I strongly disagree. We get one election every X years. Institutional inertia is a very important check on elected officials. The classic US example is the unelected and appointed for life supreme court.
In many way civil servants like juries are the most direct form of democracy. There have been a few quiet revolutions where the system effectively said enough is enough.
Civil servants are hired to do a job. That's it. They are not elected. It's not their place to restrict the power of elected officials unless their activities are illegal.
Civil service employees take an oath to defend The Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic, and to faithfully discharge the duties of their position. Their loyalty to elected officials comes after their loyalty to those first two precepts. In as much as they believe they are fulfilling their oath, they are absolutely supposed to resist the efforts of elected officials.
But we've had example of illegal activities in this administration (ie the immigration ban). What are civil servants to do then? Follow obviously illegal orders?
That's an important restriction though. There are lots of laws. Some laws give some civil servants some independence from elected officials' decisions.
At the individual level leaks are the most common 'fix'.
Importantly, the population does not care is someone leaks an FDA study demonstrating that water is safe to drink. They are inherently useful when people disagree with what's happening. Further, the government leaks constantly at all levels which is how the '5th estate' had all that power.
For more a more extreme example striking is mostly associated with working working conditions and pay. But, it's also one of the way governments can fall with minimal violence. Not paying the police for months just does not work.
In many way civil servants like juries are the most direct form of democracy. There have been a few quiet revolutions where the system effectively said enough is enough.