Category talk:Horrific wingnuttery

Just merge it into authoritarian wingnuttery or something. Gradating the levels of wingnuttery (as opposed to different ideological brands of wingnuttery) seems unnecessary. oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 02:47, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I wanted to split it up further but that can work too. If everyone was under authoritarian wingnuttery than we'd have neo-cons grouped with neo-nazis. I'm trying to think of a better label... What if we had "authoritarian wingnuttery" and "conservative wingnuttery" as two seperate categories instead? Nazis, theocrats, etc going under authoritarian. ClothCoat (talk) 02:50, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I supported conservative wingnuttery before and do so now. Even as weird as that sounds. FuzzyCatTomato (talk/stalk) 02:55, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

A bit but it works. If you try to plot this on a kind of political compass Libertarian wingnuttery goes on the bottom far-right, authoritarian on top far-right, and and conservative inbetween the two socially but still far-right. ClothCoat (talk) 02:57, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Agreed, that's what I was thinking. However: how to distinguish authoritarian (liberal) wingnuttery from authoritarian (conservative) wingnuttery? ʇυzzγɔɒтqoтɒтo (talk/stalk) 03:06, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Maybe socialist wingnuttery for the left and authoritarian for the right? Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 03:07, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Authoriatian for both works, though most authoritarian "moonbats" are communists anyways who are already under a single category. ClothCoat (talk) 03:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC)