1/Illiberals have a strange relationship with science. It seems that they decided at some point that science was on their side. Strangely, illiberals assume that the science invariably supports their position, without feeling the need to actually examine the facts.
2/ In reality, of course, science is a non-partisan, non-ideological process, and “science” is not capable of supporting a political position.
3/ What illiberals think of as “Science” is actually just the current state dogma being pumped out through MSM. Those who believe that illiberalism is a religion will point out that the way that this idea operates is very similar to that of God back when Catholicism was hegemonic
4/ Illiberals show their misunderstanding of the very nature of science by believing that whatever policy is put in place is “supported by the science”, which they mostly mostly just assume without looking into.
5/ The worst of this manifests as animosity towards those who question the science, as if it were heresy to attempt flaws in the logic that the people are being presented with.
6/ In reality, of course, there is nothing more scientific that questioning science, and nothing less so than unthinkingly accepting whatever the popular opinion on a certain matter is.
7/ Thus, illiberals are anti-science and think that they are pro-science. It is clear that what Orwell was warning us about has indeed come to pass, as the meanings of words are inverted. If we are not to question science, then it has become what religion used to be.
8/ Science does not “say” anything. It suggests possible explanations for phenomena. It does not write policy. That is the domain of politicians, lawmakers and bureaucrats. What we have now is not rule by science, then, but a kind of technocracy, the rule of experts.
9/ The reality is that illiberals are not interested in the finer points of science, like different levels of evidence, or contradictory results, or the entire concept of falsifiability, or different levels of certainty, or the reality that scientist’s viewpoints often clash.
10/ Rather, they subscribe to a false notion of science in which there is always a clear consensus, in which that consensus is always dominant and unquestionable, and where the outcome of that consensus is a high degree or even perfect certainty.
11/ Thus illiberals believe that whatever they believe is right, for the simple reason that science, which is on their side, must support whatever belief they hold. This is why some have called this new school of thought a religion, because this is precisely how Dogma operates.