The Weaponization of Science

Echoes of the 1930s in Today’s Effort to Redefine, Replace, and Control Scientific Truth

Photo by Al Aumuller/Library of Congress. Albert Einstein receiving his certificate of American citizenship from Judge Forman after refusing to return to Germany.

---

Hi - I write this to cut through the noise and bring you the truth about what’s happening in science and public health. If that matters to you, please consider upgrading to become a paid subscriber. Every new subscriber helps me reach more people and do more of this work.

---

In the years between 1918 and 1933, Germany was one of the most advanced scientific societies in the world. Its universities were world-renowned, and it was home to some of the greatest minds in modern physics, chemistry, medicine, and psychology —Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Werner Heisenberg, and Fritz Haber among them. In fact, over one-third of the world’s Nobel Prizes in science before 1933 went to German-speaking researchers.

Germany’s scientific leadership of the time was built on deep investment in basic research, a culture that valued intellectual rigor, and a network of elite institutions. At the center of this was the Kaiser Wilhelm Society (founded in 1911), a pioneering research organization that brought together the country’s top scientists under one umbrella. It was designed to promote cutting-edge science free from the teaching demands of traditional universities, which allowed researchers to focus purely on discovery. The KWS established specialized institutes across the sciences, including the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Physics, where Albert Einstein served as director starting in 1917. The KWS model would later inspire institutions like the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH).

But while science was thriving, the political fabric of Germany was unraveling.

After its defeat in World War I, Germany was forced to sign the Treaty of Versailles (1919), an agreement that imposed harsh reparations, territorial losses, and strict military limitations. The treaty was deeply unpopular across the political spectrum and became a lasting symbol of national humiliation. During World War I, Germany had abandoned the gold standard and financed the war through massive borrowing, assuming a quick victory. When that victory never came, and reparations had to be paid in gold-backed currency, the Weimar government faced overwhelming financial pressure. In 1923, when Germany missed a reparations payment, France and Belgium invaded the Ruhr, one of Germany’s most productive industrial regions, to claim coal and goods as compensation. In response, the government encouraged a general strike and began printing vast sums of paper money to pay workers, triggering a wave of hyperinflation. Prices skyrocketed, the currency collapsed, and people’s life savings disappeared. Unemployment surged, food became scarce, and trust in institutions crumbled. Out of this turmoil grew a deep sense of cultural and national instability that many exploited through conspiracy theories, rising extremist movements, and scapegoating. Germany’s struggles were no longer blamed on war or economic policy, but on so-called “internal enemies,” including Jews, communists, liberal intellectuals, and scientists.

Far-right factions promised a return to order, purity, and greatness. They rejected pluralism and intellectualism in favor of mythology, nationalism, and racial purity. By 1933, when Hitler rose to power, this resentment was weaponized into full-blown authoritarianism, and in turn, a systematic attack on reality itself.

The Nazi Attack on Science

As authoritarianism took hold in Germany, science became a target.

Hitler and the Nazi regime did not oppose all science, of course. They selectively embraced research that served the state, while purging what they viewed as politically or racially suspect. This marked a shift from evidence-based inquiry to ideologically approved research.

Entire disciplines were discredited solely because of the identity of the scientists or the perceived “foreignness” of the ideas. Modern theoretical physics, including Einstein’s theory of relativity and the early foundations of quantum mechanics, was dismissed and labeled as “Jewish physics.” It was seen as abstract, elitist, and tainted by “cosmopolitan” values. In its place, the Nazis promoted “Deutsche Physik” (“German Physics”), a so-called “pure” science aligned with Aryan ideology and practical engineering.

But the regime’s manipulation of science wasn’t limited to censorship or suppression. In some cases, the distortion originated within the scientific community itself, when ideology crept into evidence, ethical guardrails were abandoned, and institutions lent legitimacy to ideas that aligned with dominant power structures. Even research that appeared rigorous on the surface could be co-opted to serve political ends.

This was especially true in the case of eugenics, which had become mainstream in German biomedical and public health circles long before Hitler took power. Some physicians, academics, and state officials promoted the idea that the population could be strengthened by regulating who was allowed to reproduce. Sterilization of the mentally ill, disabled, and socially marginalized was framed as a cost-saving public health measure.

By the time Hitler came to power in 1933, eugenics had already been mainstreamed through academic journals, policy proposals, and state-funded research, and ultimately it was used to justify forced sterilization, medicalized persecution, and, eventually, mass murder.

Meanwhile, independent scientists who challenged the regime’s ideology were silenced.

Jewish scientists, as well as those seen as politically unreliable, were removed from their posts under the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service (1933). Entire research institutes and universities were gutted, textbooks were rewritten, and books by Einstein, Freud, Marx, and others were burned in public squares. The foundation of scientific progress, including open inquiry, skepticism, and peer review, was replaced by loyalty, obedience, and racial ideology.

Albert Einstein, one of the most visible scientists of his time, became a lightning rod for this anti-science campaign. His work was banned from German universities. He was vilified in the press. A Nazi publication titled “Not Yet Hanged” listed his name among enemies of the regime. In 1933, while traveling abroad, he learned that his home had been raided and he was no longer safe in his own country. He never returned, resigning from the Prussian Academy of Sciences and relocating to the U.S., where he joined the newly founded Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton.

But Einstein was only one of many. Thousands of scientists, doctors, and academics were dismissed from their positions, exiled, or silenced under Nazi rule. Many fled the country and others were imprisoned or killed. Germany’s intellectual leadership, which was once the envy of the world, never fully recovered. The cost of politicizing science was not only human lives, but the collapse of a world-leading scientific enterprise.

It’s important to acknowledge that not all critiques of public health or science stem from ideology. Many originate from genuine questions, personal experiences, or systemic failures in communication and trust. But that’s exactly what makes this moment so dangerous. Pseudoscience thrives by co-opting real concerns, then redirecting them toward manufactured enemies and undermining the very systems that are working to improve health outcomes.

Present Day Parallels

In the United States today, public health agencies are being dismantled. The NIH is facing a 40% decrease in funding. Scientists are being fired or silenced, entire research programs defunded, and terms like “health equity” and “gender” are being banned from federal grants. Peer-reviewed medical journals have received threats from the Department of Justice. Vaccine oversight has been handed to anti-vaccine activists. And the new head of HHS, RFK Jr., is using his position to elevate pseudoscience, spread vaccine misinformation, and install unqualified ideologues into positions of power.

In the last 6 months, we have witnessed a coordinated effort to discredit, defund, and ultimately replace evidence-based science with ideological control.

And there is a historical pattern to this kind of attack on science.

The tactics now unfolding, which include purging experts, rewriting science to fit political dogma, and replacing research with propaganda, are alarmingly similar to what happened in 1930s Germany, as well as with other authoritarian regimes. And while the context is different, the patterns are unmistakable.

Here are just a few of the parallels:

Discrediting Scientific Consensus as Corrupt or Ideological

Then (1930s Germany):
Einstein’s theory of relativity was dismissed as “Jewish physics,” not because it lacked rigor, but because it came from a Jewish scientist whose values were seen as “cosmopolitan” and subversive. And entire disciplines were undermined not on the basis of evidence, but on identity and perceived ideology.

Now (United States, 2025):
RFK Jr. purged the CDC’s independent vaccine advisory committee (ACIP) and replaced them with anti-vaccine ideologues all because they upheld consensus science. Scientists who align with consensus research are being dismissed as “captured” or “pharma shills,” while dissenters are elevated for their ideology, not their expertise.

Peer-reviewed journals such as JAMA and The New England Journal of Medicine have received threatening letters from the Department of Justice accusing them of political bias, without evidence, in an apparent attempt to intimidate and delegitimize them, and RFK Jr. has claimed that these journals are “corrupt” without evidence.

Redefining Science to Serve Ideological Ends

Then:
The Nazis promoted Deutsche Physik (“German Physics”), a state-sanctioned version of physics that rejected modern theoretical advances like Einstein’s theory of relativity and quantum mechanics. These fields were denounced as “Jewish science.” In their place, the regime elevated a “racially pure” physics grounded in classical mechanics and practical engineering, which they claimed was more intuitive (read: “common sense”) and in line with Aryan values.

This movement was championed by Nobel laureates Philipp Lenard and Johannes Stark, who weaponized their scientific credibility to attack relativity and reshape physics along ideological lines. Universities were pressured to hire loyalists who supported Deutsche Physik, and entire research agendas were redirected toward projects aligned with Nazi goals. Scientific merit no longer determined which ideas advanced. Instead, political loyalty and conformity with the regime’s worldview dictated which science was considered legitimate.

Now:
Earlier this year, RFK Jr. announced that his administration would uncover the “true cause” of autism by September 2025, a declaration that is fundamentally anti-scientific. Autism is a complex neurodevelopmental condition shaped by a range of genetic, developmental, and environmental factors. There is no single known cause, and no credible scientific body claims otherwise. Kennedy’s promise dismisses overwhelming global scientific consensus in favor of a preordained narrative that vaccines are to blame. Setting a deadline to “find” the cause of autism indicates that they are just building a case to justify a predetermined narrative, rather than engaging in genuine scientific inquiry.

Additionally, the MAHA Commission report, released last month and billed as a landmark review to identify the root causes of childhood chronic disease and inform sweeping national reforms, ignored decades of global scientific research on public health, disease prevention, and the structural drivers of chronic illness. Rather than reflecting a rigorous scientific review, it substituted a narrative built around “toxins,” food additives, and vaccines. Its purpose was not to investigate, but to justify ideological conclusions, which was made clear by the inclusion of at least seven citations that were hallucinated by AI, a red flag that often appears when trying to legitimize claims unsupported by credible evidence.

RFK Jr. has also floated the idea of banning federally funded scientists from publishing in journals like JAMA, NEJM, and The Lancet, which he calls “corrupt.” In their place, he proposes the creation of state-run journals to publish “gold standard science,” which is a chilling echo of authoritarian regimes that replaced independent scholarship with ideologically approved doctrine.

Replacing Experts with Loyal Ideologues

Then:
In the 1930s, the Nazi regime systematically purged thousands of Jewish and politically “unreliable” academics through the 1933 Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service. Entire university departments were decimated. Albert Einstein resigned before he could be expelled, while others, like physicist James Franck and chemist Fritz Haber, were forced out or fled. Many had been Nobel laureates or pioneers in their fields.

These scientists were replaced with ideologically loyal individuals, some of whom lacked the training or experience for the roles they were given. The result was an immediate intellectual decline. Prestigious German institutions lost their status as global leaders in physics, medicine, and philosophy. Fields like theoretical physics were gutted, and research priorities were redirected to serve Nazi ideology, which crippled innovation in the very institutions that once led the world.

Now:
In the last six month, several top scientific leaders have stepped away or been sidelined because they refuse to align with anti-science ideology. Dr. Fiona Havers, the CDC authority on RSV and COVID hospital data, resigned yesterday, saying she no longer had confidence that the data would be used objectively or respected scientifically. Dr. Lakshmi Panagiotakopoulos, a respected pediatric infectious disease specialist, quit earlier this month following abrupt changes in childhood vaccine guidance. Dr. Kevin Hall, a leading nutrition researcher at NIH, was forced into early retirement, citing censorship and political interference over his influential nutrition studies on ultraprocessed food. And the head of the FDA’s food division, Jim Jones, resigned in frustration, saying that it was “impossible to do the job” under current conditions, after many of his employees were fired at the FDA.

These departures are part of a broader purge. Earlier this year, HHS eliminated over 20,000 federal health researchers and staff, a move justified by citing public distrust in science, much of which had been manufactured by the administration itself.

This wave of resignations and firings was not unexpected. In fact prior to his confirmation, more than 75 Nobel Prize laureates submitted a rare letter to Congress warning Kennedy’s appointment posed a grave threat to American public health. And in the last week, prominent scientific institutions including the American Medical Association, the American Cancer Society, and numerous public health organizations issued statements after RFK Jr.'s purge of ACIP, concerned that vaccine oversight was being handed over to ideologues rather than experts.

Eight new members have now been appointed to replace the ousted panel. Among them are Robert Malone, Martin Kulldorff, and Vicky Pebsworth, all cited in Kennedy’s anti-vaccine book The Real Anthony Fauci. Each has a history of promoting vaccine misinformation or conspiracy, yet they were chosen over credentialed immunologists and public health scientists. The former ACIP members, in a JAMA article, warned that these changes undermine the vaccine program and endanger the public’s health.

And to lead the effort into uncovering the “causes” of autism by September, Kennedy appointed David Geier, a discredited anti-vaccine activist with no medical degree, no public health training, and a history of practicing medicine without a license. Geier and his father co-authored widely debunked claims linking vaccines to autism and promoted unethical “treatments” that ultimately led to the revocation of the elder Geier’s medical license in over a dozen states. David Geier has never held a relevant credential, but under the current administration, he now leads federal autism research. Not because of his qualifications, but because of his ideology.

Censorship and Control of Scientific Communication

Then:
The Nazi regime tightly controlled scientific discourse by banning and burning books written by Jewish, Marxist, pacifist, or otherwise “degenerate” authors. Einstein’s theories were stripped from physics curricula and entire university syllabi were rewritten to reflect Nazi ideology. Research that did not serve the regime’s racial or political agenda was ignored and often criminalized. And scientists who attempted to publish outside the state-sanctioned framework faced professional ruin or worse.

Now:
Federal scientists are being instructed to remove words like “equity,” “gender,” “inclusion,” and “social determinants of health” from grant applications and public-facing documents. Proposals using such terms are flagged for additional scrutiny or outright rejection. Some researchers report being told their work would not be funded unless politically neutralized.

Entire federal datasets have gone offline or returned with scrubbed documentation. Public health webpages addressing racial disparities, climate health impacts, or gender-based risk factors have been quietly edited or removed. Internal memos show that over 100 terms have been flagged as politically “sensitive,” forcing scientists to reword evidence-based findings in vague, nonthreatening language or not publish at all.

Editorial independence is also under direct threat. In May, peer-reviewed medical journals including JAMA and The New England Journal of Medicine received letters from the U.S. Department of Justice accusing them of political bias. No specific evidence was cited. Later, RFK Jr. suggested he might prohibit federally funded scientists from publishing in these journals entirely, calling them “corrupt” and proposing a state-run alternative.

Meanwhile, at the agency level, the CDC and others have been instructed that no public health communications, including press releases, social media posts, or interviews, can be released without approval from a political appointee. This bottleneck has slowed or suppressed critical updates on issues like infectious disease outbreaks, vaccination data, and environmental health alerts and resulted in a lack of scientific transparency and growing fear among agency staff that truthful communication could be punished.

Using Pseudoscience to Justify Harm

Then:
Under the Nazi regime, pseudoscience was weaponized to justify horrific policies. Eugenics and “racial hygiene” were framed as cutting-edge medical science, giving moral cover to sterilization campaigns, forced institutionalization, and ultimately genocide. These atrocities weren’t marketed as violence. They were promoted as public health interventions grounded in scientific authority.

Now:
Today, pseudoscience is once again being used to shape public policy. Not with the same outcomes, but still with dangerous consequences. RFK Jr. and his allies are reviving long-debunked claims that vaccines cause autism, giving them renewed legitimacy through federal platforms. He rejects germ theory, arguing instead that ‘toxins,’ not pathogens, cause illness, a belief that underpins his crusade against vaccines and fuels the marketing of wellness darlings like raw milk, detoxes, and unregulated supplements as immunity-boosting alternatives to evidence-based care.

This is not harmless, of course. Vaccine hesitancy, largely stoked by misinformation, has already led to declining immunization rates, measles outbreaks, and preventable deaths. By promoting ideologically driven alternatives and dismissing scientific consensus as corrupt, the administration is dismantling the systems that protect health at a population level.

The Deeper Parallel: Science as a Threat to Power

In both the 1930s and today, authoritarian movements have selectively used science, valuing it only when it serves their agenda. Evidence-based science becomes inconvenient when it challenges power or exposes harm. So they redefine it, suppress it, and replace it with something more obedient.

Both regimes claimed to champion science while simultaneously undermining it, although the attacks weren’t always overt and were often cloaked in the language of inquiry. Leaders insisted they valued research while promoting only the science that confirmed their beliefs. They dismissed experts as corrupt or compromised, and elevated pseudoscience as alternative truth. They didn’t reject science outright, but instead, they manipulated it, rebranded it, and weaponized it to legitimize their agenda.

They framed scientists whose work did not align with their ideology as the problem, manipulated public trust, and elevated convenient falsehoods over complex truths.

Of course, there are immense differences between Nazi Germany in the 1930s and the United States today. But that’s precisely why it’s so important to recognize the early patterns — the rhetorical strategies, the institutional dismantling, the ideological appointments, and the rewriting of what science is and who gets to define it. Because unless we identify those patterns and name them for what they are, we risk failing to stop them in time.