PrEP, despite the picture not being nearly so pretty as it’s painted to be.
    If anyone has any questions, please go on over to my substack and I will answer them! Thanks so much.

  12. john b()

    JH : All I know is that when I clicked the X button, the thing just wouldn’t close.

    Beautiful – I was thinking the very same thing about X — I’m also in that boat (my wife wants me tested)

    Joy was joking about Briggs?

    I wasn’t – Briggs is forever (and purposely) crossing lines that would get him in trouble with powers that be (sure he’d welcome the chance to be denied by the UK)

    I watched Glenn Greenwald’s take(down) of the UK / Rumble / Russell Brand issue.

    Biden got a pass (more than a pass – people believe his accuser – she’s not anonymous) / Harvey Weinstein got a pass for how many decades?

  13. Joy

    Wow, a Grumpy Johnby!

    How do you know what I think about Russell Brand?
    Or Biden? Or anybody else/
    You’ve changed.

  14. Milton Hathaway

    Disreputable shysters like Hotez are parasites that need to latch onto once-reputable enterprises like science, suck the reputational life out of them to pump new life into their flagging scams, and then move on, leaving a trail of empty husks. Some would call them sociopaths.

    Victor Davis Hanson has another great article, “Is the Left Happy They Got Their Wish?” that serves up a lot of tasty schadenfreude.

    Pull quote: “History … is replete with misguided zealots who even to the very first shot of their own firing squads still believed in the catastrophic cultural and political upheavals they had unleashed on others.”

    JH: “All I know is that when I clicked the X button, the thing just wouldn’t close.” I’ve done that multiple times. Was that the point somehow?

    SeaTac airport was once renamed “Henry M. Jackson International Airport” to honor a longtime US Senator. Nobody outside of government liked the change, so everyone took to calling it “JacTac”, spoken with a slight sneer. The re-namers were aghast – instead of honoring the senator, it turned him into a joke. When it became obvious that “JacTac” was going to stick, they quickly backed down on the name change. The moral here is that if you don’t like a capricious change, an excellent strategy is to mock it with an earworm.

    Admittedly “Twitter” was always a pretty stupid name, but “X” is already heavily in use, and carries a butt-load of baggage. And unprotectable. Elon knows this – I suspect his strategy is to use “X” until people get sick of it, then change to the new name he really wanted all along.

    Put an entire group of humans on perpetual antibiotics? Yeah, no chance of any unintended consequences there. I had an aunt who took cold medicine daily to ward off colds, I guess she was before her time.

  15. john b()


    I’m only Grumpy at the powers-that-be, not you at all

    The last part of my comment was a general comment to anyone about the general state of affairs – and thought Glenn Greenwald did a great job on the matter. Glenn and Russell were both darlings of the left at one time but are now anathema. I don’t always agree with either but respect them where I disagree. They make cogent arguments that give me pause.

    My only comment to you was that I thought you were taking back your comment that Briggs is dangerous.
    He is or he has the capacity to be dangerous. Jordan Peterson says that capacity to be dangerous is important.

    Harlan Ellison edited two Sci-Fi Anthologies called “Dangerous Visions” and “Again Dangerous Visions”. These were “dangerous” SciFi Short Stories compiled by a man who wrote many “dangerous” stories himself.

    O Lord ,,, Please don’t let me be misunderstood

  16. john b()


    I’ve always imagined that the name Twitter was based on ST-TOS “I, Mudd”

    Where Spock says: “Logic is a little tweeting bird chirping in a meadow.”

  17. Chad W Jessup

    As Jon Rappoport revealed in his 1988 book, “AIDS INC. Scandal of the Century”, the heavy ingestion of antibiotics by male homosexuals to combat continuous STD’s precipitated the HIV (supposedly) epidemic. Side note–Dr. Fauci promoted the use of toxic chemicals to fight that so-called epidemic. 2nd side note–to exaggerate the magnitude of that health issue, the polymerase chain reaction test was also abused and misused.

  18. Briggs



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *