08:45 am
Is It Conservapedia or Satire? There’s a Difference?
Those wacky, wacky wingnuts over at Conservatardia Conservapedia are up to their old tricks again. They’re not content with dissecting the homosexual agenda or demonstrating that Barack Obama is a Muslim, an atheist, and a Communist all at the same time. Oh no! They’ve found a much more important task: detecting, documenting, and exposing liberal attempts to subvert Conservapedia itself.
Take, for example, a page entitled “How can we protect Conservapedia by distinguishing real conservative articles from satires written by liberals?” Here are some excerpts. All typos are from the original:
Does this debate topic imply that there is no difference between conservative positions and liberal satire? There are no liberal satires in conservapedia because the editors correct them. Conservapedia is the most reliable and accurate resource for unbiased perspective on all topics covered.
Wikipedia has thousands of times more users…and hence is much more likely to notice factual errors. Conservapdia has a small (as of now) user base, and hence, articles may go weeks, or even months without anyone noticing incorrect dates, spellings, facts, and blatant fabrications.
I don’t think it is possible to distinguish real conservative encyclopedia articles from satires written by liberals, at least not whilst the founder of the site is writing things like this, or this, or his contributions here. When I first read the first of those examples, before I had read the History file and seen who had written it, I honestly thought it was a liberal satire.
i thin i good way to keep people from being liberal satierists would be to gave them take a test before the joind the website, having them answwer questions to see if they are a liberal or not, and if they are they cant join! then we can keep the commie freaks out of this website.(ps. that was a me being a liberal satiersit. god you people are ignorant:) )
There are two things I don’t understand about this debate.
First, Conservapedia is so bloody awful it almost defies satire. I mean how can you make up anything more ridiculous than sentences like this:
Obama has declared himself to be a Christian, yet never replaced his Muslim name with a Christian one as many do, casting doubt on his politically self-serving claim.
Oh my God goodness gracious me, he didn’t change his name! To conceal his Muslim origins! And therefore he’s politically self serving! Much more than if he had tried to conceal his Muslim origins by changing his name!
William F. Buckley must be spinning in his grave. These guys are so self-referential that they make 9/11 conspiracy theorists look like linear thinkers.
Second, I’ve got better things to do with my life than writing fake articles in order to twit a conservative website. Like writing fake articles for this blog. To paraphrase President Bush, I’m making fun of them over here so that I don’t have to satirize them over there.
Hat tip: Undip reader Heather