Rise of the “Expertocracy”: Arguing from Authority Rather Than Evidence
In many fields of study, predictions are frequently wrong, and disagreements amongst “experts” are commonplace.
Yet when it comes to public policy, many politicians and media personalities reference ‘expert opinion’ as though such opinions represent conclusive statements of fact.
Many of our most contentious policy discussions are dominated by phrases like “the science is settled” and “the experts agree”.
When ‘expert opinion’ is invoked in this way, it commonly replaces any logical justification for a policy decision. As a public relations tactic, it works well: a politician can avoid making difficult arguments while still maintaining credibility. Because after all, if an ‘expert’ says it’s a good policy, then case closed!
Expert Ideas are Often Overturned
How often have we seen so-called fringe ideas be denounced as “conspiracy theories” only to be proven correct six months later? It reminds me of the joke:
“What is the difference between a conspiracy theory and the truth?”
Answer: “About six months”.
Last year, I gave a speech in Parliament where I touched on many of these themes. You can watch it here:
Need for Free and Open Debate
A key Liberal principal is belief in the ‘marketplace of ideas;’ that free and open debate is the best generator of good policy. Foundational to this is the requirement that all ideas be judged according to their logical merit.
When considering issues of public policy, we should of course seek to hear from informed people. However, we should not make the mistake of holding the opinion of such people as inherently superior.
17th century philosopher John Locke, who is often considered the “Father of Liberalism”, derided this fallacy as an ‘argumentum ad verecundiam,’ a Latin phrase he coined meaning ‘appeal to shamefacedness.’ He gave it this name in reference to the way those employing this fallacy count on their opponent lacking the self-confidence to publicly challenge the view of a supposedly learned individual.
This is precisely the way we see appeals to authority used today. Whenever someone is so bold as to question decisions made in such sacrosanct policy areas as health or the climate, they are immediately chastised for “ignoring the experts” and not “trusting the science.” No matter how many times a publicly lauded ‘expert’ is proven wrong, this mentality continues to dominate the discourse.
I do not find it surprising that three of our country’s greatest public policy issues over the past ten years have all had their public debate impeded this way.
Net zero, childhood gender treatment, and the COVID pandemic response are all areas where free and open debate were shunned in favour of parroting the sacred pronouncements of ‘experts.’
Politics must resist the tendency by some to blindly elevate ‘expert opinion’ to the level of unquestionable, conversation-ending ‘truth.’
All ideas should be wrestled with and challenged before being embraced, no matter who is promoting them.
___
Image of Anthony Fauci adapted from Christopher Michel via Wikimedia Commons.
One Comment
Leave A Comment
Recent Articles:
21 August 2026
3.8 MINS
On Monday, more than 10,000 baby booties were laid in the shape of a cross on the lawns of Parliament House in Canberra, all pointing towards the chamber where that same morning, Nationals MP Llew O’Brien introduced the Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) Bill 2026.
21 August 2026
2.9 MINS
Ardie Savea and Siya Kolisi, rival captains united in faith, worshipped together ahead of Rugby's Greatest Rivalry — revealing how Christ grounds each of them on and off the field.
21 August 2026
1.8 MINS
Archbishop Fisher accuses ABC of bias in voluntary assisted dying coverage, demands formal investigation into impartiality breaches over telehealth ban debate.
21 August 2026
2.9 MINS
An Australian-designed nuclear microreactor, built in just 150 days, has been sold to a US firm after federal and state bans blocked its development at home — the latest in a long line of missed Australian innovations.
21 August 2026
2.9 MINS
When five men are accused, "all men" bear the guilt — but when a woman errs, she's just an individual. This piece asks why identity logic only turns rigid on demand.
20 August 2026
4 MINS
Young Australians face a housing crisis decades in the making. This piece argues political choices—not fate—locked a generation out of the Australian Dream, and calls for national renewal.
20 August 2026
3.1 MINS
The ABC surprises with a balanced report on Gym Church, a Melbourne-born Christian fitness ministry now spreading nationally — exploring why Gen Z men are turning to faith.
Thank you for the wonderful article, Senator Antic and the call to weigh up truth so both sides of an issue or argument are considered.
The viewpoint you gave is so sound: “When considering issues of public policy, we should of course seek to hear from informed people. However, we should not make the mistake of holding the opinion of such people as inherently superior.”
Your warning should be heeded by all in society- young and old of all backgrounds, but it seems the younger generation have been so targeted by the media and so controlled by it, that they haven’t been taught to weigh up both sides of the evidence at hand. Especially in the 3 areas you noted: “Net zero, childhood gender treatment, and the COVID pandemic response are all areas where free and open debate were shunned in favour of parroting the sacred pronouncements of ‘experts.’ ”
The strong laws and mandate surrounding the COVID issue meant punishment for those who spoke up eg loss of job if here was no vaccine taken -even if health or s conscience issues prevented a person going ahead; plus, fines, ostracism, surveillance and slander often followed anyone who did not conform to society’s new lockdown laws, employment requirements or their media comments.
The childhood and teen gender teaching in the schools came about when 2-3 ‘experts’ (professors/lecturers) at La Trobe Uni decided that there was to be no more defined male and female status, but instead an unknown gender from birth…The Education Depts of each state took this on without examining the evidence from both sides and radically began to indoctrinate the public and to take away the rights of parents to decide what gender their child was. Even preschools taught the gender confusion myth and sadly transgender story telling occurred in some public libraries. In Victoria, under Premier Andrews, a fine of up to $100.000 and up to 10 yr jail sentence was introduced for parents who sought to hold back their child or teen from gender change – this went on to apply to parents, teachers, youth workers or psychologists who might seek to counsel them. No wonder few dared speak up! It was and is like an invisible straitjacket was placed on the public.
As for ‘Net zero,’ it remains incredible that China, India, and countries that use our coal have no laws in place to restrict emissions. It also remains amazing that little is taught about the environmental and economic cost to the farmer whose properties have been denuded, where trees have been uprooted and cattle and crops eradicated so wind turbines could be installed to save the planet and Australia. These are made largely of fibreglass – a very harmful substance that can fall apart and then lie in the earth for hundreds of years and spread toxins into the soil, grass and water waters….Birds also fly into the turbines and die ….none of this is saving the planet! The farmers have tried to speak out and guard their rights but have been silenced. Yet the wind turbines have not been able to replace the coal and gas industry overnight as planned and there have been shortages of power. (For the farmers it’s a sad form of ‘net zero’ income and most are left broken hearted by the destruction and invasion of their land..The same occurred in Canada but they had more rallies to protest)
Thank you for speaking up Senator Antic for free and open debate, and may God bless you and those who stand with you.