Faucism
n. The use of authoritarianism in furtherance of corruption.
Anthony Fauci, former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Chief Medical Advisor to the President under Joe Biden, is in the headlines following his preemptive pardon on January 19, 2025, and Donald Trump’s removal of his security detail on January 24—both controversial moves.
Biden’s pardon has ensured Fauci will never be held accountable for whatever crimes he may have committed in (allegedly) funding gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and his (alleged) role in covering up the origin of COVID-19, nor will there be a formal discovery process. Trump’s move has necessitated Fauci will either have to pay for his own private security out of the millions he made as director of NIAID or disguise himself and relocate to Latin America à la Hannibal Lecter.
I don’t particularly care to see the 84-year-old Fauci spend what time he has left in prison. He has retired and can wreak no more damage. No sentence would suffice for the 7 million who died of COVID. Nor do I want to see some vigilante mete out extrajudicial revenge, although I fear that scenario may be a consequence of the public being deprived of formal justice.
Rather, the punishment that would be most suitable for Fauci, a man who loves the spotlight and public accolades, would be societal disgrace akin to that of Trofim Lysenko. Like Lysenko’s, Fauci’s name should become a byword for cynical authoritarianism that results in megadeaths.
Unfortunately, the horrors of Lysenkoism aren’t taught in schools. In my K-18 education, Lysenko was only obliquely referred to once in a graduate-level course on Chinese history.
In brief, Trofim Lysenko was a Soviet pseudoscientist who thought Darwinian evolution, “survival of the fittest,” in which organisms compete to pass on their genes, was too bourgeois. He believed organisms cooperated to transform themselves. He had thousands of scientists who disagreed with him denounced and sent to gulags, where many of them died. Application of his ideas, such as planting seeds in a single hole believing they would sprout a cornucopia, led to famines in the USSR and China in which millions of people died.
Unlike Lysenko, Fauci isn’t a crackpot. From all reports, he was a highly competent immunologist. He doesn’t come off as particularly ideological. Nor does he have the stomach to imprison fellow scientists. However, like Lysenko, his instincts are authoritarian. His measures to mitigate COVID infections relied on coercion rather than persuasion. Rather than denounce scientists who were right about lockdowns and herd immunity, such as Oxford’s Sunetra Gupta, Stanford’s Jay Bhattacharya and Harvard’s Martin Kulldorff, Fauci instead dismissed their ideas as “nonsense” and “dangerous,” then let the sycophantic media do his dirty work. Like Lysenko, the consequences of his (alleged) actions led to millions of deaths.
Background
This section is intended for normies who don’t have time to sift through independent media to examine primary sources and consumers of Pfizer-sponsored corporate media who have been fed a diet of disinformation for so long they mistake the shadows on the cave wall for reality. If you’re already familiar with the allegations against Fauci, you can skip this section.
While people who said COVID-19 may have leaked from a lab in Wuhan were smeared as conspiracy theorists guilty of a racist thought crime, especially by scientists with ties to the lab, thus poisoning the well regarding inquiries into the lab-leak hypothesis, emails sent to and by Fauci and obtained through the Freedom of Information Act indicate he must have suspected a lab leak.
In an email from Fauci’s Chief of Staff, Greg Folkers, dated January 27, 2020, which included Fauci, he wrote, “NIAID has funded Peter’s group for coronavirus work in China for the past five years.”
Peter’s group, EcoHealth Alliance, was funneling NIAID money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which was conducting gain-of-function research. This is the smoking gun that Fauci’s agency was funding the Wuhan lab. Especially significant is “the past 5 years” reference, which means NIAID began funding the WIV c. early 2015.1 Note, this was shortly after the Obama administration halted funding on gain-of-function research in October 2014, but before the Trump administration reversed it in December 2017, a move which critics at the time said “risks triggering a catastrophic pandemic.” This may explain why Fauci’s pardon was backdated to January 1, 2014, the year the ban on GOF went into effect.
In an email exchange between Fauci and his boss, NIH Director Francis Collins, from February 1, 2020, with the (presumably) damning parts redacted, Collins had clearly looked into whether the NIH had funded the Wuhan lab:
The Shi in the subject line is Shi Zhengli, a virologist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
The same day, Fauci forwarded an article from Science titled “Mining coronavirus genomes for clues to the outbreak’s origin” to Jeremy Farrar, Director of the Wellcome Trust, and Kristian Andersen of Scripps Research.
This article remarks on Shi’s research at WIV and SARS-CoV-2’s similarity to a coronavirus specimen (RaTG13) at the lab:
A team led by Shi Zheng-Li, a coronavirus specialist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, reported on 23 January on bioRxiv that 2019-nCoV's sequence was 96.2% similar to a bat virus and had 79.5% similarity to the coronavirus that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), a disease whose initial outbreak was also in China more than 15 years ago.
And:
Concerns about the institute predate this outbreak. Nature ran a story in 2017 about it building a new biosafety level 4 lab and included molecular biologist Richard Ebright of Rutgers University, Piscataway, expressing concerns about accidental infections, which he noted repeatedly happened with lab workers handling SARS in Beijing.
Fauci wrote of this article, “...it is of interest to the current discussion.”
Andersen responded: “The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (<0.1%) so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) look engineered. … I should mention that after discussions earlier today, Eddie, Bob, Mike, and myself all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.”
Fauci only responds that they will talk “on the call.”
The call in question was a secret teleconference on February 1, 2020, set up by Jeremy Farrar with Fauci, Andersen, Collins and others.
Note the “preference to keep this really tight group” and the ask to “everyone to treat in total confidence.”
Exculpatory evidence disproving the lab leak and proving the zoonotic origin of the coronavirus are presumably in the redacted notes:
The evidence in the redacted notes must have been persuasive enough to disabuse Andersen of his initial finding that the virus was “inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory,” because on March 17, 2020, he et al. published an article in Nature Medicine titled “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2” in which the authors state, “Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.”
But discussions of gain-of-function research apparently didn’t end following the February 1 call. On February 17, 2020, Matt Frieman of the University of Maryland, talked to his former supervisor, Ralph Baric, an epidemiologist who worked on gain-of-function research with WIV’s Shi Zhengli. Frieman says Baric had “sat in Fauci’s office talking about the outbreak and chimeras.”
Chimera implies an engineered virus, and is here referenced alongside the “outbreak.” Keep in mind when Frieman was joking about Baric’s link to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, this was still early in the pandemic, a month before the lockdowns began in the U.S. and well before much of the public had heard of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, implying people in-the-know knew from the beginning where the virus came from.
The above evidence is only the tip of the iceberg. I’ve focused on early primary evidence that points toward a cover-up, as I believe this is the tentpole that supports the conspiracy.
Fauci’s legacy
The public needs to shed its image of Anthony Fauci as a harried public servant. We don’t know who Fauci works for, but it’s not the public.
Watch this exchange between Rand Paul and Fauci.
Because I know you didn’t actually click the link, here’s the relevant bit. Paul says to Fauci:
Over the period of time from 2010 to 2016, 27,000 royalty payments were paid to 18,000 NIH employees. We know that not because you told us, but because we forced you to tell us through the Freedom of Information Act. Over $193 million was given to these 18,000 employees.
Can you tell me that you have not received a royalty from any entity that you ever oversaw the distribution of money in research grants?
After arguing about the premise of the question, Fauci responds:
OK, so let me give you some information. First of all, according to the regulations, people who receive royalties are not required to divulge them, even on their financial statement, according to the Bayh-Dole Act.
Fauci finally says his annual average royalties were only $191.46, but we just have to take his word on that, because the regulations state he’s not required to divulge bribes royalties.
Given Fauci’s (alleged) corruption and (alleged) coverup of the origin of COVID-19 and the fact he’ll never be held legally accountable, the public needs to correct Fauci’s record for posterity.
Fauci’s name needs to be as ignominious as Lysenko’s.
“Faucism” was a neologism used by Ron DeSantis (only somewhat) hyperbolically as a portmanteau of Fauci and fascism. Urban Dictionary defines “Fauciism” as 1. “Continually demanding draconian and largely ineffective health safety measures despite any economic consequences.” 2. “Loathsome, moral and ethical behavior with no regard for human life or human freedom for personal gain.”
(Because I don’t like two Is next to one another) I propose the “Faucism” hew closer to the second definition on Urban Dictionary. When Fauci learned the pandemic was caused by an accident at a lab his agency had illegally funded, he ensured the truth would lay buried while he used his position to gain celebrity status and discredit scientists and doctors who questioned him.2 “Faucism” is the use of authoritarianism in the furtherance of corruption. Add it to your vocabulary.
To date, Fauci has been unapologetic for his actions. In response to Biden’s pardon, he said, “It feels good, and I'm grateful to the president for doing it. I have done nothing wrong. Certainly nothing criminal. No grounds at all.”
If he’d done nothing wrong, he should reject the pardon, since it certainly makes him look guilty. But we all know he won’t do that.
While I know the chances of Anthony Fauci ever reading this would round to 0 percent, my message to him would be: Repent! You can still be the hero of this story. You can use the gift of your pardon to redeem yourself without worrying about spending the rest of your life in prison. Of course, if you were to do so, the pharmaceutical companies or the Chinese Communist Party might unalive you, but martyrdom isn’t the worst fate you could suffer.
2020 - 5 = 2015
Everything in this sentence is alleged in case any lawyers are reading this.