Weaponizing “Science”: Neo-Nationalism and the Politics of “Alternative Expertise” in the Czech Republic (2020-2025)

In the post-truth era - emerging during the pro-Brexit and pro-Trump electoral campaigns in 2016 - framing neo-nationalist thought together with disinformation, misinformation and conspiracy theories became business as usual in the public sphere. Academia and relevant scientific findings occurred as one of the most significant rhetorical targets for radical and extremist parties and grassroots protest movements. These parties and movements propagated their own “patriotic” narratives of reality tied to disinformation, misinformation and conspiracy theories. Analogously, they started to erode mainstream scientific discourse systematically and to target respected academic and scientific figures. Furthermore, they rely on alternative claims, rhetoric and reasoning advanced by would-be experts. Despite of being considered as highly controversial or even sharply condemned by mainstream scientific and academic communities in the country, these would-be experts are enjoying popularity among above mentioned neo-nationalist parties and movements and part of the national population for expressing and spreading their “alternative truth” diverse to unpopular mainstream while these would-be experts are having symbolical power as holders of scientific degree and in some cases even academics working on national institutions. As such, they appropriate the vocabulary of ‘critical reasoning’ and pluralism in order to challenge the scientific consensus or to delegitimize the public figures associated with mainstream scientific institutions. The major goal of this text is to analyse the above described biased scientific argumentation of would-be experts during the following two crises - covid-19 pandemic (2020-22) and Russian invasion to Ukraine (2022-). During such crises, neo-nationalist parties and movements exploit the diminishing levels of trust in elected officials and public institutions, and their production of ‘alternative expertise’ amplifies this dynamic. In concrete, I will reveal in comparative perspective, based on comparative data for both countries in regard to (public perception of) science: 1. How prevalent is disinformation, misinformation and conspiracy theory in the contemporary radical, extremist and illiberal (neo-nationalist) political environment? 2. How relevant is it for the programmes and strategies of neo-nationalist parties and movements to maintain relationships with their “alternative” scientist sources and neo-nationalist narratives of would-be scientific expertise denying mainstream science and experts? 3. To what extent are biased “patriotic” experts (attached to political representation of neo-nationalist political parties and movements) willing to spread disinformation and conspiracy theories in neo-nationalist framework?