WMG / Conservapedia

Conservapedia is a Batman Gambit
Andrew Schlafly is a liberal atheist who decided to raise awareness about what he perceives to be a problem of humanity, religion and extremism. He does so by creating a crazy site which people will protest against, resulting in Christian extremism getting more media place, people will know about it and will press the politics to fix it. So far, it didnīt work.

Andrew Schlafly is actually the world's greatest troll.
On his deathbed, he will admit that he really made Conservapedia as a Stealth Parody of far-right-wing fundamentalists. Also, that means he's pranking those who think they're sneaking under the radar with their own stealth parodies: that's what you're meant to do.

Not likely to be true, but wouldn't it be awesome?
  • He's the son of noted conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly.
    • There are cases of hardcore conservatives having liberal children. Sometimes the children become liberal because their parents are so hardcore.
      • Yet he is a "homeschool teacher" who has "taught hundreds of teenagers" while having no credentials to support any academic position to his teaching. Plus if it were a stealth parody then he wouldn't have the permaban system as prevalent as it is. Why would you need to ban people who are on your side and doing what you want them to do?
        • Because they were giving away the game too early.

Andrew Schlafly is Adolf Hitler.
The clue is in their similar names and ultra-conservative politics.
  • Yep, because Nazism is totally the same thing as conservativism. And the Nazi party didn't have the word "socialism" in its name or anything. Schlafly is unquestionably a total nutter, but comparing him to Hitler is really pushing it.
    • The "Socialist" bit is just a name. Just because you call your party something doesn't mean it is (case in point; North Korea goes by the name of The Democratic People's Republic of Korea).
    • Conservatism and Nazism have very similar social agendas (e.g. far right), perhaps not economic agendas as you mentioned, but the spirit of both is very much the same.
    • From The Other Wiki "In politics, Right, right-wing and rightist are generally used to describe support for preserving traditional social orders and hierarchies." Just because both are far right doesn't mean they actually have any ideologies in common.
    • Also, Nazism and Conservapedia are both very much to the right of more mainstream conservatism. It's not conservatism = Nazism. It's that Schlafly's extreme conservatism = nazism.
    • Clearly people need to go back and revise political science. Politics is not as basic as 'left vs right', which is the simplistic dichotomy people try and portray. The left can get more numbers if they make out all of their enemies (right) are the same thing, and likewise the right can get numbers if they make out their enemies (left) are the same thing. It's far more complicated than that. Nazism, as variation of Fascism, while having a policy as far right as you could possibly go, isn't strickly bound to the far right scale because it's planned economy, for example, clashes with the conservative maintenance of the market economy. Because of this, Hitler exclaimed that he disliked the right wing just as much as the left wing, because market economies and conservatism damaged Germany's national identity. Hitler hated Conservatism just as much as the conventional left wing.
      • Actually the whole association of conservatives with 'free markets' is only a recent phenomenon. Conservatives historically are paternalistic and elitist, and think that unfettered markets are unstable and ruin their chance of having a fixed social order.
      • Free-market support is economic liberalism. It's easier to make (a still highly simplified) sense of political sides if you think on two axis one is Nationalism (this is "Right wing". Basically My Country, Right or Wrong it can devolve into Nazism if pushed to far) - Socialism ("Left wing". For people everywhere, mostly lower classes and minorities. Pushed too far becomes Communism, where who stands out gets weeded out) the other is Conservatism (basically Appeal to Tradition. Can lead to conserve not healthy practices just by the merit of being old) - Liberalism (Everybody should be free. Pushed to far can cause Might Makes Right secenarios.). There are overlaps Socialism is a socially liberal movement, but it's highly against economic liberalism (because it exploits the classes Socialism tries to protect). Or Nationalism tends to be very conservative but it's more concerned with national interests and not with tradition.
  • Hitler's too old to still be alive.
    • Not if Schlafly is a mutant clone of Hitler who went even crazier than Hitler himself.

Conservapedia is really an in-character wiki for an alternate history roleplaying game setting
Schlafly is completely unaware that 'Liberal' is a real word, and thinks he made it up to describe his race of Always Chaotic Evil Orc analogues, whose presence in the timeline is responsible for the many, many discrepancies between his world and observable reality.

He probably also thinks that 'Conservative' means 'Player Character'

He is really a highly intelligent super-genius conservative. He made Conservapedia as a parody site, but so that non-conservatives reading it will have their view about conservatives skewed so that if they try to debate a "real" conservative they'll lose.

Or it's a parody of that.
  • Alternatively, he wrote it to make sure that conservatives read it, become afraid of it, and don't wind up strawmanning themselves into something incomprehensibly stupid.

Conservapedia was created by the Conservative Crime Squad

Schlafly suffered a breakdown at some point.
He has degrees in electrical engineering and law, and actually co-published a few papers in proper academic journals while working as an engineer. This means that, while he believes in some pretty silly stuff, he is intelligent.

Now look at the bizarre, rambling, non-sequitur-filled nonsense he writes on Conservapedia. Perhaps the stress of studying law got to him, and he gradually burned out over time.

  • "[B]eliefs can survive potent logical or empirical challenges. They can survive and even be bolstered by evidence that most uncommitted observers would agree logically demands some weakening of such beliefs. They can even survive the total destruction of their original evidential bases."
    —Lee Ross and Craig Anderson

    In other words, you don't have to be crazy to believe crazy things. Granted, it does help.

Conservapedia is actually completely objective
We, the public, have in fact been the victims of mass brainwashing by the coterie of liberal elites controlling the media and government. Via wikipedia, the press and television, they have succeeded in skewing all information to the point that what we perceive as reality is actually biased towards the Gay-Muslim-Democrat-Atheist agenda.

Andy Schlafly is a hero and a true patriot.

  • Must.....fight.....urge to mark that entire.....paragraph as sarcasm....agh, somebody help me out here!

The above entry was written by Schlafly
Do I need to explain this one?
  • Well, there is a reason they're called Wild Mass Guesses...