Conservapedia:Last Wordism

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Wigocp.svg This Conservapedia-related article is of largely historical interest, and not necessarily the focus of RationalWiki today.
Conservapedia was a major focal point in the early history of RationalWiki, but long ago ceased coming up with new ways to appall and amuse.
Our energies are now spent debunking other, fresher examples of religious fundamentalism and creationist claims.
For RationalWiki's less ancient content, try the cover story articles or a random article.

Last wordism is a neologism invented by Andrew Schlafly; the premise is that liberals have an insatiable urge to have the last word in a debate.[1]

Definition[edit]

Andy defines last wordism as

the belief, common among liberals, that victory is obtained in a debate or discussion by having the last word.

Last wordism claims are usually used as a last resort. When the statistics don't fool anyone and the Schlafly Reversal fails to stem debate, Andy must pull out the big gun. When Andy starts screaming last wordism, the English translation is: "Shit, this isn't going away... I better do something about it now." Not only has "Last wordism" proved extremely effective in removing him from accountability for his insane rambling, it has also allowed him to reach George W. Bush levels in Inventive English.

Characterization[edit]

Conservapedia characterizes last wordism as a "bad thing used by liberals." They claim it's characteristic of "less intellectually robust presentations,"[2] a phrase Andy found in a book review and thought sounded good. It is taken completely out of context in the article and with a little digging, Andy appears very foolish.

(the author) gives satisfying answers while avoiding that kind of triumphal, and unsatisfying, last-wordism one often encounters in less intellectually robust presentations.[3]

Use[edit]

In essence, the concept of "last wordism" impugns a party in a debate for having the audacity to... actually debate.[4]

Interestingly, the concept is usually applied to stifle debate, and ensure that someone in line with Conservapedia (read: Andy) gets the last word.[5] When a run-of-the-mill peon engages in debate with a member of the Conservapedian elite (someone with blocking powers or supported by someone with blocking powers), the inexorable next steps in the process are:

  1. Editor is accused of "last wordism," or always trying to have the last word,
  2. Editor responds,
  3. Editor is blocked,
  4. Elite Conservapedian gets the last word by replying after the editor cannot reply, by virtue of the block.
Rarely, when confronted with a last wordism claim, an editor will back off, allowing Andy to have the last word, claim victory, sit back, relax and continue driving his rocket ship to unknown galaxies beyond the reach of mortal men.

In conclusion, although "last wordism" is in theory a bad thing at Conservapedia, the only one who appears to care about it, let alone actually practice it, is... Andy Schlafly.[6][7]

How to gain the last word[edit]

To gain the last word properly you need the ability to enforce it,

Further attempts at liberal last wordism on my personal talk page may result in a short block of the offending account. - Andrew Schlafly[8]

Biblical example[edit]

Hilariously, Schlafly added the following "spiritual touch" to the Conservapedia entry for "last wordism":

Last wordism reflects a lack of restraint, a characteristic of wrongdoing or sin. The ultimate in last wordism was the Crucifixion of Jesus, to which He responded with the Resurrection.[9]

One can only presume that Andy thought he was giving a good example of Jesus' critics getting the last word by crucifying him. In fact he has implied that God 'sinfully' responded by resurrecting Jesus to get the final word on the matter.

Last Word[edit]

Pwned!

Footnotes[edit]

  1. See this point explained here and here.
  2. Conservapedia's article 11/11/2007
  3. http://www.cslewisinstitute.org/sites/www.cslewisinstitute.org/files/webfm/aboutcslewis/books/CaseforChrist.pdf
  4. and win
  5. For those too stupid unable to understand, this is called irony. But it's also just sickeningly disgusting and hypocritical.
  6. Famously used on talk:main_page, here.
  7. and here
  8. User talk:Aschlafly April 5th 2008
  9. Revision as of 21:36, 13 May 2008.