One of the most significative differences between science and State Pseudoscience is the way it deals with opposing ideas; the first deals with them directly and rationally, while the latter deflects and focuses on the opponent instead.
A proper scientific debate consists in various participants interacting as equals, and refuting each other points by identifying their intrinsic errors and flaws, in light of available evidence and according to the principles of the scientific method.
In State Pseudoscience, on the contrary, most of the "debate" is entirely unilateral and consists of one side identifying and discrediting an opponent in advance through a wide range of defamatory tactics that might range from pretextuous (i.e.: true but irrelevant to the issue at hand) to outright slander (i.e.: lies); their actual points are never addressed and, when they are, they are deliberately misrepresented in order to quickly and lazily dismiss them without a proper refutation; in other words, in State Pseudoscience there is no debate, but only propaganda.