In this paper, I critically examine institutional epistemic gatekeepers—including academic platforms such as PhilPapers, JSTOR, major publishers, and academic repositories—as fiduciaries entrusted with safeguarding epistemic diversity, justice, and integrity.

Peter Kahl argues that epistemic violence in universities, journals, and academic platforms constitutes fiduciary breaches harming democratic discourse. He proposes radical fiduciary reforms for inclusive, pluralistic scholarship.

A multimodal poetic thesis explicitly critiquing academic gatekeeping and epistemic domestication. Through poetry, multilingualism, and visual epistemology, it illustrates how traditional academic structures actively constrain knowledge into sanctioned forms.

This policy report argues that UK higher education should be treated as critical national infrastructure. It highlights systemic risks from market fragility, fiscal exposure, and governance opacity, and sets out reforms for fiduciary openness, resilience planning, and conflict-proofed oversight.

This academic paper critically examines traditional peer-review processes in academia, exposing embedded colonial epistemic structures and proposing a transformative ‘epistemocratic’ governance model to proactively foster epistemic justice, inclusivity, cognitive diversity, and scholarly autonomy.