> How has progress been stopped dead in its tracks by wokeism? I think its hard to make the argument that technical progress has stopped, but to some extent th

> How has progress been stopped dead in its tracks by wokeism? I think its hard to make the argument that technical progress has stopped, but to some extent the woke ideologues do introduce friction to technical progress. Here’s one simple example: before wokeism took root in corporations, the ideal that most wanted to strive towards was something like a color-blind meritocracy. Today, the prevailing idea in hiring/promoting in many corporations isn’t “is this person the absolute best scientist/engineer/inventor that we can get” it’s “does this person have the right identity?”. It’s not hard to imagine that some technical progress is being left on the table by the focus on identity and not on merit. > If anything one could make an argument that the current anti-vax/anti-science elements pervading society would fit the description should their views gain more traction. Deciding whether to take a medication is not the domain of science: that’s a risk-management decision. The well of discourse has been poisoned by the repeated false claim that not finding enough benefit in a particular medication is anti-science. Science can’t and doesn’t command anybody to take any medication, it just gives you tools to understand the possible risks and benefits. People can reasonably disagree that the risks aren’t worth the benefits, even if you personally disagree.