Without an admission of ignorance, nothing can be learnt or discovered. But modern science, which has become an adjunct of the state, cannot admit its ignorance. Such an admission would destroy the authority of the “scientist” as state official. Therefore, when confronted with a new problem for which he is ill-equipped, the science bureaucrat pretends to be knowledgeable, and concocts a plausible discourse. (He has even been known to concoct “scientific” results that are anything but scientific.)

A politician who claims to be a “scientist,” like Dr. Anthony Fauci of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), takes up a “scientific” pose, even though science is not a pose. He pretends to absolute knowledge, even though science is made of doubts more than certainties. If science is the pursuit of truth, politics is not. Politics is the pursuit of power. The two pursuits do not go together. They are antagonistic. And Dr. Fauci cannot pursue both.

In a science bureaucracy, like the NIH or CDC, the bureaucrat eschews transparency. He covers up his “scientific” mistakes. As a politician he cannot be honest about the limits of science. His power depends on projecting a false image of perfection in “settled science.” He would not want it known that scientists make mistakes — that their theories are frequently discredited. In fact, science sometimes gropes its way through a succession of mistaken theories. But the bureaucrat cannot admit this. Such an admission would be damaging to the prestige of his bureaucracy. The tenure of the bureaucrat would be short-lived if his mistaken theories should be proven wrong. To maintain his tenure, he must never be proved wrong; and he has the administrative power — through government funding of research — to preserve the appearance of infallibility. Therefore, with Fauci’s long tenure at NIH, we should not be surprised to find that scientific research (under its auspices) has been stifled, that discoveries have been suppressed. (Consider the case of Judy Mikovits, described in her book, Plague of Corruption.)

The history of Dr. Anthony Fauci and the National Institutes of Health is a story of scientific fraud, political pandering, coverups and abuse of power; — of honest scientists ruined and epidemics wrongly addressed; of diseases attributed to the wrong causal agents, and cures that kill. You will find this history in the writings of Charles Ortleb, Judy Mikovits, Peter Duesberg, John Lauritsen and Hillary Johnson — to name but a few. You would be shocked by this history, except that it logically follows from the principle that science and politics do not go together; that when you mix them, science comes out corrupted.

It is a paradox for government to say what is science. True science can only arise outside the corrupting structures of power. Just as power and the games of power drive out affection, it likewise drives out truth. The Swiss historian Jacob Burckhardt famously wrote, “Power is evil.” It is one of the least understood lessons of history. For in our shallow assessment of things, we value power without realizing its morality-bending propensities. 

Science is not a thing on which a bureaucracy can ever be predicated. True science belongs to the soul alone, and exists in a particular quality of mind. It would be a blessing if such a mind prevailed in politics; but now, in evil times, such minds are far and few between. The bureaucratic game, meanly played by the mean-of-spirit, now belongs to the Anthony Faucis of the world. It is their time — a time of half-truths and half-baked theories imposed as dogma. The present age belongs to the bureaucrats, and falls to ruin at their hands. 

The crisis of the hour requires great leadership, animated by genuine insight. To arrive at genuine insight, a leader would have to be an independent person, free to think for himself. It is this quality that is least likely to appear in today’s “leaders”; for independence is fragile in an age of bureaucratic dependencies. When every scientist must ask where his funding comes from, then every scientist must accommodate the powers-that-be; that is to say, the bureaucratic powers. 

At what point does the surrender of independent thought occur? At what point does mankind surrender to the petty tyranny of the bureaucrats? For this is what bureaucracies aim at. They foster dependence and thereby diminish the spirit and mind of man. The bureaucrat, in his role as functionary, signifies a belittlement of man. The bureaucrat literally makes us in his image; that is, small — reducing us to dependence. It may be more than coincidental, in this regard, that Anthony Fauci is an outlandishly small man, as if Providence made him an exemplar. The bureaucrat who diminishes man, who diminishes entire economies, is himself a diminutive specimen.

The belittlement of man, of course, is the object of bureaucracy’s ideological corollary, better known as socialism. The core indecency of totalitarian socialism — the purest form of bureaucratic tyranny — is its hatred of independent thought and its diabolical insight into the fragile character of man’s intellectual independence. The mind of man, says Marxism, is “epiphenomenal.” It is not worthy of independence. Therefore, says the Marxist, let us embrace the annihilation of the “bourgeois illusion” of truth. What takes the place of bourgeoise truth? Bureaucratic dictate conveniently defined as whatever the Party bureaucrat says.

We are now obeying the health bureaucracy, counting on its scientific acumen. But do they know what they are doing? Are lockdowns going to save us from a contagious pandemic? Or will the lockdowns, at best, postpone an inevitable calamity at backbreaking cost? The honest answer to this and other questions can only come out of real science; not out of the ideological gurglings of right and left. Here we find traffickers in false promises and false hopes. Such will always lead to quarreling. But we cannot afford to quarrel at this time. We cannot afford the indulgence of a civil war. 

Professor Dechend’s “annihilating recognition of … complete ignorance” should be our point of departure for discussing the pandemic. But almost nobody takes this position, which is the only genuinely scientific position. The health bureaucracy has made many mistakes during the present crisis, and is not likely to accept criticism. A spirit of blind rebellion, on the other side, is growing ever stronger. The problem of bureaucratic government, unchecked by the usual parliamentary mechanisms, leads to the problem of mass disobedience and a collapse of confidence. 

Is there any way to solve the problem? First, we must face up to the reality of scientific fraud across many disciplines. We must develop competent mechanisms to check the bureaucrats of science and restore public confidence. Unless we deal with this problem through open scientific discourse, we are going to fail. 

And time is running out. 

NOTES

From John Lauritsen’s report on Fauci’s confrontation with Dr. Peter Duesberg over the cause of the AIDS epidemic at the 1988 amfAR Forum, found in his book, Poison by Prescription, p. 168: “I am more convinced than ever that HIV is not the cause of AIDS. If HIV advocates [Anthony Fauci] were sure of their hypothesis, they would want to enlighten Duesberg and the rest of us; they would want to publish their arguments in a proper scientific journal complete with references. They would not need to resort to stonewalling, deception, and personal abuse.”

From page 39 of Charles Ortleb’s book, Fauci: The Bernie Madoff of Science and the HIV Ponzi Scheme that concealed the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Epidemic: “Scientific totalitarianism is the background music of Anthony Fauci’s brilliant and long-lasting Ponzi Scheme. A so-called liberal democracy like America demands a covert form of scientific totalitarianism that does not scare the horses of oversight and public opinion. Fauci knew how to manipulate the levers of institutional power and image-making in ways that Bernie Madoff would envy. For a scientific Ponzi scheme to prevail in America and Europe, nobody must recognize that they have acquiesced to a major and scientific fraud. Doctors must follow protocols established by the HIV/AIDS Ponzi scheme and patients must not question them. Sanctions should stand at the ready if they do. Nobody must see the telltale signs of fraud, deceit, and censorship. Fauci knew the tricks required to turn ivy-league-educated journalists into servile puppets and perky stenographers…. A long list of servile journalists who were chummy with Fauci and enabled his Ponzi scheme will have a lot to answer for.” (Note: Ortleb has discovered, in moralistic prejudice and the bureaucratic drive for power, a psychological mechanism of intellectual, political and scientific corruption which knows no bounds. His points deserve careful consideration.)

From Judy Mikovits’s Plague of Corruption, p. 92: “There are three people I place in what Frank Ruscetti calls the Unholy Trinity of Science,’ and they are Harold Varmus, Francis Collins, and Tony Fauci. Whenever you ask yourself why the truth hasn’t been told in a critical area of public health, you’ll probably find the fingerprints of these men at the crime scene.”

JRN: I have given three representative quotes about Fauci from three different sources, suggestive of his reputation among those who have studied him closely.