Legacy of the Strawman: The "Pedestaled" Argument

The view that most arguments can be easily refuted if presented in an inaccurate form and crushed has led to a new vista:  arguments and positions that merit shoddy treatment.  This tweak on the politically incorrect position conceives then of arguments and positions that must be per faciem allowable, to be orthodox in all social structures.  Such as these need not be under review, unless the trends sweep away to further ideologies that become the pampered pets of social dreamers.

This variation of the argumentum ad auctoritatem focuses its placement not on logical grounds, but rather that a figure possessing ability of discernment in some viable field that grants him/her a deciding opinion on some matter of concern.  In its worse manifestations, it gravitates toward the views of the elite, or notions of a celebrity.  In the market of ideas, a form of status is assumed where the views of Class A supersedes the notions of a predetermined inferior Class B.

I have sensed that we are fast moving away from the concept of an arena of ideas, where all submissions are given fair movement to be recognized as valid, workable, flawed, or commendable.  We are soon lapsing into a society of only a few capable minds worthy of submitting plans and concepts.  Is a conservative opinion to be rejected due to its conservatism, or can it attain the flow of thoughts that contribute to the workings of a fair, equitable society?