Liberal – Conservapedia: this is not a joke

19 Jul

Yes, convinced that Wikipedia, aside from its real sins, is a hotbed of “liberal bias”, people have come together to create a serious Conservative (US sense) alternative. Let’s see how they define “liberal” — and anything more parochial and US-centred is hard to imagine. No, this is not Landover Baptist Church. I only wish it were.

Liberal – Conservapedia

[Note that links here are Conservapedia’s and do not open in new windows or tabs. — N]

A liberal supports many of the following political positions and practices:

Feel free to express your disbelief! I seriously thought this to be satire, but am convinced after looking at other articles that it is not.

After that definition comes more detail which you can check for yourselves.

I of course immediately looked up Kevin Rudd, John Howard (both showing my own parochialism of course), and then evolution and global warming.

Of course this, unlike Wikipedia, is “objective” isn’t it? No bias here! Yeah, sometimes, but not often… Otherwise, from what I have seen this is as tendentious and dishonest a project — dishonest in its naked political agenda — as I have ever seen.

Am I too harsh?

The horrible thought is that for some this could become knowledge and teh TROOF!

Oh, and if you do think I am too unfair, check their funny little cartoon beside the definition of “liberal”.

And do note, just for fun, how “liberal” by the definition above John Howard turns out to have been. Yes, he also scores rather well on “conservatism” in the eccentric US sense in some areas, but he famously supported gun control, ran a government-funded medicare program (even if attenuated perhaps), did have progressive taxation as all Oz governments have (though skewed in his case), spent on social programs, and maintained our position on the death penalty — we don’t have one in Australia. Why, Johnnie H was almost a Commie!

God save us from US conservatives! I may add, too, that there is almost no resemblance between that brand of conservatism and the conservatism that imbues the work of Alexander McCall Smith, whose recent novel I mentioned earlier today, much of which I can empathise with, sometimes even agree with; and even, dare I say, there is not much in that brand of conservatism that would appeal to very many in our own Liberal [i.e. Conservative] and National Parties, certainly not to the ones I have actually spoken to, though it has gained more traction in some circles than it merits.


What Would Jesus Wiki?  Cool headline there in Wired, but we could all do with reminding that Jesus is not/was not a conservative American. As many American Christians well know.

UPDATE 24 July

See Entries tagged as ‘Conservapedia’ on Submitted to a Candid World

Site Meter


3 responses to “Liberal – Conservapedia: this is not a joke

  1. ninglun

    July 22, 2008 at 11:08 am

  2. Marty

    July 23, 2008 at 6:08 pm

    Bear in mind that while Andy Schlafly (yes, the spawn of Phyllis) and many other sysops are non-parodists, most other users — including at least a dozen sysops — are doing the whole thing with tongue firmly in cheek. If you find this sort of thing amusing, try Googling “wandalism”. Remember, CP allows anyone to create an account! 🙂

    “It is an unequalled miasma of debauchery and ignorance, whose squalor is by no means leavened by the ready availability of first-class quaffage and strumpetry.”

  3. ninglun

    July 23, 2008 at 6:25 pm

    …with tongue firmly in cheek…

    Well, thank God for that! But which bits…? 😉

%d bloggers like this: