A significant portion of the full inclusion movement appears permeated by radicalism, rejecting the empirical in favor of the nonepistemic and postmodern. Further, current full inclusion spin seems to have had wide influence on the field disproportionate to its claims of efficacy. We briefly discuss the ideological underpinnings, consequences, and rhetoric of the movement and offer some important instances of empirical evidence running counter to full inclusionists' claims of the general education classroom as the be-all and end-all of special education intervention.