Filed under: Author - ACG,Politics | Tags: Conservapedia, Creationism, Fundamentalism, Political rhetoric
Last Friday, Obama mocked congressional Republicans for characterizing his “pretty centrist” healthcare plan as some kind of “Bolshevik plot,” explaining that such scorched-earth argumentation leaves Republicans with little to no room to maneuver, and in fact demonstrates the party’s bad faith. Watch:
Clever, hard-hitting, and long overdue. But from the minute Obama said the word “Bolshevik,” this reaction from far-right outlets was unavoidable:
Conservapedia has never been one for metaphor or literary devices. A respect for context, and a willingness to look for meaning beyond the literal, is too much to ask from young-earth creationists.
Filed under: Author - ACG,Politics,Religion,Science | Tags: Censorship, Conservapedia, Copyright, Creationism, Discovery Institute, Fair use, Fundamentalism, Law, RationalWiki, William Dembski
Several years ago, friend-of-the-site RationalWiki posted a stunningly thorough side-by-side refutation of a Conservapedia article on creationism. Conservapedia, naturally, could offer no argument in defense, but happily threatened the site with a copyright suit, because if you can’t beat ‘em, sue ‘em, “fair use” notwithstanding.
Now, history is set to repeat itself. Another RationalWiki user has posted a thorough, well-sourced, compelling refutation of William Dembski’s latest attempt to ground creationism in science, and rather than engage in a debate on the merits, Dembski himself is now threatening to sue.
By means of background, Dembski is not a lawyer. But it’s common knowledge that U.S. copyright law explicitly preserves the right to excerpt a work, even substantially, for comment and criticism. See 17 U.S.C. § 107. Dembski’s complaint against RationalWiki is so wrong that no lawyer would take it; and if they did, they’d be laughed out of court. But it’s still further proof that (1) creationists can only protect their views by censorship and, (2) they’re willing to ignore established law when convenient, be it the Establishment Clause or federal copyright statutes.
Disappointing to be sure, but not surprising. Though the Bible may not be much for science, it does have some good insights on human nature. And as the author of Ecclesiastes would’ve put it, “there is nothing new under the sun” (1:9-14).
Filed under: Author - ACG,History,Politics | Tags: Conservapedia, History, Jonah Goldberg, Marxism, Socialism
Jonah Goldberg, the man famous for redrawing the political spectrum to equate “liberals” with Nazis, shares an important trait with Conservapedia — a passion for historical revisionism. For both, the war against liberalism is a quest that spans the epochs. There were Jewish liberals in ancient Jerusalem, eager to kill the Son of God; and there were German liberals in the Weimar Republic, eager to kill the Jews. What a difference a few millenia makes!
Curiously, this need to remake all of history to demonize one’s foes is not conservative — it’s Marxist. Politicians have manipulated history for millenia to aggrandize themselves, but it was Marx who first took that impulse to its extreme, in framing his epochal struggle between workers and merchants. How curious that expansive revisionism now undergirds the modern right-wing fringe.
Filed under: Author - ACG,Culture,Politics,Religion | Tags: Bible, Conservapedia, Fundamentalism, History, Practical History, Religious politics
Really. It makes too much sense, doesn’t it? The life of Jesus fairly read makes him look like anything from a social reformer to, in the Gospel of Thomas, a quasi-anarchist or, in the Acts of Paul & Thecla, a feminist. It was only a matter of time until conservatives ditched the substance of his theology, to embrace only the steady-state implications of institutional religion.
This in flagrant violation of Revelations 22:18 –
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book.”
Of course, presumably that passage was added by liberals.
Thus the routinization of charisma has come full circle: Jesus challenged the status quo, Paul regularized his teachings, and with the passing of millenia, Christianity became the status quo. Now, conservatives would have Christianity used to roll back the clock — once the extirpation of its revolutionary roots is complete.
Whether mankind needs an intermediary on earth, between him and God, is a theological question. Historically, Protestants believe that mankind can speak directly to the divine, while Catholics require a church intermediary. Conservapedia’s approach appears to combine the worst of both worlds: the Bible is mutable, but the only authority is a fundamentalist website. No man comes to the kingdom — but through the Republican Party.
Filed under: Author - ACG,Politics | Tags: Censorship, Conservapedia, Free speech, Mail, PUMAs, RedState, Site News
As most common readers will know, this blog, normally a pleasant and fairly civil place, has seen a not-so-subtle deluge from birther hordes, on account of our few posts on Orly Taitz. Thankfully, it’s also brought in a lot of inoffensive readers, and some great commenters, too. Welcome!
Of course that leaves the question of what to do with the set of crazies. Screeching about birth certificates and other such nonsense is one thing, but wishing for public figures to die is another entirely, and no part of any civil discussion. I’ve never censored commenters (the farthest I’ve gone is disemvoweling a few persistent birthers), but this particular individual, and others like her, seem to push the limits of my commitment to free speech.
Although the First Amendment doesn’t apply to private actors, no-one should silence another lightly, even on the internet. You’ll notice that any blog that does censor comments for ideology alone quickly descends into an echo chamber, useless at best, and a breeding ground for disconnected extremists at the worst (RedState, Confluence, Conservapedia).
Still, with narrowly tailored rules, that worst-case scenario can be avoided. I’ll never spam or delete comments for their political content alone; never have, never will. But I will censor comments that fall outside the lines of First Amendment-protected speech, if any emerge (they have not), and I am open to censoring the comments of those who add nothing to the site, and instead make it a less pleasant place for other readers. I say “open” only, because I remain unsure of the best course to take. Your suggestions are welcome to break my mental deadlock.
On a more pleasant note, a big “thank you!!” to Mike C., for the e-mail I received, copied below: an excellent summation of the problem posed by some pundits. “You’re welcome” for the review, but much more, thank you for reading and taking the time to write.
My father gave me a copy of the book with a very heartfelt note saying how worried he was for me and his grandchildren with the direction the country is going. He used similar terms as Mr. Beck to describe the current administration – elitist, intellectuals, etc. It saddened me very much that a well educated and well traveled man in his late 70s could be drawn into this propaganda – but my father’s generation, I believe, is the foundation of Mr. Beck’s (and Limbaugh’s) audience. They truly are the Greatest Generation, but also the most exploited – mainly for the undying desire to follow self-proclaimed “patriots”.
Your review [of Beck's book - Ed.] was insightful and mirrored my own feelings while reading the book – although I think I was far more horrified at the prospect of Americans buying into this viewpoint. Now I just need to figure out how to gently tell my father what I think about the book – but most importantly to show the love and respect he deserves for writing the letter of concern for me and my children.
Thanks for providing common sense about something that lacks it completely.
Again, thank you for reading, Mike C., and thank you to all readers.
Filed under: Author - ACG,Religion,Science | Tags: Conservapedia, Creationism, Fundamentalism
Flash - Conservapedia is intolerable. Even for creationists & conservatives. Or so writes Philip J. Rayment, ex-administrator and Australian creationist, in his tell-most web memoir. There he documents the double standards, factual relativism, and bizarrely churlish behavior that have made Conservapedia not just a failure in its own right, but a macrosm of the failures of the American far-right. No governing philosophy so steeped in dogmatism can long survive, or retain its adherents.
To be sure, Philip is an imperfect hero in this little tale. While he’s rightly rejected an organization of theocrats and thugs, Philip is an unapologetic young-earth creationist, with presumably similar opinions on gay rights, etc., etc. But he differs from the organization he left, and indeed the majority of his fellow-travelers, in two significant ways: he has a decent respect for the rest of humanity, and a desire to debate rather than dictate. This, as they say, is not nothing. If opponents we must have, we should hope for such individuals.
Filed under: Author - ACG,Politics,Religion,Science | Tags: Conservapedia, Creationism
Yesterday, Conservapedia lost its last claim to sanity when Philip J. Rayment, longtime administrator, resigned, saying only “enough is enough.” Philip was for some time the only administrator who even entertained the idea that non-fundamentalist Christians were human. For those of us who briefly had an account on Conservapedia back in the day, he was a pleasure to debate with, and always genial, especially to his opponents. This basic human decency bought him suspicion and contempt from Conservapedia’s more hardline elements – and thus his departure.
To be sure, Philip shares a few negative traits with those he leaves behind, notably, adherence to a narrow and exclusionary view of religion that threatens all of western civilization’s post-1700 gains. But his consistent composure, decency, respect, and genuine interest in debate should serve to remind us that just because we have such glaring differences with our ideological opponents doesn’t necessarily mean we can’t discuss them like adults.
Filed under: Author - ACG,Politics,Religion | Tags: Conservapedia, Fundamentalism
Good news, everyone! Conservapedia, the “trusworthy” encyclopedia, now has its very own YouTube channel! Now you can look forward to more gems like this little wonder:
From Andy Schlafly comparing “liberals” to lynch mobs, to Conservapedians bragging about their site outpacing Rush Limbaugh’s (o rly?), this channel clearly promises to be the gift that keeps on giving. God willing, they’ll expand into Twitter, too…
Oh glorious day. Do what you must with this information.
Filed under: Author - ACG,Politics | Tags: Conservapedia, Entertainment, Science fiction
Conservapedia: Andy Schlafly WILL seek state funding to provide Supplemental Education Services, and plans to submit his application today. I have an e-mail in to the New Jersey Department of Education asking where to send my list of “recommended reading” on Schlafly. I’ll update when (if) I hear back.
Futurama: one of my favorite shows, canceled a while back by Fox (a surefire sign of its greatness), just put out its last of four planned straight-to-DVD movies. Of the three already out, two were great, and this recent release (“Into the Wild Green Yonder”) has gotten great reviews. Without being able to verify that report (yet), I recommend you BUY IT anyways: apparently, stellar DVD sales have prompted Fox to at least open dialogue with Matt Groening over the possibility of a formal Futurama season six. In other words, $30 buys you a probably-good DVD and a “yes” vote for Futurama’s… umm… future.
Lost: tonight’s episode focuses on John Locke (aka “Jeremy Bentham”), and owing to its subject matter, will go a long way towards proving or disproving my theory that the show has gotten a little preachy.
Filed under: Author - ACG | Tags: Andy Schlafly, Conservapedia, Creationism, Culture wars, Fundamentalism
A while ago, we reported on the gross disservice putative “educator” Andy Schlafly is doing to his homeschooled students, and the parents that rely upon him. Far from giving te children a leg-up in the world through superior and rigorous education, a Schlafly education sets the bar incredibly low, both for instrutor and student, and clearly prizes ideological conformity far above intelligence, independent/critical thinking, or effort.
Sadly (and one would think impossibly), things have only gotten worse since then. In his latest course (World History), Andy explains away prehistory by saying, “There is no reason to think that man existed for thousands of years without ever expressing himself in written form,” and rewards students for explaining that Plato’s “Republic” is “the basis for our form of government in the U.S.” Interesting, because I don’t recall reading anything in the Constitution about philosopher kings…
Now Andy Schlafly wants to take his show on the road – at your expense – by getting himself accredited as a “Supplemental Education Service” for New Jersey. No Child Left Behind requires each state to develop these SES programs to function as private adjuncts to the public school system, funded and promoted by the state, charged with bringing remedial students up to speed. Given Andy’s noted distaste for public schools, this little stunt (if he follows through on it) is properly seen as his attempt to funnel the godless into his waiting hands, where they can be more easily converted: for the sake of New Jersey’s children, this can’t be allowed to happen.
Fortunately, there’s no reason to think he’ll pass the accreditation process. Most obviously, he seems to be on the “supply” side of the remedial students equation: the only difference between Andy Schlafly and an utterly incompetent teacher is that Andy uses religion to disguise his incompetence as “faith.” The extensive application for certification (PDF), we should hope, aggressively screens out such failures.
Even if Andy doesn’t flunk the certification based on soft estimates of his competence, a number of objective barriers stand in his way. Federal law requires SES providers to be “secular, neutral, and nonideological,” none of which are words that describe Andy, Conservapedia, or his “lectures.” ((See 20 U.S.C. § 6316(e)(5)(D) (2008) and 34 CFR 200.47(b)(2)(B)(ii)(D).)) Nor could Andy make the required certification ((Application p. 12.)) that, as an SES provider, he would live up to New Jersey’s Core Curriculum Content Standards. These standards would require that his students either understand ideas he doesn’t credit (evolution, the science explaining life’s origins, deep-time geology, hominid development), or learn methodologies he doesn’t teach (critical thinking in American and world history). Andy’s entire motivation for homeschooling is to enable him to legally ignore these standards: why he thinks they won’t apply to him the second he tries to step back into the public school system is beyond me.
A prediction: Andy knows this, and won’t follow through. When the deadline for applications rolls around on February 27th, he’ll either forget to file and subsequently pretend the whole thing never happened, or file a truly slipshod document and, when it’s inevitably rejected, blame liberals. If he takes the latter course, he’ll whine for a few weeks, gloat in the web-traffic he gets from gawkers based here or at similar blogs, and then pretend the whole thing never happened. Laughs will be had all around.
That said, there’s no accounting for government incompetence. Acccordingly, we’ll report back as this story develop, with contact information for New Jersey Department of Education officials if necessary.
