Political bias is undermining social science

I'm sorry but this makes no sense at all. It presents no documentation or credible evidence, only hearsay. It begins with "left" (which she can't define at all) and "right" false whataboutism but then rushes to blame the undefined "left." BTW: what's the difference between "socialist" and "anti-capitalist," neither of which, nor anything else, is defined. Why?

I couldn't agree more with Martyn's excellent article which strongly resonates with my own personal experience. Over the past few years I've watched with dismay as the social sciences, arts and humanities in British universities have increasingly become vehicles for the transmission of dogma masquerading as scientific truth, with anyone who publicly dares challenge the prevailing orthodoxy subject to witch hunts and virtual heretic burning. Well done, Martyn, for adding your voice to the rising chorus of dissent!

I think I have read some of the articles in the journal discussed by Martyn Hammersley. Some rehearsed the familiar arguments developed by Qualitative Sociology against ‘positivism’, ‘Eurocentric White epistemology’ or even vaguer ‘epistemologies of the North’, and advocated various ‘indigenous’ alternatives. Others offered a partisan literature review on the theme of racial injustice, ending with the ‘tenets’ of Critical Race Theory, the first of which simply asserts that racism is ubiquitous, Researchers illustrated this with subjective accounts of personal oppression in the form of a ‘counterstory’. To question the tenets is ‘White denial’. To question personal counterstories is a further form of oppression. Censorship of critics is fully warranted: they must be racists, and suppressed as part of the wider struggle against ‘oppression, discrimination and domination caused by global capitalism, colonialism and patriarchy’. However, a closed intellectual system can never do much more than repeat itself endlessly, and I see the journal’s latest issue includes conventional research findings again. It seems to have sponsored grandiose claims of epistemic disruption, refused any discussion, joined the revolt against global capitalism and the rest – and then returned to business as usual!