RationalWiki's 2018 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff — we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone seeing this today donates $5, we will meet our goal for 2018.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $3630Goal: $5000

Conservapedia:What We've Learned

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.
Conservlogo late april.png
Newcomer's Guide
What is going on?
Best of Conservapedia
Blatant plagiarism
Differences with Wikipedia
Hijacked articles
"Fab Five"
CP in the media
In-depth analysis
Active users
Illustrated guide
Article Matrix
Greatest Insights
Parthian Shots

More about CP
Anyone with an observation should contribute to this article. Feel free to cross-apply material from WIGO.

Conservapedia, managed by a cabal of far right fundamentalist Christians in accordance with their values, is a poor encyclopedia. However, by virtue of its ownership and management it provides an excellent vignette into what a society would look like when managed by this group. This little side-benefit - that Conservapedia in effect becomes a controlled social engineering experiment run amok - means that the project has not been a total loss. It allows we, the editors of RationalWiki, to learn what society would be like, when run by fundamentalist Christians, and exactly what would become of the rest of the world.


  • We learn just what the right thinks of the First Amendment. Speech is suppressed brutally in the regime for not falling into line. Dissent is a barely tolerated offense; outright pressing of disagreeable ideas is an offense justly punished by excommunciation.
  • The tragedies of others would be bandied about to score a political point, at varying levels of insensitivity. The movement must make a point... at all costs to dignity.
  • The jails would soon be overcrowded, since "kill them all & let God sort 'em out" is as good a phrase as any, in a theocracy.
  • Racism is thinly veiled and tolerated.


  • Science becomes a political tool, turning upon ideology, and not observed fact. However, this blatant bias - worse even than being admitted - is concealed, corrupting the minds of the unaware.
  • Even medicine is a pawn of the establishment.
  • Better to impugn and attack a scientist ad hominem than discuss the facts! After all, science is eminently political.


  • Everything, but everything is created in service of ideology. No art, no education, no event, no movement escapes this. All culture is Liberal or Conservative to these ideologues, and it results in idiotic formulations such as "conservative humour" and "conservative drama".
  • Newspeak will soon reign.
  • The words "liberal" and "conservative" become quality adjectives rather than descriptions of actual political beliefs. "Liberal Lies" are revealed by "Conservative Truth", etc.
  • Facts can be either liberal or conservative, despite being statements whose value can only be true/false.

Justice (lol)[edit]

  • Might is right.
  • If you have the power, use it, and the rules do not apply to you. Power is given to you to make other people follow the rules.
  • Rules are arbitrary. They may change on a whim and it is not up to those changing them to let people know they have changed.
  • Rule of law? What? Dissenting legal views are "opinions" - conservative legal views are "Opinions." Guess which one should actually be followed, in a fundamentalist world, and which one discarded?