By Gerard Dinith Mendis
In an age where scientific breakthroughs define the trajectory of human progress, a concerning global trend has emerged: skepticism toward science and the resurgence of superstitious rhetoric in political leadership. Leaders are increasingly leaning on pseudoscience and cultural mysticism, often at the expense of evidence-based policymaking.
This shift not only threatens public health and environmental initiatives but also jeopardizes the credibility of governance on the world stage. Exploring these developments through examples from both nations reveals a pressing need for a reimagined approach to leadership rooted in science and reason.
Superstition has long held sway in political discourse, often employed as a tool to connect with the masses. However, in recent years, the deliberate rejection of scientific consensus has intensified.
In the US, the political powerhouses have been shaped by promoting skepticism of climate science, dismissing the gravity of the COVID-19 pandemic, and fostering vaccine misinformation. These actions, often framed as populist defiance of “elitist” scientific institutions, found fertile ground among disillusioned segments of society.
Globally, similar patterns have emerged. Political leaders increasingly lean on pseudoscientific claims and traditional beliefs to rally support, often at the expense of public welfare. This phenomenon transcends borders, reflecting a growing distrust of institutions and a retreat into comforting, albeit regressive, narratives.
Carl Sagan, in his 1995 book The Demon-Haunted World,states that
“… when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what’s true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness.”
Is this humanity’s way of reverting back to the inevitable psychology of trying to control the uncontrollable, or are we simply deceived by the rhetoric of a few powerful individuals?
Sri Lanka offers a striking example of the consequences of blending superstition with governance. The previous government faced scrutiny for its reliance on cultural mysticism to address critical issues. This trend is not new. Sri Lanka’s political history is peppered with episodes where pseudoscience took precedence over rational decision-making.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, several high-profile leaders endorsed “magic cures”, including herbal concoctions touted as vaccines. These claims, often based on traditional beliefs rather than scientific validation, undermined the country’s public health response. Mismanagement during the crisis exposed the dangers of prioritizing superstition over evidence, with dire consequences for the population.
The issue extends beyond health. In the past, Sri Lankan leaders have used astrology to time critical decisions, including elections and policy rollouts, further eroding trust in governance. While cultural and religious traditions hold deep significance, their intrusion into science-based policymaking illustrates a troubling disconnect between modern challenges and leadership’s capacity to address them.
The skepticism toward science witnessed in the US and Sri Lanka is not isolated but part of a larger global trend. As misinformation spreads faster than ever, anti-science rhetoric erodes trust in institutions and hampers international cooperation.
For instance, the US’s initial withdrawal from the Paris Agreement sent shockwaves through global climate efforts. Similarly, Sri Lanka’s mishandling of its pandemic response highlighted the ripple effects of poor governance on regional health security.
In both cases, the consequences extend beyond borders. Climate change, pandemics, and other global challenges require collective action grounded in scientific evidence. When major players abandon this approach, the repercussions are felt worldwide. The failure to prioritize science in policymaking risks not only immediate crises but also long-term progress in health, technology, and sustainable development.
Addressing the rise of superstition and anti-science rhetoric in leadership requires a multi-pronged approach. First, strengthening science communication is essential. Bridging the gap between experts and the public can help demystify complex issues and counter misinformation. Leaders must also foster transparency and accountability, ensuring that decisions are based on evidence rather than ideology or tradition.
Although it is easier to place blame on the skeptics of science, one may wonder if it is the intellectual elitism that led to these events in the first place. Have we alienated our fellow citizens that this is their way of self-expression?
As Sagan cautions, this requires humility and inclusion:
“The chief deficiency I see in the skeptical movement is its polarization: Us vs. Them — the sense that we have a monopoly on the truth; that those other people who believe in all these stupid doctrines are morons; that if you’re sensible, you’ll listen to us; and if not, to hell with you. This is nonconstructive. It does not get our message across. It condemns us to permanent minority status.”
Effective science communication must avoid elitism and engage communities in meaningful dialogue. Leaders, too, must model transparency and accountability. By rooting decisions in evidence while respecting cultural traditions, they can rebuild public trust.
Moreover, the global community must promote examples of successful, evidence-based governance. Countries that have balanced respect for cultural traditions with scientific innovation offer valuable lessons.
Collaborative international efforts, from public health initiatives to climate agreements, can further reinforce the importance of science in addressing shared challenges. The rise of superstition and the erosion of trust in science among leaders is a global tide with profound consequences.
From the US to Sri Lanka, this trend threatens public trust, endangers health and the environment, and halts the march of progress. To meet the demands of our century, we must call for leadership that embraces evidence-based decision-making while honoring the tapestry of cultural identities.
Now is the time to reimagine governance—anchored in science, built on cooperation, and grounded in trust. As Carl Sagan might suggest, reclaiming the rigor of the scientific method is not just an intellectual pursuit; it is the path for individuals to regain control of knowledge and restore democracy’s power. Only then can governments truly serve the many, not the privileged few, in a world where far too many democracies resemble oligarchies.
This is a call to think freely – with logic, reason, and empathy – for our neighbors near and far, for humanity, and for the generations yet to come. We must be vigilant, for after all, “The best way to keep a prisoner from escaping is to make sure he never knows he’s in prison.”
Gerard Dinith Mendis is a Biomedical Science graduate from the University of Central Florida and a Master of Public Health (MPH) candidate at Eastern Washington University. He is currently a Vascular Neurology Researcher at a US based research institution and part of the senior leadership team at multinational non-profit “H4H International”, a student-led initiative dedicated to addressing preventive health disparities on a global scale.
Factum is an Asia-Pacific focused think tank on International Relations, Tech Cooperation, Strategic Communications, and Climate Outreach accessible via www.factum.lk.
The views expressed here are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the organization’s.
