Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY
/
COVID-19: the tyranny of experts
COVID-19: the tyranny of experts
Jun 29, 2026 10:47 AM

You already know the basic story of the 2020 coronavirus global pandemic, but the proper interpretation is still in flux. If we fail to discern the role of the tyranny of experts, we will miss the linchpin that turned a pandemic into a catastrophe.

As a public-health problem, COVID-19 started in late 2019, when a mysterious new coronavirus infected people in Wuhan, China. Within a couple of months, it had spread to every corner of the occupied world. At first, when officials outside China did not know how dangerous it was, reactions varied. In late January, President Donald Trump responded to the news by restricting travel from China. At the time, the World Health Organization still downplayed the risk and criticized limits on travel. Trump’s opponents, from Joe Biden to Nancy Pelosi, accused him of xenophobia. By late March, though, panic was setting in, and Trump’s domestic critics were claiming he had not acted fast enough.

In downplaying the danger early on, the World Health Organization seemed to be carrying water for the regime in Beijing. (We provide the details in our new book, The Price of Panic.) But in March, the UN agency reversed course. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus pointed to a scary model from the Imperial College London, which predicted as many as 40 million people could die worldwide without draconian efforts to reduce the spread of the virus. It would be more than a month before non-experts learned that the model was little more than high tech, unreliable conjecture.

American public health experts followed the lead of WHO and advised the president accordingly. On April 8, Trump explained that “two very smart people walked into my office and said, ‘Listen these are your alternatives.’ And that was a projection of 1.5 to 2.2 million people would die if we didn’t close [the economy] up.” One of these was public health official Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Dr. Fauci and a few other officials soon became household names, thanks to a viral boost from the press and social media. As a result, government bureaucrats with narrow expertise gained the status of infallible oracles. This made it politically deadly for the president to weigh their advice against the advice of other experts.

That arrangement, we should now realize, set the stage for disaster. The coronavirus was surely a danger, especially to the elderly who suffered from ill health. But it’s not nearly as severe as the Spanish flu a century ago, and it poses less risk than the ordinary flu to the young and healthy. As a result, we argue in The Price of Panic that the cost of the public response – which involved untested, population-wide lockdowns rather than targeted quarantines – vastly exceeded even their promised benefits.

Let’s grant that the federal government has a proper role to play in public health and, in particular, during a pandemic. Still, public health officials left to their own devices should not have this sort of power over government leaders or public perception. Executing policy is finally the job of elected officials, practical men and women who are accountable to the public and who are charged with balancing the advice peting experts, not getting rolled by them.

The problem here is not that public health officials are wicked. Let’s assume they are all noble and well-meaning. The problem is that they are bound to maximize a certain kind of safety, to the neglect of other goods. In this way, they are like anxious doctors who run every possible test on a patient. Looking for problems is a physician’s job. Misdiagnosis could be considered malpractice. This makes them risk-averse and hypervigilant. They tend to respond to the worst-case scenario. But you, as a patient, have different aims. What you deem best for you, weighing costs and benefits, may not be what is best for the doctor who is treating you.

In the same way, putting medical specialists in charge of nations – or the whole globe – is asking for overly cautious and even oppressive policies. These experts tend to e fixated on the single malady in front of them, to the exclusion of any other concern – with tragic results for us in the United States and every other country that followed the doctors’ orders.

Consider, as Exhibit A, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel – oncologist, bioethicist, and one-time public health guru under President Barack Obama. Probably for shock value, news outlets quoted him in April saying that the whole country must be locked down for 12 to 18 months until there is a vaccine. “Realistically, COVID-19 will be here for the next 18 months or more. We will not be able to return to normalcy until we find a vaccine or effective medications,” he said. “I know that’s dreadful news to hear. How are people supposed to find work if this goes on in some form for a year and a half? Is all that economic pain worth trying to stop COVID-19? The truth is we have no choice.”

The doctor was wrong: There is always a choice. We could have quarantined the sick, isolated those at high risk, monsense precautions, and then gone on with our lives – just as people did during the swine flu, the Asian flu, the Hong Kong flu, and on and on. Failing that, at least we could have pivoted as soon as we saw that the coronavirus was not as deadly and indiscriminate as predicted.

Why couldn’t Emanuel see this? For the same reason that Exhibit B, presidential advisor Anthony Fauci, said: “I don’t think we should ever shake hands, ever again, to be honest with you. Not only would it be good to prevent coronavirus disease, it probably would decrease instances of influenza dramatically in this country.” This from the man the New Yorker called “America’s doctor.”

In mid-May, Dr. Fauci spoke to a Senate mittee about the dangers of reopening schools and warned governors of “needless suffering and death” if we reopened states “prematurely.” pared to what? The word implies a fixed end date, like a due date during a pregnancy. But Fauci promised no end date to the madness.

Why do public health officials like Emanuel and Fauci say such things? Because they are in the grip of a single goal. Such officials tend to think in bulk, to focus on the quantity of abstract life protected in the near term, rather than the quality of actual lives lived over the long term. Imagine, for instance, what might happen if a risk-averse public health expert who had spent 30 years obsessing over traffic deaths could dictate the driving choices of 330 million Americans, or eight billion humans. It would not be pretty.

The problem is not expertise. We all benefit from experts. The problem is the tyranny of experts – when their constricted focus dictates policy for everyone. In a sane world, the media would grasp that experts like Emanuel and Fauci offer one narrow take on a vast plex problem, and that while we should not ignore them, we should not idolize them, either.

Regrettably, the press weaponized Fauci against President Trump and other politicians who challenged the wisdom of an indefinite shutdown. The headlines reporting on Fauci’s May testimony before a mittee – when Senator (and doctor) Rand Paul had the temerity to tell him, “You’re not the end-all” – were predictable: “Trump’s Push to Reopen Schools Clashes with Fauci’s Call for Caution”; “Fauci Warns of Colossal, Deadly Mistake. Will Trump Listen?”; “Fauci Warns: More Death, Econ Damage If US Reopens Too Fast.”

Of course, Fauci has no expertise in economics, and even his health advice changed over the course of the winter and spring. As Steve Deace noted on May 14:

In January, Fauci did an interview in his native NYC saying coronavirus was just another flu. In February, he wrote virtually the same in the New England Journal of Medicine. In March, he said Americans don’t need to be walking around wearing masks. Then later in March he told Congress this would kill 10 times more people than the flu. He signed up to lockdown the country based on the disgraced Imperial College Model in March, too. In April, he sentenced us to further lockdown based on the always wrong IHME model. Later in April he said he wasn’t sure we could trust the models. Now in May he’s not sure we can send the kids back to school this fall, a linchpin to reopening the country, despite the fact kids are returning to school in China, Japan, Switzerland, Iceland, Norway, Denmark, France, Israel, and Sweden.

So, how do you know which Fauci to worship? Your demigod sure does change his mind a lot.

No matter. The press had elevated Fauci and other specialists to the status of infallible oracles – whose most recent pronouncements erased whatever they had said the day before – and dared governors and presidents to challenge them. But challenge them we must, if we’re going to avoid a repeat of the 2020 catastrophe.

Jay W. Richards, Douglas Axe, and William Briggs are the authors of The Price of Panic: How the Tyranny of Experts Turned a Pandemic into a Catastrophe.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY
Rethinking mission to the poor: An interview with Dolphus Weary
Dolphus Weary grew up in segregated Mississippi and then moved to California to attend school in 1967. He is one of the first black graduates of Los Angeles Baptist College. He returned to Mississippi to lead Mendenhall Ministries, a munity outreach organization that takes a holistic approach to solving problems of poverty. Currently, Dolphus Weary is president of R.E.A.L. Christian Foundation in Richland, Miss., which strives to empower and develop rural ministries to improve the lives of Mississippians. Among...
The great harvest: Revival in the confederate army during the civil war
Oh for a revival throughout the Confederacy! exclaimed the editor of the Macon (GA) Daily Telegraph in 1862. The paper menting on an outpouring of the Gospel throughout the town, while reporting on food shortages, ordinances, and the latest news from the front lines of the American Civil War. The war's second season was a reality check for many Southerners as the Federal blockade, inefficiencies of the Confederate government, and devastating casualties of Shiloh and Antietam dimmed the glow...
Claiming California for God: The great southern migration
Review of Darren Dochuk's From Bible Belt to Sunbelt: Plain-Folk Religion, Grassroots Politics, and the Rise of Evangelical Conservatism (ISI, Dec 2010) ISBN: 978-0-393-06682-1. Hardback, 520 pages; $28.99. Southern evangelicals that, beginning in the 1930s, left their towns and farms for the fresh optimism and opportunities of Southern California transformed a region, molding it into their own. Darren Dochuk's account From Bible Belt to Sunbelt: Plain-Folk Religion, Grassroots Politics, and the rise of Evangelical Conservatism tells the story of...
Onward catholic soldiers: The catholic church during the american civil war
It is mon, even clichéd saying that the American Civil War pitted brother against brother. Certainly, the conflict divided the nation as the seceded Southern states fought for independence, while the Northern and Border states fought to preserve the Union. Even within the sections, there were politicians, civilians, and soldiers who sympathized with the other side. The issues of Slavery, States-Rights, and the meaning of the Federal Constitution created passions and hatreds, which leapt from the ballot box to...
Why does the Acton Institute publish the 'Journal of Markets & Morality?'
The Acton Institute has long recognized the critical importance that first-rate scholarship plays in the development of a free and virtuous society. The Journal of Markets & Morality is a peer-reviewed academic journal. The journal is the flagship publication with which the institute shapes the larger academic and intellectual conversation about the free economy. The journal is truly interdisciplinary in an era where it can be very difficult to cover academic subjects from a variety of perspectives, and even...
Double-edged sword: The power of the Word - Ruth 1:16,17
But Ruth replied, Don't urge me to leave you or to turn back from you. Where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there I will be buried. May the LORD deal with me, be it ever so severely, if even death separates you and me. These words from Ruth are perhaps among the most well-known...
Oliver Ellsworth
From 1745 to 1807. Liberty is a word which, according as it is prehends the most good and the most evil of any in the world. Oliver Ellsworth played an instrumental role in the shaping of the early Republic. Not only did he ratify the constitution but he also served as Chief Justice of the United States from 1796 to 1800. Ellsworth, a delegate to the Constitutional Convention from Connecticut, is credited with dropping the term national for the...
The Church as the bride of Caesar
It is telling that the Washington Post report on the religious Left's Circle of Protection campaign for big government describes the effort as one that would send chills through any politician who looks to churches and religious groups as a source of large voting blocs, because, in fact, this is not an honest faith-inspired campaign to protect the least of these from Draconian government cuts, as claimed. It is a hyper-political movement that offers up the moral authority of...
Editor's note
More than anything else, Dolphus Weary brings credibility to the issues of poverty and economic and spiritual development. His life itself is a testimony. Weary grew up under difficult social and economic circumstances in Mississippi. He has harnessed his own life experience to lead others out of the cycle of poverty and hopelessness. His model for holistic outreach to the poor with Mendenhall Ministries has been widely adopted in other parts of the country. The Mendenhall Ministries received national...
The separation of church and art
There is a trend among evangelicals to engage in social reform without first developing a coherent social philosophy to guide the agenda. To bridge this gap, Acton Institute and Kuyper College are partnering together to translate Abraham Kuyper's seminal three-volume work mon grace (De gemeene gratie). The below excerpt is from Wisdom & Wonder: Common Grace in Science & Art, the first published selection from the broader project ing later this year from Christian's Library Press. Common grace, as...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved