Catholic Candle note:  The article below is a warning about the harm caused by the free, online encyclopedia called Wikipedia.  There are many ways in which Wikipedia does harm, e.g., it has a huge amount of the vilest impurities, ready to send a person straight to hell.

However, the article below focuses only on a single type of Wikipedia’s evil: its leftist bias.

 

One modern habit which is harming intellects and spreading error, is people’s wide-spread excessive use of, and overreliance on, cell phones.  Connected with that bad habit is many people’s gullibility and intellectual laziness in using unreliable online sources as their “go-to” sources for practically all information. 

By gullible and intellectually lazy, we mean a blind trust in information sources which are convenient, popular, and approved by the world, without making the effort to be more careful, dig deeper, do more thinking, reading, and searching for the truth in better, (but often less convenient), sources.

One of the common sources of falsehood frequently relied upon by the gullible and intellectually lazy, is Wikipedia.

Wikipedia was started about 20 years ago.  It is a free, online encyclopedia available to anyone with an internet connection.  The name “Wikipedia” is a combination of:

·         a Hawaiian word “wiki”, which means “quick”, but in this context seems to connote collaboration; and

·         the end of the word “encyclopedia”.

Wikipedia is free and convenient and so, is very popular.  Wikipedia claims to be:

the world’s largest reference website, attracting 1.7 billion unique visitors monthly as of November 2020.  It currently has more than fifty-six million articles in more than 300 languages, including 6,347,334 articles in English.[1]

However, Larry Sanger, one of Wikipedia’s two co-founders[2] (who has since left the organization) warns that Wikipedia “completely ignores any conservative, libertarian, or critical treatment of the subject.”[3]

According to Sanger, Wikipedia did not start with its current heavy leftist bias.  However, a decade ago, “as liberals, or leftists made their march through the institutions, Wikipedia became one of those influential institutions.  They started their march and basically took it over.”[4]

One way Wikipedia prevents the (conservative) truth being presented in its articles, is that the encyclopedia has blacklisted most conservative media sources because these media sources do not hide the truth that the leftists want to hide.[5]  These blacklisted sources are the only news sources doing any reporting on many important stories.  Wikipedia bans even mainstream media sources that are less liberal, e.g., like Fox News, the New York Post, and Daily Mail (UK).[6]  Other examples of Wikipedia’s blacklisting include Lifesitenews.com and TheEpochTimes.com.[7]

Wikipedia allows anyone to author new articles.  However, as a consequence of the above-mentioned bias, even if a Wikipedia article’s author hypothetically wanted to cite one of those less-liberal sources to support a statement in his article, he is not allowed to do so.  If the author gives no citation to a source, he risks deletion of his statement by Wikipedia because it is unsupported.

Let us examine a few examples of Wikipedia’s leftist bias.

Wikipedia changes “facts” in its “historical” and “scientific” articles, serving leftist goals.

Have you ever heard of Dr. Robert Malone?  According to Wikipedia in mid-June 2021, he is the principal inventor of the mRNA technology used in the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines.  Here is a screenshot of the beginning of Wikipedia’s entry for the invention of mRNA technology, as it read on June 14, 2021:

This entry is now changed (as we will explain below); and so, we had to extract the above screenshot from a past version of Wikipedia which is stored at archive.org.[8]

On June 10, 2021, Dr. Malone joined biologist Dr. Bret Weinstein, Ph.D., on the Dark Horse Podcast, to discuss the use of mRNA technology in the COVID “vaccines”.[9]  Dr. Malone raised numerous safety concerns about the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, both of which use the mRNA technology invented under his leadership.  Among other hazards, he warned about future autoimmune risks caused by the spike proteins within the mRNA injections.

This podcast was uploaded onto YouTube but it didn’t last there very long before YouTube deleted his warnings off of its site.[10]

Dr. Malone repeated his warning about the danger of mRNA “vaccines” when he appeared a few days later on Fox News.[11]  So here was one of the principal inventors of the mRNA technology used in these COVID “vaccines”, who was warning about their danger.  These warnings contradicted the mainstream media’s constant promotion of those “vaccines” and Dr. Malone’s status as chief inventor of this technology gave great weight to his warnings.

On June 16, 2021, Wikipedia changed its mRNA article to remove all credit and mention of Dr. Malone from the entry.  Here is a screenshot, (again from archive.org[12], because Wikipedia changed the mRNA article again, as will be explained below):

Wikipedia then tweaked the article again to give chief credit to Jon Wolff (a collaborator of Malone’s in 1990), for the mRNA research experiments.  Here is a screenshot from earlier July 2021[13]:  

As you see, Wikipedia’s article now also praises and promotes Katalin Karikó.  Karikó strongly promotes these mRNA “vaccines”.[14]

This is an example of Wikipedia’s bias in countless articles.  This reminds us of the warnings in George Orwell’s novel, 1984, in which the main character, Winston, worked in the Ministry of Truth to re-write articles in order to change the “truth” as it had been previously written, in order to fit the current desires of the totalitarian government.

There are countless other examples, besides the above, extended example of Wikipedia falsifying history and science by re-writing[15] what it claims as true.  Wikipedia expediently changes its narrative of the science/history involved, thereby destroying Dr. Malone’s important authority to speak on the subject, serving to promote the vaccines using the technology that Dr. Malone knew well and about which he began giving public warnings.  Wikipedia was his “cheerleader” until political expedience caused Wikipedia to “cancel” him.

Let’s look into more examples that show Wikipedia promoting leftist ideology rather than truth and facts.

Gender dysphoria on Wikipedia

Wikipedia writes a solemn “academic” treatment of people’s gender delusions as if those poor confused souls were not out of touch with reality.[16]

Wikipedia writes how some people have no gender (“agender”).[17]

Wikipedia solemnly explains the teachings of “scholar” Finn Enke, a poor deluded woman professor at the University of Wisconsin at Madison (a university known for its craziness and its doctrinaire leftism, similar, in this way, to the University of California at Berkeley).  On Enke’s website, you can also see that woman’s ugly, disorderly, talentless, and gimmicky “art” that she is promoting.[18]

With great seriousness, Wikipedia explains how “agender” is a gender, how a person can have multiple genders at once, or even all genders at once (whatever that means, and which absurdity is called “omnigender”).[19]

Wikipedia solemnly explains how some people (whom common sense recognizes as indecisive and confused) are “gender fluid” because they don’t want to commit to being either one of the two real genders or even firmly commit to any other specific (pretend) gender they might concoct.[20]

This Wikipedia article (as so many others) pretends that Nature does not exist, as if God does not exist, and as if reality were only whatever a person chooses, similar to a person deliriously deciding he is Napoleon. 

Wikipedia gives no hint that this transgender delusion is irrational.  Of course, we also know that this position (which Wikipedia sets forth) not only attacks sound reason and the magnificent Catholic culture which the Catholic Church built (viz., Christendom), but also God’s Law and the Holy Catholic Faith itself.

Further, Wikipedia gives no hint that there is another side on this issue, besides the satanic lie that Wikipedia gives.  Perhaps Wikipedia would object that it does present both sides of an issue when there are two sides worthy of mention.  Wikipedia might then claim that its transgender position – which is the leftist position – is the only reasonable one and so that is why the article does not give the conservative (and true) position.  However, even under that hypothesis, Wikipedia would still be no less biased and this would still result in Wikipedia being a purveyor of leftist propaganda.

Wikipedia’s article does not mention that this transgenderism was listed as a mental illness by the World Health Organization until 2019 and by the American Psychiatric Association until 2012.[21]

This is one of countless examples of Wikipedia pushing the leftist evils as if they were the only “orthodoxy”.

Truly, our times fit St. Paul’s warning:

For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: and will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables.

2 Timothy, 4:3-4.

Wikipedia’s treatment of “conversion therapy”

We know from our Holy Catholic Faith (as well as from the science of Ethics) that a man can follow reason and eschew sin and vice.  In this he is not like the brute beasts, who follow instinct and have no free will.  Unlike the brute beasts, man is both capable of sin and capable of overcoming sin.  Unnatural vice is sinful[22] because a man has a free will and can stop sinning.

Thus, we know that a man who has fallen into unnatural vice was not “made that way” as some of those men claim, nor is he incapable of ceasing to commit those sins (as is also true of other sins).

So, we know that a person can stop committing these unnatural sins and that people can help him do so, by prayer, moral support, good habits, good advice, etc.  This is Catholic, reasonable, and common sense.

Now let’s look at Wikipedia’s false and leftist treatment of the issue.

Wikipedia correctly says that “conversion therapy” involves trying to change someone who is involved in such unnatural impurity, and describes the methods as:

counseling, visualization, social skills training, psychoanalytic therapy, and spiritual interventions such as “prayer and group support and pressure”.[23]

In a rough sort of way, this description corresponds to the many Catholic moral helps which can aid a person to conquer this habit of sin.

Wikipedia adds that all such efforts to help a person free himself from this unnatural vice are “pseudoscientific”.[24]  Wikipedia defines “pseudoscience” in a way that shows Wikipedia is saying that conversion therapy does not and cannot work:

Pseudoscience consists of statements, beliefs, or practices that claim to be both scientific and factual but are incompatible with the scientific method.  Pseudoscience is often characterized by contradictory, exaggerated or unfalsifiable claims; reliance on confirmation bias rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts; absence of systematic practices when developing hypotheses; and continued adherence long after the pseudoscientific hypotheses have been experimentally discredited.[25]

Wikipedia not only falsely declares that efforts to help a person to stop committing sins of unnatural vice are unscientific, discredited, and futile, but also connects these efforts (in the article) with “icepick lobotomies”, electric shock therapy, and other weird things[26] which have nothing to do with helping a person eschew sin by increasing virtue in the soul, as God wants us all to do.

As with the transgender article discussed above, this Wikipedia article (as so many others) pretends that Nature does not exist, that God does not exist, and that acts of unnatural vice are good, if that is what a person chooses.

Again, Wikipedia’s position is not only attacking reason and the magnificent Catholic culture which the Catholic Church built, but also the Holy Catholic Faith itself.

Also, Wikipedia gives no hint that there is another side on this issue, beside the satanic lie that Wikipedia gives.  If Wikipedia does not even recognize there is a conservative (and true) position worthy of discussion, that would merely cement Wikipedia’s status as a leftist mouthpiece. 

Wikipedia gives no hint that, only a few decades ago, before society became as degraded as it is, this unnatural vice was listed as a mental illness and also was a felony.  This crime traces its way back to the law of God, making it a capital offense.   Leviticus, 20:13

This is one of countless examples of Wikipedia pushing the leftist evils as if they were the only “orthodoxy”.

Historically, Catholic morality has been reflected in the civilized world’s common law.  That is a subject for a different article, but many of the basic principles of our law, like the right to confront witnesses, were first established in the Church’s own courts.

Of course, the Catholic Church and the Natural Law are the source of much of the civilized world’s substantive laws too, such as the recognition of the criminality of unnatural vice.  See, e.g., the U.S. Supreme Court upholding the criminality of unnatural vice, in Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986).

Wikipedia casts doubt on the truth of the Gospels

With a thin veneer of pseudo “scholarship”, Wikipedia rolls out the usual claims made by Our Lord’s enemies that the Gospels are uncertain, unreliable, disputed, contradictory, and not historically accurate.[27]  Wikipedia simply echoes the assertions of centuries of heretics, Jews, and other non-believers in telling the reader that the Gospels tell us little or nothing about the “historical Jesus”.[28]  Rather, they are merely pious assertions and falsehoods which are disputed by “truth-telling” scholars.[29]  Wikipedia asserts that its pronouncements on the Gospels are the conclusions of “the majority of scholars”, although Wikipedia makes no effort to prove this false assertion. 

Wikipedia’s promotion of abortion

Wikipedia’s article on abortion is full of falsehoods and leftist bias.  For example, it claims that “When properly done, abortion is one of the safest procedures in medicine.”[30]  This is a statement straight from Planned Parenthood’s own propaganda. 

Wikipedia’s claim omits the obvious fact that abortion murders a baby, so it is a deadly procedure.  Further, this claim ignores the vast body of evidence proving the grave harm to the mother, morally, emotionally[31], intellectually, and, often, physically[32], when she consents to be an accomplice to this murder of her baby.

Wikipedia’s promotion of legalizing mind-altering drugs

Wikipedia minimally acknowledges some of the obvious problems with legalizing hallucinogenic drugs, e.g., legalization leads to increased consumption of drugs.[33]  But Wikipedia’s treatment is like the typical leftist talking points which promote the legalization of “recreational” narcotics.  Although Wikipedia mentions that legalization foreseeably will cause drug use to increase, the encyclopedia then quickly transitions to the pro-legalization talking points, such as decreased gang violence, saving the costs of enforcing these laws, ability to tax “recreational” narcotic use to increase government tax revenue, and the police’s ability to concentrate on enforcing other laws.[34]

Wikipedia’s promotion of allowing the adoption of children by persons who live lives of unnatural impurity

Wikipedia’s leftist bias is on display on this adoption issue too.  Wikipedia presents (supposed) “science”, “fairness”, and “civil rights” in favor of this evil, and says that those people opposed to such adoptions are against it because of their own personal assumptions and personal faith-beliefs.[35]  The implication is that these assumptions are unscientific and unfair and that the particulars of such people’s personal beliefs are not a basis for society to prohibit such adoptions.

Wikipedia promotes the leftists’ “climate change” narrative

Wikipedia promotes the leftists’ climate alarmism.[36]  The encyclopedia falsely claims that there is an “overwhelming scientific consensus” for global warming caused by humans.  Wikipedia falsely says all research scientists agree on this “fact” and that “no scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view”.[37]

Wikipedia says that the only persons who disagree are the deniers spreading misinformation, who are funded by conservatives and the self-interested fossil fuel industry.  Wikipedia says that the uncertainty and controversy are not real but only manufactured.[38]  The article does not give any of the great abundance of evidence disproving the leftists’ climate alarmism.

Wikipedia promotes the leftists’ narrative on the 2020 U.S. presidential elections

Wikipedia gives a false, one-sided account of the 2020 election fraud controversy, saying that the Republican side was merely “promoting the conspiracy theory that falsely posits” election fraud.  Here is one place Wikipedia states this leftist propaganda:

Stop the Steal is a far-right and conservative campaign and protest movement in the United States promoting the conspiracy theory that falsely posits that widespread electoral fraud occurred during the 2020 presidential election to deny incumbent President Donald Trump victory over former vice president Joe Biden.[39]

This article is false and completely one-sided, failing to provide any of the extensive evidence of the actual voting fraud.[40]  However, leaving to a different time an examination of the truth of the fraud evidence (which exists in large amounts), for the present we note that this is another example of Wikipedia giving a one-sided narrative setting forth only the leftists’ talking points. 

So, if anyone seeks only to know what the leftists say about the election fraud, he can find it in Wikipedia.  But for anyone seeking to understand what evidence has moved 41% of U.S. voters to believe that Biden did not win the election fairly,[41] Wikipedia withholds this information.[42]

Conclusion

Wikipedia is largely not a source of truth but of leftist ideology.  Wikipedia can (and often does) change its articles almost instantaneously to take today’s news into account.  So, what was “true” yesterday, might be denied or deleted today, with no indication that yesterday’s “truth” was the opposite.

Beware of Wikipedia’s leftist bias on a large number of topics:

❖  from philosophy to foreign policy;

❖  from science to civil unrest;

❖  from technology to elections;

 

❖  from biography to religion;

❖  from history to immigration;

❖  from morals to medicine;

 

❖  from forensics to the Constitution;

 

❖  from medicine to music;

 

❖  from law to culture; and

 

❖  from politics to the rule of law.

With few exceptions, only globalist, progressive mainstream sources – and sources friendly to globalist progressivism – are permitted.  What is against Wikipedia’s leftist agenda is either ignored or is summarily dismissed as “misinformation” or a “conspiracy theory”.  In saying so, Wikipedia (and other, similarly-biased institutions) are plainly claiming exclusive control over what is thinkable.  They want any debate to occur only on the leftist playing field and want to set the boundaries of that debate, in order to tell you how to think about countless important issues.

Wikipedia articles are the perfect bait for intellectually lazy and gullible people, who are looking for a “go-to” source which is convenient, popular, and approved by the world, which does not require the effort to be more careful, dig deeper, do more thinking, reading, and searching for the truth in better, (but often less convenient), sources. 

A further “advantage” for lazy Catholics, that get their information from Wikipedia, is that they do not risk the possibility that they might learn something which would require them to withstand opposition from the world in order to defend truth and Christ the King.

We are not saying that Wikipedia never ever says anything true – even Satan tells some truths/half-truths, for his own ends.  But we urge everyone to remember whenever he is on Wikipedia (if ever) that he is in enemy-occupied territory, which exists to move the reader toward the left.