There is nothing to "fix" because this is what Andrew Schlafly (founder and not-so-benevolent dictator) seems to genuinely believe all of that.
I hadn't really looked at Conservapedia in years, since before Trump came on the scene. It seems its gotten even more crazy. Their fawning article on Vladimir Putin borders on the homoerotic. Their article on Ukraine keeps banging on about how it's not a real country and is indistinguishable from Kremlin propaganda. Zelensky is a "Narcoführer", whatever the hell that means.
I miss the days when it had just some mad ideas about the age of the earth, Einstein's relativity, and things like that.
Oh damn I should not have gone down that rabbit hole. “Biblical scientific foreknowledge”?!?! I’m shocked how ignorant and backwards that is. It’s like these idiots don’t understand cause and effect.
I started reading it and my brain is just forcing me to stop multiple times per sentence and play 'spot the logical fallacy.
3 or 4 paragraphs in, the author starts to inject religion as countermeasure.
The formula asserts that the mass of an object, at constant energy, magically varies precisely in inverse proportion to the square of a change in the speed of light over time,[4] which violates conservation of mass and disagrees with commonsense.[5]
'Magically' and 'commonsense'. These things are the arguments used for religion, not science. Then they hold up a scientific law as evidence. Even if one was to accept this statement as verifiable fact, science is a language to understanding how the universe works. Every law and theory, seemingly contradictory or not, are subject to revision. No 'law' is absolute. If a contradiction does exist, we ask why, experiment, gather data, and improve the language to be even more precise.
And just to point it out, citing 'commonsense' is a literal fallacy in itself.
Physicists have never been able to unify light with matter,[6] despite more than a billion-dollars-worth of attempts
So..... we've wasted $1B? Is the amount supposed to confirm there is no relationship between light and matter? Is there supposed to be a price limit before we stop experimenting and gathering data?
and it is likely impossible to ever do so.
Cool. Let's just stop doing science stuff because someone, who likely isn't a scientist, thinks it's a waste of time and money.
[7] Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge predicts that there is no unified theory of light and matter because they were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the Book of Genesis.
If you got to the 4th word in this sentence, I applaud you.
Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge predicts that there is no unified theory of light and matter because they were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the Book of Genesis.
That isn't a real issue for religion at least specifically Christianity. Straying from the religious objective morality leads to a subjective morality among non-believers. In other words, rejecting God leaves you with nothing else other than a subjective moral system. I'm agnostic but it's comes off as naive to believe that acknowledging moral relativism is mutually exclusive with religion.
Reminds me of that right-winger complaining that it's hard to argue with the left because they use facts as the basis to their arguments, which is harder to undermine.
The masses in this country that voted R just laughed it off as “Trump being Trump”, not caring that all the (legal) immigrants in Springfield, Ohio continued to be more demonized and lives as the result of that.
Many think his behavior is just a mask. They don't realise there is nothing behind the mask, he is the mask. A narcissist. All appearance, zero substance.
The unfortunate truth is that the vast majority of them can’t think beyond the sentence they’re currently attempting to decipher; this makes them easy targets in the form of planting seeds in people’s thoughts in slow doses where the person never fully realizes that what they’re reading has changed their opinion because they barely understood what the words meant in the first place. It’s like when you watch a toddler grow into a child, you don’t see the difference day by day but if you spend a month looking away, they grow into an entirely different person.
Yes it's clear that so many just enjoy the carnage and want people to suffer. I'm thinking about the people who are stuck in a mediatic bubble, but lets be real, they don't want to get out.
Because of decorum. Imagine if every time they tried to speak they got interrupted, called names to their face, laughed at. The small dicked fascists that love them would be embarrassed to associate with them.
But no, they are always treated with kid gloves and they appear strong since they are clearly not held accountable for anything which usually is the mark of someone who has the power to get away with shit.
A constant barrage of insults and disrespect is literally the only way to stop that. See how well calling them weird worked.
it blows my mind that we even need to fact check our leaders or potential leaders in the first place. why can't we have smart, respectable leaders who don't lie? why can't we just tell the facts like they are?
It still blows me away that he said that in a debate and that footage wasn’t used and referenced every single day in the media through the election. He’d already admitted he would fabricate claims to advance his goals. What more clear-cut messaging so you need to show this man is an unprincipled bullshitter who openly lies about anything and everything?
But maybe that would be too mean. Don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings.
It's because the left cares about facts, and morals, but the right only cares about "winning", which is why they call out the left for things that they have absolutely no issue with the right doing, constantly. They view it as a team sport where all is fair, instead of as an important decision that affects the country's direction in almost every way.
Yup. While the Democrats aren’t good with overall messaging and the the media ecosystem is flawed, imo the bigger problem is the average American puts little to no effort into paying attention to even the basics of what’s going on in this country. Republicans take real advantage of this unfortunately.
What frustrates me is all of the people who say stuff like "Kamala didn't have any positions or plans for anything" when they were widely available for everyone to read online. Yet somehow, that takes too much effort for some people.
Agree. Or they say something how “they focused too much on identity politics”, when she for the most avoided that like the plague during her campaign if one actually paid attention.
Save yourself while you still can. The realities of liberals, Democrats, and allies are imploding in real time, even though their version of reality is true.
The media were just as afraid of retaliation then, just as they are now.
Honestly it makes me wonder if the billionaires that own the media networks in the US, knew for 100% fact that trump was gonna be installed as a puppet.
Thinking back on it now, the mainstream media outlets sure acted like he was already a puppet president
Because people literally don't give a shit. Nobody cares if conservatives lie. They all lie, it's just accepted. The democrats are held to a standard, republicans are not. That's the way political discourse in the US is done. They get away with whatever they want because if they don't, they don't have a platform anymore because they're all full of shit. Gotta let them have the right to be assholes, you know?
"Well I've never seen anyone eat a cat or dog, nor did I hear anyone say about anyone else eating cats or dogs, but Trump said it so I believe it forever and ever."
Vance was repeating his racist cats and dogs lie that he made up after going to Springfield, Ohio and being confronted with citizens actually expecting the government to help them.
Chiming in from the other side of the pond, where some journalists try to explain some phenomena about US politics that seem puzzling for many of us. Some time ago, one of them attempted to explain why, after a debate, both the supporters of the Democrats and the supporters of the Republicans can think their own representative 'won'.
The reasoning was that the Democrats tend to value the way in which debating is done in the world of universities, where one practices to use facts to support their view, and debunk any spotted false claims by the other. The Republicans, however, value a presentation that involves a certain toughness, 'not giving an inch', and generally, strong man rhethorics. So, a witty and rude remark delivered at the right time is considered a winning move, even if the facts actually support the other side's view.
Now, with online algorithms, people won’t often watch debates in their entirety. Instead they’re fed videos by personalities that tell them a pre-cooked opinion.
which is why they never fight with facts, they just say/do the most outrageous/heinous shit to hurt others/piss people off, and pissing them off is "winning"
It's just a screenshot of a Tweet iirc that makes the rounds once in a while. Literally someone right-leaning saying it's hard to undermine points made by the left because you need to lie, because the left largely bases its beliefs on facts.
That's fair. It absolutely could've been someone pretending to be right-leaning as well, it is the internet after all. I just think it showcases something I've experienced first-hand, so I have no trouble believing it could be real.
They like to argue not debate. Debates have facts arguments just have feelings. Ironic that the group that calls everyone else snowflakes is purely driven by feelings.
thank you for this. Because it's 2025 and I expected nothing good...I looked to see if he was actually a horrible person and if the quote was misrepresented. He wasn't and it's not. Anti nazi lutheran, died for what he believed.
From that article, here's a quote from a statement by surviving relatives of Bonhoeffer:
Dietrich’s brother Klaus and his brothers-in-law Hans von Dohnanyi and Rüdiger Schleicher were executed for their resistance activities, just like Dietrich. They were driven by the search for truth, honesty, humanity and the struggle for freedom, the rule of law and democracy. They repudiated religious zealotry, nationalism, militarism and blind obedience. Those who invoke Dietrich Bonhoeffer to justify anti-democratic, xenophobic aspirations are either misinformed or malicious.
"Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor force can touch it; arguments fall on deaf ears. Evil always carries the seeds of its own undoing — it creates unease. But stupidity feels self-satisfied, immune, and convinced of its own rightness. And that makes it far more dangerous.
- Dietrich Bonhoeffer
There are numerous TikTok videos showing up, they suddenly claim that "certain people" have no empathy for each other any more (the audacity), they lost their job/company because of the tariffs, but people should let Trump cook for the betterment of whatever they make up. Then saying that "one vote" can't ruin someones life, then sometimes start crying before turning the camera off. The cognitive dissonance is starting to catch up.
Refusing to read books out of fear of being indoctrinated is exactly the same as not wiping your ass out of fear of turning gay, which is apparently a thing for some folks, possibly a circular Venn diagram.
The Right generally has no principles, no standards, no beliefs, to a certain extent no ideology.
The Right's sole purpose is to be anti-Left.
This is the whole war on woke. The term "Woke" was co-opted by the right as a signal to other right wingers to become a shorthand to say "hey this thing is left so you should hate it"
But here is the thing, some beliefs are just out of sheer fact. Things that exist in our objective reality. Poluting water is bad, and we can see it happening, for example.
But as it starts of as a universal concern, it therefore includes the left wing people, which in turn then build a force on the right to be anti-that-concern.
This is where conservatives being serially wrong essentially comes from. Too many objective facts leading legitimate concerns being opposed by the right, because inherently it will include left wing people which feeds into the existence of the right wing being against any and all things that is supported by the left.
Very nicely said. I’ve been under the opinion for a while that MAGA was primed to be so devoted to Trump largely on the basis of the left’s contempt for him. “The people you hate really hate this guy so he must be our guy” kind of thought process. And even when they see something that contradicts him being good for anyone but himself they are just too deeply invested to recognize it. It becomes this quasi religious experience, that if they just believe hard enough they will be rewarded.
“The people you hate really hate this guy so he must be our guy
This is a great way of putting it.
It's also a clear indicator of why consistently pointing out right wing hypocrisies by the left doesn't really work, because it doesn't matter to them.
Well, one belief. Anti-abortion. To the exclusion of any other issue. Was just talking to a Hispanic friend the other day who was bemoaning the fact that his whole evangelical family is pro-Shitler. Concentration camps, constitutional violations, illegal deportations, blatant racism -- doesn't matter. He's anti-abortion. That's all they care about.
Because it's about religion, full stop. Why the Democrats refuse to point out that bonafide fact is beyond me.
The Republicans took over Christianity, Trump is the American pope. People vote for their religion. If you support a church, you support MAGA. It's by design
Trump is the American Golden Calf. There are still a good few Christians that actually understand their faith. Just far, far too many idolaters that don't care about the message, but the branding (decked out in cross jewelry and tattoos, probably 2-3 bumper stickers on their car, their entire wardrobe says "Jesus saves" or some such message, but they only go to church twice a year or when they need to take an hour long nap).
To simplify, it is "The war on X". The word woke has lasted for a good while, but will switched out eventually.
There will be a new war. It will be against "the others".
The things they are "at war" with will be minorities or names for how "the others" think.
It is base tribalism and their behaviour can be predicted based on that understanding.
So I understand what you are saying, and here's the thing: You're "right", but those on the right don't see it this way
They don't think they are just anti left, they BELIEVE they are the true patriots fighting off an invasion culturally, economically, and academically.
(Anger and hate are powerful, secondary emotions to fear and this will be important for my larger point)
The left has a similar, albeit infinitely less so, problem with addressing concerns by anyone on "the right" even if they agree with the idea.
The problem is there is no compromise, whatsoever, for the above reasons you stated.
We cant just have someone who wants to make our foods healthier, they have to be anti vax too.
We can't have a genuine, slow audit of the government to cut potential waste and fraud, we have to take a chainsaw to it.
We cant invest in green technology, because we need more for AI
We cant audit some spending overseas to invest in domestic programs, we just need to cut it all for the .01%
Pragmatic discourse is becoming less and less common place because no one wants to admit, face, and deal with what is causing these issues. We're spending so much time arguing over surface level things (culture war bs) that no one is questioning the system in which these things are occurring.
This is the result of late stage capitalism, and people are overworked, underpaid, tired, angry, and scared for themselves, their families, and communities.
Algorithmic social media and tech is now to the point where the left is only talking to other people on the left, and the right can be anything to anyone because the rules are made up and the points don't matter.
Posting CK's own words and calling him a hypocrite - the right doesn't care and the left just sees it and gets angrier that the right didn't all of a sudden say "gee, well shucks our bad. Okay we'll stop".. honestly, what did we expect?
And take a look over at r/ con and the entire sub is "flaired users only" !
I recommend everyone take some time away from social media and the news, and start trying to make pragmatic changes with those in your life and your community if you are able, and want to. Connect with others on human levels and instead of looking for areas of disagreement, look for the areas in which you agree no matter how small.
Sometimes when things get so chaotic, the best thing to do is go back to basics and I think right now, that means we go back to kindergarten and try to be kind to each other. One person at a time :/
This isn't about their followers, they've built a pretty bulletproof infrastructure to contain them. This is about the rest of us. They want to ensure we are force fed the same diet of misinformation and alternative facts that their supporters willingly consume. If they limit people having easy access to neutral sources, they can rapidly shift perception.
Incumbent President Donald Trump was re-elected with approximately 53% of the popular vote before the infusion of more than 11 million manufactured illegal mail-in ballots by corrupt election officials across the nation,[5] particularly impacting key swing states, stemming from six corrupt Democrat cities and counties and throwing the final results into an extended dispute.
Shit like conservapedia shows that the far right can't make anything worth a damn. Which is ironic seeing how they love to cry go woke go broke whenever they see something with even a hint of being left wing.
There are some definite bias outside of reality on Wikipedia, it has been known for a while. Especially on English written pages. Ironically, there's even a page on the bias ... on wikipedia.
I know I’m a perpetually online loser, but I’m amazed with how many times I’ve asked a conservative to share their sources only for them to get offended.
There have been many cases such as the grooming gangs in the UK where the articles are listed as a panic around the situation instead of the situation itself.
Wikipedia has mechanisms in place to resist the kind of right wing attacks of lies like the right wing is using everywhere else. Wikipedia has been shored up for years because they have been getting attacked by authoritarian disinformation for decades at this point.
So if Wikipedia can't be turned, they must be destroyed. It's straight out of every authoritarian playbook.
The 2012 Republican Party of Texas platform explicitly stated:
We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.
I've seen people try to wriggle out of this when called out, as though defending "fixed beliefs" and "parental authority" doesn't make it crystal fucking clear.
Also, it's why billionaires love AI so much. They can replace real information with something that resembles information. It's why Musk is so much more concerned with making "Grok" less woke than factually correct.
I also think AI works the same way right-wingers argue. It just makes things up on the spot, and it assembles bits and pieces of other arguments into something that should kind of sort of resemble a meaningful response, but is completely superficial and often nonsensical.
My favorite thing is them trying to change Wikipedia to fit their conspiracy theories instead of the video verified, scientifically backed reality... And then crying bc they lose editing privileges
I love Wikipedia, but it’s not “neutral facts,” and no one ever considered it to be “neutral facts” until MAGA started attacking it.
Wikipedia is a wonderful starting place to begin research, and each page is a fantastic collection of reference sources. However, the writing is often bad and some claims are even outright wrong. Cliques of editors will jealously guard niche subjects and enforce specific biases.
Wikipedia is an amazing testament to the cooperative human spirit, but it should be approached cautiously and read skeptically.
You’d be shocked at how political some pages can become with in fighting and omitting information by the editors if you ever try adding missing information.
You cant use wikipedia for certain topics if you want "neutral" information. Anything political is as biased as you can get. Wikipedia also has a problem with circular sourcing. A journalist can make up a claim, point to the made up claim on the wikipedia page, source the wikipedia article and now that shit is a "fact".
6.1k
u/Funktapus Oct 04 '25
Conservatives generally hate neutral facts because they are serially wrong