Conservapedia

[Adamo]

About 150 years ago Darvin proposed so-called Theory of Evolution...
Which was a greatest lie in history of science! You have to know the Thruth!
http://www.conservapedia.com/Young_Earth_Creationism

[Jan]

Conservapedia! OMG! I mean - is that serious, or is it a joke (something like Uncyclopedia)?

[Trantor]

I believe it's real. One of the wonders of the internet is that weird people can easily form a large group and create something even weirder. I briefly skimped over the article about Barack Obama, and the only way for me to take sites as that one is with humour.
For those who are able to speak German, there is also this: http://www.encyclopaedia-germanica.org/
This is some Wiki maintained by right-wing extremists. One of the "funny" facts you can read there is "Austria is a country located in south-west Germany". So yeah, stuff like this IS real, which showcases that humanity may be in more trouble than we could want.

[Sophia]

Es existiert kein Artikel :Technopanzer.

What a joke of a site!

[Duckman]

What does "conservepedia" mean? That topic Adamo made link to is too hard for me to understand. It should be in finnish...

[oh_brother]

You should be glad it is not in Finnish...

Hilarious but disturbing at the same time.

[Trantor]

Hilarious but disturbing at the same time.

Exactly.

Duckman, it's some variation of Wikipedia made by conservative people, which means that non-white people, left-wing politicians, non-Christians and people who have sex without being married are all considered as terroristic communists who will burn in hell. Or something.

[Adamo]

Duckman wrote:

What does "conservepedia" mean? That topic Adamo made link to is too hard for me to understand. It should be in finnish...

Conservapedia is a conservative (Republican) answer to popular Wikipedia (multilingual online encyclopedia), wchich US-neoconservatives considered as too much politically uncorrect (from their point of view). Although Wikipedia tries to show things from the purely scientifical point of view (doesn`t judge things, just reflects them as they are - or at least tries to do it), Conservapedia is mostly ideologicly based (it do judge and tells you, what`s "right" and "wrong", strictly basing on ideology).
In Poland - we hate that kind of language (ideological), because we had far too much of these. Although they claim they`re anticommunists, they`re trying to mix science and pseudo-science with ideologies, just like thier opponents (leftists) did, wchich I think is the reason it didn`t became very popular (it`s unreliable). Oh, and it`s not multilingual and internationally edited, so for sure you won`t find a finnish version; it`s written by right-wing Americans to right-wing Americans and I think that`s the only target. It was found to make a strong, religious (specifically Judeo-christian) response to "godless" Wikipedia lies.


The best example is the Theory of Evolution and how it is reflected in Conservapedia. Or their thoughts on a religious topics.

[Bit]

/me shivers

[Jan]

Czechs have only their "Necyklopedie" (Non-encyclopedia) full of fictional and fancied things (like Soviet super-computer made of wood or a pig-dog crossbred, etc.). It fits our sarcastic and self-ironic nature better than weird serious-minded things like Conservapedia.

[Duckman]

It claims we shouldn't have people who are black, non-christian, sleep together before getting married, communists and so on should be removed... hmmm...

At least it really sounds better than those left-wing lies. About before-wedding things they are 100% right, it would be adultance. Non-christians belong to country where they came from, or at least they shouldn't be given the right to demand secularism from us. And communists should be banished into WOODS! These are just my opinions however.

In Britain and other countries do you have a big central wing? Here in Finland we do, it's as popular as the left and right ones.

It's a good wing. Left and right wings don't seem to care about very many people becoming inpractical and lazy urban idiots, whereareas the middle wing attempts to preserve the countryside and village population so it does not all move to big cities and in most things it defends the old ways and the traditional art of farming. Some exceptionally dumb at the left wing has, can you imagine, said that we should completely take out our defensive forces! Centrals however say that it requires as much money as before.

Edit: What is the name of wikia which descpribes thing in central wing view?

[Trantor]

Duckman, I hope you are joking with some of the stuff you said. I really do.

And the central wing wiki would probably be www.wikipedia.org...

[Jan]

@Duckman: Many of your opinions are rather radical, to put it neutrally (unless you're joking, as Trantor pointed out). I would agree only with your anti-communist view. But I don't want to comment on more of your views, because I don't want to turn it into a political dispute. But I have to make a few points:

About before-wedding things they are 100% right, it would be adultance.

Adultery is something different: "Sex between a married man or woman and someone who is not their wife or husband" (Cambridge Dictionary)

What is the name of wikia which descpribes thing in central wing view?

Again, as Trantor indicated, there is no such thing. But Wikipedia itself is not always balanced and very often it presents only one, even minorities' opinions / facts. So - beware!

[Duckman]

Am i joking you ask... Which of my opinions you consider radical? I were harsher than I probaly should have been on what I said about non-christians and communinsts. They can stay where they live, ok, as long as they follow the conditions of the host country. If not then they are free to go to woods or where they came from. I don't mean they should all turn in religion, I mean for example that outlanders have no right to forbid prayers in school/work. (and skin colour does NOT matter at all, thats where right wing is bit wrong on my opinion)

But all other things I said just as I meant unless I have made a very funny grammar error. For adultary thing I did word it incorrectly but that does not change my opinion about it. Or edit: I do but that does not mean they are communists who will all go to **** (It's always possible to turn).

How popular is the central wing in your countries?

[MasterWuuf]

Holy CAN OF WORMS, Batman!
Opinions can surely SORE, or SOUR, or whatever, in THIS arena.
Oh well, I'm gonna check out this Conservapedia.

I have friends on the left, right, AND in Ultimate Fighting Competitions.
(I believe I covered all the bases there, didn't I? )

Wishing everyone a happy and fun-filled seasons greetings from LOUISIANA, where we EAT our alligators.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Up1t5sii ... re=related

[Duckman]

How popular is the central wing in your countries?

EDIT: Do feminists really have something AGAINST house-wives even if they are that by their own will? Here at leasts that's considered a very GOOD thing because of the children.

[Jan]

How popular is the central wing in your countries?

We have a more or less common political spectrum with two strong parties - social democrats on the left and liberal/conservative right wing party, each of them getting ca 30 or 35 % of votes. So centralist parties (Greens - erm, it's me ; christian democrats; etc.) are rather weak, getting maybe 15 % of votes for all those parties together. Our political scene is distorted by the fact that there is the very conservative and extremist Communist party (a heir to the old Communist party from the times before 1989), getting ca 15 % of votes. Nobody talks to them, nobody cooperates with them (fortunately), but because of their relative power (15 %) it is very hard to make stable coalition governments here, and the politics is thus rather unstable.

[Duckman]

The Green are considered to belong to the left wing, christian democrats to the right, at least here. Central wings mean the central, patriots, and here in Finland also "the true finns" are considered by some to be.

EDIT: graz from 700th post, and this was 200th of mine!

[Jan]

The Green are considered to belong to the left wing, christian democrats to the right, at least here.

Yeah, normally. But don't forget that we're a post-communist country where the things have not settled down yet, and our politics still doesn't work as it should. And you have also many normal variations between countries.

EDIT: graz from 700th post, and this was 200th of mine!

LOL, thanks, and congratulations to you too!

[Adamo]

I have central political opinions too. I don`t like right and left wing. I`m a liberal. Right wing and leftists are generally socialists.

In liberalism govermant doesn`t care about your religion, skin colour, sexual orientation, etc. Everyone is responsible for himself. Taxes are low and law is straight and same for all.

That said, there`s a political party in Europe, that fits all these conditions I mentioned. It`s FDP (FDP - Freie Demokratische Partei). If I were German, I would vote them! I vote similar liberal politicians in Poland.

But - I`m not sure who would I vote in US.. There are only two parties.. In Republican Party there`s lot of liberals, but on the other hand, there`s a lot of idiots (they`re supported by people who believes that earth is 4000 years old) and they have bad foreign policy.. Everytime I try to watch Fox News I`m getting sick. Democrats are socialists.. I don`t know - if I was forced to vote, I think I would vote right wing of the Democrats (or left wing of Republicans, if there`s any, but I think Reps are monolith).

[Bit]

The tragedy about the FDP is - they are nowhere really in responsibility (even if now in coalition) - and that makes it easy to have that opinion.
Self-responsibility is one thing, but I demand from a government that it protects me in things where I cannot protect me - and not only on paper, but active. It's not allowed to slap someone - pretty okay, but you can ruin one for the rest of his life economically. That happens with free markets, which is after all an evil game of melting together to get the control and the monopol - to become not eaten by others.
Those are wars too.
But then - imagine people would really be free, had enough money and whatever. How long would that last? I bet, most of them would go crazy in a short time, lost on alcohol and drugs, such bored that they would cry for virgins for the lions again, or spawn like hell so that overpopulation happens soon - and those kids will grow on with less and less ethics - and the circle starts again.
A solution for this?
Would my answer matter?
Usually a common enemy helps to make them think and work together.
But this rule isn't one anymore - see Kopenhagen...

[Adamo]

You know, Germany needs liberalism and economic freedom to develop, because now it doesn`t. When there is enough money, you can give it away to God-knows-what-for, but if there`s not, you need to count each euro. I care about Germany, because it`s the greatest economy in UE. If it fail, the whole european budget will be ruined. Remember that whole world is in crisis.

There is no other way.

imagine people would really be free, had enough money and whatever. How long would that last?

What do you mean "people had enough money"? That everyone is happy with his salary? This is psychologically impossible (people always want to have more than other; if your neighbour has 10 cars, you want to have 11; I know that doesn`t apply to everyone, but 99% of society).
People ARE really free, at least in Europe.

Also, the money cannot be given away; more money is on the market means greater inflation.

[Zyx]

People ARE really free, at least in Europe.

The worst jail is the one you can't even guess because you were born in.
But I agree that europeans are free to work or be assisted. They have the right to exploit or be exploited. They may talk or not. They receive a certain education.

Don't get me wrong. I think the occidental societies are haven of civilisations and I'm glad to be born at this time in this place. But given these conditions, one should find more to achieve with his own life than just survival working and biding his time.

Most of europeans don't think, they consume. They're afraid of being different. In fact, they're scared of life. I don't blame them. I'm just stating that it's still a long way to reach freedom of thought.

[Bit]

You're absolutely right with everything in your response.
Still - freedom is a very relative thing.
And maybe Janis Joplin was right singing: 'Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose'.
Perhaps we'll meet soon again in the chatroom - then I'll tell you how I mean that.

btw - the one and only truth can be found here:

Spoiler

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

[MasterWuuf]

The Green are considered to belong to the left wing, christian democrats to the right, at least here.

Yeah, normally. But don't forget that we're a post-communist country where the things have not settled down yet, and our politics still doesn't work as it should. And you have also many normal variations between countries.

EDIT: graz from 700th post, and this was 200th of mine!

LOL, thanks, and congratulations to you too!

Post-communist fallout. So many excited youths growing into adults. Their minds ablaze for change.
Opportunities arise to make good decisions, as well as to take advantage of others along the way.

Just noticed that I'm a LO Master now. I didn't even notice when it happened. I'm so emotionally traumatized.

[Duckman]

Adamo by your posts I think the politics at poland are probaly same than at Czech. That's because here centarls are NOT liberals, some even call us conservative. The most liberalist is probaly vasemmistoliitto, which is left from social-democratians but not as left as communists. (I hate it nonetheless).

There is as said VERY much liberty here, more than enough. Actually TOO much in some things, some people at vasemmistoliitto claim that we should take out the Bethlehem star from top of the public chrismas tree "because it's christian tradition"! Madness isn't it?

Around here a man is trying to raise an another central group. A vast majority of people, cuz the amount of urban idiots (nothing personal meant with that), support EU. Centrals don't like the idea becuse EU is unfair for the farmers, the most important profession there is or have never been. But because it seems hopeless that we will get out of it, the centrals don't try anymore to oppose it. The new group hjowever if it rises is going to continue the battle. Good thing but not that much matter actually because sooner or later the EU will fall down for it's own impossiblity.

[Jan]

A few reactions on your post, Duckman:

Adamo by your posts I think the politics at poland are probaly same than at Czech.

I don't think so. As I wrote, we have a more or less balanced political spectrum (one strong left-wing party, and one strong right-wing party, and some minor parties around), whereas in Poland the political scene is nowadays rather deformed in this sense. In last elections (2007), two major right-wing parties got almost 3/4 of votes (conservative Prawo i Sprawiedliwość 32 % and rather liberal Platforma Obywatelska 42 %). The left-wing part of the spectrum is negligible.

EU is unfair for the farmers

What makes you think so? Farming sector is heavily subsidised in the EU. It consumes the largest portion of the EU budget (almost 1/2), altgough there are only ca 5 % of people employed in farming. Why do you think it's unfair? Could you give a few examples?

sooner or later the EU will fall down for it's own impossiblity.

I don't think so. I think that EU is not perfect, but I can't imagine it breaking down - it'd be a disaster, especially for smaller countries like Finland or the Czech Republic, and there is no practical alternative for us. Could you specify it's "impossibility"?

I'm rather surprised by your anti-EU stance, because Finland was one of the countries that profited largly from the EU membership.

You raised a lot of interesting topics. I hope you'll send more details so we can continue our discussion!

[MasterWuuf]

Adamo commented:

I have central political opinions too. I don`t like right and left wing. I`m a liberal. Right wing and leftists are generally socialists.

In liberalism govermant doesn`t care about your religion, skin colour, sexual orientation, etc. Everyone is responsible for himself. Taxes are low and law is straight and same for all.

I've talked with

Spoiler

ZILLIONS

hundreds of people, who have strong political opinions and values.

Something happened the other day that said, from one perspective,
what I've noticed so many times about personal political standards.

A guy walked into the place at which I work at night. He was a decent looking younger guy.
He was hugging (and I think he may have done a little 'lip transfer' work ) a nice looking girl.
When they walked up to the register, I notice his shirt said something like:
"Pass proposition number ???" (can't remember the number) Legalize homosexuality.

I thought, "Homosexuality isn't illegal."

Keep in mind, my boss is a practicing homosexual. The 'next in line' is a practicing lesbian.
The other boss is a heterosexual lady.I'm as heterosexual as anyone I've ever met.
Yet I'm good friends with all of my bosses.
I've noticed the first guy always shakes my hand (although I'd hug him, if he was a hugger).
The lesbian boss came in last night (wow, was she ever drunk ), saw me, and gave me a big hug.
The third one also hugged me last night.

Back to the story. The young guy was making a statement. Er, somehow?
A guy (didn't notice if he was cute ), hugging a cute girl,
wearing a 'legalize homosexuals' shirt, and homosexuality isn't illegal.

What if I were to wear a shirt that said, "Illegalize homosexuality" and was hugging and flirting with a guy?
That would not be well accepted (especially by my wife ).
I would probably be marked by some as a raving conservative and a bigot.


Point? OUR views almost always seem reasonable, yet might not seem 'a vision of clarity' to those around us.

In my experience, more people are 'reactionists' than political beacons of clarity.

As I've heard one guy say of late: Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it! (Don't know if he was referring to tobacco or weed)

[Jan]

What if I were to wear a shirt that said, "Illegalize homosexuality" and was hugging and flirting with a guy?
That would not be well accepted (especially by my wife ).
I would probably be marked by some as a raving conservative and a bigot.

Good point, Sir! However, on the other hand, there's a huge difference between legalising and illegalising something. You can see it so that "at the beginning", all things were legal (allowed), and then the society started making some of them illegal. So legality may be viewed as a "natural" state (I don't mean "good" or "desired", I just say "natural"). I don't want to say that every act of making something illegal decreases freedom of individuals (e.g. if you make a robbery or a murder illegal, it definitely increases human rights), but every ban can potentially decrease freedoms and liberties, and so it should be considered more seriously than making something legal.

(Note: I intentionally exaggerated the argument to stir up the discussion)

[MasterWuuf]

I certainly like freedom. Bias will always have a tendency to dampen real communication.

Ted Kennedy just passed away, of late. He would be considered a 'raving' liberal and democrat by some.
It is my understanding, that he was friendly to his opponents in private, but livid in his opinions in the debate hall.
While I possibly wouldn't have agreed with him on many points, I liked his ability to 'like' those with whom he differed.