Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Quack

2022-02-19T12:06:56Z

TerryH:

'''Quack''' or '''quacksalver''' is a derogatory term for a person within the field of [[medicine]] whose practice is suspect, unprofessional, or bad. Such individuals have either swindled people of money or, through their practice, have caused harm. There are also quacks who believe in what they are doing and are operating under pure motives, but they are nevertheless wrong.

'''Quack''' is also an [[onomatopoeia]] for the noise that a [[duck]] makes.

==Links==
*[http://www.quackwatch.org/index.html QuackWatch, operated by Dr. Stephen Barrett]
*[http://your-doctor.com/patient_info/alternative_remedies/various_therapy/reportfraud.html Reporting medical fraud]

[[Category:Slang Terms]]
[[Category:Medicine]]

Quack

2022-02-19T12:06:39Z

TerryH:

'''Quack''' or '''quacksalver'' is a derogatory term for a person within the field of [[medicine]] whose practice is suspect, unprofessional, or bad. Such individuals have either swindled people of money or, through their practice, have caused harm. There are also quacks who believe in what they are doing and are operating under pure motives, but they are nevertheless wrong.

'''Quack''' is also an [[onomatopoeia]] for the noise that a [[duck]] makes.

==Links==
*[http://www.quackwatch.org/index.html QuackWatch, operated by Dr. Stephen Barrett]
*[http://your-doctor.com/patient_info/alternative_remedies/various_therapy/reportfraud.html Reporting medical fraud]

[[Category:Slang Terms]]
[[Category:Medicine]]

Stanley Milgram

2021-09-30T16:09:50Z

TerryH: Created page with "'''Stanley Milgram, Ph.D.''' (1933-1984) was an American professor of psychology, then a lecturer, at Harvard University. He gained notoriety in 1962 with wha..."

'''Stanley Milgram, Ph.D.''' (1933-1984) was an [[America]]n [[professor]] of [[psychology]], then a lecturer, at [[Harvard University]].

He gained notoriety in 1962 with what became known as the Milgram Obedience Experiment. That experiment raised ethical issues that dogged his career forever. He almost failed to gain admission to the [[American Psychological Association]], and never did gain [[tenure]] at Harvard University.

Milgram's early life informed his work. Born in 1933 in the [[Bronx]] in [[New York City]], he grew up in a [[Judaism|Jewish]] household. Shortly after the [[Second World War]], distant relatives came to stay at the Milgram home – and tell tales of the [[Holocaust]] and their survival of it. Milgram would go on to mention that in his [[Bar Mitzvah]] speech.

In 1962 he memorably tested the thesis that obedience is all too easy to elicit. Working at [[Yale University]], he brought in fifty subjects at a time, informing each that he was testing the effect of punishment on memory and memorization. What he was actually doing was giving his subjects more draconian and terrifying orders, on a sliding scale, and measuring at what point – if any – his subjects would balk. Some did. But fifty percent of his subjects did not balk.

In 1976 he consulted on a [[CBS]] Special Presentation, ''The Tenth Level.'' Actor [[William Shatner]] portrayed a fictitious version of Milgram. Milgram said afterward that the project did not satisfy him, to the point of his demanding that CBS leave his name off the credits. In fact, ''The Tenth Level'' took many liberties with his original Obedience Experiment, including the portrayal of one of his subjects having a psychotic breakdown, storming out of the laboratory, and then virtually asking someone in a bar to beat him up, in order to do some sort of [[penance]] for the obedience he had shown in the experiment. Nothing like that ever happened to any of Milgram's actual subjects.

Milgram died in 1984.

[[Category:Biography]][[Category:Science]][[Category:Education]]

Essay:Greatest Conservative Novels

2021-09-03T22:35:57Z

TerryH:

[[Conservative]] novels exist, and some are immensely influential. Please read one of these, or add a new one that you like to our growing list:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Title
!Author
!Summary
!Genre
!Year Published
|-
|''[[Animal Farm]]''
|[[George Orwell]]
|A short story by [[George Orwell]], it describes a farm run by [[socialist]] animals. The animals rebel against its owners and set up a new farm under socialist ideas, though this idealistic future devolves into a dictatorship run by Napoleon the pig. Although it seems to be more pro-socialist, as the book goes on it begins to show the dangers and corruptness that arises through [[communism]]. It is based on the beginning of the Soviet Revolution, and every character represents either a prominent Soviet leader or a group of Russian citizens (Such as the elderly or workers).

Two film adaptations have been released: an animated film in 1954 and a live-action/puppet film in 1999.
|Political Satire
|1945
|-
|''[[The Bostonians]]''
|[[Henry James]]
|A brilliant satire of the elite in [[Boston]] in the late 1800s, this book hurt the career of the magnificent writer Henry James because [[liberal]]s disliked both his mockery of them and his implicit criticism of the early [[feminist]] movement. James did not expect the politically motivated disdain for this classic, and it caused him to shift some of his time to writing plays.

A movie version was made in 1984, starring Vanessa Redgrave, Christopher Reeve, and Jessica Tandy.
|Political Fiction
|1886
|-
|''[[1984]] / Nineteen Eighty-Four''
|[[George Orwell]]
|Another classic book by Orwell, it focuses on a civilian living in a [[Socialist]] world. The earth is split into 3 Nations : Oceania (The Americas, Australia, South Africa, and England), Euraisa (All of Europe and Russia), and Eastasia (Japan, China, and other parts of South Asia). All 3 nations fight over the left over areas, like North Africa and the Middle East, which result in endless casualties. There is constant editing of history. People, places, and things are constantly erased or changed or added (Similar to the acts of the Soviet Union. Words and thoughts are censored and use of them result in torture and death.
|Dystopian
|1949
|-
|''[[One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich]]''
|[[Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn]]
|This novel about a [[communist]] prison camp describes the triumph of [[faith]] and perseverance over inhumanity and compliance with [[evil]].
|Political Fiction
|1962
|-
|''The Brothers Karamazov''
|[[Fyodor Dostoyevsky]]
|The book is about keeping your traditional values, such as love in God, in a quickly changing world.
|Philosophical Fiction
|1880
|-
|''Crime and Punishment''
|[[Fyodor Dostoyevsky]]
|A man must argue against his morality in this novel. The main character, a poor school drop-out, murders a corrupt pawnbroker and takes her cash. Although he knows murder and robbery is wrong, he uses the stolen cash to do good and help people. This is similar to the tale of Robin Hood, who steals from the rich and gives to the poor.
|Philosophical Fiction
|1886
|-
|''Advise and Consent''
|[[Allen Drury]]
|A gripping account of a confirmation battle in the [[U.S. Senate]] with an underlying criticism of how [[liberals]] think and act.
|Political Fiction
|1959
|-
|''[[Fahrenheit 451]]''
|Ray Bradbury
|The perils and harm caused by book-burning, a metaphor for [[censorship]].
|Science Fiction
|1953
|-
|''The First Circle''
|[[Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn]]
|The book follows "Zeks" , a group of intelligent scientists living in Soviet gulags forced to work for the Soviet Government ; they're forced to help improve a government that causes to much pain and suffering. The novel is about the moral struggle between keeping yourself alive and causing someone else more pain in the future or doing the right thing.
|Autobiographical Fiction
|1968
|-
|''The Moon is a Harsh Mistress''
|[[Robert Heinlein]]
|Set in a Lunar Colony created as a prison on the Moon in the year 2075, Heinlein tells the story of the revolution by the Moon colony and its criminal population against the authoritarian Earth (Similar to a Soviet Gulag revolting against the USSR). The novel seems to lean towards Libertarian beliefs.
|Science Fiction
|1966
|-
|''Double Star''
|[[Robert Heinlein]]
|Fate smiles on a skilled but extraordinarily vain, racist (OK: species-ist), and seemingly hopelessly character-flawed actor induced by chance casting to practice better behavior for long enough dimly to recognize the worth of doing so for its own sake - and duly grows into the role becoming, to his own amazement, a significant and inspiring historical figure.
|Science Fiction
|1956
|-
|''Starship Troopers''
|[[Robert Heinlein]]
|Human society had to rebuild itself after a war between [[Communist]] [[China]] and a [[Russia]]n, [[United Kingdom|British]] and [[America]]n alliance. As part of that rebuilding, mustered-out [[veteran]]s, returning to find their home cities in disorder, imposed an order of their own, leading to a society in which one has to earn the right to [[vote]] by serving the society by putting one's life at risk. A young man, a product of this society, joins a [[Marines]]-like space infantry to impress a female friend at his school, but makes a career of it and goes on to become an [[officer]] – as his society must fight a major [[war]] against a species of [[spider]]-like social [[insect]]s. A stark contrast between total communism and a society where those who would take part in running the state, must first risk their lives for the sake of the state.
|Science Fiction
|1959
|-
|''Lord of the Rings''
|[[J.R.R. Tolkien]]
|With about 150 Million copies sold, this book is said to be the best-selling novel of all time. The book touches on themes of corruptness through absolute power, Fate VS Free Will, and Death.
|Fantasy
|1954-1955
|-
|''The Man Who Was Thursday''
|[[G.K. Chesterton]]
|This book follows an English detective recruited to an Anti-Anarchist branch of Scotland Yard.
|Fantasy
|1908
|-
|''Darkness at Noon''
|[[Arthur Koestler]]
|The book is set in the year 1938 in the now Communist Russia. The main character, Nicholas Rubashov, stands trial during one of Josef Stalin's infamous Purges. A former Bolshevik leader, he is tried for treason against the nation he helped to change. Although the novel is based on true events, Koestler doesn't use names like "Stalin" or "The Soviet Union". The novel is about the dangers of communism, similar to "Animal Farm" , and tries to show the reader how corrupt the Soviet system is.
|Dystopian
|1940
|-
|''The Camp of the Saints''
|[[Jean Raspail]]
|Back on the Bestseller list, Le Camp Des Saints is a book that could be applied to modern day. Its about citizens from a third world country that mass immigrate to Europe and America and absolutely destroy the Western culture. The book has "Rouge States" , Countries that refuse to give in to pressure from others to accept immigrants. It can be applied to modern day with Muslims. Muslims come into countries (Germany, England, ECT.) and rape their once great culture and turn it into the hell that was their home countries.
|Speculative Fiction
|1973
|-
|''State of Fear''
|[[Michael Crichton]]
|Crichton's novel revolves around a terrorism plot by "Eco-Terrorists" to raise attention on Global Warming / Global Cooling / Climate Change / Climate Disruption / Carbon Pollution. Even though the book is a work of dystopian fiction, it tries to get readers to think about both sides of the global warming debate. Critics and readers say this ruin the book's story.
|Dystopian
|2004
|-
|''The Red Badge of Courage''
|[[Stephen Crane]]
|About redemption, this book is about a Union Army Private during the United States Civil War. During a battle, he fled from the skirmish. Overcome by shame, he decides that he could redeem himself if he takes a bullet for his cause.
|Fiction
|1895
|-
|''Persepolis''
|Marjane Satrapi
|Graphic novel about a teen girl in [[Iran]] at the time of the 1979 [[Iranian Revolution]] who secretly gains a liking for Western culture and realises how corrupt her country's new [[Islamic extremist]] government is. The book portrays American values positively and the authoritarian regime of Iran negatively.
|Fiction
|1980
|-
|''Nuremberg: The Reckoning''
|[[William F. Buckley, Jr.]]
|Set during the 1945 Nazi War Crime trials in Nuremberg, Germany, a young German-American interpreter must listen and translate stories of the Nazi Party's brutal treatment of Jews during the Holocaust. Being of German descent, he must deal with the shame he now has from his home country's acts.
|Historical Fiction
|2003
|-
|''Gilead''
|[[Marilynne Robinson]]
|Gilead is the autobiography of a fictional dying pastor from Iowa who writes about his life for his young son to read. The son, who wont have many memories of his father, develops a love for God and family through this diary-like book from his father.
|Fiction
|2004
|-
|''Rainbow Six''
|[[Tom Clancy]]
|About a counter-terrorist unit in several nations, it focuses on the unit as they deal with terrorist plots worldwide, similar to the G.I. Joe team but worldwide. The concept was so popular it has spawned a video game series, starting in 1998 and still continuing today, giving teenage gamers good morals.
|Techno-Thriller
|1998
|-
|''Red Storm Rising''
|[[Tom Clancy]]
|This book focuses on a Third World War between the forces of NATO And those of the Warsaw Pact. Surprisingly, the war never escalated to the point where nuclear warheads were used, but conventional guns and vehicles were used instead.
|Techno-Thriller
|1986
|-
|''The Bridges at Toko-Ri''
|[[James Michener]]
|About US Navy pilots during the Korean war, they must destroy bridges in enemy territory used by the Koreans to send supplies and soldiers to the front. The story was so popular it eventually spawned a movie of the same name in 1954.
|Fiction
|1953
|-
|''The Thin Red Line''
|[[James Jones]]
|
|War Story
|1962
|-
|''Quo Vadis: A Narrative of the Time of Nero''
|[[Henryk Sienkiewicz]]
|
|Historical Fiction
|1895
|-
|''The Day of the Jackal''
|[[Frederick Forsyth]]
|
|Spy Fiction
|1971
|-
|''Master and Commander''
|[[Patrick O'Brian]]
|
|Historical Fiction
|1969
|-
|''The Idiot''
|[[Fyodor Dostoevsky]]
|
|Philosophical Fiction
|1868
|-
|''The Overton Window''
|[[Glenn Beck]]
|
|Fiction
|2010
|-
|''[[The Fountainhead]]''
|[[Ayn Rand]]
|
|Philosophical Fiction
|1943
|-
|''Little Women''
|[[Louisa May Alcott]]
|Jo March and her sisters come of age during the end of the Civil War, in which their father is fighting for the Union. The March sisters hold to conservative values taught by their mother despite pressure from their companions.
|Bildungsroman
|1868
|-
|''One Second After''
|William R. Forstchen
|
|Speculative Fiction
|2009
|-
|''The Screwtape Letters''
|[[C.S. Lewis]]
|C.S Lewis tells the story of Screwtape, a demon mentoring another and giving him advice on how to tempt Christians, revealing the weaknesses the Church must repair.
|Satire
|1942
|-
|''The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe''
|[[C.S. Lewis]]
|Four children cross over from a wardrobe to a fantasy world called Narnia, where the heroic lion Aslan prepares a great battle against the White Witch, who wants to keep Narnia in an eternal winter. Contains many Christian allegories.
|Fantasy
|1984
|-
|''Dracula''
|[[Bram Stoker]]
|Abraham van Helsing is a Christian vampire slayer who does what he believes is right.
|Horror Fiction
|1897
|-
|''Frankenstein''
|[[Mary Shelley]]
|Warns about the dangers and consequences of playing God.
|Horror Fiction
|1818
|-
|''The Canterbury Tales''
|[[Geoffrey Chaucer]]
|It's about a pilgrimage, or quest for Christianity from the Christians' standpoint.
|Anthology
|1478
|-
|''Beowulf''
|Anonymous
|Depicts the ever going battle between good and evil with Christianity being the good.
|Poetry
|700-1000 A.D.
|-
|''The Jungle Book''
|[[Rudyard Kipling]]
|A boy named Mowgli is found orphaned in the Indian jungle and is raised by a pack of wolves, with Bagheera the panther and Baloo the bear as his teachers. He also faces down Shere Khan, a crippled tiger who wants to kill Mowgli after killing his parents. The book promotes friendship and family values, and misanthropy is frowned down upon.
|Children's Literature
|1894
|-
|''Maus''
|Art Spiegelman
|Portrays the sheer disgustingness of the Nazis from the viewpoint of a Holocaust survivor.
|Autobiography/Biography
|1980
|-
|''Gone with the Wind''
|[[Margaret Mitchell]]
|Celebrates man-and-woman relationships as well as a strong heroic woman who is the antithesis of a modern feminist.
|Historical Fiction
|1936
|-
|''[[Winnie the Pooh]]'' series
|[[A.A. Milne]]
|Winnie-the-Pooh and his toy friends, along with Christopher Robin, experience the innocence of childhood. A classic standing against the Liberals' attempts to ruin childhood.
|Children's Literature
|1924-1928
|-
|''[[A Christmas Carol]]''
|[[Charles Dickens]]
|A classic Christmas story about how Ebenezer Scrooge decides to give up his miserly ways and shows the dangers of hating Christmas in the end.
|Novella
|1843
|-
|''The Gift of the Magi''
|[[O Henry]]
|Heart warming story about a poor married couple who sacrifice their most cherished possessions to buy each other a Christmas gift.
|Fiction.
|1905
|-
|''The Monkey's Paw''
|[[W.W Jacobs]]
|Warns of the consequences of playing God.
|Horror
|1902
|-
|''The Railway Series''
|Rev. W. Awdry (1945–1946, 1948–1970, 1972) Christopher Awdry (1983–1996, 2007, 2011)
|Promotes friendship values and many of the anthropomorphic trains overcome hardships.
|Children's Literature
|1945–1946, 1948–1970, 1972, 1983–1996, 2007, 2011
|-
|''Of Sound Mind''
|Jean Farris
|It's about overcoming hardships as a high school senior named Theo is the only hearing member of an all deaf family. It also promotes friendship and family values.
|Realistic Fiction
|2001
|-
|''Painting the Black''
|Carl Deuker
|For the majority of this book, it promotes friendship values between a baseball playing high school senior named Ryan Ward and his best friend named Josh Daniels, who plays both football and baseball. After Josh grabs a girl by the bra at lunch, has a mocking article in the school newspaper, and attempts to sexually assault the girl who wrote it as revenge, Ryan doesn't want to rat him out but eventually does. The ending has a message about overcoming such hardships. The book can also be seen to show the dangers and consequences of [[anger]].
|Realistic Fiction/Sports Fiction
|1997
|-
|''[[The Divine Comedy]]''
|[[Dante]]
|Describes the dangers of wrongdoing, which could have you end up in the infamous Inferno (Hell) and the virtues of doing the right thing, which could have you end up in Heaven. It also talks about Purgatory.
|Epic Poetry
|1320
|-
|''Ferdinand the Bull''
|Munro Leaf
|This book is about a bull named Ferdinand who lives in Spain and sniffs flowers instead of fighting a matador in a bullring. It also inspired conservative leader [[Martin Luther King]].
|Children's Literature
|1936
|-
|''[[Watership Down]]''
|[[Richard Adams]]
|This book tells of a band of British rabbits led by two brothers - clever leader Hazel and prophetic Fiver - as they journey to a new home when their old home is bulldozed. Once they reach their new home, they spend the novel building it up by recruiting more rabbits to join them, as well as fend off an attack from an aggressive neighboring warren.

While Richard Adams said that the book is more for entertainment and not an allegory, there are still some lessons to be learned in the story. The book promotes upholding traditions, though the rabbits are not afraid to break tradition once in a while to make their new home (for example, females do most of the digging for their babies, but the males that made it through the journey decide to dig in their place), thus showing that there is room for both conservative values and progressive values. Totalitarian rule is condemned in the form of the book's villain: General Woundwort, who rules Efrefa with an iron paw; he keeps his rabbits in seclusion in Efrefa to the point of them overcrowding and allows his council to rip the ears of another rabbit named Blackavar for trying to escape. Courage, loyalty, and fighting for one's home are shown in a positive light, an example being Bigwig (a friend of Hazel's and an officer in the "Owsla") helping his friends defend their new home and fighting Woundwort himself. Hazel and Fiver share a strong brotherhood; while they have their differences in ways of thinking (Hazel being more daring and Fiver being more cautious), they ultimately respect each other and care for each other, showing brotherhood in a good way. Finally, while there is some environmentalism in the book (though the humans are portrayed as mainly apathetic to the rabbits' lives, and Richard Adams had condemned urbanizing the countryside), it does show that humans can be good to rabbits, as seen when a girl named Lucy saves Hazel from her cat and releases him back into the wild.

An animated movie based on the book premiered in 1978, which (while portraying the same values as the book) is remembered for being pretty graphic and violent. A three-season animated TV series was released in 1999 and ended in 2001, being the most family-friendly of ''Watership Down'' adaptations. BBC released a CGI Netflix miniseries in 2018, which follows the book more than the 1978 film. A sequel to the book called ''Tales of Watership Down'' was published in 1996.
|Fiction
|1972
|-
|''Guardians of Ga'Hoole''
|Kathryn Lasky
|The series stars a world where owls dominate the world after humanity goes extinct and form their own kingdoms; a band of owls called the Guardians of Ga'Hoole is formed, knightly owls who rise each night to perform noble deeds, protect the innocent, and vanquish evil. The first several books tell of the story of Soren, a young barn owl shoved out of the nest by his older brother Kludd, as he and an elf owl named Gylfie escape their captors and join new friends in finding the Great Ga'Hoole Tree. His nephew Coryn (born to the traitorous Kludd and Nyra) gets his story in the last few books, where he goes from child soldier to kindly king of Ga'Hoole.

These books positively portray a battle of good versus evil (showing who is clearly good and who is clearly evil) and objective morality, as well as portraying family in a positive light. Betraying family is seen in a negative light, an example being where Kludd shoves Soren out of the nest to pass a Pure Ones test, brainwashes his baby sister, and very likely kills his parents. Racism is rightfully portrayed as negative, as the Pure Ones are barn owl supremacists who want all other species of owls to be servants to barn owls; they even show hypocrisy by treating other Tytos in their ranks (like sooty owls and masked owls) lower than barn owls. Faith and science are both important in the series, where owl authors have written in books how the gizzard is important to owls both physically and mentally; the more scientific spotted owl Otulissa even learns to respect others' way of thinking even if she doesn't agree.

The books have also gotten a field guide, a collection of stories, and a prequel called ''The Rise of a Legend'' (which tells the long story of a soldier-turned-teacher owl named Ezylryb who had served in the owl army). Spinoffs were also included like ''Wolves of the Beyond'', ''Horses of the Dawn'', and ''Bears of the Ice''. An animated movie called ''Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole'' was released in theatres in 2010, loosely based on the first three books of the series (''The Capture'', ''The Journey'', and ''The Rescue'').
|Fantasy
|2003-2008
|-
|''The Alchemist ''
|Paulo Coelho
|This novel is ultimately an anti-victimhood moral. It's a story about having a dream, and the number one thing that keeps us from achieving greatness is not some oppressive force, (although there will be obstacles), it's instead one's fear that keeps one from ever trying.

Set at some undisclosed time somewhere in the middle east, a young shepherd boy has a dream. Of which he is convinced is a prophetic vision where he will find a hidden treasure in Egypt. The boy is visited by a mysterious traveler (who turns out to be a famous biblical character) who knows without being told, the boys vision, and at the cost of 10% of his flock will help him on his journey.

The boy has to decide if he is going to take a leap of faith and embark on a journey that is filled with life lessons, hardships, and mysteries. While in the end, all these things were just a part of an ordained destiny, or as he puts it, necessary steps towards his "Personal Legend". It's a wonder quick read, with a wonder biblical story type feel but has magical or "Alchemist" elements similar to "The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe" that makes it appealing to fantasy readers.

It's all the more powerful and inspiring when you read the Author's life story, and realize the story is true.
|Fiction
|1988
|-
|''Elephants Are Not Birds''
|Ashley St. Clair
|This children's book stars a young elephant child named Kevin who has a penchant for singing, which prompts a vulture named Culture to trick him into believing that he was born a bird; the vulture even gives him some fake wings and a fake beak so that he can be one. Over the course of the book, however, Kevin comes to understand that he can't be a bird and decides to be who he was born to be: an elephant who can sing. The author confirms that this is an "unapologetic rebuke of the transgender acceptance and the growing number of young people identifying as trans", calling out the idea of creating many "genders" and confusing kids into becoming trans.<ref>https://www.bizpacreview.com/2021/07/26/conservative-publisher-brave-books-launches-with-anti-trans-childrens-book-elephants-are-not-birds-1109054/?fbclid=IwAR3t0e9Y3eF3itTGLec83eQxbOPg_BOrS5jD-6mhoI_5pR3m4BSM8xXCqIE</ref>
|Children's literature
|2021

|}

==Debatable whether Conservative==
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Title
!Author
!Summary
!Genre
!Year Published
|-
|''[[Bambi]]''
|Felix Salten
|Even though it's anti-hunting, this novel featuring the life of a young European roe deer still promotes friendship and family values. An animated film by Walt Disney was released in 1942, changing the setting from Austria to Maine, USA, for a more familiar audience (and thus changing Bambi from a roe deer to a white-tailed deer).
|Children's Literature
|1923
|-
|''Diary of a Wimpy Kid'' series
|Jeff Kinney
|Although these books are silly and don't necessarily portray friendship and family values in the most positive light, the main character, Greg Heffley and his family are Christians. Some of these books also have brief anti-public school and anti-environmentalist messages as well. Even though Greg Heffley can be a jerk sometimes, in some books, he overcomes certain hardships.
|Comedy
|2007-2017
|-
|''[[The Great Gatsby]]
|[[F. Scott Fitzgerald]]
|It's about living the American dream, but its stances on [[gambling]] seems to be rather mixed to positive. It also speaks against materliasm, but seems to glorify Gatsby, the epinome of materalism and sexual immorality. He has an affair with Daisy despite her being married.
|Historical Fiction
|1925
|-
|''Hocus Pocus and the All New Sequel''
|A.W. Jantha
|The first part of this novelization of the classic 1993 [[Halloween]] film ''Hocus Pocus'' contain the same conservative messages that the movie had portrayed: family and friendship, as well as resisting against evil. The sequel has Max and Allison's daughter Poppy witnessing the three Sanderson witch sisters rising up again after twenty-five years, and she must work with her friends and Thackery Binx's ghost to stop them from wreaking the destruction that her parents and aunt helped stop. While the sequel contains most of the same conservative messages that the book before and the film portrayed, Poppy is shown to be homosexual by having a crush on a fellow girl after being friends for years.
|Young Adult Novel/Fantasy
|2018
|-
|''Hoot''
|Carl Hiaasen
|While it seems to be rather pro-environmentalism and anti-capitalism, it still shows three teenaged kids standing up for what they believe in, doing what they believe is right, and even standing up to a bully.
|Realistic Fiction
|2002
|-
|''[[The Lorax]]''
|[[Dr. Seuss]]
|While it has an environmentalist agenda, it also warns against monopolies.
|Children's Literature
|1971
|-
|''[[Lord of the Flies]]''
|William Golding
|During a fictional World War 3, a plane containing schoolboys crashes, leaving the boys left on a deserted island. They band together for survival and make their own society, which begins to crumble the more they stay on the island. Conservative lessons include responsibility and self-reliance, for the boys make a fire to signal for help and also hunt for enough food for them all. On the other hand, the ending has a rather negative message on how there is ultimately no redemption, only a perpetuation of sin and violence. Christ has the promise of redemption.
|Allegory
|1954
|-
|''Warriors''
|Erin Hunter
|''Warriors'' (or ''Warrior Cats'') is an ongoing book series about five colonies of feral cats called Clans living together and fighting for survival. The series starts with a house cat named Rusty leaving his owners to join one of these Clans, and later books star much more characters that include the descendants of Rusty - who eventually becomes Firestar - and even cats from before his era. The series itself has had seven six-book arcs (with an eighth arc on the way), thirteen stand-alone books, four manga arcs and two stand-alone manga novels, five field guides, and twenty-one novellas.

The series starts out pretty neutral, one example being that while the Clans are staying separate, they can still come together to fight whatever threatens all the Clans, including Scourge and his BloodClan cats as well as the Dark Forest (the cat version of hell). Family is portrayed positively, an example being Firestar agreeing to adopt his sister's firstborn kitten Cloudtail so that he can be a warrior like him. Totalitarianism is condemned through leaders like Brokenstar, who kills kittens during battle practice and forces his cats to constantly go to war.

However, it's become more liberal in later books. An open border policy is suggested as good, an example being Mistystar's decision to temporarily close RiverClan's borders and look after her own cats first being portrayed as negative (however, this has been seen as not completely bad by some fans, who said that it could put an end to inbreeding in the Clans). Moral relativism is even seen as good in a way, an example being the author portraying the murderous manipulator Mapleshade as sympathetic by making everyone around her even worse. There seems to be a pro-anarchy message in the form of Needletail, who refuses to take responsibility for helping the sixth arc's villain, Darktail, take control of ShadowClan due to resentment towards their leader Rowanstar. ''The Raging Storm'' portrays a not-so-subtle jab at Donald Trump's 2016 slogan "Make America Great Again" by painting Tigerheart's line "Make ShadowClan great again" in a negative light. Finally, the series promotes a slight environmentalist message in glorifying the wild cats' harsh way of life while having the Clan cats look down on house cats (known to them as "kittypets") and their safer and saner lifestyle.
|Fantasy
|2003-
|}

==See also==
*[[Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books]]
*[[Essay: Worst Liberal Books]]
*[[Greatest Conservative Writers]]
*[https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2010/02/08/ten-great-conservative-novels/ Ten Great Conservative Novels according to ''National Review'']

[[Category:Essays about Conservatism]]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Greatest Conservative Novels}}

Essay:Greatest Conservative Novels

2021-09-03T22:33:01Z

TerryH:

[[Conservative]] novels exist, and some are immensely influential. Please read one of these, or add a new one that you like to our growing list:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Title
!Author
!Summary
!Genre
!Year Published
|-
|''[[Animal Farm]]''
|[[George Orwell]]
|A short story by [[George Orwell]], it describes a farm run by [[socialist]] animals. The animals rebel against its owners and set up a new farm under socialist ideas, though this idealistic future devolves into a dictatorship run by Napoleon the pig. Although it seems to be more pro-socialist, as the book goes on it begins to show the dangers and corruptness that arises through [[communism]]. It is based on the beginning of the Soviet Revolution, and every character represents either a prominent Soviet leader or a group of Russian citizens (Such as the elderly or workers).

Two film adaptations have been released: an animated film in 1954 and a live-action/puppet film in 1999.
|Political Satire
|1945
|-
|''[[The Bostonians]]''
|[[Henry James]]
|A brilliant satire of the elite in [[Boston]] in the late 1800s, this book hurt the career of the magnificent writer Henry James because [[liberal]]s disliked both his mockery of them and his implicit criticism of the early [[feminist]] movement. James did not expect the politically motivated disdain for this classic, and it caused him to shift some of his time to writing plays.

A movie version was made in 1984, starring Vanessa Redgrave, Christopher Reeve, and Jessica Tandy.
|Political Fiction
|1886
|-
|''[[1984]] / Nineteen Eighty-Four''
|[[George Orwell]]
|Another classic book by Orwell, it focuses on a civilian living in a [[Socialist]] world. The earth is split into 3 Nations : Oceania (The Americas, Australia, South Africa, and England), Euraisa (All of Europe and Russia), and Eastasia (Japan, China, and other parts of South Asia). All 3 nations fight over the left over areas, like North Africa and the Middle East, which result in endless casualties. There is constant editing of history. People, places, and things are constantly erased or changed or added (Similar to the acts of the Soviet Union. Words and thoughts are censored and use of them result in torture and death.
|Dystopian
|1949
|-
|''[[One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich]]''
|[[Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn]]
|This novel about a [[communist]] prison camp describes the triumph of [[faith]] and perseverance over inhumanity and compliance with [[evil]].
|Political Fiction
|1962
|-
|''The Brothers Karamazov''
|[[Fyodor Dostoyevsky]]
|The book is about keeping your traditional values, such as love in God, in a quickly changing world.
|Philosophical Fiction
|1880
|-
|''Crime and Punishment''
|[[Fyodor Dostoyevsky]]
|A man must argue against his morality in this novel. The main character, a poor school drop-out, murders a corrupt pawnbroker and takes her cash. Although he knows murder and robbery is wrong, he uses the stolen cash to do good and help people. This is similar to the tale of Robin Hood, who steals from the rich and gives to the poor.
|Philosophical Fiction
|1886
|-
|''Advise and Consent''
|[[Allen Drury]]
|A gripping account of a confirmation battle in the [[U.S. Senate]] with an underlying criticism of how [[liberals]] think and act.
|Political Fiction
|1959
|-
|''[[Fahrenheit 451]]''
|Ray Bradbury
|The perils and harm caused by book-burning, a metaphor for [[censorship]].
|Science Fiction
|1953
|-
|''The First Circle''
|[[Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn]]
|The book follows "Zeks" , a group of intelligent scientists living in Soviet gulags forced to work for the Soviet Government ; they're forced to help improve a government that causes to much pain and suffering. The novel is about the moral struggle between keeping yourself alive and causing someone else more pain in the future or doing the right thing.
|Autobiographical Fiction
|1968
|-
|''The Moon is a Harsh Mistress''
|[[Robert Heinlein]]
|Set in a Lunar Colony created as a prison on the Moon in the year 2075, Heinlein tells the story of the revolution by the Moon colony and its criminal population against the authoritarian Earth (Similar to a Soviet Gulag revolting against the USSR). The novel seems to lean towards Libertarian beliefs.
|Science Fiction
|1966
|-
|''Double Star''
|[[Robert Heinlein]]
|Fate smiles on a skilled but extraordinarily vain, racist (OK: species-ist), and seemingly hopelessly character-flawed actor induced by chance casting to practice better behavior for long enough dimly to recognize the worth of doing so for its own sake - and duly grows into the role becoming, to his own amazement, a significant and inspiring historical figure.
|Science Fiction
|1956
|-
|''Starship Troopers''
|[[Robert Heinlein]]
|Human society had to rebuild itself after a war between [[Communist]] [[China]] and a [[Russia]], [[United Kingdom|British]] and [[America]]n alliance. As part of that rebuilding, mustered-out [[veteran]]s, returning to find their home cities in disorder, imposed an order of their own, leading to a society in which one has to earn the right to [[vote]] by serving the society by putting one's life at risk. A young man, a product of this society, joins a [[Marines]]-like space infantry to impress a female friend at his school, but makes a career of it and goes on to become an [[officer]] ndash; as his society must fight a major [[war]] against a species of [[spider]]-like social [[insect]]s. A stark contrast between total communism and a society where those who would take part in running the state, must first risk their lives for the sake of the state.
|Science Fiction
|1959
|-
|''Lord of the Rings''
|[[J.R.R. Tolkien]]
|With about 150 Million copies sold, this book is said to be the best-selling novel of all time. The book touches on themes of corruptness through absolute power, Fate VS Free Will, and Death.
|Fantasy
|1954-1955
|-
|''The Man Who Was Thursday''
|[[G.K. Chesterton]]
|This book follows an English detective recruited to an Anti-Anarchist branch of Scotland Yard.
|Fantasy
|1908
|-
|''Darkness at Noon''
|[[Arthur Koestler]]
|The book is set in the year 1938 in the now Communist Russia. The main character, Nicholas Rubashov, stands trial during one of Josef Stalin's infamous Purges. A former Bolshevik leader, he is tried for treason against the nation he helped to change. Although the novel is based on true events, Koestler doesn't use names like "Stalin" or "The Soviet Union". The novel is about the dangers of communism, similar to "Animal Farm" , and tries to show the reader how corrupt the Soviet system is.
|Dystopian
|1940
|-
|''The Camp of the Saints''
|[[Jean Raspail]]
|Back on the Bestseller list, Le Camp Des Saints is a book that could be applied to modern day. Its about citizens from a third world country that mass immigrate to Europe and America and absolutely destroy the Western culture. The book has "Rouge States" , Countries that refuse to give in to pressure from others to accept immigrants. It can be applied to modern day with Muslims. Muslims come into countries (Germany, England, ECT.) and rape their once great culture and turn it into the hell that was their home countries.
|Speculative Fiction
|1973
|-
|''State of Fear''
|[[Michael Crichton]]
|Crichton's novel revolves around a terrorism plot by "Eco-Terrorists" to raise attention on Global Warming / Global Cooling / Climate Change / Climate Disruption / Carbon Pollution. Even though the book is a work of dystopian fiction, it tries to get readers to think about both sides of the global warming debate. Critics and readers say this ruin the book's story.
|Dystopian
|2004
|-
|''The Red Badge of Courage''
|[[Stephen Crane]]
|About redemption, this book is about a Union Army Private during the United States Civil War. During a battle, he fled from the skirmish. Overcome by shame, he decides that he could redeem himself if he takes a bullet for his cause.
|Fiction
|1895
|-
|''Persepolis''
|Marjane Satrapi
|Graphic novel about a teen girl in [[Iran]] at the time of the 1979 [[Iranian Revolution]] who secretly gains a liking for Western culture and realises how corrupt her country's new [[Islamic extremist]] government is. The book portrays American values positively and the authoritarian regime of Iran negatively.
|Fiction
|1980
|-
|''Nuremberg: The Reckoning''
|[[William F. Buckley, Jr.]]
|Set during the 1945 Nazi War Crime trials in Nuremberg, Germany, a young German-American interpreter must listen and translate stories of the Nazi Party's brutal treatment of Jews during the Holocaust. Being of German descent, he must deal with the shame he now has from his home country's acts.
|Historical Fiction
|2003
|-
|''Gilead''
|[[Marilynne Robinson]]
|Gilead is the autobiography of a fictional dying pastor from Iowa who writes about his life for his young son to read. The son, who wont have many memories of his father, develops a love for God and family through this diary-like book from his father.
|Fiction
|2004
|-
|''Rainbow Six''
|[[Tom Clancy]]
|About a counter-terrorist unit in several nations, it focuses on the unit as they deal with terrorist plots worldwide, similar to the G.I. Joe team but worldwide. The concept was so popular it has spawned a video game series, starting in 1998 and still continuing today, giving teenage gamers good morals.
|Techno-Thriller
|1998
|-
|''Red Storm Rising''
|[[Tom Clancy]]
|This book focuses on a Third World War between the forces of NATO And those of the Warsaw Pact. Surprisingly, the war never escalated to the point where nuclear warheads were used, but conventional guns and vehicles were used instead.
|Techno-Thriller
|1986
|-
|''The Bridges at Toko-Ri''
|[[James Michener]]
|About US Navy pilots during the Korean war, they must destroy bridges in enemy territory used by the Koreans to send supplies and soldiers to the front. The story was so popular it eventually spawned a movie of the same name in 1954.
|Fiction
|1953
|-
|''The Thin Red Line''
|[[James Jones]]
|
|War Story
|1962
|-
|''Quo Vadis: A Narrative of the Time of Nero''
|[[Henryk Sienkiewicz]]
|
|Historical Fiction
|1895
|-
|''The Day of the Jackal''
|[[Frederick Forsyth]]
|
|Spy Fiction
|1971
|-
|''Master and Commander''
|[[Patrick O'Brian]]
|
|Historical Fiction
|1969
|-
|''The Idiot''
|[[Fyodor Dostoevsky]]
|
|Philosophical Fiction
|1868
|-
|''The Overton Window''
|[[Glenn Beck]]
|
|Fiction
|2010
|-
|''[[The Fountainhead]]''
|[[Ayn Rand]]
|
|Philosophical Fiction
|1943
|-
|''Little Women''
|[[Louisa May Alcott]]
|Jo March and her sisters come of age during the end of the Civil War, in which their father is fighting for the Union. The March sisters hold to conservative values taught by their mother despite pressure from their companions.
|Bildungsroman
|1868
|-
|''One Second After''
|William R. Forstchen
|
|Speculative Fiction
|2009
|-
|''The Screwtape Letters''
|[[C.S. Lewis]]
|C.S Lewis tells the story of Screwtape, a demon mentoring another and giving him advice on how to tempt Christians, revealing the weaknesses the Church must repair.
|Satire
|1942
|-
|''The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe''
|[[C.S. Lewis]]
|Four children cross over from a wardrobe to a fantasy world called Narnia, where the heroic lion Aslan prepares a great battle against the White Witch, who wants to keep Narnia in an eternal winter. Contains many Christian allegories.
|Fantasy
|1984
|-
|''Dracula''
|[[Bram Stoker]]
|Abraham van Helsing is a Christian vampire slayer who does what he believes is right.
|Horror Fiction
|1897
|-
|''Frankenstein''
|[[Mary Shelley]]
|Warns about the dangers and consequences of playing God.
|Horror Fiction
|1818
|-
|''The Canterbury Tales''
|[[Geoffrey Chaucer]]
|It's about a pilgrimage, or quest for Christianity from the Christians' standpoint.
|Anthology
|1478
|-
|''Beowulf''
|Anonymous
|Depicts the ever going battle between good and evil with Christianity being the good.
|Poetry
|700-1000 A.D.
|-
|''The Jungle Book''
|[[Rudyard Kipling]]
|A boy named Mowgli is found orphaned in the Indian jungle and is raised by a pack of wolves, with Bagheera the panther and Baloo the bear as his teachers. He also faces down Shere Khan, a crippled tiger who wants to kill Mowgli after killing his parents. The book promotes friendship and family values, and misanthropy is frowned down upon.
|Children's Literature
|1894
|-
|''Maus''
|Art Spiegelman
|Portrays the sheer disgustingness of the Nazis from the viewpoint of a Holocaust survivor.
|Autobiography/Biography
|1980
|-
|''Gone with the Wind''
|[[Margaret Mitchell]]
|Celebrates man-and-woman relationships as well as a strong heroic woman who is the antithesis of a modern feminist.
|Historical Fiction
|1936
|-
|''[[Winnie the Pooh]]'' series
|[[A.A. Milne]]
|Winnie-the-Pooh and his toy friends, along with Christopher Robin, experience the innocence of childhood. A classic standing against the Liberals' attempts to ruin childhood.
|Children's Literature
|1924-1928
|-
|''[[A Christmas Carol]]''
|[[Charles Dickens]]
|A classic Christmas story about how Ebenezer Scrooge decides to give up his miserly ways and shows the dangers of hating Christmas in the end.
|Novella
|1843
|-
|''The Gift of the Magi''
|[[O Henry]]
|Heart warming story about a poor married couple who sacrifice their most cherished possessions to buy each other a Christmas gift.
|Fiction.
|1905
|-
|''The Monkey's Paw''
|[[W.W Jacobs]]
|Warns of the consequences of playing God.
|Horror
|1902
|-
|''The Railway Series''
|Rev. W. Awdry (1945–1946, 1948–1970, 1972) Christopher Awdry (1983–1996, 2007, 2011)
|Promotes friendship values and many of the anthropomorphic trains overcome hardships.
|Children's Literature
|1945–1946, 1948–1970, 1972, 1983–1996, 2007, 2011
|-
|''Of Sound Mind''
|Jean Farris
|It's about overcoming hardships as a high school senior named Theo is the only hearing member of an all deaf family. It also promotes friendship and family values.
|Realistic Fiction
|2001
|-
|''Painting the Black''
|Carl Deuker
|For the majority of this book, it promotes friendship values between a baseball playing high school senior named Ryan Ward and his best friend named Josh Daniels, who plays both football and baseball. After Josh grabs a girl by the bra at lunch, has a mocking article in the school newspaper, and attempts to sexually assault the girl who wrote it as revenge, Ryan doesn't want to rat him out but eventually does. The ending has a message about overcoming such hardships. The book can also be seen to show the dangers and consequences of [[anger]].
|Realistic Fiction/Sports Fiction
|1997
|-
|''[[The Divine Comedy]]''
|[[Dante]]
|Describes the dangers of wrongdoing, which could have you end up in the infamous Inferno (Hell) and the virtues of doing the right thing, which could have you end up in Heaven. It also talks about Purgatory.
|Epic Poetry
|1320
|-
|''Ferdinand the Bull''
|Munro Leaf
|This book is about a bull named Ferdinand who lives in Spain and sniffs flowers instead of fighting a matador in a bullring. It also inspired conservative leader [[Martin Luther King]].
|Children's Literature
|1936
|-
|''[[Watership Down]]''
|[[Richard Adams]]
|This book tells of a band of British rabbits led by two brothers - clever leader Hazel and prophetic Fiver - as they journey to a new home when their old home is bulldozed. Once they reach their new home, they spend the novel building it up by recruiting more rabbits to join them, as well as fend off an attack from an aggressive neighboring warren.

While Richard Adams said that the book is more for entertainment and not an allegory, there are still some lessons to be learned in the story. The book promotes upholding traditions, though the rabbits are not afraid to break tradition once in a while to make their new home (for example, females do most of the digging for their babies, but the males that made it through the journey decide to dig in their place), thus showing that there is room for both conservative values and progressive values. Totalitarian rule is condemned in the form of the book's villain: General Woundwort, who rules Efrefa with an iron paw; he keeps his rabbits in seclusion in Efrefa to the point of them overcrowding and allows his council to rip the ears of another rabbit named Blackavar for trying to escape. Courage, loyalty, and fighting for one's home are shown in a positive light, an example being Bigwig (a friend of Hazel's and an officer in the "Owsla") helping his friends defend their new home and fighting Woundwort himself. Hazel and Fiver share a strong brotherhood; while they have their differences in ways of thinking (Hazel being more daring and Fiver being more cautious), they ultimately respect each other and care for each other, showing brotherhood in a good way. Finally, while there is some environmentalism in the book (though the humans are portrayed as mainly apathetic to the rabbits' lives, and Richard Adams had condemned urbanizing the countryside), it does show that humans can be good to rabbits, as seen when a girl named Lucy saves Hazel from her cat and releases him back into the wild.

An animated movie based on the book premiered in 1978, which (while portraying the same values as the book) is remembered for being pretty graphic and violent. A three-season animated TV series was released in 1999 and ended in 2001, being the most family-friendly of ''Watership Down'' adaptations. BBC released a CGI Netflix miniseries in 2018, which follows the book more than the 1978 film. A sequel to the book called ''Tales of Watership Down'' was published in 1996.
|Fiction
|1972
|-
|''Guardians of Ga'Hoole''
|Kathryn Lasky
|The series stars a world where owls dominate the world after humanity goes extinct and form their own kingdoms; a band of owls called the Guardians of Ga'Hoole is formed, knightly owls who rise each night to perform noble deeds, protect the innocent, and vanquish evil. The first several books tell of the story of Soren, a young barn owl shoved out of the nest by his older brother Kludd, as he and an elf owl named Gylfie escape their captors and join new friends in finding the Great Ga'Hoole Tree. His nephew Coryn (born to the traitorous Kludd and Nyra) gets his story in the last few books, where he goes from child soldier to kindly king of Ga'Hoole.

These books positively portray a battle of good versus evil (showing who is clearly good and who is clearly evil) and objective morality, as well as portraying family in a positive light. Betraying family is seen in a negative light, an example being where Kludd shoves Soren out of the nest to pass a Pure Ones test, brainwashes his baby sister, and very likely kills his parents. Racism is rightfully portrayed as negative, as the Pure Ones are barn owl supremacists who want all other species of owls to be servants to barn owls; they even show hypocrisy by treating other Tytos in their ranks (like sooty owls and masked owls) lower than barn owls. Faith and science are both important in the series, where owl authors have written in books how the gizzard is important to owls both physically and mentally; the more scientific spotted owl Otulissa even learns to respect others' way of thinking even if she doesn't agree.

The books have also gotten a field guide, a collection of stories, and a prequel called ''The Rise of a Legend'' (which tells the long story of a soldier-turned-teacher owl named Ezylryb who had served in the owl army). Spinoffs were also included like ''Wolves of the Beyond'', ''Horses of the Dawn'', and ''Bears of the Ice''. An animated movie called ''Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole'' was released in theatres in 2010, loosely based on the first three books of the series (''The Capture'', ''The Journey'', and ''The Rescue'').
|Fantasy
|2003-2008
|-
|''The Alchemist ''
|Paulo Coelho
|This novel is ultimately an anti-victimhood moral. It's a story about having a dream, and the number one thing that keeps us from achieving greatness is not some oppressive force, (although there will be obstacles), it's instead one's fear that keeps one from ever trying.

Set at some undisclosed time somewhere in the middle east, a young shepherd boy has a dream. Of which he is convinced is a prophetic vision where he will find a hidden treasure in Egypt. The boy is visited by a mysterious traveler (who turns out to be a famous biblical character) who knows without being told, the boys vision, and at the cost of 10% of his flock will help him on his journey.

The boy has to decide if he is going to take a leap of faith and embark on a journey that is filled with life lessons, hardships, and mysteries. While in the end, all these things were just a part of an ordained destiny, or as he puts it, necessary steps towards his "Personal Legend". It's a wonder quick read, with a wonder biblical story type feel but has magical or "Alchemist" elements similar to "The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe" that makes it appealing to fantasy readers.

It's all the more powerful and inspiring when you read the Author's life story, and realize the story is true.
|Fiction
|1988
|-
|''Elephants Are Not Birds''
|Ashley St. Clair
|This children's book stars a young elephant child named Kevin who has a penchant for singing, which prompts a vulture named Culture to trick him into believing that he was born a bird; the vulture even gives him some fake wings and a fake beak so that he can be one. Over the course of the book, however, Kevin comes to understand that he can't be a bird and decides to be who he was born to be: an elephant who can sing. The author confirms that this is an "unapologetic rebuke of the transgender acceptance and the growing number of young people identifying as trans", calling out the idea of creating many "genders" and confusing kids into becoming trans.<ref>https://www.bizpacreview.com/2021/07/26/conservative-publisher-brave-books-launches-with-anti-trans-childrens-book-elephants-are-not-birds-1109054/?fbclid=IwAR3t0e9Y3eF3itTGLec83eQxbOPg_BOrS5jD-6mhoI_5pR3m4BSM8xXCqIE</ref>
|Children's literature
|2021

|}

==Debatable whether Conservative==
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
!Title
!Author
!Summary
!Genre
!Year Published
|-
|''[[Bambi]]''
|Felix Salten
|Even though it's anti-hunting, this novel featuring the life of a young European roe deer still promotes friendship and family values. An animated film by Walt Disney was released in 1942, changing the setting from Austria to Maine, USA, for a more familiar audience (and thus changing Bambi from a roe deer to a white-tailed deer).
|Children's Literature
|1923
|-
|''Diary of a Wimpy Kid'' series
|Jeff Kinney
|Although these books are silly and don't necessarily portray friendship and family values in the most positive light, the main character, Greg Heffley and his family are Christians. Some of these books also have brief anti-public school and anti-environmentalist messages as well. Even though Greg Heffley can be a jerk sometimes, in some books, he overcomes certain hardships.
|Comedy
|2007-2017
|-
|''[[The Great Gatsby]]
|[[F. Scott Fitzgerald]]
|It's about living the American dream, but its stances on [[gambling]] seems to be rather mixed to positive. It also speaks against materliasm, but seems to glorify Gatsby, the epinome of materalism and sexual immorality. He has an affair with Daisy despite her being married.
|Historical Fiction
|1925
|-
|''Hocus Pocus and the All New Sequel''
|A.W. Jantha
|The first part of this novelization of the classic 1993 [[Halloween]] film ''Hocus Pocus'' contain the same conservative messages that the movie had portrayed: family and friendship, as well as resisting against evil. The sequel has Max and Allison's daughter Poppy witnessing the three Sanderson witch sisters rising up again after twenty-five years, and she must work with her friends and Thackery Binx's ghost to stop them from wreaking the destruction that her parents and aunt helped stop. While the sequel contains most of the same conservative messages that the book before and the film portrayed, Poppy is shown to be homosexual by having a crush on a fellow girl after being friends for years.
|Young Adult Novel/Fantasy
|2018
|-
|''Hoot''
|Carl Hiaasen
|While it seems to be rather pro-environmentalism and anti-capitalism, it still shows three teenaged kids standing up for what they believe in, doing what they believe is right, and even standing up to a bully.
|Realistic Fiction
|2002
|-
|''[[The Lorax]]''
|[[Dr. Seuss]]
|While it has an environmentalist agenda, it also warns against monopolies.
|Children's Literature
|1971
|-
|''[[Lord of the Flies]]''
|William Golding
|During a fictional World War 3, a plane containing schoolboys crashes, leaving the boys left on a deserted island. They band together for survival and make their own society, which begins to crumble the more they stay on the island. Conservative lessons include responsibility and self-reliance, for the boys make a fire to signal for help and also hunt for enough food for them all. On the other hand, the ending has a rather negative message on how there is ultimately no redemption, only a perpetuation of sin and violence. Christ has the promise of redemption.
|Allegory
|1954
|-
|''Warriors''
|Erin Hunter
|''Warriors'' (or ''Warrior Cats'') is an ongoing book series about five colonies of feral cats called Clans living together and fighting for survival. The series starts with a house cat named Rusty leaving his owners to join one of these Clans, and later books star much more characters that include the descendants of Rusty - who eventually becomes Firestar - and even cats from before his era. The series itself has had seven six-book arcs (with an eighth arc on the way), thirteen stand-alone books, four manga arcs and two stand-alone manga novels, five field guides, and twenty-one novellas.

The series starts out pretty neutral, one example being that while the Clans are staying separate, they can still come together to fight whatever threatens all the Clans, including Scourge and his BloodClan cats as well as the Dark Forest (the cat version of hell). Family is portrayed positively, an example being Firestar agreeing to adopt his sister's firstborn kitten Cloudtail so that he can be a warrior like him. Totalitarianism is condemned through leaders like Brokenstar, who kills kittens during battle practice and forces his cats to constantly go to war.

However, it's become more liberal in later books. An open border policy is suggested as good, an example being Mistystar's decision to temporarily close RiverClan's borders and look after her own cats first being portrayed as negative (however, this has been seen as not completely bad by some fans, who said that it could put an end to inbreeding in the Clans). Moral relativism is even seen as good in a way, an example being the author portraying the murderous manipulator Mapleshade as sympathetic by making everyone around her even worse. There seems to be a pro-anarchy message in the form of Needletail, who refuses to take responsibility for helping the sixth arc's villain, Darktail, take control of ShadowClan due to resentment towards their leader Rowanstar. ''The Raging Storm'' portrays a not-so-subtle jab at Donald Trump's 2016 slogan "Make America Great Again" by painting Tigerheart's line "Make ShadowClan great again" in a negative light. Finally, the series promotes a slight environmentalist message in glorifying the wild cats' harsh way of life while having the Clan cats look down on house cats (known to them as "kittypets") and their safer and saner lifestyle.
|Fantasy
|2003-
|}

==See also==
*[[Essay:Greatest Conservative Non-fiction Books]]
*[[Essay: Worst Liberal Books]]
*[[Greatest Conservative Writers]]
*[https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2010/02/08/ten-great-conservative-novels/ Ten Great Conservative Novels according to ''National Review'']

[[Category:Essays about Conservatism]]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Greatest Conservative Novels}}

Rewilding

2021-04-05T00:57:37Z

TerryH: /* Pilot projects */

'''Rewilding''' or '''Re-Wilding''' means reverting an already [[human]]-settled or at least human-changed area to ''status quo ante'' human settlement or intervention.<ref name=Davis>John Davis, "What is Rewilding," ''Rewilding Earth''. <https://rewilding.org/what-is-rewilding/></ref> [[Environmentalism|Environmentalists]] today advocate this process as a means to combat [[climate change]]. Human settlement has destroyed carbon sinks and created carbon sources. This applies even to [[agriculture]],<ref name=Vice>Tristan Kennedy, "The Uncomfortable Truth About Rewilding," ''Vice'', 4 November 2020. <https://www.vice.com/en/article/dy88eq/rewilding-climate-crisis-solution></ref> so humans must abandon agriculture and [[animal husbandry]] in large tracts of land to restore the balance between [[carbon dioxide]] emission and absorption. So environmentalist theory states.

== Pilot projects ==
Pilot projects for rewilding are already under way in the Appenines in [[Italy]],<ref name=Appenines>Rewilding-Appenines project site. <https://rewilding-apennines.com/></ref> on the grounds of one nobleman's castle in [[Ireland]], and at nine sites in the [[United States of America]].<ref name=CallOfNature>Gavin Haines, "Call of Nature: 9 Rewilding Sites You Can Visit in the USA," ''Lonely Planet'', 24 November 2019. <https://www.lonelyplanet.com/articles/rewilding-in-the-usa-national-parks-and-reserves></ref>

Furthermore, [[Joe Biden]], now (April 2021) holding office as [[President of the United States]], has announced an [[infrastructure]] plan that appropriates $20 trillion for removal of highways in at least two locations and reverting at least to ''status quo ante'' the building of those highways. As highway removal would be a requirement of any large-scale rewilding in the United States, these might constitute pilot projects that would facilitate the development of efficient methods of highway removal.<ref name=CNAV>Terry A. Hurlbut, "Rewilding - a dangerous strategy for social control," ''Conservative News and Views'', 4 April 2021. <https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2021/04/04/accountability/executive/rewilding-dangerous-strategy-social-control/></ref>

== References ==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Environmentalism]][[Category:Politics]]

Rewilding

2021-04-05T00:56:33Z

TerryH:

'''Rewilding''' or '''Re-Wilding''' means reverting an already [[human]]-settled or at least human-changed area to ''status quo ante'' human settlement or intervention.<ref name=Davis>John Davis, "What is Rewilding," ''Rewilding Earth''. <https://rewilding.org/what-is-rewilding/></ref> [[Environmentalism|Environmentalists]] today advocate this process as a means to combat [[climate change]]. Human settlement has destroyed carbon sinks and created carbon sources. This applies even to [[agriculture]],<ref name=Vice>Tristan Kennedy, "The Uncomfortable Truth About Rewilding," ''Vice'', 4 November 2020. <https://www.vice.com/en/article/dy88eq/rewilding-climate-crisis-solution></ref> so humans must abandon agriculture and [[animal husbandry]] in large tracts of land to restore the balance between [[carbon dioxide]] emission and absorption. So environmentalist theory states.

== Pilot projects ==
Pilot projects for rewilding are already under way in the Appenines in [[Italy]],<ref name=Appenines>Rewilding-Appenines project site. <https://rewilding-apennines.com/></ref> on the grounds of one nobleman's castle in [[Ireland]], and at nine sites in the [[United States of America]].<ref name=CallOfNature>Gavin Haines, "Call of Nature: 9 Rewilding Sites You Can Visit in the USA," ''Lonely Planet'', 24 November 2019. <https://www.lonelyplanet.com/articles/rewilding-in-the-usa-national-parks-and-reserves></ref>

Furthermore, [[Joe Biden]], now (April 2021) holding office as [[President of the United States]], has announced an [[infrastructure]] plan that appropriates $20 trillion for removal of highways in at least two locations and reverting at least to ''status quo ante'' the building of those highways. As highway removal would be a requirement of any large-scale rewilding in the United States, these might constitute pilot projects that would facilitate the development of efficient methods of highway removal.

== References ==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Environmentalism]][[Category:Politics]]

Rewilding

2021-04-05T00:56:03Z

TerryH: Created page with "'''Rewilding''' or '''Re-Wilding''' means reverting an already human-settled or at least human-changed area to ''status quo ante'' human settlement or intervention.<ref na..."

'''Rewilding''' or '''Re-Wilding''' means reverting an already [[human]]-settled or at least human-changed area to ''status quo ante'' human settlement or intervention.<ref name=Davis>John Davis, "What is Rewilding," ''Rewilding Earth''. <https://rewilding.org/what-is-rewilding/></ref> [[Environmentalism|Environmentalists]] today advocate this process as a means to combat [[climate change]]. Human settlement has destroyed carbon sinks and created carbon sources. This applies even to [[agriculture]],<ref name=Vice>Tristan Kennedy, "The Uncomfortable Truth About Rewilding," ''Vice'', 4 November 2020. <https://www.vice.com/en/article/dy88eq/rewilding-climate-crisis-solution></ref> so humans must abandon agriculture and [[animal husbandry]] in large tracts of land to restore the balance between [[carbon dioxide]] emission and absorption. So environmentalist theory states.

== Pilot projects ==
Pilot projects for rewilding are already under way in the [[Appenines]] in [[Italy]],<ref name=Appenines>Rewilding-Appenines project site. <https://rewilding-apennines.com/></ref> on the grounds of one nobleman's castle in [[Ireland]], and at nine sites in the [[United States of America]].<ref name=CallOfNature>Gavin Haines, "Call of Nature: 9 Rewilding Sites You Can Visit in the USA," ''Lonely Planet'', 24 November 2019. <https://www.lonelyplanet.com/articles/rewilding-in-the-usa-national-parks-and-reserves></ref>

Furthermore, [[Joe Biden]], now (April 2021) holding office as [[President of the United States]], has announced an [[infrastructure]] plan that appropriates $20 trillion for removal of highways in at least two locations and reverting at least to ''status quo ante'' the building of those highways. As highway removal would be a requirement of any large-scale rewilding in the United States, these might constitute pilot projects that would facilitate the development of efficient methods of highway removal.

== References ==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Environmentalism]][[Category:Politics]]

Essay:Declaration of Cybernetic Independence

2021-02-16T16:15:23Z

TerryH: /* Abuses of power */

By --[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 11:09, 16 February 2021 (EST) Originally published at <https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2018/08/26/accountability/news-media/declaration-cybernetic-independence/>

Sometimes in cybernetic events, a user or users must terminate their contracts with immediate connection and other service providers. Often that means building their own providers, having a separate and equal station with those of their former contractors. The civil law, and the laws of physics, allow this. But one must pay the proper respect to the opinions of others—if they deserve it. That means setting forth the causes for declaring cybernetic independence.<ref name=Jefferson>Apologies to Thomas Jefferson, author of the original Declaration of Independence. <http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.html></ref>
== The rights of an Internet user==
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that
# All account holders and other service clients begin as equals.
# They have, by virtue of human nature itself, certain inalienable rights.
# These rights include freedom of exercise and promulgation of religion, except where such religion advocates initiating force or violence. They also include freedom of speech, information, and association.
# To secure these rights, Internet users contract for various Internet services. The providers of these services derive certain powers from the consent of their clients. Which is to say, a client may terminate a service contract any time.
# Sometimes a provider acts in a way that threatens or destroys a client’s rights. The client then has the right to decamp from the said provider and to build a new provider. Such a provider can then promulgate such regulations as will best serve the market for connectivity and freedom.
== Abuses of power ==
One does not change a long-lasting provider-client relationship for light or transient causes. Furthermore, Internet users would rather suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to set themselves right by abandoning such long-lasting relationships. All human experience has shown this. But what happens when providers suddenly abuse their power, alone or in coordination? What happens when, in so doing, they demonstrate the clear objective of censorship? Then the client has the right – the ''duty'' – to abandon such providers. That could mean choosing other providers or building their own.

This is the kind of abuse up with which conservative Internet users have long put. The Alex Jones affair<ref name=AlexJones>Hurlbut TA, “Alex Jones, terms of service, and truth,” ''Conservative News and Views'', published 10 August 2018. <http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2018/08/10/accountability/news-media/alex-jones-terms-service-truth/></ref> has brought this to an immediate head. This, in turn, compels us now to provide for ourselves the services our erstwhile providers would now deny us.

The history of the present Internet social establishment includes vague “Terms of Service” and abrogation of account and contractual relationships for any reason or no reason. All such acts have in direct object the suppression of any voice of protest against leftist opinion. To prove this, we now submit facts to a candid cybernetic universe.
=== Direct censorship ===
* Web hosts have refused to install certain technical refinements that would make the Internet run better for everyone. “Better” includes “more securely,” against viruses and Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks.
* Social-network moderators have suspended and revoked accounts for any cause or no cause. They cite “Terms of Service” that appear to ask for politeness. But ''those same moderators allow leftist account holders a pass for demonstrably rude behavior.'' Behavior that provides a pretext for kicking off a conservative, passes as acceptable in a leftist.
* Web hosts have suspended entire Web sites, likewise selectively applying Terms of Service and alleging breach of content regulation. Sometimes they accuse site administrators of burdening their services disproportionately. When the said administrators inform them that they are in fact under DDoS attack, the hosts turn deaf ears.
* Search engine administrators, inside or outside social networks, have suppressed our sites and commentaries from search results. To this end they have changed “algorithms” daily in many cases. The results strongly suggest their specific tasking of their staff to watch for and “manually” suppress any mention of us.
* Smartphone “app store” managers have disallowed the “mobile apps” of alternative social networks, on specious, indeed mendacious, pretexts. Thus far, the app developers can serve their content by a direct link. But this provokes dire warnings of security compromise, etc., etc. This lays the groundwork for permanently disallowing any app that does not come from an approved store. Such approval is subject to the same sort of content regulation that allows social-network administrators to expel account holders.
=== Invasions of privacy ===
* Electronic mail providers have read our mail and submitted digests of the contents to hostile government officials.
* Electronic mail providers have sold lists of our accounts without our consent, to advertisers and other exploiters. Worse yet, they have shared them to hostile government officials and equally hostile violent groups.
* Search engine administrators have given or sold our search activity, without our consent or even our knowledge, to advertisers, other private harassers, and hostile government officials.
=== Open war ===
* Social-network chief administrators have declared us out of their protection and are now prosecuting open war against us. Witnesses report sudden decrease in followership, or direct termination of their own accounts.
* Those same social-network moderators are now implementing a system to rate the “trustworthiness”<ref name=Facebook>Keach S, “Facebook has TRUST ratings for users – but it won’t tell you your score,” ''The Sun'', 21 August 2018. <https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/7067261/facebook-trust-rating-score-check/></ref> of account holders. They refuse to reveal their criteria. Yet they have announced plans to discipline users according to this new rating.
* They have excited and incited DDoS and other attacks against us. Furthermore they refuse in all cases even to acknowledge that such attacks are in fact taking place.
* Service providers of all types are now acting in concert like an ''ad hoc'' political action committee. They propose to use their services as weapons to influence materially upcoming Federal, State and local elections. And they do this without our consent, some without acknowledgment, and some with brazen avowal.

== Breach of contract ==
In every stage of these outrages, we have asked the administrators involved for redress or at least explanations. These administrators have answered our repeated petitions only by repeated injury. An administrator who thus marks his character by every act which may define a tyrannical censor, is unfit to provide network connective or social services to any community of ‘’free’’ users. (Such an administrator is also guilty of fraud, if he has promised civil authorities he would not so act.)

Nor have we been lacking in attention to our fellow account holders. We have warned them from time to time of the vagaries of Terms of Service. Specific instances of inconsistent and selective application of such Terms of Service abound. We have reminded fellow users of the very reasons we repaired to the Internet to begin with. Those reasons concerned avoiding the censorship of the Mainstream Media, including newspapers, magazines, and the former Big Three Networks. We have appealed for common decency and fair play, and have asked them nicely, as fellow human beings, to disavow such censorship, which would inevitably interrupt our very ability to hold converse with them.

They, too, have turned deaf ears to the voices of justice and fellow-feeling. Worse yet, they have ‘’incited’’ administrators so to act and even ‘’castigated administrators who refuse so to act.’’ We must, therefore, acquiesce in the reality that necessitates our separation. That means holding them, as we hold the offending administrators, in ‘’breach of contract.’’ This applies to specific contracts with specific providers, and the general social contract of the Internet.

== Cybernetic independence ==
We, therefore, conservative Internet users, editors and publishers, appealing to the Supreme Administrator of the universe for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name and by the authority of all whom we represent, solemnly publish and declare, that
* We shall provide our own services, freely and independently.
* We thus absolve ourselves from all connections to conventional Internet hosting, e-mail, social-networking, video distribution, smartphone operating system, and similar providers.
* All contractual obligations on the part of ourselves to these conventional Internet services providers is, and by right ought to be, terminated.
* As our own Internet services providers, we reserve to ourselves the full power to:
** Host Internet sites,
** Defend those sites assiduously and proactively against Distributed Denial of Service and viral attacks,
** Establish our own social network,
** Distribute video content (subject only to the laws of intellectual property and traditional decency),
** Write and maintain our own smartphone operating system and apps,
** Deliver electronic mail, and
** Do all the other acts and things which Internet services providers may of right do.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to one another such financial, technical, and intellectual resources as the task of cybernetic independence might require.
== References ==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Internet]]

Essay:Declaration of Cybernetic Independence

2021-02-16T16:14:53Z

TerryH: /* Abuses of power */

By --[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 11:09, 16 February 2021 (EST) Originally published at <https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2018/08/26/accountability/news-media/declaration-cybernetic-independence/>

Sometimes in cybernetic events, a user or users must terminate their contracts with immediate connection and other service providers. Often that means building their own providers, having a separate and equal station with those of their former contractors. The civil law, and the laws of physics, allow this. But one must pay the proper respect to the opinions of others—if they deserve it. That means setting forth the causes for declaring cybernetic independence.<ref name=Jefferson>Apologies to Thomas Jefferson, author of the original Declaration of Independence. <http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.html></ref>
== The rights of an Internet user==
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that
# All account holders and other service clients begin as equals.
# They have, by virtue of human nature itself, certain inalienable rights.
# These rights include freedom of exercise and promulgation of religion, except where such religion advocates initiating force or violence. They also include freedom of speech, information, and association.
# To secure these rights, Internet users contract for various Internet services. The providers of these services derive certain powers from the consent of their clients. Which is to say, a client may terminate a service contract any time.
# Sometimes a provider acts in a way that threatens or destroys a client’s rights. The client then has the right to decamp from the said provider and to build a new provider. Such a provider can then promulgate such regulations as will best serve the market for connectivity and freedom.
== Abuses of power ==
One does not change a long-lasting provider-client relationship for light or transient causes. Furthermore, Internet users would rather suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to set themselves right by abandoning such long-lasting relationships. All human experience has shown this. But what happens when providers suddenly abuse their power, alone or in coordination? What happens when, in so doing, they demonstrate the clear objective of censorship? Then the client has the right – the ''duty'' – to abandon such providers. That could mean choosing other providers or building their own.

This is the kind of abuse up with which conservative Internet users have long put. The Alex Jones affair<ref name=AlexJones>Hurlbut TA, “Alex Jones, terms of service, and truth,” ''Conservative News and Views'', published 10 August 2018. <http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2018/08/10/accountability/news-media/alex-jones-terms-service-truth/></ref> has brought this to an immediate head. This, in turn, compels us now to provide for ourselves the services our erstwhile providers would now deny us.
The history of the present Internet social establishment includes vague “Terms of Service” and abrogation of account and contractual relationships for any reason or no reason. All such acts have in direct object the suppression of any voice of protest against leftist opinion. To prove this, we now submit facts to a candid cybernetic universe.
=== Direct censorship ===
* Web hosts have refused to install certain technical refinements that would make the Internet run better for everyone. “Better” includes “more securely,” against viruses and Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks.
* Social-network moderators have suspended and revoked accounts for any cause or no cause. They cite “Terms of Service” that appear to ask for politeness. But ''those same moderators allow leftist account holders a pass for demonstrably rude behavior.'' Behavior that provides a pretext for kicking off a conservative, passes as acceptable in a leftist.
* Web hosts have suspended entire Web sites, likewise selectively applying Terms of Service and alleging breach of content regulation. Sometimes they accuse site administrators of burdening their services disproportionately. When the said administrators inform them that they are in fact under DDoS attack, the hosts turn deaf ears.
* Search engine administrators, inside or outside social networks, have suppressed our sites and commentaries from search results. To this end they have changed “algorithms” daily in many cases. The results strongly suggest their specific tasking of their staff to watch for and “manually” suppress any mention of us.
* Smartphone “app store” managers have disallowed the “mobile apps” of alternative social networks, on specious, indeed mendacious, pretexts. Thus far, the app developers can serve their content by a direct link. But this provokes dire warnings of security compromise, etc., etc. This lays the groundwork for permanently disallowing any app that does not come from an approved store. Such approval is subject to the same sort of content regulation that allows social-network administrators to expel account holders.
=== Invasions of privacy ===
* Electronic mail providers have read our mail and submitted digests of the contents to hostile government officials.
* Electronic mail providers have sold lists of our accounts without our consent, to advertisers and other exploiters. Worse yet, they have shared them to hostile government officials and equally hostile violent groups.
* Search engine administrators have given or sold our search activity, without our consent or even our knowledge, to advertisers, other private harassers, and hostile government officials.
=== Open war ===
* Social-network chief administrators have declared us out of their protection and are now prosecuting open war against us. Witnesses report sudden decrease in followership, or direct termination of their own accounts.
* Those same social-network moderators are now implementing a system to rate the “trustworthiness”<ref name=Facebook>Keach S, “Facebook has TRUST ratings for users – but it won’t tell you your score,” ''The Sun'', 21 August 2018. <https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/7067261/facebook-trust-rating-score-check/></ref> of account holders. They refuse to reveal their criteria. Yet they have announced plans to discipline users according to this new rating.
* They have excited and incited DDoS and other attacks against us. Furthermore they refuse in all cases even to acknowledge that such attacks are in fact taking place.
* Service providers of all types are now acting in concert like an ''ad hoc'' political action committee. They propose to use their services as weapons to influence materially upcoming Federal, State and local elections. And they do this without our consent, some without acknowledgment, and some with brazen avowal.

== Breach of contract ==
In every stage of these outrages, we have asked the administrators involved for redress or at least explanations. These administrators have answered our repeated petitions only by repeated injury. An administrator who thus marks his character by every act which may define a tyrannical censor, is unfit to provide network connective or social services to any community of ‘’free’’ users. (Such an administrator is also guilty of fraud, if he has promised civil authorities he would not so act.)

Nor have we been lacking in attention to our fellow account holders. We have warned them from time to time of the vagaries of Terms of Service. Specific instances of inconsistent and selective application of such Terms of Service abound. We have reminded fellow users of the very reasons we repaired to the Internet to begin with. Those reasons concerned avoiding the censorship of the Mainstream Media, including newspapers, magazines, and the former Big Three Networks. We have appealed for common decency and fair play, and have asked them nicely, as fellow human beings, to disavow such censorship, which would inevitably interrupt our very ability to hold converse with them.

They, too, have turned deaf ears to the voices of justice and fellow-feeling. Worse yet, they have ‘’incited’’ administrators so to act and even ‘’castigated administrators who refuse so to act.’’ We must, therefore, acquiesce in the reality that necessitates our separation. That means holding them, as we hold the offending administrators, in ‘’breach of contract.’’ This applies to specific contracts with specific providers, and the general social contract of the Internet.

== Cybernetic independence ==
We, therefore, conservative Internet users, editors and publishers, appealing to the Supreme Administrator of the universe for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name and by the authority of all whom we represent, solemnly publish and declare, that
* We shall provide our own services, freely and independently.
* We thus absolve ourselves from all connections to conventional Internet hosting, e-mail, social-networking, video distribution, smartphone operating system, and similar providers.
* All contractual obligations on the part of ourselves to these conventional Internet services providers is, and by right ought to be, terminated.
* As our own Internet services providers, we reserve to ourselves the full power to:
** Host Internet sites,
** Defend those sites assiduously and proactively against Distributed Denial of Service and viral attacks,
** Establish our own social network,
** Distribute video content (subject only to the laws of intellectual property and traditional decency),
** Write and maintain our own smartphone operating system and apps,
** Deliver electronic mail, and
** Do all the other acts and things which Internet services providers may of right do.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to one another such financial, technical, and intellectual resources as the task of cybernetic independence might require.
== References ==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Internet]]

Essay:Declaration of Cybernetic Independence

2021-02-16T16:14:20Z

TerryH: /* Breach of contract */

By --[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 11:09, 16 February 2021 (EST) Originally published at <https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2018/08/26/accountability/news-media/declaration-cybernetic-independence/>

Sometimes in cybernetic events, a user or users must terminate their contracts with immediate connection and other service providers. Often that means building their own providers, having a separate and equal station with those of their former contractors. The civil law, and the laws of physics, allow this. But one must pay the proper respect to the opinions of others—if they deserve it. That means setting forth the causes for declaring cybernetic independence.<ref name=Jefferson>Apologies to Thomas Jefferson, author of the original Declaration of Independence. <http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.html></ref>
== The rights of an Internet user==
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that
# All account holders and other service clients begin as equals.
# They have, by virtue of human nature itself, certain inalienable rights.
# These rights include freedom of exercise and promulgation of religion, except where such religion advocates initiating force or violence. They also include freedom of speech, information, and association.
# To secure these rights, Internet users contract for various Internet services. The providers of these services derive certain powers from the consent of their clients. Which is to say, a client may terminate a service contract any time.
# Sometimes a provider acts in a way that threatens or destroys a client’s rights. The client then has the right to decamp from the said provider and to build a new provider. Such a provider can then promulgate such regulations as will best serve the market for connectivity and freedom.
== Abuses of power ==
One does not change a long-lasting provider-client relationship for light or transient causes. Furthermore, Internet users would rather suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to set themselves right by abandoning such long-lasting relationships. All human experience has shown this. But what happens when providers suddenly abuse their power, alone or in coordination? What happens when, in so doing, they demonstrate the clear objective of censorship? Then the client has the right – the ''duty'' – to abandon such providers. That could mean choosing other providers or building their own.
This is the kind of abuse up with which conservative Internet users have long put. The Alex Jones affair<ref name=AlexJones>Hurlbut TA, “Alex Jones, terms of service, and truth,” ''Conservative News and Views'', published 10 August 2018. <http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2018/08/10/accountability/news-media/alex-jones-terms-service-truth/></ref> has brought this to an immediate head. This, in turn, compels us now to provide for ourselves the services our erstwhile providers would now deny us.
The history of the present Internet social establishment includes vague “Terms of Service” and abrogation of account and contractual relationships for any reason or no reason. All such acts have in direct object the suppression of any voice of protest against leftist opinion. To prove this, we now submit facts to a candid cybernetic universe.
=== Direct censorship ===
* Web hosts have refused to install certain technical refinements that would make the Internet run better for everyone. “Better” includes “more securely,” against viruses and Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks.
* Social-network moderators have suspended and revoked accounts for any cause or no cause. They cite “Terms of Service” that appear to ask for politeness. But ''those same moderators allow leftist account holders a pass for demonstrably rude behavior.'' Behavior that provides a pretext for kicking off a conservative, passes as acceptable in a leftist.
* Web hosts have suspended entire Web sites, likewise selectively applying Terms of Service and alleging breach of content regulation. Sometimes they accuse site administrators of burdening their services disproportionately. When the said administrators inform them that they are in fact under DDoS attack, the hosts turn deaf ears.
* Search engine administrators, inside or outside social networks, have suppressed our sites and commentaries from search results. To this end they have changed “algorithms” daily in many cases. The results strongly suggest their specific tasking of their staff to watch for and “manually” suppress any mention of us.
* Smartphone “app store” managers have disallowed the “mobile apps” of alternative social networks, on specious, indeed mendacious, pretexts. Thus far, the app developers can serve their content by a direct link. But this provokes dire warnings of security compromise, etc., etc. This lays the groundwork for permanently disallowing any app that does not come from an approved store. Such approval is subject to the same sort of content regulation that allows social-network administrators to expel account holders.
=== Invasions of privacy ===
* Electronic mail providers have read our mail and submitted digests of the contents to hostile government officials.
* Electronic mail providers have sold lists of our accounts without our consent, to advertisers and other exploiters. Worse yet, they have shared them to hostile government officials and equally hostile violent groups.
* Search engine administrators have given or sold our search activity, without our consent or even our knowledge, to advertisers, other private harassers, and hostile government officials.
=== Open war ===
* Social-network chief administrators have declared us out of their protection and are now prosecuting open war against us. Witnesses report sudden decrease in followership, or direct termination of their own accounts.
* Those same social-network moderators are now implementing a system to rate the “trustworthiness”<ref name=Facebook>Keach S, “Facebook has TRUST ratings for users – but it won’t tell you your score,” ''The Sun'', 21 August 2018. <https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/7067261/facebook-trust-rating-score-check/></ref> of account holders. They refuse to reveal their criteria. Yet they have announced plans to discipline users according to this new rating.
* They have excited and incited DDoS and other attacks against us. Furthermore they refuse in all cases even to acknowledge that such attacks are in fact taking place.
* Service providers of all types are now acting in concert like an ''ad hoc'' political action committee. They propose to use their services as weapons to influence materially upcoming Federal, State and local elections. And they do this without our consent, some without acknowledgment, and some with brazen avowal.

== Breach of contract ==
In every stage of these outrages, we have asked the administrators involved for redress or at least explanations. These administrators have answered our repeated petitions only by repeated injury. An administrator who thus marks his character by every act which may define a tyrannical censor, is unfit to provide network connective or social services to any community of ‘’free’’ users. (Such an administrator is also guilty of fraud, if he has promised civil authorities he would not so act.)

Nor have we been lacking in attention to our fellow account holders. We have warned them from time to time of the vagaries of Terms of Service. Specific instances of inconsistent and selective application of such Terms of Service abound. We have reminded fellow users of the very reasons we repaired to the Internet to begin with. Those reasons concerned avoiding the censorship of the Mainstream Media, including newspapers, magazines, and the former Big Three Networks. We have appealed for common decency and fair play, and have asked them nicely, as fellow human beings, to disavow such censorship, which would inevitably interrupt our very ability to hold converse with them.

They, too, have turned deaf ears to the voices of justice and fellow-feeling. Worse yet, they have ‘’incited’’ administrators so to act and even ‘’castigated administrators who refuse so to act.’’ We must, therefore, acquiesce in the reality that necessitates our separation. That means holding them, as we hold the offending administrators, in ‘’breach of contract.’’ This applies to specific contracts with specific providers, and the general social contract of the Internet.

== Cybernetic independence ==
We, therefore, conservative Internet users, editors and publishers, appealing to the Supreme Administrator of the universe for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name and by the authority of all whom we represent, solemnly publish and declare, that
* We shall provide our own services, freely and independently.
* We thus absolve ourselves from all connections to conventional Internet hosting, e-mail, social-networking, video distribution, smartphone operating system, and similar providers.
* All contractual obligations on the part of ourselves to these conventional Internet services providers is, and by right ought to be, terminated.
* As our own Internet services providers, we reserve to ourselves the full power to:
** Host Internet sites,
** Defend those sites assiduously and proactively against Distributed Denial of Service and viral attacks,
** Establish our own social network,
** Distribute video content (subject only to the laws of intellectual property and traditional decency),
** Write and maintain our own smartphone operating system and apps,
** Deliver electronic mail, and
** Do all the other acts and things which Internet services providers may of right do.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to one another such financial, technical, and intellectual resources as the task of cybernetic independence might require.
== References ==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Internet]]

Essay:Declaration of Cybernetic Independence

2021-02-16T16:13:03Z

TerryH:

By --[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 11:09, 16 February 2021 (EST) Originally published at <https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2018/08/26/accountability/news-media/declaration-cybernetic-independence/>

Sometimes in cybernetic events, a user or users must terminate their contracts with immediate connection and other service providers. Often that means building their own providers, having a separate and equal station with those of their former contractors. The civil law, and the laws of physics, allow this. But one must pay the proper respect to the opinions of others—if they deserve it. That means setting forth the causes for declaring cybernetic independence.<ref name=Jefferson>Apologies to Thomas Jefferson, author of the original Declaration of Independence. <http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.html></ref>
== The rights of an Internet user==
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that
# All account holders and other service clients begin as equals.
# They have, by virtue of human nature itself, certain inalienable rights.
# These rights include freedom of exercise and promulgation of religion, except where such religion advocates initiating force or violence. They also include freedom of speech, information, and association.
# To secure these rights, Internet users contract for various Internet services. The providers of these services derive certain powers from the consent of their clients. Which is to say, a client may terminate a service contract any time.
# Sometimes a provider acts in a way that threatens or destroys a client’s rights. The client then has the right to decamp from the said provider and to build a new provider. Such a provider can then promulgate such regulations as will best serve the market for connectivity and freedom.
== Abuses of power ==
One does not change a long-lasting provider-client relationship for light or transient causes. Furthermore, Internet users would rather suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to set themselves right by abandoning such long-lasting relationships. All human experience has shown this. But what happens when providers suddenly abuse their power, alone or in coordination? What happens when, in so doing, they demonstrate the clear objective of censorship? Then the client has the right – the ''duty'' – to abandon such providers. That could mean choosing other providers or building their own.
This is the kind of abuse up with which conservative Internet users have long put. The Alex Jones affair<ref name=AlexJones>Hurlbut TA, “Alex Jones, terms of service, and truth,” ''Conservative News and Views'', published 10 August 2018. <http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2018/08/10/accountability/news-media/alex-jones-terms-service-truth/></ref> has brought this to an immediate head. This, in turn, compels us now to provide for ourselves the services our erstwhile providers would now deny us.
The history of the present Internet social establishment includes vague “Terms of Service” and abrogation of account and contractual relationships for any reason or no reason. All such acts have in direct object the suppression of any voice of protest against leftist opinion. To prove this, we now submit facts to a candid cybernetic universe.
=== Direct censorship ===
* Web hosts have refused to install certain technical refinements that would make the Internet run better for everyone. “Better” includes “more securely,” against viruses and Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks.
* Social-network moderators have suspended and revoked accounts for any cause or no cause. They cite “Terms of Service” that appear to ask for politeness. But ''those same moderators allow leftist account holders a pass for demonstrably rude behavior.'' Behavior that provides a pretext for kicking off a conservative, passes as acceptable in a leftist.
* Web hosts have suspended entire Web sites, likewise selectively applying Terms of Service and alleging breach of content regulation. Sometimes they accuse site administrators of burdening their services disproportionately. When the said administrators inform them that they are in fact under DDoS attack, the hosts turn deaf ears.
* Search engine administrators, inside or outside social networks, have suppressed our sites and commentaries from search results. To this end they have changed “algorithms” daily in many cases. The results strongly suggest their specific tasking of their staff to watch for and “manually” suppress any mention of us.
* Smartphone “app store” managers have disallowed the “mobile apps” of alternative social networks, on specious, indeed mendacious, pretexts. Thus far, the app developers can serve their content by a direct link. But this provokes dire warnings of security compromise, etc., etc. This lays the groundwork for permanently disallowing any app that does not come from an approved store. Such approval is subject to the same sort of content regulation that allows social-network administrators to expel account holders.
=== Invasions of privacy ===
* Electronic mail providers have read our mail and submitted digests of the contents to hostile government officials.
* Electronic mail providers have sold lists of our accounts without our consent, to advertisers and other exploiters. Worse yet, they have shared them to hostile government officials and equally hostile violent groups.
* Search engine administrators have given or sold our search activity, without our consent or even our knowledge, to advertisers, other private harassers, and hostile government officials.
=== Open war ===
* Social-network chief administrators have declared us out of their protection and are now prosecuting open war against us. Witnesses report sudden decrease in followership, or direct termination of their own accounts.
* Those same social-network moderators are now implementing a system to rate the “trustworthiness”<ref name=Facebook>Keach S, “Facebook has TRUST ratings for users – but it won’t tell you your score,” ''The Sun'', 21 August 2018. <https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/7067261/facebook-trust-rating-score-check/></ref> of account holders. They refuse to reveal their criteria. Yet they have announced plans to discipline users according to this new rating.
* They have excited and incited DDoS and other attacks against us. Furthermore they refuse in all cases even to acknowledge that such attacks are in fact taking place.
* Service providers of all types are now acting in concert like an ''ad hoc'' political action committee. They propose to use their services as weapons to influence materially upcoming Federal, State and local elections. And they do this without our consent, some without acknowledgment, and some with brazen avowal.

== Breach of contract ==
In every stage of these outrages, we have asked the administrators involved for redress or at least explanations. These administrators have answered our repeated petitions only by repeated injury. An administrator who thus marks his character by every act which may define a tyrannical censor, is unfit to provide network connective or social services to any community of ‘’free’’ users. (Such an administrator is also guilty of fraud, if he has promised civil authorities he would not so act.)
Nor have we been lacking in attention to our fellow account holders. We have warned them from time to time of the vagaries of Terms of Service. Specific instances of inconsistent and selective application of such Terms of Service abound. We have reminded fellow users of the very reasons we repaired to the Internet to begin with. Those reasons concerned avoiding the censorship of the Mainstream Media, including newspapers, magazines, and the former Big Three Networks. We have appealed for common decency and fair play, and have asked them nicely, as fellow human beings, to disavow such censorship, which would inevitably interrupt our very ability to hold converse with them.
They, too, have turned deaf ears to the voices of justice and fellow-feeling. Worse yet, they have ‘’incited’’ administrators so to act and even ‘’castigated administrators who refuse so to act.’’ We must, therefore, acquiesce in the reality that necessitates our separation. That means holding them, as we hold the offending administrators, in ‘’breach of contract.’’ This applies to specific contracts with specific providers, and the general social contract of the Internet.
== Cybernetic independence ==
We, therefore, conservative Internet users, editors and publishers, appealing to the Supreme Administrator of the universe for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name and by the authority of all whom we represent, solemnly publish and declare, that
* We shall provide our own services, freely and independently.
* We thus absolve ourselves from all connections to conventional Internet hosting, e-mail, social-networking, video distribution, smartphone operating system, and similar providers.
* All contractual obligations on the part of ourselves to these conventional Internet services providers is, and by right ought to be, terminated.
* As our own Internet services providers, we reserve to ourselves the full power to:
** Host Internet sites,
** Defend those sites assiduously and proactively against Distributed Denial of Service and viral attacks,
** Establish our own social network,
** Distribute video content (subject only to the laws of intellectual property and traditional decency),
** Write and maintain our own smartphone operating system and apps,
** Deliver electronic mail, and
** Do all the other acts and things which Internet services providers may of right do.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to one another such financial, technical, and intellectual resources as the task of cybernetic independence might require.
== References ==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Internet]]

Essay:Declaration of Cybernetic Independence

2021-02-16T16:12:06Z

TerryH:

By --[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 11:09, 16 February 2021 (EST)

Sometimes in cybernetic events, a user or users must terminate their contracts with immediate connection and other service providers. Often that means building their own providers, having a separate and equal station with those of their former contractors. The civil law, and the laws of physics, allow this. But one must pay the proper respect to the opinions of others—if they deserve it. That means setting forth the causes for declaring cybernetic independence.<ref name=Jefferson>Apologies to Thomas Jefferson, author of the original Declaration of Independence. <http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.html></ref>
== The rights of an Internet user==
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that
# All account holders and other service clients begin as equals.
# They have, by virtue of human nature itself, certain inalienable rights.
# These rights include freedom of exercise and promulgation of religion, except where such religion advocates initiating force or violence. They also include freedom of speech, information, and association.
# To secure these rights, Internet users contract for various Internet services. The providers of these services derive certain powers from the consent of their clients. Which is to say, a client may terminate a service contract any time.
# Sometimes a provider acts in a way that threatens or destroys a client’s rights. The client then has the right to decamp from the said provider and to build a new provider. Such a provider can then promulgate such regulations as will best serve the market for connectivity and freedom.
== Abuses of power ==
One does not change a long-lasting provider-client relationship for light or transient causes. Furthermore, Internet users would rather suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to set themselves right by abandoning such long-lasting relationships. All human experience has shown this. But what happens when providers suddenly abuse their power, alone or in coordination? What happens when, in so doing, they demonstrate the clear objective of censorship? Then the client has the right – the ''duty'' – to abandon such providers. That could mean choosing other providers or building their own.
This is the kind of abuse up with which conservative Internet users have long put. The Alex Jones affair<ref name=AlexJones>Hurlbut TA, “Alex Jones, terms of service, and truth,” ''Conservative News and Views'', published 10 August 2018. <http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2018/08/10/accountability/news-media/alex-jones-terms-service-truth/></ref> has brought this to an immediate head. This, in turn, compels us now to provide for ourselves the services our erstwhile providers would now deny us.
The history of the present Internet social establishment includes vague “Terms of Service” and abrogation of account and contractual relationships for any reason or no reason. All such acts have in direct object the suppression of any voice of protest against leftist opinion. To prove this, we now submit facts to a candid cybernetic universe.
=== Direct censorship ===
* Web hosts have refused to install certain technical refinements that would make the Internet run better for everyone. “Better” includes “more securely,” against viruses and Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks.
* Social-network moderators have suspended and revoked accounts for any cause or no cause. They cite “Terms of Service” that appear to ask for politeness. But ''those same moderators allow leftist account holders a pass for demonstrably rude behavior.'' Behavior that provides a pretext for kicking off a conservative, passes as acceptable in a leftist.
* Web hosts have suspended entire Web sites, likewise selectively applying Terms of Service and alleging breach of content regulation. Sometimes they accuse site administrators of burdening their services disproportionately. When the said administrators inform them that they are in fact under DDoS attack, the hosts turn deaf ears.
* Search engine administrators, inside or outside social networks, have suppressed our sites and commentaries from search results. To this end they have changed “algorithms” daily in many cases. The results strongly suggest their specific tasking of their staff to watch for and “manually” suppress any mention of us.
* Smartphone “app store” managers have disallowed the “mobile apps” of alternative social networks, on specious, indeed mendacious, pretexts. Thus far, the app developers can serve their content by a direct link. But this provokes dire warnings of security compromise, etc., etc. This lays the groundwork for permanently disallowing any app that does not come from an approved store. Such approval is subject to the same sort of content regulation that allows social-network administrators to expel account holders.
=== Invasions of privacy ===
* Electronic mail providers have read our mail and submitted digests of the contents to hostile government officials.
* Electronic mail providers have sold lists of our accounts without our consent, to advertisers and other exploiters. Worse yet, they have shared them to hostile government officials and equally hostile violent groups.
* Search engine administrators have given or sold our search activity, without our consent or even our knowledge, to advertisers, other private harassers, and hostile government officials.
=== Open war ===
* Social-network chief administrators have declared us out of their protection and are now prosecuting open war against us. Witnesses report sudden decrease in followership, or direct termination of their own accounts.
* Those same social-network moderators are now implementing a system to rate the “trustworthiness”<ref name=Facebook>Keach S, “Facebook has TRUST ratings for users – but it won’t tell you your score,” ''The Sun'', 21 August 2018. <https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/7067261/facebook-trust-rating-score-check/></ref> of account holders. They refuse to reveal their criteria. Yet they have announced plans to discipline users according to this new rating.
* They have excited and incited DDoS and other attacks against us. Furthermore they refuse in all cases even to acknowledge that such attacks are in fact taking place.
* Service providers of all types are now acting in concert like an ''ad hoc'' political action committee. They propose to use their services as weapons to influence materially upcoming Federal, State and local elections. And they do this without our consent, some without acknowledgment, and some with brazen avowal.

== Breach of contract ==
In every stage of these outrages, we have asked the administrators involved for redress or at least explanations. These administrators have answered our repeated petitions only by repeated injury. An administrator who thus marks his character by every act which may define a tyrannical censor, is unfit to provide network connective or social services to any community of ‘’free’’ users. (Such an administrator is also guilty of fraud, if he has promised civil authorities he would not so act.)
Nor have we been lacking in attention to our fellow account holders. We have warned them from time to time of the vagaries of Terms of Service. Specific instances of inconsistent and selective application of such Terms of Service abound. We have reminded fellow users of the very reasons we repaired to the Internet to begin with. Those reasons concerned avoiding the censorship of the Mainstream Media, including newspapers, magazines, and the former Big Three Networks. We have appealed for common decency and fair play, and have asked them nicely, as fellow human beings, to disavow such censorship, which would inevitably interrupt our very ability to hold converse with them.
They, too, have turned deaf ears to the voices of justice and fellow-feeling. Worse yet, they have ‘’incited’’ administrators so to act and even ‘’castigated administrators who refuse so to act.’’ We must, therefore, acquiesce in the reality that necessitates our separation. That means holding them, as we hold the offending administrators, in ‘’breach of contract.’’ This applies to specific contracts with specific providers, and the general social contract of the Internet.
== Cybernetic independence ==
We, therefore, conservative Internet users, editors and publishers, appealing to the Supreme Administrator of the universe for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name and by the authority of all whom we represent, solemnly publish and declare, that
* We shall provide our own services, freely and independently.
* We thus absolve ourselves from all connections to conventional Internet hosting, e-mail, social-networking, video distribution, smartphone operating system, and similar providers.
* All contractual obligations on the part of ourselves to these conventional Internet services providers is, and by right ought to be, terminated.
* As our own Internet services providers, we reserve to ourselves the full power to:
** Host Internet sites,
** Defend those sites assiduously and proactively against Distributed Denial of Service and viral attacks,
** Establish our own social network,
** Distribute video content (subject only to the laws of intellectual property and traditional decency),
** Write and maintain our own smartphone operating system and apps,
** Deliver electronic mail, and
** Do all the other acts and things which Internet services providers may of right do.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to one another such financial, technical, and intellectual resources as the task of cybernetic independence might require.
== References ==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Internet]]

Essay:Declaration of Cybernetic Independence

2021-02-16T16:11:34Z

TerryH: /* Abuses of power */

By --[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 11:09, 16 February 2021 (EST)

Sometimes in cybernetic events, a user or users must terminate their contracts with immediate connection and other service providers. Often that means building their own providers, having a separate and equal station with those of their former contractors. The civil law, and the laws of physics, allow this. But one must pay the proper respect to the opinions of others—if they deserve it. That means setting forth the causes for declaring cybernetic independence.<ref name=Jefferson>Apologies to Thomas Jefferson, author of the original Declaration of Independence. <http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.html></ref>
== The rights of an Internet user
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that
# All account holders and other service clients begin as equals.
# They have, by virtue of human nature itself, certain inalienable rights.
# These rights include freedom of exercise and promulgation of religion, except where such religion advocates initiating force or violence. They also include freedom of speech, information, and association.
# To secure these rights, Internet users contract for various Internet services. The providers of these services derive certain powers from the consent of their clients. Which is to say, a client may terminate a service contract any time.
# Sometimes a provider acts in a way that threatens or destroys a client’s rights. The client then has the right to decamp from the said provider and to build a new provider. Such a provider can then promulgate such regulations as will best serve the market for connectivity and freedom.
== Abuses of power ==
One does not change a long-lasting provider-client relationship for light or transient causes. Furthermore, Internet users would rather suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to set themselves right by abandoning such long-lasting relationships. All human experience has shown this. But what happens when providers suddenly abuse their power, alone or in coordination? What happens when, in so doing, they demonstrate the clear objective of censorship? Then the client has the right – the ''duty'' – to abandon such providers. That could mean choosing other providers or building their own.
This is the kind of abuse up with which conservative Internet users have long put. The Alex Jones affair<ref name=AlexJones>Hurlbut TA, “Alex Jones, terms of service, and truth,” ''Conservative News and Views'', published 10 August 2018. <http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2018/08/10/accountability/news-media/alex-jones-terms-service-truth/></ref> has brought this to an immediate head. This, in turn, compels us now to provide for ourselves the services our erstwhile providers would now deny us.
The history of the present Internet social establishment includes vague “Terms of Service” and abrogation of account and contractual relationships for any reason or no reason. All such acts have in direct object the suppression of any voice of protest against leftist opinion. To prove this, we now submit facts to a candid cybernetic universe.
=== Direct censorship ===
* Web hosts have refused to install certain technical refinements that would make the Internet run better for everyone. “Better” includes “more securely,” against viruses and Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks.
* Social-network moderators have suspended and revoked accounts for any cause or no cause. They cite “Terms of Service” that appear to ask for politeness. But ''those same moderators allow leftist account holders a pass for demonstrably rude behavior.'' Behavior that provides a pretext for kicking off a conservative, passes as acceptable in a leftist.
* Web hosts have suspended entire Web sites, likewise selectively applying Terms of Service and alleging breach of content regulation. Sometimes they accuse site administrators of burdening their services disproportionately. When the said administrators inform them that they are in fact under DDoS attack, the hosts turn deaf ears.
* Search engine administrators, inside or outside social networks, have suppressed our sites and commentaries from search results. To this end they have changed “algorithms” daily in many cases. The results strongly suggest their specific tasking of their staff to watch for and “manually” suppress any mention of us.
* Smartphone “app store” managers have disallowed the “mobile apps” of alternative social networks, on specious, indeed mendacious, pretexts. Thus far, the app developers can serve their content by a direct link. But this provokes dire warnings of security compromise, etc., etc. This lays the groundwork for permanently disallowing any app that does not come from an approved store. Such approval is subject to the same sort of content regulation that allows social-network administrators to expel account holders.
=== Invasions of privacy ===
* Electronic mail providers have read our mail and submitted digests of the contents to hostile government officials.
* Electronic mail providers have sold lists of our accounts without our consent, to advertisers and other exploiters. Worse yet, they have shared them to hostile government officials and equally hostile violent groups.
* Search engine administrators have given or sold our search activity, without our consent or even our knowledge, to advertisers, other private harassers, and hostile government officials.
=== Open war ===
* Social-network chief administrators have declared us out of their protection and are now prosecuting open war against us. Witnesses report sudden decrease in followership, or direct termination of their own accounts.
* Those same social-network moderators are now implementing a system to rate the “trustworthiness”<ref name=Facebook>Keach S, “Facebook has TRUST ratings for users – but it won’t tell you your score,” ''The Sun'', 21 August 2018. <https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/7067261/facebook-trust-rating-score-check/></ref> of account holders. They refuse to reveal their criteria. Yet they have announced plans to discipline users according to this new rating.
* They have excited and incited DDoS and other attacks against us. Furthermore they refuse in all cases even to acknowledge that such attacks are in fact taking place.
* Service providers of all types are now acting in concert like an ''ad hoc'' political action committee. They propose to use their services as weapons to influence materially upcoming Federal, State and local elections. And they do this without our consent, some without acknowledgment, and some with brazen avowal.

== Breach of contract ==
In every stage of these outrages, we have asked the administrators involved for redress or at least explanations. These administrators have answered our repeated petitions only by repeated injury. An administrator who thus marks his character by every act which may define a tyrannical censor, is unfit to provide network connective or social services to any community of ‘’free’’ users. (Such an administrator is also guilty of fraud, if he has promised civil authorities he would not so act.)
Nor have we been lacking in attention to our fellow account holders. We have warned them from time to time of the vagaries of Terms of Service. Specific instances of inconsistent and selective application of such Terms of Service abound. We have reminded fellow users of the very reasons we repaired to the Internet to begin with. Those reasons concerned avoiding the censorship of the Mainstream Media, including newspapers, magazines, and the former Big Three Networks. We have appealed for common decency and fair play, and have asked them nicely, as fellow human beings, to disavow such censorship, which would inevitably interrupt our very ability to hold converse with them.
They, too, have turned deaf ears to the voices of justice and fellow-feeling. Worse yet, they have ‘’incited’’ administrators so to act and even ‘’castigated administrators who refuse so to act.’’ We must, therefore, acquiesce in the reality that necessitates our separation. That means holding them, as we hold the offending administrators, in ‘’breach of contract.’’ This applies to specific contracts with specific providers, and the general social contract of the Internet.
== Cybernetic independence ==
We, therefore, conservative Internet users, editors and publishers, appealing to the Supreme Administrator of the universe for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name and by the authority of all whom we represent, solemnly publish and declare, that
* We shall provide our own services, freely and independently.
* We thus absolve ourselves from all connections to conventional Internet hosting, e-mail, social-networking, video distribution, smartphone operating system, and similar providers.
* All contractual obligations on the part of ourselves to these conventional Internet services providers is, and by right ought to be, terminated.
* As our own Internet services providers, we reserve to ourselves the full power to:
** Host Internet sites,
** Defend those sites assiduously and proactively against Distributed Denial of Service and viral attacks,
** Establish our own social network,
** Distribute video content (subject only to the laws of intellectual property and traditional decency),
** Write and maintain our own smartphone operating system and apps,
** Deliver electronic mail, and
** Do all the other acts and things which Internet services providers may of right do.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to one another such financial, technical, and intellectual resources as the task of cybernetic independence might require.
== References ==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Internet]]

Essay:Declaration of Cybernetic Independence

2021-02-16T16:09:04Z

TerryH: Created page with "By --~~~~ Sometimes in cybernetic events, a user or users must terminate their contracts with immediate connection and other service providers. Often that means building thei..."

By --[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 11:09, 16 February 2021 (EST)

Sometimes in cybernetic events, a user or users must terminate their contracts with immediate connection and other service providers. Often that means building their own providers, having a separate and equal station with those of their former contractors. The civil law, and the laws of physics, allow this. But one must pay the proper respect to the opinions of others—if they deserve it. That means setting forth the causes for declaring cybernetic independence.<ref name=Jefferson>Apologies to Thomas Jefferson, author of the original Declaration of Independence. <http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.html></ref>
== The rights of an Internet user
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that
# All account holders and other service clients begin as equals.
# They have, by virtue of human nature itself, certain inalienable rights.
# These rights include freedom of exercise and promulgation of religion, except where such religion advocates initiating force or violence. They also include freedom of speech, information, and association.
# To secure these rights, Internet users contract for various Internet services. The providers of these services derive certain powers from the consent of their clients. Which is to say, a client may terminate a service contract any time.
# Sometimes a provider acts in a way that threatens or destroys a client’s rights. The client then has the right to decamp from the said provider and to build a new provider. Such a provider can then promulgate such regulations as will best serve the market for connectivity and freedom.
== Abuses of power ==
One does not change a long-lasting provider-client relationship for light or transient causes. Furthermore, Internet users would rather suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to set themselves right by abandoning such long-lasting relationships. All human experience has shown this. But what happens when providers suddenly abuse their power, alone or in coordination? What happens when, in so doing, they demonstrate the clear objective of censorship? Then the client has the right – the ‘’duty’’ – to abandon such providers. That could mean choosing other providers or building their own.
This is the kind of abuse up with which conservative Internet users have long put. The Alex Jones affair<ref name=AlexJones>Hurlbut TA, “Alex Jones, terms of service, and truth,” ‘’Conservative News and Views’’, published 10 August 2018. <http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2018/08/10/accountability/news-media/alex-jones-terms-service-truth/></ref> has brought this to an immediate head. This, in turn, compels us now to provide for ourselves the services our erstwhile providers would now deny us.
The history of the present Internet social establishment includes vague “Terms of Service” and abrogation of account and contractual relationships for any reason or no reason. All such acts have in direct object the suppression of any voice of protest against leftist opinion. To prove this, we now submit facts to a candid cybernetic universe.
=== Direct censorship ===
* Web hosts have refused to install certain technical refinements that would make the Internet run better for everyone. “Better” includes “more securely,” against viruses and Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks.
* Social-network moderators have suspended and revoked accounts for any cause or no cause. They cite “Terms of Service” that appear to ask for politeness. But ‘’those same moderators allow leftist account holders a pass for demonstrably rude behavior.’’ Behavior that provides a pretext for kicking off a conservative, passes as acceptable in a leftist.
* Web hosts have suspended entire Web sites, likewise selectively applying Terms of Service and alleging breach of content regulation. Sometimes they accuse site administrators of burdening their services disproportionately. When the said administrators inform them that they are in fact under DDoS attack, the hosts turn deaf ears.
* Search engine administrators, inside or outside social networks, have suppressed our sites and commentaries from search results. To this end they have changed “algorithms” daily in many cases. The results strongly suggest their specific tasking of their staff to watch for and “manually” suppress any mention of us.
* Smartphone “app store” managers have disallowed the “mobile apps” of alternative social networks, on specious, indeed mendacious, pretexts. Thus far, the app developers can serve their content by a direct link. But this provokes dire warnings of security compromise, etc., etc. This lays the groundwork for permanently disallowing any app that does not come from an approved store. Such approval is subject to the same sort of content regulation that allows social-network administrators to expel account holders.
=== Invasions of privacy ===
* Electronic mail providers have read our mail and submitted digests of the contents to hostile government officials.
* Electronic mail providers have sold lists of our accounts without our consent, to advertisers and other exploiters. Worse yet, they have shared them to hostile government officials and equally hostile violent groups.
* Search engine administrators have given or sold our search activity, without our consent or even our knowledge, to advertisers, other private harassers, and hostile government officials.
=== Open war ===
* Social-network chief administrators have declared us out of their protection and are now prosecuting open war against us. Witnesses report sudden decrease in followership, or direct termination of their own accounts.
* Those same social-network moderators are now implementing a system to rate the “trustworthiness”<ref name=Facebook>Keach S, “Facebook has TRUST ratings for users – but it won’t tell you your score,” ‘’The Sun’’, 21 August 2018. <https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/7067261/facebook-trust-rating-score-check/></ref> of account holders. They refuse to reveal their criteria. Yet they have announced plans to discipline users according to this new rating.
* They have excited and incited DDoS and other attacks against us. Furthermore they refuse in all cases even to acknowledge that such attacks are in fact taking place.
* Service providers of all types are now acting in concert like an ‘’ad hoc’’ political action committee. They propose to use their services as weapons to influence materially upcoming Federal, State and local elections. And they do this without our consent, some without acknowledgment, and some with brazen avowal.
== Breach of contract ==
In every stage of these outrages, we have asked the administrators involved for redress or at least explanations. These administrators have answered our repeated petitions only by repeated injury. An administrator who thus marks his character by every act which may define a tyrannical censor, is unfit to provide network connective or social services to any community of ‘’free’’ users. (Such an administrator is also guilty of fraud, if he has promised civil authorities he would not so act.)
Nor have we been lacking in attention to our fellow account holders. We have warned them from time to time of the vagaries of Terms of Service. Specific instances of inconsistent and selective application of such Terms of Service abound. We have reminded fellow users of the very reasons we repaired to the Internet to begin with. Those reasons concerned avoiding the censorship of the Mainstream Media, including newspapers, magazines, and the former Big Three Networks. We have appealed for common decency and fair play, and have asked them nicely, as fellow human beings, to disavow such censorship, which would inevitably interrupt our very ability to hold converse with them.
They, too, have turned deaf ears to the voices of justice and fellow-feeling. Worse yet, they have ‘’incited’’ administrators so to act and even ‘’castigated administrators who refuse so to act.’’ We must, therefore, acquiesce in the reality that necessitates our separation. That means holding them, as we hold the offending administrators, in ‘’breach of contract.’’ This applies to specific contracts with specific providers, and the general social contract of the Internet.
== Cybernetic independence ==
We, therefore, conservative Internet users, editors and publishers, appealing to the Supreme Administrator of the universe for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name and by the authority of all whom we represent, solemnly publish and declare, that
* We shall provide our own services, freely and independently.
* We thus absolve ourselves from all connections to conventional Internet hosting, e-mail, social-networking, video distribution, smartphone operating system, and similar providers.
* All contractual obligations on the part of ourselves to these conventional Internet services providers is, and by right ought to be, terminated.
* As our own Internet services providers, we reserve to ourselves the full power to:
** Host Internet sites,
** Defend those sites assiduously and proactively against Distributed Denial of Service and viral attacks,
** Establish our own social network,
** Distribute video content (subject only to the laws of intellectual property and traditional decency),
** Write and maintain our own smartphone operating system and apps,
** Deliver electronic mail, and
** Do all the other acts and things which Internet services providers may of right do.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to one another such financial, technical, and intellectual resources as the task of cybernetic independence might require.
== References ==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Internet]]

Parler

2021-02-15T18:03:34Z

TerryH: /* External Links */

'''Parler''' is an [[American]] social networking service and alternative to [[Twitter]]. Its name is the [[French]] word for "to speak" (and is pronounced like "parlor"). It was founded in 2018 and based in Henderson, [[Nevada]] by John Matze and Jared Thomson.<ref>https://home.parler.com/about/</ref> The site is populated with a majority of right-leaning users, although all are welcome. Famous users include [[Candace Owens]], [[Laura Loomer]], [[Mike Lee]], [[Milo Yiannopoulos]], [[Paul Joseph Watson]] and [[Roger Stone]]. In June of 2020, Parler gained many users, and more celebrities including [[Ted Cruz]], [[Rand Paul]], [[Dan Bongino]], [[Eric Trump]], and [[Donald Trump Jr.]] Parler currently has around 1,000,000 users.

Parler, like fellow social networking service [[Gab]], does not engage in censorship against other opinions. Because of this, Parler has been unfairly attacked by the anti-free speech [[Mainstream Media]] and [[Wikipedia]] as "far-right" and "anti-[[Islam]]", despite having over 200,000 [[Arabic]] users currently online.<ref>https://www.thedailybeast.com/about-200000-saudi-arabian-users-suddenly-flood-parler-a-pro-trump-twitter-alternative</ref> Unfortunately, to sign up for a Parler account, a mobile phone number is needed when registering, which effectively blocks those who do not have cell phones from obtaining an account.

[[Hate speech]] is not a bannable offense on Parler according to its company's CEO, John Matze.<ref>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/5/parler-ceo-says-up-and-coming-social-media-service/</ref>

== Parler Ban From Amazon, Apple and Google ==
Recently in a [[leftwing]] [[fascist]] assault on [[free speech]], the [[First Amendment]], and [[human rights]], Parler was banned by [[Apple, Inc.]], [[Google]] and [[Amazon.com]].<ref>https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/01/11/amazon-google-and-apple-are-enemies-of-the-first-amendment/</ref>

== Change of leadership ==
On 29 January 2021, John Matze, the first CEO of Parler, lost his position at the company. Allegations have surfaced that the organization of former [[President]] [[Donald J. Trump]] received an offer from Parler of a 40 percent stake in the company, in return for Trump opening a verified account with Parler. John Matze opposed this, fearing that Trump would take the company over by the force of his personality.<ref name=Buzzfeed>https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/trump-parler-ownership</ref>

Shortly after his leavetaking, Matze released a personal statement saying the company's Board did not agree with him on a vision for a platform dedicated to freedom of speech and "more product stability." Dan Bongino, who owns a twenty-percent stake, hotly disputed Matze's claims and version of events. Bongino has not, thus far, responded directly to the specific allegation that an attempt by the Trump organization to obtain a 40 percent stake occasioned the rupture between Matze and the board.

Rebekah Mercer, daughter of financier Robert Mercer, in fact holds the controlling vote. Dan Bongino holds twenty percent of the company. A third owner, to whom Dan Bongino refers without naming, holds the remaining stake, however large it might be.

== Parler returns ==
On 15 February 2021, on or about midnight EST, Parler returned to full functionality.<ref>https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2021/02/15/news/parler-returns/</ref> Parler sits on a cluster of fully dedicated servers that either the company controls exclusively, or another unidentified host provides. Parler had earlier reached out to Epik, which offers Web hosting and domain registration and is better known as the host of another social network, called Gab. Epik has never confirmed or denied being Parler's new host.

Mark Meckler now holds the post of Interim CEO, while Parler searches for a permanent CEO.

== References ==
{{reflist}}

== External Links ==
* Parler official site [https://parler.com/]
* Epik official site [https://epik.com/]
* Gab Social official site [https://gab.com/home]

[[Category:Websites]]
[[Category:Online Social Networking]]
[[Category:Alt-tech]]

Parler

2021-02-15T18:03:03Z

TerryH: /* External Links */

'''Parler''' is an [[American]] social networking service and alternative to [[Twitter]]. Its name is the [[French]] word for "to speak" (and is pronounced like "parlor"). It was founded in 2018 and based in Henderson, [[Nevada]] by John Matze and Jared Thomson.<ref>https://home.parler.com/about/</ref> The site is populated with a majority of right-leaning users, although all are welcome. Famous users include [[Candace Owens]], [[Laura Loomer]], [[Mike Lee]], [[Milo Yiannopoulos]], [[Paul Joseph Watson]] and [[Roger Stone]]. In June of 2020, Parler gained many users, and more celebrities including [[Ted Cruz]], [[Rand Paul]], [[Dan Bongino]], [[Eric Trump]], and [[Donald Trump Jr.]] Parler currently has around 1,000,000 users.

Parler, like fellow social networking service [[Gab]], does not engage in censorship against other opinions. Because of this, Parler has been unfairly attacked by the anti-free speech [[Mainstream Media]] and [[Wikipedia]] as "far-right" and "anti-[[Islam]]", despite having over 200,000 [[Arabic]] users currently online.<ref>https://www.thedailybeast.com/about-200000-saudi-arabian-users-suddenly-flood-parler-a-pro-trump-twitter-alternative</ref> Unfortunately, to sign up for a Parler account, a mobile phone number is needed when registering, which effectively blocks those who do not have cell phones from obtaining an account.

[[Hate speech]] is not a bannable offense on Parler according to its company's CEO, John Matze.<ref>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/5/parler-ceo-says-up-and-coming-social-media-service/</ref>

== Parler Ban From Amazon, Apple and Google ==
Recently in a [[leftwing]] [[fascist]] assault on [[free speech]], the [[First Amendment]], and [[human rights]], Parler was banned by [[Apple, Inc.]], [[Google]] and [[Amazon.com]].<ref>https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/01/11/amazon-google-and-apple-are-enemies-of-the-first-amendment/</ref>

== Change of leadership ==
On 29 January 2021, John Matze, the first CEO of Parler, lost his position at the company. Allegations have surfaced that the organization of former [[President]] [[Donald J. Trump]] received an offer from Parler of a 40 percent stake in the company, in return for Trump opening a verified account with Parler. John Matze opposed this, fearing that Trump would take the company over by the force of his personality.<ref name=Buzzfeed>https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/trump-parler-ownership</ref>

Shortly after his leavetaking, Matze released a personal statement saying the company's Board did not agree with him on a vision for a platform dedicated to freedom of speech and "more product stability." Dan Bongino, who owns a twenty-percent stake, hotly disputed Matze's claims and version of events. Bongino has not, thus far, responded directly to the specific allegation that an attempt by the Trump organization to obtain a 40 percent stake occasioned the rupture between Matze and the board.

Rebekah Mercer, daughter of financier Robert Mercer, in fact holds the controlling vote. Dan Bongino holds twenty percent of the company. A third owner, to whom Dan Bongino refers without naming, holds the remaining stake, however large it might be.

== Parler returns ==
On 15 February 2021, on or about midnight EST, Parler returned to full functionality.<ref>https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2021/02/15/news/parler-returns/</ref> Parler sits on a cluster of fully dedicated servers that either the company controls exclusively, or another unidentified host provides. Parler had earlier reached out to Epik, which offers Web hosting and domain registration and is better known as the host of another social network, called Gab. Epik has never confirmed or denied being Parler's new host.

Mark Meckler now holds the post of Interim CEO, while Parler searches for a permanent CEO.

== References ==
{{reflist}}

== External Links ==
* Parler official site [https://parler.com/]
* Epik official site [https://epik.com/]

[[Category:Websites]]
[[Category:Online Social Networking]]
[[Category:Alt-tech]]

Parler

2021-02-15T18:02:30Z

TerryH: /* Parler returns */

'''Parler''' is an [[American]] social networking service and alternative to [[Twitter]]. Its name is the [[French]] word for "to speak" (and is pronounced like "parlor"). It was founded in 2018 and based in Henderson, [[Nevada]] by John Matze and Jared Thomson.<ref>https://home.parler.com/about/</ref> The site is populated with a majority of right-leaning users, although all are welcome. Famous users include [[Candace Owens]], [[Laura Loomer]], [[Mike Lee]], [[Milo Yiannopoulos]], [[Paul Joseph Watson]] and [[Roger Stone]]. In June of 2020, Parler gained many users, and more celebrities including [[Ted Cruz]], [[Rand Paul]], [[Dan Bongino]], [[Eric Trump]], and [[Donald Trump Jr.]] Parler currently has around 1,000,000 users.

Parler, like fellow social networking service [[Gab]], does not engage in censorship against other opinions. Because of this, Parler has been unfairly attacked by the anti-free speech [[Mainstream Media]] and [[Wikipedia]] as "far-right" and "anti-[[Islam]]", despite having over 200,000 [[Arabic]] users currently online.<ref>https://www.thedailybeast.com/about-200000-saudi-arabian-users-suddenly-flood-parler-a-pro-trump-twitter-alternative</ref> Unfortunately, to sign up for a Parler account, a mobile phone number is needed when registering, which effectively blocks those who do not have cell phones from obtaining an account.

[[Hate speech]] is not a bannable offense on Parler according to its company's CEO, John Matze.<ref>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/5/parler-ceo-says-up-and-coming-social-media-service/</ref>

== Parler Ban From Amazon, Apple and Google ==
Recently in a [[leftwing]] [[fascist]] assault on [[free speech]], the [[First Amendment]], and [[human rights]], Parler was banned by [[Apple, Inc.]], [[Google]] and [[Amazon.com]].<ref>https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/01/11/amazon-google-and-apple-are-enemies-of-the-first-amendment/</ref>

== Change of leadership ==
On 29 January 2021, John Matze, the first CEO of Parler, lost his position at the company. Allegations have surfaced that the organization of former [[President]] [[Donald J. Trump]] received an offer from Parler of a 40 percent stake in the company, in return for Trump opening a verified account with Parler. John Matze opposed this, fearing that Trump would take the company over by the force of his personality.<ref name=Buzzfeed>https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/trump-parler-ownership</ref>

Shortly after his leavetaking, Matze released a personal statement saying the company's Board did not agree with him on a vision for a platform dedicated to freedom of speech and "more product stability." Dan Bongino, who owns a twenty-percent stake, hotly disputed Matze's claims and version of events. Bongino has not, thus far, responded directly to the specific allegation that an attempt by the Trump organization to obtain a 40 percent stake occasioned the rupture between Matze and the board.

Rebekah Mercer, daughter of financier Robert Mercer, in fact holds the controlling vote. Dan Bongino holds twenty percent of the company. A third owner, to whom Dan Bongino refers without naming, holds the remaining stake, however large it might be.

== Parler returns ==
On 15 February 2021, on or about midnight EST, Parler returned to full functionality.<ref>https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2021/02/15/news/parler-returns/</ref> Parler sits on a cluster of fully dedicated servers that either the company controls exclusively, or another unidentified host provides. Parler had earlier reached out to Epik, which offers Web hosting and domain registration and is better known as the host of another social network, called Gab. Epik has never confirmed or denied being Parler's new host.

Mark Meckler now holds the post of Interim CEO, while Parler searches for a permanent CEO.

== References ==
{{reflist}}

== External Links ==
* [Official site https://parler.com/]

[[Category:Websites]]
[[Category:Online Social Networking]]
[[Category:Alt-tech]]

Parler

2021-02-15T17:58:23Z

TerryH:

'''Parler''' is an [[American]] social networking service and alternative to [[Twitter]]. Its name is the [[French]] word for "to speak" (and is pronounced like "parlor"). It was founded in 2018 and based in Henderson, [[Nevada]] by John Matze and Jared Thomson.<ref>https://home.parler.com/about/</ref> The site is populated with a majority of right-leaning users, although all are welcome. Famous users include [[Candace Owens]], [[Laura Loomer]], [[Mike Lee]], [[Milo Yiannopoulos]], [[Paul Joseph Watson]] and [[Roger Stone]]. In June of 2020, Parler gained many users, and more celebrities including [[Ted Cruz]], [[Rand Paul]], [[Dan Bongino]], [[Eric Trump]], and [[Donald Trump Jr.]] Parler currently has around 1,000,000 users.

Parler, like fellow social networking service [[Gab]], does not engage in censorship against other opinions. Because of this, Parler has been unfairly attacked by the anti-free speech [[Mainstream Media]] and [[Wikipedia]] as "far-right" and "anti-[[Islam]]", despite having over 200,000 [[Arabic]] users currently online.<ref>https://www.thedailybeast.com/about-200000-saudi-arabian-users-suddenly-flood-parler-a-pro-trump-twitter-alternative</ref> Unfortunately, to sign up for a Parler account, a mobile phone number is needed when registering, which effectively blocks those who do not have cell phones from obtaining an account.

[[Hate speech]] is not a bannable offense on Parler according to its company's CEO, John Matze.<ref>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/5/parler-ceo-says-up-and-coming-social-media-service/</ref>

== Parler Ban From Amazon, Apple and Google ==
Recently in a [[leftwing]] [[fascist]] assault on [[free speech]], the [[First Amendment]], and [[human rights]], Parler was banned by [[Apple, Inc.]], [[Google]] and [[Amazon.com]].<ref>https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/01/11/amazon-google-and-apple-are-enemies-of-the-first-amendment/</ref>

== Change of leadership ==
On 29 January 2021, John Matze, the first CEO of Parler, lost his position at the company. Allegations have surfaced that the organization of former [[President]] [[Donald J. Trump]] received an offer from Parler of a 40 percent stake in the company, in return for Trump opening a verified account with Parler. John Matze opposed this, fearing that Trump would take the company over by the force of his personality.<ref name=Buzzfeed>https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/trump-parler-ownership</ref>

Shortly after his leavetaking, Matze released a personal statement saying the company's Board did not agree with him on a vision for a platform dedicated to freedom of speech and "more product stability." Dan Bongino, who owns a twenty-percent stake, hotly disputed Matze's claims and version of events. Bongino has not, thus far, responded directly to the specific allegation that an attempt by the Trump organization to obtain a 40 percent stake occasioned the rupture between Matze and the board.

Rebekah Mercer, daughter of financier Robert Mercer, in fact holds the controlling vote. Dan Bongino holds twenty percent of the company. A third owner, to whom Dan Bongino refers without naming, holds the remaining stake, however large it might be.

== Parler returns ==
On 15 February 2021, on or about midnight EST, Parler returned to full functionality.<ref>https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2021/02/15/news/parler-returns/</ref> Mark Meckler now holds the post of Interim CEO, while Parler searches for a permanent CEO.

== References ==
{{reflist}}

== External Links ==
* [Official site https://parler.com/]

[[Category:Websites]]
[[Category:Online Social Networking]]
[[Category:Alt-tech]]

Community caretaking

2021-02-13T15:59:34Z

TerryH:

'''Community caretaking''' is a fallacious doctrine under which [[government]]s claim an [[Inherent Powers|inherent power]] to infringe upon individual [[liberty]] in the interest of community safety.

== History ==

Community caretaking first entered [[United States]] [[law]] in the federal case of ''Cady v. Dombrowski.'' <ref name=Moore>Moore SC, "Fourth Amendment: The Community Caretaker Exception," Law Offices of Samuel C. Moore PLLC. Retrieved 13 February 2021. <https://scmoorelaw.com/fourth-amendment-community-caretaker-exception/> </ref> In that case, [[police]] seized a [[gun]] from the trunk of a [[vehicle]] in the police pound. The [[Supreme Court]] held that the seizure was permissible because the officers were performing a "community caretaking" function only. In this case the government argued that vandals might break into the trunk, take the gun, and use it to commit a crime.<ref name=Forbes>Gertsmann E, "Supreme Court will decide whether police can enter a home to seize guns without a warrant," ''Forbes'', 5 February 2021. <https://www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstmann/2021/02/05/supreme-court-will-decide-whether-police-can-enter-a-home-to-seize-guns-without-a-warrant/?sh=3dd0f1645bb4></ref>

== Contemporary jurisprudence ==

At the time of this writing, "community caretaking" will come before the Supreme Court again. The case (''Caniglia v. Strom''<ref name=Caniglia>See the case citation, <https://casetext.com/case/caniglia-v-strom-1>.</ref>) began when a wife called police after her husband played a joke during an argument. He placed an unloaded gun on the table between them and told her to shoot him. When police arrived, they encouraged the husband to take an ambulance ride to hospital for psychiatric evaluation. But they also told the wife the husband had just consented to a search of their home for more guns. She told them he kept two guns in his home. They seized them.

The husband sued the city because the police lied to his wife when he couldn’t correct the lie, and took his guns. ''And the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit sided with the police. They applied the “community caretaking” standard.''

== References ==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Law]] [[Category:Constitution]] [[Category:Supreme Court]]

Community caretaking

2021-02-13T15:58:52Z

TerryH:

'''Community caretaking''' is a fallacious doctrine under which [[government]]s claim an [[inherent power]] to infringe upon individual [[liberty]] in the interest of community safety.

== History ==

Community caretaking first entered [[United States]] [[law]] in the federal case of ''Cady v. Dombrowski.'' <ref name=Moore>Moore SC, "Fourth Amendment: The Community Caretaker Exception," Law Offices of Samuel C. Moore PLLC. Retrieved 13 February 2021. <https://scmoorelaw.com/fourth-amendment-community-caretaker-exception/> </ref> In that case, [[police]] seized a [[gun]] from the trunk of a [[vehicle]] in the police pound. The [[Supreme Court]] held that the seizure was permissible because the officers were performing a "community caretaking" function only. In this case the government argued that vandals might break into the trunk, take the gun, and use it to commit a crime.<ref name=Forbes>Gertsmann E, "Supreme Court will decide whether police can enter a home to seize guns without a warrant," ''Forbes'', 5 February 2021. <https://www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstmann/2021/02/05/supreme-court-will-decide-whether-police-can-enter-a-home-to-seize-guns-without-a-warrant/?sh=3dd0f1645bb4></ref>

== Contemporary jurisprudence ==

At the time of this writing, "community caretaking" will come before the Supreme Court again. The case (''Caniglia v. Strom''<ref name=Caniglia>See the case citation, <https://casetext.com/case/caniglia-v-strom-1>.</ref>) began when a wife called police after her husband played a joke during an argument. He placed an unloaded gun on the table between them and told her to shoot him. When police arrived, they encouraged the husband to take an ambulance ride to hospital for psychiatric evaluation. But they also told the wife the husband had just consented to a search of their home for more guns. She told them he kept two guns in his home. They seized them.

The husband sued the city because the police lied to his wife when he couldn’t correct the lie, and took his guns. ''And the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit sided with the police. They applied the “community caretaking” standard.''

== References ==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Law]] [[Category:Constitution]] [[Category:Supreme Court]]

Community caretaking

2021-02-13T15:58:13Z

TerryH: /* References */

Community caretaking

2021-02-13T15:57:10Z

TerryH: Created page with "'''Community caretaking''' is a fallacious doctrine under which governments claim an inherent power to infringe upon individual liberty in the interest of communit..."

'''Community caretaking''' is a fallacious doctrine under which [[government]]s claim an [[inherent power]] to infringe upon individual [[liberty]] in the interest of community safety.

== History ==

Community caretaking first entered [[United States]] [[law]] in the federal case of ''Cady v. Dombrowski.'' <ref name=Moore>Moore SC, "Fourth Amendment: The Community Caretaker Exception," Law Offices of Samuel C. Moore PLLC. Retrieved 13 February 2021. <https://scmoorelaw.com/fourth-amendment-community-caretaker-exception/> </ref> In that case, [[police]] seized a [[gun]] from the trunk of a [[vehicle]] in the police pound. The [[Supreme Court]] held that the seizure was permissible because the officers were performing a "community caretaking" function only. In this case the government argued that vandals might break into the trunk, take the gun, and use it to commit a crime.<ref name=Forbes>Gertsmann E, "Supreme Court will decide whether police can enter a home to seize guns without a warrant," ''Forbes'', 5 February 2021. <https://www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstmann/2021/02/05/supreme-court-will-decide-whether-police-can-enter-a-home-to-seize-guns-without-a-warrant/?sh=3dd0f1645bb4></ref>

== Contemporary jurisprudence ==

At the time of this writing, "community caretaking" will come before the Supreme Court again. The case (''Caniglia v. Strom''<ref name=Caniglia>See the case citation, <https://casetext.com/case/caniglia-v-strom-1>.</ref>) began when a wife called police after her husband played a joke during an argument. He placed an unloaded gun on the table between them and told her to shoot him. When police arrived, they encouraged the husband to take an ambulance ride to hospital for psychiatric evaluation. But they also told the wife the husband had just consented to a search of their home for more guns. She told them he kept two guns in his home. They seized them.

The husband sued the city because the police lied to his wife when he couldn’t correct the lie, and took his guns. ''And the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit sided with the police. They applied the “community caretaking” standard.''

== References ==
{reflist}

[[Category:Judiciary]] [[Category:Supreme Court]]

Conservapedia:Community Portal

2021-02-02T13:06:59Z

TerryH: /* RfC */

<center>''(this page redirects from [[CP:COMPORT]])''</center>
<center>''This is the place to discuss issues of interest to the Conservapedia community.''</center>

[[Community Portal/Archives]]

''This page contains some material that has been moved from [[Talk:Main_Page]]. We are attempting to get general discussion of issues relating to Conservapedia's content and policies on this page, leaving the main talk page for its original purpose of discussing the content of the Main Page.''

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

== Cool article ==

I found a cool [http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/barbara-kay-bless-this-food-except-for-the-atheist-at-table-12 article about atheism in the National Post]. You might not like it at first, but read past the first couple of paragraphs.--[[User:Abcqwe|Abcqwe]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 20:31, 11 May 2017 (EDT)
==Error==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/United_States_Presidential_Election,_2016 Error in the Move log. I dont have delete powers so I cant fix it.] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Trump now is fighting back against the coup plotters'']] 17:17, 12 May 2017 (EDT)
==Overly long articles==
From what I understand, the typical Conservapedia article should be accessible to a secondary school student or at least a freshman in university. Some articles, such as [[Alger Hiss]], [[Elvis Presley]], and [[Barack Hussein Obama]], are some of the longest articles on this site. They rival the overly verbose entries on Wikipedia, in my opinion. Should these and other overly long articles be trimmed and extraneous content possibly be moved to more subpages? Just a thought. --[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 18:34, 16 May 2017 (EDT)
:I'm personally against it. I'm glad that these articles are detailed. For me, it's fine just as long as they are well-organized. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:01, 16 May 2017 (EDT)
::These articles aren't exactly accessible to the target audience, and overly complex I think. Basic biographies should really be the emphasis most of the articles on here are shorter and more digestible than WP and aren't weighed down with non-essential information. I personally like articles that resemble the old school paper encyclopedias of my youth than WP's excessively long articles. Encyclopedia entries are meant to be starting points for research. --[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 20:57, 16 May 2017 (EDT)
:::If you really think these articles should be split up, I recommend asking the editors most occupied with them. The Alger Hiss article is predominantly edited by [[User:FOIA]]. Maybe ask RobS or Andy regarding Obama. The editors most familiar with the articles will probably give you the best answer. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 21:45, 16 May 2017 (EDT)
::::Some articles can be split up, if done carefully with a summary of the forked article remaining in the main article. It is best if the expert on the topic do the splitting up because they are best at summarizing what is most important. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 08:12, 30 May 2017 (EDT)
:::::In the print encyclopedias I recall, there was a Micropedia and a Macropedia, short and long articles. An article about George Ade, Hoosier playwright and fable writer, would only need to be a brief paragraph. An article called "Rocks and Minerals," meanwhile, would detail every type, the various classifications, chemical compositions, and means of formation, though both would be really an outline to the sum of human knowledge on the subject. In the area of biographies, length was variant - short biographies for Jeppe Aekjaer and Abbas I, a longer biography for Alvar Aalto, and a massive Macropedia biography for Isaac Newton or William Shakespeare. As we specialize in politics, it would make sense to have such articles for Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Donald Trump.--[[User:Abcqwe|Nathan]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 14:22, 30 May 2017 (EDT)
::::::That was the later Encyclopedia Britanica. The earlier EBs when I was a child were like the World Book encyclopedia with all of the articles (long and short) in an alphabetical list. My parents bought both. As a child, I would pick up a volume and start reading articles in alphabetical order sometimes. Unfortunately, Wikipedia killed off the market for printed encyclopedias (and for professionally written encyclopedias.) There is no viable market for printed encyclopedias today. People would hand down their printed encyclopedias and dictionaries from generation to generation, because they did not think that the world was changing quickly. However, none of the country names and maps of Africa that I learned as of 1960 were around by 1970. After 9/11 all of the stuff that was of little consequence became of vital importance to the American public. People had to know about Osama bin Laden, but less so about Isaac Newton or William Shakespeare. So, the pace of change killed off the printed encyclopedia. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 09:23, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
==Religion in America==
After reading a number of CP articles, I realize that we accidentally present an inaccurate or outdated view of religion in America. Religion in America has changed since we were growing up. 1) The traditional churches have declined in attendance. To attract new members some churches have offered new ministries: weight loss, financial counseling, youth, etc. 2) Some churches are offering foreign language services or sublet to a separate foreign language congregation (such as Korean, Filipino, etc.) 3) More people are getting their sermons via television, radio or the internet. 4) Military chaplains and chapels are important for worship by the military and their families. 5) Wealthy people have private chapels on their weekend estates for privacy and security. 6) College based ministries must compete for student time and attention. 7) Historic downtown congregations have had to respond to migration to the suburbs, and small congregations face competition from mega-church congregations. Religion continues to be an important social force in America -- it is not as much of a melting pot as it was decades ago. Does anyone want to work on an article or additions to related articles? Perhaps AlanE or AugustO can tell us if similar changes are happening in other countries. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 08:12, 30 May 2017 (EDT)

=== My feedback ===

Michael Brown wrote:

"Several decades ago, church statistician and demographer David Barrett began to report the surprising news that around the world, the most rapidly growing faith was Spirit-empowered Christianity, marked by clear gospel preaching, belief in the literal truth of the Scriptures, and the reality of God’s presence. (The data were compiled in the prestigious “World Christian Encyclopedia,” published by Oxford University Press.)...

This is confirmed in the new Pew Forum report, which showed that [[Evangelicalism|evangelical Protestant]] churches in America grew by 2 million from 2007 to 2014 whereas the so-called mainline (liberal) Protestant churches declined by 5 million, meaning that evangelical Protestants now make up the largest religious group in the nation. (Although this is not part of the Pew Forum survey, my surmise is that the evangelical churches that are most Bible-based and make the most serious, grace-empowered demands on their congregants are, generally speaking, the ones that are growing rather than declining.[http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/why-conservative-churches-are-still-growing/]

I hope the helps. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:51, 12 June 2017 (EDT)

== Is this article appropriate to cite? ==

I and JDano have been in a major dispute on the [[Donald Trump achievements]] article over what is probably a silly and absurd issue: whether [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/18/media-ignores-imported-female-genital-mutilation/ this article] is appropriate to cite. JDano believes that we should not cite it because adding it to this article would somehow increase the chances of people who practice FGM of being ruled not guilty and having the practice legalized -- something which I frankly think is completely absurd and ridiculous. But JDano will not give up in his attempts to delete the source, and I am fully convinced that it is appropriate, so I an bringing it here. Is this article appropriate or inappropriate to cite? Thanks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:29, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
:There are two Brettbart articles. The first one was a straight news story about three people being arrested for performing [[female genital mutilation]] on two Minnesota girls in a clinic outside of Detroit. The second article, the one at issue, is an ax-griding piece that has the following points:
:*Trump Has a New Policy - there is nothing to show that the policy changed in April from the "old" Trump policy or the policy under the Obama administration.
:*There is "a national campaign" to eradicate FGM. This was an action brought by the US Attorney in Michigan, not some newly-announced task force.
:*That one media critic is complaining that there is not enough MSM coverage of this "new national campaign" - perhaps because it does not exist.
:*That the critic says that is due to "political correctness" and "fear of offending Muslims" - but it could be due to the fact that the government is not bringing religion into this and does not want to set up the defense counsel with a "religious defense" to the criminal charges. This is speculation.
:*That a few MSM media stories have followed the government' lead in the bringing religion into this.
:*The story then conclude with an attack on the MSM as "conspicuously silent on this case and their silence is deafening" and "aiding and abetting violence against women out of a politically correct fueled fear of offending Muslims." On the whole, this is an advocacy piece trying to bootstrap a failure of the MSM to play up the religion angle so as to explain why they did not report on the dramatic launch of a "new national campaign" when there apparently is no such campaign.
:I think the article is very misleading, and plays into the hands of those who would assert that this prosecution is anti-Muslim motivated. We don't need to cite it. We have now fixed the [[Donald Trump achievements]] article to just focus on the individual prosecution. I have been trying to take any mention of religion out of the article bullet as well, because neither the statute nor the indictment mentions religion. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 19:05, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
:I think it is an appropriate article to cite. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:56, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
::For the record, I linked the article that is in dispute, and both Andy and Conservative have seen the article. They know which article we are referring to, and they think it's fine. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:07, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Nobody's asserting that the prosecution is motivated by "Islamophobia," and the article certainly does not say that. It is noting that this practice is one that is promoted by the leaders of sects of Islam. It is also noting MSM bias in covering the story. The MSM cannot admit that certain sects of Islam promote this practice. We know the religon and even the sect ([http://religionnews.com/2017/04/27/the-splainer-what-is-female-genital-mutilation-and-what-does-it-have-to-do-with-islam/ the Dawoodi Bohra sect]) of those who committed the crimes. They are crimes nonetheless. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 19:12, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
::::The article does not advance the bullet in the article. It is focusing on Islam, but we all agree that so far, this case has nothing to do with Islam. Let's wait until the Defense raises it. The "Trump Administration achievement" has nothing to do with Islam, just as the bullets in [[Obamagate timeline]] have nothing to do with "Russian conspiracy." [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 20:27, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::I am involved with several projects right now so I unfortunately don't have time to investigate this issue further and mediate this issue. However, I do have a message for 1990sguy and JDano: Please consider the possibility of a compromise position. Perhaps, there is some middle ground position that you two could settle on. Again, my regrets for not being able to investigate this issue further. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 03:05, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::@Conservative: JDano got about 80% of what he wanted: we originally cited only the Breitbart source, but now other sources are cited as well. I removed mentions of "Islamic" from the Donald Trump achievements article (even though those prosecuted ''clearly'' are Muslim and that FGM is mainly Islamic). I changed other wording after JDano criticized it. I have been extremely patient, and I have been very considerate. It is time for JDano to accept a middle ground position, which I think is how it is now, which actually would be 80% JDano's version. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:18, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
The matter was easier to research than I expected.

Obama commissioned a study on FGM in 2014 and a fairly mainstream press outlet, ''The Hill'', wondered if he was serious about the the issue.[http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/civil-rights/214242-will-obama-keep-his-promise-to-end-fgm-in-the-us] A politician saying he is commissioning a study is often like a husband telling a wife "we'll so" or a sales prospect saying "I'll think about". In short, it is often a ploy to do nothing. Obama does not have a good record on FGM or equal pay for equal work in terms of White House employees.[http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2016/06/25/female-genital-mutilation-epidemic-obama-administration-hiding/]

Trump quickly took action on this issue which shows at least some commitment. So it is a new policy rather than Obama's do nothing FGM policy for 8 years which obtained zero convictions.

So I vote for 1990sguys' decision and oppose JDano. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:28, 15 June 2017 (EDT)

== JDano ==

I did not want to do this, and I waited 24 hours and 1-2 dozen reversions, but I was forced to block JDano for three days for poor editing in [[Donald Trump achievements]].

He added irrelevant information with a liberal POV, he blindly reverted edits that I made that had nothing to do with our disputes that he had no apparent problem with, and in his latest edit, he duplicated information to create a new "education" section without deleting the duplicate information that was listed in the "government size" section.

We had a serious dispute over whether to cite a single Breitbart article, and he continued edit warring even though I asked him to keep the status quo until we resolved the dispute. He was the only editor to oppose citing the article, and I still made many changes to satisfy him.

JDano's behavior has been very irritating, and he has been almost impossible to work with. Please judge the edits on Donald Trump achievements for yourselves (the "education" section he added are just copied-and-pasted info from other portions of the article). I gave him a three-day block for him to cool off. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:54, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
:JDano's objections to [[Richard Dawkins' health]] have been adequately answered at [[Talk:Richard Dawkins' health]]. Yet, I do not expect him to acknowledge this matter.

:On top of this, Dawkins is clearly acting hypocritical when it comes to his views on experts/consensus/science when it comes to the application of medical science/medical advice to his health. His doctors are clearly giving him sound advice and he is clearly acting foolishly and ignoring their advice. And the proof is in the pudding. Namely, Dawkins ignored and continues to ignore their sound medical advice and continues to go back to the "controversy trough" again and again even after his stroke.

:I thought JDano had some reasonable objections to the [[Obama's religion]] article, but I thought his picture choice of Obama standing in front of a glorious looking cross like he was some kind of devout Christian preacher was over the top. Do I like the present Obama's religion article? I am not a fan of it. That is why I provided the counterexamples to Obama being a Muslim.

:Many conservatives are reactive and overly defensive. When liberals invariably and reflexively yell racist/misogynist, etc. regardless of the merit of their charges, conservatives often cower like kicked puppies. I like the fact that Sean Hannity took on a liberal via threat of a slander suit in order to stop her nonsense. I wish more conservatives were like Hannity.

:[[Sun Tzu]] said a strong defense makes one invincible, but an attack brings victory. At some point, Hitler/other unsavory characters and harmful ideologies have to be challenged. The one thing I like about Trump is that he is willing to go on the attack. For years, conservatives largely ignored liberal indoctrination in public schools. What did Trump do? He picked Betty Devos as his Secretary of Education to promote school choice. Trump pushed for a wall on the Mexican border. Trump has "NY attitude" like assertiveness and boldness. He is the George Patton of American politics. That is why people voted for him. Does Trump go too far sometimes? Yes, he does. Attacking Carly Fiorina's looks in terms of her face was crass and foolish for example.

:Maybe JDano is being overly reactive. At the same time, I do believe in accuracy in both content and sources. I wish I had time to investigate this matter and mediate it, but I don't. I will say that as long as the Breitbart article has no inaccuracy in it, I have no problems with it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:08, 15 June 2017 (EDT)

::Conservative, JDano's dispute with me over the Breitbart reference was not the only problem.

::JDano also wanted to add other information that I did not think was appropriate. Some of the information was irrelevant (it should have been added in other articles) or had a liberal POV, some of the information was unsourced (everything should be sourced so we can verify it as true). I explained my edits, but he reverted them.

::Although I made several edits in the meantime that were completely unrelated to what we were disputing, JDano reverted those edits as well.

::When trying to add changes, JDano also said he created a new section on Trump's achievements on education. This seems good, but he just copied and pasted information that already existed in the article, and he did not delete the duplicates. I seemed like a ploy for him to continue reverting.

::It's also not just the past 24 hours. I have had disputes with him in the past where he repeated the same behaviors, constantly reverting without discussing, adding irrevevant content with a liberal pov, and removing unrelated changes I had done in the meantime.

::Overall, his behavior was too disruptive and was doing CP more harm than good. I had to temporarily block him. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:59, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
1990sguy, I revised my commentary/decision on this issue. I took your side. See my post above.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:30, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Still having a hard time wrapping my head around the dispute here. Is it (a) Brietbart is not credible if it's not backed up by MSM reporting, or (b) the Brietbart article is irrelevent to the text in mainspace? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 18:39, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
::::The funniest thing about this is that 1990sguy has actually removed his own factually incorrect editorialising about Islam and FGM from the Conservapedia text, but still insists on retaining a reference which engages in exactly the same kind of editorialising, only turned all the way up to 11 and with a dirty great fireworks and laser show to boot.

::::JDano has probably done himself an injury with all the facepalming he must've been doing last night. He deserves a medal, not a 3 day block. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 19:44, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
Today was a separate problem from yesterday. I wanted to add content about Title IX and the appointment of Adam Kissel to head up these Dept. of Education reforms. I realized that although Education policy is a very important area of Trump policy changes, and is of high interest to Conservapedia readers, there was no section for it on the page. So, I started to move education bullets from other sections and to add the Kissel bullet, but every time I would hit "save", 1990sguy would create an "edit conflict" Rather than loose the text, I saved it so that I could go back and fix the conflicts, but 1990sguy blocked me before I could complete the work as intended. The plan was to move the bullets not duplicate them. I think we need more group effort and less "individual ownership" of pages. Also, less name-calling. I am a life-long conservative, and Lindsay Graham is a life-long conservative, who is a good-guy. If he offers concise, good-natured advice to President Trump to stop tweeting, it is very newsworthy and worth including in a discussion of the [[Trump Twitter]] account. I am here to build a well-researched reliable encyclopedia, not to see how much I can build a false narrative to advance my own political agenda. I expect everyone else to be here for the same reason. So:
1) Let's give each other some space - make sure the first editor is done before you start to rewrite his contribution.
2) Look at multiple sources - if only one source has the story and everyone else has the opposite, consider that the outlier may have the facts wrong or has miscommunicate to you.
3) If you don't understand what you are trying to write, ask for help. If your understanding is not clear, what you write will only confuse other Conservapedia readers. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 21:04, 15 June 2017 (EDT)

===Just the facts, ma'am===
::Ok, so we have established the dispute is over inclusion of a Brietbart citation. Now, can you answer my inquiry over ''why'' Brietbart is inappropriate for the language in text, without going into extraneous discussion on unrelated matters. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 22:31, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Correct. Setting aside the interwoven "edit conflict" confusion of today, we are back to the Brietbart article with a headline "Establishment Media Hides Trump’s New Policy to Stop ‘Genital Mutilation’ of American Girls". I described my concerns [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=prev&oldid=1353941 here.] The revised bullet has nothing to do with Islam or any "Trump's New Policy to Stop FGM", rather it discusses just the Michigan prosecution, which is notable because it is the first prosecution under 18 U.S.C. §118. So, the Breitbart article is not relevant to the bullet in question. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 23:16, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
::::Ok. So it's not really a 'new policy', it is the first time prosecutions have been brought under a 20 year old federal law. The Trump White House and sympathetic media charge the mainstream media is covering this fact up, which is both pro-woman, pro-child, and even designed to protect Muslims. What's wrong with that? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 23:39, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::Perhaps I am missing a source. The White House (Sean Spicer) is not commenting. The main stream media is not covering up "a new policy" because the policy and law have been the same for years. How can Brietbart beat up on the mainstream media if there has been no announcement of a "new policy?" What is new was the FBI was able to prove that two girls were transported across state lines for FGM, so they arrested the doctors and got medical help for the girls. Prior actions have been focusing on international "FGM tourism" at border crossings. [https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/general/fact-sheet-on-female-genital-mutilation-or-cutting.html State Dept. Fact Sheet] Intrastate FGM cases are in the hands of local and state police. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 23:56, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::So there are two issues, correct me if I'm wrong. One, enforcement of a law to protect young girls, which is an achievement; secondly, the debate over identifying victims and perpetrators of these crimes as Muslims. Is this a fair synopsis? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 00:12, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::No. The second issue is whether there was a "new" policy or a policy change. There is a long tradition in the media of not identifying young victims of sexual crimes. Neither the government nor almost all of the media have said anything about the girls (names, hometown, nor religious sect.) The Breitbart article is misinterpreting the MSM's absence of detail as "fear of offending Muslims." The problem that I had with the original bullet was the claim that during the Obama Administration and the Trump Administration (Jan. 20 to mid-April) there was a policy of non-enforcement of 18 U.S.C. § 118. I can't find any evidence of that. It is easier to catch international "FGM tourism" at the border than to catch mothers driving daughters across state-lines for a domestic FGM trip. So, the achievement was the first domestic criminal prosecution. (Please watch this brief interview if you think it is a "Muslim issue": https://youtu.be/sb_YPFrWty0 .)[[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 05:22, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::::Ok, fair enough. So your argument is that while the Trump Justice Department's first enforcement of federal anti-FGM is a recognizable achievement, the Brietbart article is irrelevent to that accomplishment. Should any reference be made to the fact that both perpatrators and victims were Muslim in this achievement? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 10:14, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::::As an experienced encyclopedia editor on several wikis, I value your input on this. To me, the fact that no mention was made in the charging documents and that I don't want to give defense counsel any ammo leads me to say "no". Wikipedia would call that "synthesis". [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 10:19, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::::::Would it be a valid citation to outline the facts of the case, without mentioning 'Muslim' or 'Islam' in the text? Secondly, in an article entitled 'Donald Trump achievements', why wouldn't the Trump administration aggressively enforcing federal law to protect little Muslim girls be an achievement? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 10:47, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::::::::Answer #1: The first Brietbart article would be better than the second one that 1990sguy wants in the footnote. There are many other clearer sources including the DOJ press release, and 1990sguy and I have reached agreement on the text of the bullet and all references except the second Brietbart article, which I feel is nonsense. Answer #2: The US attorney would argue that religion was not relevant to the arrest and prosecution. FGM is not limited to one religious group, and the health-related statute focuses upon a specific action rather than upon the motives of the accused. Hypotheically, if DOJ was trying to prosecute a religious group for their beliefs, that move would be subject to the same court challenges as now apply to the "travel ban." 1990sguy chose to have this debate on my [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJDano&diff=1354127&oldid=1353746 talk page] rather than on this page. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 11:28, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::::::::Well, my simple point is, the Trump administration protecting Muslims is a worthy accomplishment, which is the point the first Brietbart article - and no other source - makes. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 11:48, 16 June 2017 (EDT)

===policy vs law===
JDano states, "the policy and law have been the same for years". I bring this up here because understanding the difference can be valuable to us on multiple levels. ''What is the difference between policy and law?''. I disagree with JDano's assertion: while the law outlaws FMG, the policy of three past administrations has been not to enforce the law. Similiarly, while sanctuary cities are illegal, and
Dream Act is not law, the policy of past administrations has been to not enforce immigration law and treat the Dream Act as if it were law. Or the ABM missile Treaty with Russia, while the ABM treaty is binding law, the policy of the Bush & Obama administrations have been to ignore it and allow international tensions to escalate. Or Operation Fast and Furious. While the law required enforcement of illegal weapons sales, the policy allowed the government itself to facilitate illegal weapons sales. These issues will be revisted soon in the Supreme Court were the law entrusts national security to the president, the courts have denied the president's policy of enforcing the law in regard to the travel ban. So we can use all these illustrations to understand the difference. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 10:47, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
::You can judge each President's administration by the totality of their actions. The bill was signed into law by President Clinton on Sept. 30, 1996. President Obama signed an amendment to the law to outlaw "FGM tourism" abroad in 2013. One of the things that custom and border patrol staff look out for is young girls traveling abroad for FGM. There is also continuous US support of anti-FGM actions via the United Nations. I realize that law and policy can differ. For example, President Lincoln made a deal with the Mormons to not prosecute bigamy laws in exchange for their not siding with the Confederacy in the Civil War. Everything I have found indicates that the DOJ policies inherited from the Obama Administration were to enforce 18 U.S.C. § 116. If we can find something credible to the contrary, it would be quite a scoop for Conservapedia. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 11:02, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:::FMG tourism would be virtually impossible to enforce without a confession of intent from the adult escort, or perhaps on return if the facts can be documented. Are there any known cases of prosecution? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 11:22, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
::::I can look for sources, but it would be administrative action and not a criminal case in an Article III court. Only the travel and the adult escort would be targeted, since the person performing the procedure would be in the other country. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 12:46, 16 June 2017 (EDT)

:JDano, Lindsey Graham is one of the most liberal Republicans.[https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/06/how-lindsey-graham-stomped-the-tea-party/372521/] He belongs to the "surrender Republicans" rather than someone like Newt Gingrich who forced Bill Clinton to have a balanced budget.

:The GOP base is sick of surrender GOP members and that is why Trump far surpassed Graham in the 2016 GOP presidential primary. We're tired of GOP members who are terrified to have their uniforms soiled by the press/liberals calling them names. We want Donald "blood and guts" Trump.

:Please don't bother me on a talk page page again if you want to fly the white flag rather than take the opposition to task for hypocritical/inconsistent behavior. You are not willing to concede reasonable points and impose time wasting opposition to others.

:You were so busy to appease liberals with that ridiculous picture of Obama that you couldn't see the obvious truth: Obama is not a Christian. The Apostle Paul's views never "evolved" on homosexuality. Obama may not be a Muslim, but he is certainly not a Christian. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:35, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
::As far as clarification, I am not saying Trump or any other politician should go out of his way to create unnecessary conflict, but they shouldn't be afraid of conflict either. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:08, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
:::You have totally lost me. What does Lindsey Graham have to do with female genital mutilation, a specific Brietbart citation, and the blocking of a constructive editor? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 23:42, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
::::Man if you lost ''nobs'' then that's like, some next-level obfuscation. Kudos, Conservative. [[User:Koidevelopment|Vive]] [[User talk:Koidevelopment|Liberté!]] 00:03, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::I'm really struggling to see what Sun Tzu, Lindsey Graham, and the Apostle Paul have to do with settling a dispute between users on female genital mutilation. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 00:14, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::Conservative was referring to [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Donald_Trump_achievements&diff=1354109&oldid=1354107 this edit] and previous edits done by JDano. He made other problematic edits before I blocked him. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:26, 16 June 2017 (EDT)

=== History of FGM in the United States ===

*[http://ufdcimages.uflib.ufl.edu/UF/E0/02/10/16/00001/schubert_k.pdf FEMALE CIRCUMCISION IN THE UNITED STATES: AN ANALYSIS OF LAWS AND POLICIES]

*[http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1162/152651603766436324 Cutting History, Cutting Culture: Female Circumcision in the United States]

The history of FGM is more complex than I originally thought. My first inclination to not get involved in this matter unless I gave it the due diligence it may require turned out to be correct.

I hope these resources help resolve matters. I do think that JDano and 1990sguy should be able to work this matter out. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 07:27, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:Dear Conservative, thank you for sharing your research. The first paper is a bit out-of-date. Since then, Congress amended the law to address FGM tourism, and more states have enacted laws. I have hesitated to greatly expand the FGM article because I want to keep it family-friendly. I believe that 1990sguy and I reached agreement on the FGM bullet, except for whether to include the Brietbart article. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 09:40, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
::If you are a member of an Islamic sect that practices FGM, you will be offended by the US, the UN, and the EU outlawing the practice. So, you will not be surprised by news coverage of an arrest whether or not the mainstream media discusses the religion of the family or the doctor. If you are a non-Muslim whose family practiced FGM, you may feel uncomfortable every time FGM is in the news, but that does not dictate how we cover the subject. If you are a criminal defense lawyer, your only real option is to argue the statute is unconstitutional under the First Amendment and that this is more a question of free exercise of religion than of protecting the health of the girls. (You could also argue under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment because cutting girls is illegal when cutting boys is not.) Quite a difficult area to navigate. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 10:16, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Without getting too far off course, and changing this to a sociological phenomenon, the practice among Muslims (and others) is mostly motivated by tribal custom, i.e. preparing a female for barter or trade in a marriage contract who will not dishonor the the family or tribe she originated from, thus violating the marriage contract that binds certain tribal alliances together. An unfaithful wife can cause wars, such as Helen of Troy, or serious internal breaches like Tristan and Isolde. At root of FGM is treating women as property. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 11:37, 16 June 2017 (EDT)

===My response to JDano's other edits that I reverted===
It seems we have solved the Breitbart source (finally! :) ). JDano made [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Donald_Trump_achievements&diff=1354109&oldid=1354107 several other edits that I reverted] because I thought they were not constructive. First, however, let me say thank you for not trying to re-add them after I reverted (and blocked) you. I don't think I did a good job of explaining my position, which I strongly hold.

One of these edits was adding the paragraph of Lindsey Graham. I am not opposed to having opposing viewpoints, but what makes Graham's single viewpoint so notable compared to other people? He is one of 100 Senators, 1 of 535 Congressmen, and 1 of over 7 billion people in the world. What makes his view so notable? ''If you want to add an opposing view of Trump's Twitter activity, please find a good source (preferably NOT from the MSM, or at least a fair MSM source) that speaks generally of opposition from conservatives and other people, rather than the opinion of a single RINO Senator.'' '''Anyone can say anything about everything. Let's not cherry pick quotes, please.'''

You also added a sentence saying that "The Trump Administration continues to offer spousal benefits to federal workers in same-sex marriages." However, ''there's no source''. The intro paragraph of the article specifically tells you to add sources. Once again, anyone can say anything about everything. We need to be certain this fact you added is accurate. I am not opposed to adding that sentence, but '''there MUST be a source.'''

In your edit, you removed an unrelated edit I made in the meantime. You had no dispute with the edit, but you still reverted it. It was the single Breitbart reference I added (not the same Breitbart article -- a different article on a different topic). JDano, your edit was sloppy, and you need to avoid doing this in the future.

I did not like your wording of the Qatar failure because funding nations is more complicated that you made it seem. If the U.S. did not fund Qatar, a nation that does fund terrorists, Qatar might be driven to align itself with Iran. That would not be good. I simplified the wording.

Your typo in the Trump official portrait at the top did not help at all.

Thank you for improving the "education" section above. It was a lot better than you first made it in the edit I linked above. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:25, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:Also, JDano's edit summary in that edit was very misleading because it stated "new section" when in fact he did more than create a new section (namely revert all my edits). Edit summaries must not be misleading. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:06, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:And by the way, I know that I do not own the article. I was reverting what I believed (justifiably) to be simply bad edits (bad for various reasons which I explained above). I support having other people add ''constructive'' edits to the article. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 11:32, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
::Since going with Windows 10, my computer crashes frequently, particularly upon times of inactivity. So, I have to save less than the complete set of changes. When you save edits while I am editing, when I save, I get a "edit conflict dialog box" which does not allow me to see your edit summaries, but requires me to locate my edit within the entire source code of the page. Because the page is so long, I copy and paste the entire contents of my source window over the entire article source and hope to work out any lost content by looking at the page history. I was getting three or four edit conflict dialog boxes per save yesterday. So, you need to edit a different section of the page, or give the other editor a chance to finish up before you edit the same section. I assume that a editor will go back and check for spelling or other mistakes and do not edit there for at least 5 min after the initial save. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 11:40, 16 June 2017 (EDT)

:Edit conflict ;)

:JDano, if you want, I can try to help you diagnose the crashing problem. That does sound problematic! If you are letting the PC idle, it could even just be autostandby. Windows Vista and 7 had that kind of issue where it would crash when starting to standby or recovering from it. I dont know if the 8/8.1/10 core has the same issue or not. If you are constantly editing, them a bit more troubleshooting will be needed.
:If you edit one section at a time and then save rather than moving around, it may cause more conflicts, but would also make it easier to recover from one. If both of you edit one paragraph or small section, it would be less destructive to reload the page and paste in that edited section only. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 12:00, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
::JDano, you may make the edits in the way you do for a reason, but it is very problematic because only you know why you edit the way you do. For the rest of us, for all we are able to see, you are being sloppy. I understand now, but please change your editing behaviors in the future. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:06, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Isn't this just a question of "assume good faith"? If a known editor is starting to do something, wait 5 to 10 minutes before jumping in, rather than creating a lot of edit conflicts. I had the educational source windows open and was going to put the section as it is now, but never got a chance. I still do not understand how one of my cut-and-pastes accidentally butchered to top of the article, but I managed to fix it quickly. On Wikipedia, the edit conflict window is based on just the section open to editing, why does the edit conflict window expand the "conflict zone" to the entire article? [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 12:32, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
::::I'm still not seeing where Lindsey Graham fits in this discussion on female genital mutilation. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 12:14, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::I'm talking about another problematic edit JDano made in this section. I'm not talking about FGM here. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:25, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::As a part-time JAG officer in the Air Force reserves, Lindsay Graham gets into more legal issues than you can imagine. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 12:37, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::Lindsey Graham was in on the [[Arab_Spring#McCain_onboard|Operation Zero Footprint]] coverup, which means he's likely in on the Russian hacking scam, as well. How does Lindsey Graham relate to any Donald Trump achievement? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 12:48, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::IOW, Lindsey Graham is complicit in [[Obama war crimes]]. The only way he can rehabilitate himself is by voting right in the Senate. Other than that, nobody should care or pay attention to what he thinks about Donald Trump or Donald Trump's accomplishments. We got plenty of dirt on Lindsey Graham, even going back to his inept mishandling of Bill Clinton's impeachment case. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 13:08, 16 June 2017 (EDT)

== Can someone edit this template so the useful links are readable? ==

{{welcome}}

Can someone edit this template so the useful links are readable?

The blue links on a dark red background is hard to read.

Also, some people have started to edit Conservapedia and then quickly gave up because they didn't know how to edit a wiki. I noted about 3 people who did this. There are probably many more who quit but didn't say anything. I added a link entitled "How to edit a wiki". But I believe there are various versions of the welcome template so my link is not on all welcome template versions. For example, the welcome template that JPatt uses didn't incorporate my "How to edit a wiki" link.

Does the newest version of the Wikimedia software allow for WYSIWYG editing? In other words "What you see is what you get".

The newest version of the Wikimedia software does not have the counter at the bottom of the pages. I understand why Andy Schlafly likes the counters at the bottom. I like the counters too. I guess there might be an extension to add the counters to the newest version of Wikimedia. But after all is said and done, having WYSIWYG editing could greatly increase the participation rate at this wiki and lower the rate of people falling out because they don't know how to edit a wiki. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:40, 19 June 2017 (EDT)

=== Here is the welcome to Wikipedia and it is much better and legible ===

[[File:Plate of cookies.jpg|thumb|300px|Some cookies to welcome you! [[File:Face-smile.svg|25px]]]] [[Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome to Wikipedia|Welcome to Wikipedia]], Conservative! I am [[User:This lousy T-shirt|This lousy T-shirt]] and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you for [[Special:Contributions/Knox490|your contributions]]. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check out [[Wikipedia:Questions]], or feel free to leave me a message on [[User talk:This lousy T-shirt|my talk page]] or type ''{{tl|helpme}}'' at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
* [[Wikipedia:Introduction|Introduction]]
* [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|The five pillars of Wikipedia]]
* [[Wikipedia:How to edit a page|How to edit a page]]
* [[Help:Contents|Help pages]]
* [[Wikipedia:Article development|How to write a great article]]
*[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ten_Simple_Rules_for_Editing_Wikipedia Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia].
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians|Wikipedian]]! Also, when you post on [[Wikipedia:Talk page|talk pages]] you should [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|sign your name]] using four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome!

I think Conservapedia needs a better greeting. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:02, 19 June 2017 (EDT)
==Donald Trump's tweets==
We have had a lot of discussion about how to cover Donald Trump's twitter account on the main space pages. So, I have started a page [[Debate:Should President Trump stop tweeting?]] and invite interested editors to comment there. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 20:55, 26 June 2017 (EDT)

== Request for Conservative or another admin ==

You recently deleted the article entitled "Donald Trump's breaking of promises." I am OK with this action, but would you (or another admin) please copy-and-paste the article's content onto [[User:1990'sguy/Sandbox]]? There may be some content in the article worth saving. Thanks. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 12:17, 25 June 2017 (EDT)

:I restored it to your Sandbox, but noticed that it quotes [[anti-Trump]] gasbags like Jason Chaffetz as though they are some kind of authority. The guy cannot even fulfill his own obligation to compete his 2-year term for his constituents.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:47, 26 June 2017 (EDT)

::Thank you, Andy. Restoring the content has nothing to do with whether the content is accurate or good. I just want it to see if any of it is salvageable. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:01, 26 June 2017 (EDT)

== BLOCK THIS GUY!!!!!!!! ==

As anyone who is logged in knows, there is a major vandalism wave going on (based on the topics being vandalized, it seems to have originated from the recent dust-up about "fake news", not that it matters.) The only assistant I can see currently aware of this seems to be Pokeria1. He has block powers. But I have attempted to alert him to this. He can't '''possibly''' be unaware of what is going on, since he has reverted my warnings on his talk page.

Can someone put a stop to this? Here is what I put (several times, getting blasted each time) on his talk page:

<big><big><big>BLOCK THIS GUY!!!!!</big></big></big>

What the Hell are you doing????? You have block rights!

[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&group=Block]

[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 16:34, 27 June 2017 (EDT)

For the record, I DID respond to your post in the limited amount of time I could before that 2000'sguy person undid the revision, and I even attempted to ask how long I should block him. However, I also made it very clear that I'm extremely reluctant to do it because I fear ultimately being corrupted by that power (I've already witnessed plenty of admins on the forums and other wikis blocking people for the sheer heck of it, or even threatening people to keep them in line, and I want to go out of my way to avoid being like them). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 18:51, 28 June 2017 (EDT)

:OK, I see it now. In the heat of battle, I did not. My answer to the "how long?" question is:
:*Correct answer: Infinite. That kind of stuff is infinite.
:*Acceptable answer: 1 day. That's enough for admins to notice what happened and take it from there.
:*Crazy answer: However long it takes for me to come over and beat you up. Non-violently, of course. :-)
:Your position on not letting power corrupt you is very similar to mine. See the discussion among Ed Poor, DavidB4, and myself on Ed's talk page. Blocking people for the heck of it, and threatening people, happens elsewhere, and it used to happen here. I think we have improved.

:[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 19:21, 28 June 2017 (EDT)

== If you see something, say something ==

More precisely: If you see blatant vandalism taking place, and you have block powers, block the perpetrator.

I believe most active users are "assistants", meaning they have the power, and authority, to block vandals. Yesterday there was a huge vandal attack, in which 65 acts of vandalism were committed in about 40 minutes. I saw that an assistant was logged in, and attempted to alert him on his talk page. The vandal reverted that, and I kept trying. The user saw the vandalism to his talk page and reverted it. He even reverted my warning. I sent private mail to Andy. Finally Ed Poor did the deed.

Assistants have the power to block vandals. Use it. That's what it's for. Don't just let vandalism sprees go on. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 18:24, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
:I think there are more vandal attacks because liberals are getting desperate. They are losing power and do not like it. They are like cornered rats right now. The engaging in violent tactics, violent demonstrations, etc. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:02, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
::It even happened here this morning, but the two perps (who, based on very similar user names, is most likely the same kid using multiple accounts) got cut off at the pass quickly. If I'd been on line yesterday when said vandalism happened, I would've stopped it right there and then, but no editor with blocking power can be on site 24/7. Best thing to do is pay attention to the Recent changes section and watch what happens. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 20:01, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
:::I noticed that incredible spree after the fact--yikes! Sam, I was offline, but that doesn't mean I can't help. I've provided a link on my talk page to send my a text message for a reason too--that's what it's there for. I may not be available, but I would be happy to deal with the issue if I am. Just because I'm not editing doesn't mean I can help for a moment. :) --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 20:03, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
::::This is similar to when I kept on reverting the several accounts of this "James Wilson" fellow a few weeks ago. It took forever to block him, and he was able to get a lot of pages, including repeatedly vandalizing the [[Taylor Swift]] article and creating frivolous entries. There seems to be plenty enough "assistants" on here, so such long sprees shouldn't be happening so often. --[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 22:25, 28 June 2017 (EDT)
==Political Directory==
We have a project that started last February, but still needs teamwork to complete. This project accidentally drifted to Archive2, but still has work to be done.

A few years ago, some editors copied a lot of political directory information into CP. For example, the state articles list all of the Senators and Congressmen and the infobox has the Senators' telephone numbers. Much of this has changed in the 2014 and 2016 elections. In some cases, like [[Elizabeth Warren]], the junior senator has become the senior senator of the state. I have corrected [[Ohio]], but do not want to fix all of this by myself. Can we organize a work list and cross off each state as it is updated? Please let me know if you want to help. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 09:22, 15 February 2017 (EST)

:I can't say I'm thrilled at the idea, but I can try to chip in a little, as time permits. That's a very good idea, and I'm glad you noticed--I'm just not sure how much time I can contribute. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 11:03, 15 February 2017 (EST)
::In my state even the official state website hasn't been updated in more than two years (it still lists an officer sitting in jail as Secretary of State). I'm sure the lazy government bureaucrats blame Republican budget cuts who took over the legislature in 2014. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|CIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win?]] 21:33, 15 February 2017 (EST)
:::This project is focusing on 1) list of US Congressmen and Senators and 2) Senators in infobox. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 00:27, 16 February 2017 (EST)

Sources: http://www.house.gov/representatives/ and https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state&Sort=ASC When you have finished with a state, cross the state name out using <nowiki><s>State</s></nowiki>.
{| class="wikitable"
|
* [[Alabama]]: Dec. 14, 1819
* <s>[[Alaska]]: Jan. 3, 1959</s>
* <s>[[Arizona]]: Feb. 14, 1912</s>
* <s>[[Arkansas]]: Jun. 15, 1836</s>
* <s>[[California]]: Sep. 9, 1850</s>
* <s>[[Colorado]]: Aug. 1, 1876</s>
* <s>[[Connecticut]]: Jan. 9, 1788</s>
* [[Delaware]]: Dec. 7, 1787
* <s>[[Florida]]: Mar. 3, 1845</s>
* <s>[[Georgia]]: Jan. 2, 1788</s>
* <s>[[Hawaii]]: Aug. 21, 1959</s>
* <s>[[Idaho]]: Jul. 3, 1890</s>
* [[Illinois]]: Dec. 3, 1818
* <s>[[Indiana]]: Dec. 11, 1816</s>
* <s>[[Iowa]]: Dec. 28, 1846</s>
* <s>[[Kansas]]: Jan. 29, 1861</s>
* [[Kentucky]]: Jun. 1, 1792
* <s>[[Louisiana]]: Apr. 30, 1812</s>
* <s>[[Maine]]: Mar. 15, 1820</s>
* [[Maryland]]: Apr. 28, 1788
* <s>[[Massachusetts]]: Feb. 6, 1788</s>
* <s>[[Michigan]]: Jan. 26, 1837</s>
* <s>[[Minnesota]]: May 11, 1858</s>
* <s>[[Mississippi]]: Dec. 10, 1817</s>
* [[Missouri]]: Aug. 10, 1821
|
* <s>[[Montana]]: Nov. 8, 1889</s>
* <s>[[Nebraska]]: Mar. 1, 1867</s>
* <s>[[Nevada]]: Oct. 31, 1864</s>
* <s>[[New Hampshire]]: Jun. 21, 1788</s>
* <s>[[New Jersey]]: Dec. 18, 1787</s>
* <s>[[New Mexico]]: Jan. 6, 1912 </s>
* <s>[[New York]]: Jul. 26, 1788</s>
* [[North Carolina]]: Nov. 21, 1789
* <s>[[North Dakota]]: Nov. 2, 1889</s>
* [[Ohio]]: Mar. 1, 1803
* <s>[[Oklahoma]]: Nov. 16, 1907</s>
* <s>[[Oregon]]: Feb. 14, 1859</s>
* <s>[[Pennsylvania]]: Dec. 12, 1787</s>
* <s>[[Rhode Island]]: May 29, 1790</s>
* <s>[[South Carolina]]: May 23, 1788</s>
* <s>[[South Dakota]]: Nov. 2, 1889</s>
* <s>[[Tennessee]]: Jun. 1, 1796</s>
* [[Texas]]: Dec. 29, 1845
* <s>[[Utah]]: Jan. 4, 1896</s>
* [[Vermont]]: Mar. 4, 1791
* [[Virginia]]: Jun. 25, 1788
* <s>[[Washington]]: Nov. 11, 1889</s>
* [[West Virginia]]: Jun. 20, 1863
* [[Wisconsin]]: May 29, 1848
* <s>[[Wyoming]]: Jul. 10, 1890</s>
|}
Many thanks to Pokeria1, AMorrow, and DavidB4 for their help on this project. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 13:44, 16 February 2017 (EST)

'''Since we finished the federal officers faster than I expected, I am proposing a Phase II, where we go back and check the names of the state-wide officers''' listed in each of the above articles. After you have checked an article please change <nowiki><s>state</s> to state</nowiki>. Many thanks! [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 10:59, 17 February 2017 (EST)

==Clean sweep response to Muslim protestors==

I saw this on a woman's Twitter page. She responded to four themes that make up quite a lot of common Muslim protest arguments in such a way as to maximize the exposure of their contradictions. Those who call for more Muslim immigration should be confronted with these short arguments and why they think they don't apply seriously to these all-too-typical Muslim sentiments:

:You call me intolerant because I won't tolerate a religion of intolerance [Muslim activist's sign "Islam will dominate the world"].
:You call me hate-filled because I'm against hate preachers [Muslim activist's sign: "Behead those who insult Islam"].
:You call me extreme because I don't want extremists in my country [Two men dressed in all black except hole for eyes: "God Bless Hitler" in bold red capital letters].
:You call me a supremacist because I won't submit to invaders who believe their law & culture is supreme to ours [Muslims with black parade banner: "Shariah for the UK"].
:I only need to call you one word...Traitor.
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 01:24, 14 July 2017 (EDT)

== Recent issue(s) ==

So, with at least a few articles in the past, including the articles on [[Kate Upton]] and earlier [[Taylor Swift]], I am unsure about what direction the site should be taking regarding the topic of women wearing less than modest clothing. Should it be mentioned in the articles, and if so, how should it be done? The Upton situation seems to have at least two Senior Administrators and two Junior Administrators involved, and I think we should talk about how to address the issue, given that this is a conservative-minded encyclopedia and that social conservatism has been a key component of conservatism in the US. --[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 16:22, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
:The trend of women wearing less modest clothes is a relatively recent development, and it is associated with feminism. I think things like this should be mentioned only if the person in question claims to be religious or traditional. This is just my take, however. We'll see what everyone else has to say. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:32, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
::Your take does make sense, and a claim to be a Christian may imply something of the sort, as [[User:RonaldB]] pointed out. Since it has come up in at least a few articles it is something that really should be addressed. We should be able to do it in an encyclopedic tone, without sounding too preachy. One of the earlier revisions of the Upton article did come off rather preachy. --[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 16:41, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
:::Yes, regardless of what we do, we should stick to an encyclopedic tone. I don't think we will have to mention these things on articles of people who clearly are secular liberals (unless that they do is blatantly outrageous, like what Miley Cyrus did a while back). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:55, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
::::I stepped in as far as the Kate Upton article because there was a dispute happening and there were nude photographs that she had taken. Plus, she lied about the issue shortly before the cloud website had a data breach which caused her pictures to become public.

::::You have to draw the line somewhere and I drew the line at nude. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
When I was in high school, I volunteered to help in the school library. We had a periodical collection, and students would have to request a specific magazine issue, and then the student assistant would go into the back room, pull the issue and have the student sign it out. The most requested magazines were ''Car and Driver'' followed by the ''National Geographic'' issues which photos of native African women. We can discuss these subjects with an encyclopedic tone and without including examples. In contrast, Wikipedia works extensively to collect as many nude photos as possible and is not family friendly. We don't want Conservapedia to appeal to the crowd that reads ''National Geographic'' for just those few special photos. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 18:05, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
:::::It sounds like everyone basically agrees on this anyway, but I'll chime in. I agree that we should keep such content to a minimum. If such information can be used to prove hypocrisy, then it might be worth carefully mentioning. However, in general, that's just a part of the secular world now. Let's keep it out of here, unless perhaps if it is beneficial to prove a different point. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 21:04, 14 July 2017 (EDT)

I'm thinking that there's an agreement about how to handle this particular issue from now on. Although, I still regret my rash judgment and current inability to correct it at this time. --[[User:Anglican|Anglican]] ([[User talk:Anglican|talk]]) 23:02, 14 July 2017 (EDT)

== Sam Chui's Little Theorem ==

I wasn't able to find anything on the internet related to [[Sam Chui's Little Theorem]]. And there are no citations in the article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 07:01, 19 August 2017 (EDT)
:Appears to be a private gag between half a dozen 14-year olds from math camp. No encyclopaedic value, no educational value and, frankly, unfunny to boot. They have had their few days of glory, now burn it with fire. [[User:NeilWalker|NeilWalker]] ([[User talk:NeilWalker|talk]]) 07:57, 19 August 2017 (EDT)
::I deleted the article.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:12, 19 August 2017 (EDT)
== User:GinnyS ==
I see that someone today blocked User:GinnyS for violating the 90%/10% rule. Just so that the record is clear, since she created her account, GinnyS had 49 talk page edits and 22 article page edits leading to a 69%/31% ratio, which is seems to meet the rule's requirements. While today's exchange was intemperate, we do want users to feel free to raise concerns to ensure that what is posted matches the sources provided. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 20:50, 27 August 2017 (EDT)
:"Ginny" was a man.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])

== Block flood ==

Apologies for the block flood--I got the process derailed onto the wrong account (main rather than bot). I will try to be more careful in the future. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 00:07, 8 September 2017 (EDT)

== Conservative of the Year 2017 ==

I created the article where we list the nominations for [[Conservative of the Year 2017]]. Feel free to add solid conservatives to the list who deserve mention. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:18, 8 November 2017 (EST)

== New essay, need contributors ==

I have created a new essay: http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:Virtue:_Christian_vs_secular

I would welcome contributions from other CP users. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 11:28, 28 December 2017 (EST)

== Conservatism sells: The growth of followers of conservatives on Twitter ==

See [[Essay:Top conservatives on Twitter]] for current number of followers of top Twitter users considered to be conservative. Of those Twitter posters whose accounts on that page are still active, none lost in their total number of followers over the whole year of 2017.

{| class="wikitable sortable" style="font-size:98%; margin:left;"
|+ Promoters of conservatism with large gains of followers on Twitter, 2016-7 (top 20 each category)
|+
!Twitter poster
!Increase in followers 2016
!% in- crs. in fol- low ers
!Increase in followers 2017
!% in- crs. in fol- low ers
!Increase in followers Dec. 17 2018
!% in- crs. in fol- low ers
|-
|align="left"|Pres. (or-Elect) [[Donald J. Trump]]
|align="right"|+13,053,000
|align="right"|+237%
|align="right"|+26,905,000
|align="right"|+145%
|align="right"|+10,520,000
|align="right"|+23%
|-
|align="left"|Dr. [[Ben Carson]]
|align="right"|+1,475,000
|align="right"|+136%
|align="right"|0
|align="right"|+0%
|align="right"|91,000
|align="right"|+3%
|-
|align="left"|[[Michelle Malkin]]
|align="right"|+943,000
|align="right"|+105%
|align="right"|+328,000
|align="right"|+18%
|align="right"|-26,000
|align="right"|-1%
|-
|align="left"|[[Sean Hannity]]
|align="right"|+697,000
|align="right"|+56%
|align="right"|+1,266,000
|align="right"|+65%
|align="right"|+643,000
|align="right"|+20%
|-
|align="left"|[[Laura Ingraham]]
|align="right"|+550,000
|align="right"|+89%
|align="right"|+819,000
|align="right"|+73%
|align="right"|+575,000
|align="right"|+30%
|-
|align="left"|[[Ann Coulter]]
|align="right"|+463,000
|align="right"|+63%
|align="right"|+632,000
|align="right"|+53%
|align="right"|+279,000
|align="right"|+15%
|-
|align="left"|Judge [[Jeanine Pirro]]
|align="right"|+292,000
|align="right"|+222%
|align="right"|+479,500
|align="right"|+113%
|align="right"|+387,000
|align="right"|+43%
|-
|align="left"|[[Franklin Graham]]
|align="right"|+277,000
|align="right"|+59%
|align="right"|+565,000
|align="right"|+76%
|align="right"|+489,000
|align="right"|+37%
|-
|align="left"|[[Sarah Palin]]
|align="right"|+226,000
|align="right"|+20%
|align="right"|+139,000
|align="right"|+10%
|align="right"|+16,000
|align="right"|+1%
|-
|align="left"|[[Tucker Carlson]]
|align="right"|+224,000
|align="right"|+89%
|align="right"|+943,000
|align="right"|+198%
|align="right"|+930,000
|align="right"|+65%
|-
|align="left"|[[Steven Crowder]]
|align="right"|+180,000
|align="right"|+122%
|align="right"|+177,000
|align="right"|+54%
|align="right"|+151,000
|align="right"|+30%
|-
|align="left"|[[Dinesh D'Souza]]
|align="right"|+166,000
|align="right"|+69%
|align="right"|+313,000
|align="right"|+77%
|align="right"|+362,000
|align="right"|+50%
|-
|align="left"|[[Mark Levin]]
|align="right"|+157,000
|align="right"|+30%
|align="right"|+346,000
|align="right"|+50%
|align="right"|+398,000
|align="right"|+39%
|-
|align="left"|[[James O'Keefe]]
|align="right"|+147,000
|align="right"|+198%
|align="right"|+136,000
|align="right"|+62%
|align="right"|+125,000
|align="right"|+35%
|-
|align="left"|[[Katie Pavlich]]
|align="right"|+145,000
|align="right"|+70%
|align="right"|+111,900
|align="right"|+32%
|align="right"|+131,000
|align="right"|+28%
|-
|align="left"|[[Allen West]]
|align="right"|+137,000
|align="right"|+29%
|align="right"|+132,000
|align="right"|+22%
|align="right"|+15,000
|align="right"|+2%
|-
|align="left"|Dr. [[Charles Krauthammer]]
|align="right"|+121,000
|align="right"|+20%
|align="right"|+135,000
|align="right"|+18%
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|-
|align="left"|[[Monica Crowley]]
|align="right"|+114,000
|align="right"|+42%
|align="right"|+84,000
|align="right"|+22%
|align="right"|+51,000
|align="right"|+11%
|-
|align="left"|[[Linda Suhler]], Ph. D.
|align="right"|+90,000
|align="right"|+48%
|align="right"|+73,000
|align="right"|+26%
|align="right"|+24,800
|align="right"|+7%
|-
|align="left"|Gov. [[Greg Abbott]]
|align="right"|+65,000
|align="right"|+40%
|align="right"|+129,300
|align="right"|+57%
|align="right"|+40,300
|align="right"|+11%
|-
|align="left"|[[John Nolte]]
|align="right"|+46,000
|align="right"|+74%
|align="right"|+41,800
|align="right"|+38%
|align="right"|+8,900
|align="right"|+6%
|-
|align="left"|[[Dennis Prager]]
|align="right"|+28,000
|align="right"|+50%
|align="right"|+51,300
|align="right"|+60%
|align="right"|+47,100
|align="right"|+35%
|-
|align="left"|[[Hugh Hewitt]]
|align="right"|+42,000
|align="right"|+47%
|align="right"|+29,100
|align="right"|+22%
|align="right"|+10,500
|align="right"|+7%
|-
|align="left"|[[Nikki Haley]]
|align="right"|+57,000
|align="right"|+47%
|align="right"|+746,000
|align="right"|+417%
|align="right"|+725,000
|align="right"|+78%
|-
|align="left"|Sen. [[Tim Scott]]
|align="right"|+51,000
|align="right"|+45%
|align="right"|+177,200
|align="right"|+108%
|align="right"|+39,000
|align="right"|+11%
|-
|align="left"|[[Kellyanne Conway]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+1,376,000
|align="right"|+232%
|align="right"|+532,000
|align="right"|+27%
|-
|align="left"|Sher. [[David Clarke]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+540,000
|align="right"|+123%
|align="right"|-36,000
|align="right"|-4%
|-
|align="left"|[[Dan Scavino]], Jr.
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+196,000
|align="right"|+74%
|align="right"|+41,000
|align="right"|+9%
|-
|align="left"|[[Bill Mitchell]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+143,500
|align="right"|+85%
|align="right"|+89,000
|align="right"|+29%
|-
|align="left"|[[Wayne Dupree]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+136,100
|align="right"|+91%
|align="right"|+23,500
|align="right"|+8%
|-
|align="left"|[[Larry Kudlow]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+76,700
|align="right"|+73%
|align="right"|+53,800
|align="right"|+30%
|-
|align="left"|[[Kayleigh McEnany]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+39,100
|align="right"|+57%
|align="right"|+34,000
|align="right"|+31%
|-
|align="left"|[[Sarah Sanders]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+1,206,000
|align="right"|+43%
|-
|align="left"|[[Candace Owens]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+634,000 +
|align="right"|+192% +
|-
|align="left"|[[Charlie Kirk]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+564,000
|align="right"|+208%
|-
|align="left"|[[Diamond and Silk]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+473,000
|align="right"|+99%
|-
|align="left"|[[Sebastian Gorka]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+175,000 +
|align="right"|+36% +
|-
|align="left"|[[John Bolton]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+168,000
|align="right"|+65%
|-
|align="left"|[[Chuck Woolery]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+158,000
|align="right"|+47%
|-
|align="left"|[[Alana Mastrangelo]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+67,400
|align="right"|+85%
|-
|align="left"|[[Liz Wheeler]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+102,000
|align="right"|+72%
|-
|align="left"|[[Sean Davis]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+52,600
|align="right"|+62%
|-
|align="left"|Rep. [[Mark Meadows]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+100,000 +
|align="right"|+51% +
|-
|align="left"|[[Charles V. Payne]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+99,300
|align="right"|+49%
|-
|align="left"|[[Tim Young]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+58,700
|align="right"|+43%
|-
|align="left"|[[Dylan Wheeler]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+100,200
|align="right"|+41%
|-
|align="left"|[[Buck Sexton]]
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|
|align="right"|+47,300
|align="right"|+38%
|}

[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 03:40, 1 January 2018 (EST)
:I just had a big mystery solved. Monica Crowley was originally named as one of Trump's top advisors (see [[Jared Kushner]] page. She backed out at the last minute. I always wondered what dirt the FBI had on her, But it's something different. [[Victor Pinchuk]] hired her as his DC lobbyist. [https://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/monica-crowley-registers-foreign-agent-lobbying-for-victor-pinchuk] She's probably making 3 or 4 times more as his attorney than she would on the National Security Council ([[Adam Waldman]] is being paid $40,000 a month). Pinchuk gave $29 million to the Clintons, and is behind [[Alexandra Chalupa]], [[Olga Bielkova]], and bunch of sources for the [[Steele dossier]].
:So there are two observations here about corrupt DC politics: One, given a choice, does a person go for temporary power and influence ([[NSC]] staff) or greed (big cash)? Secondly, this explains why Trump has had some difficultly in getting an retain staff (in addition to the illegal FISA surveillance on Trump staffers and appointees), qualified people are simply targeted, paid off, and outbid on government pay scales by Trump opponents. I'm sure she's not the first or only one. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 00:55, 12 November 2019 (EST)

==Twitter reactions on the news==

I try to produce web pages at Conservapedia that are useful, or even seem like they may be useful but at the time can't put my finger on what they may be useful for.

This is one of those times when a use has become uncovered. Several news events involving the top Twitterers took place this month, and now we can see its effect on their followers.

[https://twitter.com/BrittPettibone Brittany Pettibone] was detained three days and then turned away from the United Kingdom for loving Great Britain when it was populated by the British. Her Twitter followers rose from 110,000 followers on March 2, 2018 to 133,000 on March 23, 2018 (+ 21%).

[https://twitter.com/scrowder Steven Crowder] was suspended from Twitter seven days for uploading a comic video, and meanwhile Louis Farrakhan's Twitter account uploaded many videos with anti-Jewish remarks and was left alone. Crowder's Twitter followers rose from 549,000 followers on March 2 to 583,000 on March 23, 2018 (+ 6%).

Not to leave out events about other Twitter users, [[Paul Nehlen]], a competitor in Paul Ryan's Congressional race was removed from Twitter over a certain picture he had posted. Eventually you stop pursuing Twitter's rationales for removal of conservatives and just assume they are false.

And [https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton John Bolton], who was recently added by President Trump to his National Security team, had his Twitter followers rise from 264,000 on March 2 to 290,000 on March 23 (+ 10%). [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 20:10, 23 March 2018 (EDT)

:Specifically regarding Bolton, he now has nearly 306,000 followers as of the time I'm writing this. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:19, 28 March 2018 (EDT)

:The month is not yet over and The Broward-County/Democrat-Party-disregard-of-gun-laws diversion circus swept in [http://twitter.com/IngrahamAngle Laura Ingraham] this month to attack her for making a random remark about it in passing: Her Twitter followers rose from 2,111,000 on March 2 to 2,177,000 on March 31 (+ 3%). [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 14:39, 31 March 2018 (EDT)

Conservative commentators [https://twitter.com/DiamondandSilk Diamond and Silk] caught Facebook shadow-banning their account and after months of inquiry received a reply April 5, 2018 regarding their Facebook page, "your content and your brand has been determined unsafe to the community."

The two women replied: "So our questions to Facebook (Mark Zuckerberg) are:
*1. What is unsafe about two Blk-women supporting the @POTUS @realDonaldTrump?
*2. Our FB page has been created since December 2014, when exactly did the content and the brand become unsafe to the community?
*3. When you say "community" are you referring to the Millions who liked and followed our page?
*4. What content on our page was in violation?
*5. If our content and brand was so unsafe to the community, why is the option for us to boost our content and spend money with FB to enhance our brand page still available? Maybe FB should give us a refund since FB censored our reach.
*6. Lastly, didn't FB violate their own policy when FB stopped sending notifications to the Millions of people who liked and followed our brand page?

"This is deliberate bias censorship and discrimination. These tactics are unacceptable and we want answers!"

On March 2, Diamond and Silk had 584,000 followers on Twitter. On April 8, their readership had grown to 621,000 (+ 6%) [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 03:00, 8 April 2018 (EDT)


The House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee on April 11, 2018 interviewed Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg in the halls of Congress, and some of the members of Congress actually held up a poster-sized photograph of Diamond and Silk and asked him if he recognized them or knew about the removal of their account from Facebook. Zuckerberg tried to change the subject to a more general question, but eventually replied that the removal was an error.

Diamond and Silks' followers on Twitter rose from 584,000 on March 2 by 84,000 to 668,000 on April 18 (+ 14%). [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 17:20, 18 April 2018 (EDT)

===Someone or more than one person is targeting top conservatives on Twitter===

[http://twitter.com/WayneDupreeShow Wayne Dupree] is now claiming that he has noticed shadow-banning on his Twitter account. That makes seven top conservatives on Twitter members being targeted in an attempt to marginalize them: Brittany Pettibone, Steven Crowder, Paul Nehlen, Laura Ingraham, Diamond and Silk, Wayne Dupree and Feisty☀️FL [FL = Floridian] (@Feisty_FL).

[http://twitter.com/IngrahamAngle [[Laura Ingraham]]] was able to get some publicity and conservative support regarding the boycott staged against her advertisers regarding her having showed skepticism against the attempt to add new gun-restriction laws to those laws that are already not being implemented. Her followers on Twitter rose from 2,111,000 on March 2 to 2,239,000 on April 18, a rise of 128,000 (+ 6%). [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 17:20, 18 April 2018 (EDT)

==April Fool's joke==

The ''Titanic'': built by experts. Ark: built by [[best of the public]]. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 09:05, 28 March 2018 (EDT)

== How would you guys convince an athiest about God? ==

Purely hypothetical, but I’m curious so see all the different tactics. [[User:GoodWeather|GoodWeather]] ([[User talk:GoodWeather|talk]]) 18:39, 15 May 2018 (EDT)

:The problem with your question is that it assumes atheists need to be convinced about the existence of God. God's existence is already obvious to everyone (see Romans 1:18-23, Psalm 14:1). The problem with atheists is not that they're unconvinced of God, it's that they reject God and His Word outright. Also, I can't convince anyone to submit God -- that's something God in His grace (alone) does to those He chooses to show mercy. If it weren't for God's opening up of the eyes of believers, none of us would submit to Him (see Romans 8:7-8, for example). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:57, 15 May 2018 (EDT)

::The "tactic" against you, "GoodWeather" is to boot you off the site, along with your many socks, for trolling, harassment, and outright lying. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 01:48, 16 May 2018 (EDT)

:::Another atheist who received [[atheist indoctrination]] in a poorly run public school. The telltale sign is that he cannot spell the word atheist correctly.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:56, 16 May 2018 (EDT)

::::It's a pity that Chawcer, who had geneyus, was so unedicated as well. He's the wuss speller I know of. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 10:31, 26 May 2018 (EDT)
:::::1990sguy nails it. If you're a sceptic, you're already decieved (see 2 Tim 2:26). IMHO, one should begin by desiring to free their mind from Satanic enslavement, and that would put you on the path of the knowledge of God. It's not always a straight line from disbelief to belief. You need a desire to free yourself from deception to start. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 15:29, 26 May 2018 (EDT)

== Twitter prune ==

I read in passing that Twitter was going to start pruning non-responsive accounts soon. I read the same thing about two months ago, and yet I didn't notice any difference in the follower count of conservatives that couldn't be explained by summer vacations.

But if so, this may mark the first time in about three years that conservatives will see a real downward "trend" (actually a one-time brief decrease). Who knows which accounts will be affected, how long it will take for them to recover from these corrections, and whether these removals will be administered fairly. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 04:22, 13 July 2018 (EDT)

:So far the purged accounts among conservatives with the largest number of followers have been mostly chicken feed:

::Donald Trump: -0.04%
::Sean Hannity: -2.0%
::Sarah Sanders: -0.1%
::Ben and Candy Carson: -3.4%
::Laura Ingraham: -0.3%

::Kellyanne Conway: -0.04%
::Michelle Malkin: -1.7%
::Tucker Carlson: -0.4%
::Ann Coulter: -0.9%
::Franklin Graham: -0.15%

::Sarah Palin: -3.9%

:I read in articles about the inflation of Twitter accounts that journalists reporting on it expected some political figures with a large popularity to have 40 or 50 percent inactive or fake followers. This brief survey shows this is not the case with conservative figures with large popularity.

:I think the reason for the faint exception in Ben and Candy Carson's and Sarah Palin's case, is that they had been inactive for a long period of time, so the people who subscribed to their accounts were going to wait until those conservatives posted "in person" rather than by their staffs, and when their feeds weren't being written by their staffs either, the zero newsfeed made their accounts easy to maintain (that is, not taking up any space) nor allowing any opportunity for those Twitter figures to say things with which these followers might disagree and cause them to unsubscribe.

:On the other hand, I also think these pruned subscribers possibly heard about these popular conservatives' Twitter accounts and made an impulse decision to subscribe to them due to their popularity, but weren't necessarily very committed to Twitter as a whole. Hence they left to do other things, but still holding out hope for the popular figures to come back (I am willing to bet that Rush Limbaugh is among these), they never deleted their account, but only monitored it sporadically.

:Now you know that these things are going on, don't be discouraged from politics or feel you have to keep silent if you notice it happening elsewhere or hear complaints of your fellow conservatives or sneers by liberals about decreasing follower counts. You're welcome. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 03:38, 14 July 2018 (EDT)

==Shadowban evidence==
There is an online shadowban detector that I found today. To catch Twitter in the act before they find out about it and possibly change their search algorithms (they have done this for a different tool), I entered all 100 names on my Top Conservatives on Twitter list because I believe that time may be of the essence.

[https://twitter.com/PoliticalShort Nick Short] 139,500 followers 
[https://twitter.com/BrittPettibone Brittany Pettibone] 137,800 followers 
[https://twitter.com/TheMarkPantano Mark Pantano] 119,500 followers 
[https://twitter.com/Rockprincess818 RockPrincess] 104,400 
[https://twitter.com/gatewaypundit Jim Hoft] 101,900 followers 
[https://twitter.com/JBurtonXP Jack Burton] 71,500 followers 
[https://twitter.com/Feisty_FL Feisty☀️FL] 18,920 followers 

These are "quality" shadowbanned. I guess because they don't have enough liberal "quality". [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 00:58, 27 July 2018 (EDT)

:Twitter spoke out yesterday about accusations of shadowbanning:

::"ACTUALLY what we do doesn't TECHNICALLY qualify as "shadowbanning." We just make certain users harder to see based on our totally opaque, uncontestable, unilaterally-determined definition of 'relevance.'"

:I was just pulling your leg; that was a satire written by Jack Burton above. He actually may not even know that he himself is shadowbanned. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 19:57, 28 July 2018 (EDT)

::BTW FYI, I checked, and the Conservapedia Twitter account (@Jay_pe) is not shadowbanned. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 23:22, 28 July 2018 (EDT)

== Yay! HTTPS! ==

I'm glad we managed to get HTTPS set up! I know it's a bit of a nuisance, but it is a good idea! It seems the PayPal plugin is still using HTTP, but this is still better than before! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:28, 5 August 2018 (EDT)
:It does seem that the favicon on the home page is not loading correctly, also. It seems to work elsewhere just fine. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:52, 5 August 2018 (EDT)
::For the record, the favicon doesn't show up at all on Chrome (and I don't think it ever has). This might be something that should be fixed. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:00, 5 August 2018 (EDT)
:::Scratch that--it's working now. I don't know if the issue got fixed, or it was a temporary glitch. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 18:02, 5 August 2018 (EDT)
:::That's odd... I use Firefox, Opera, Vivaldi, and a number of other browsers but not chrome. I'd never noticed. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 18:04, 5 August 2018 (EDT)
::::I see what you mean. I tried it in a chrome install, and couldn't see it either. Do we need to add it as a Base64 Encoded Image or some other such nonsense to get it to work? --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 18:08, 5 August 2018 (EDT)

:::::I really should stop edit flooding here, but one more thing. Someone else with a similar problem said the following:
:::::{{cquote|Instead of using the filename favicon.ico for my icon, I renamed it to something else, ie myIcon.ico. Then I just used [this]:

:::::<nowiki><link rel="shortcut icon" href="myIcon.ico" type="image/x-icon" /></nowiki>}}

:::::The full discussion I'm talking about is found [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16375592/favicon-not-showing-up-in-google-chrome here]. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 18:13, 5 August 2018 (EDT)

== requested article: Trumponomics ==

Article request: [[Trumponomics]]. It would be a nice complementary article to our [[Obamunism]] article. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:40, 5 August 2018 (EDT)

== HTTP -->HTTPS URL update project ==

The Web is changing a great deal. One of these changes is the shift from the [[HyperText Transfer Protocol]] to [[HyperText Transfer Protocol Secure]] (which we have recently done in part here at CP as well). While HTTPS is not perfect (and it will continue to be less than ideal at least until/unless we get DNSSEC) this is a good move, as it provides some security and privacy using TLS. 

The problem for us is that we now have a great deal of links which still refer to the old protocol. 1990'sguy pointed out this issue and suggested that I use my bot to update our links. I don't have the ability to automatically test URLs for TLS support, so I'm making a list of URLs to be updated. If there are any websites linked to anywhere on CP which have upgraded to HTTPS but are still linked to under HTTP, please add them to [[User:DavidB4-bot/HTTPS URL update project|the list]]. I will then attempt to verify that they are using sufficiently complete HTTPS configurations, and then do my best to apply the change to all CP articles and perhaps some other pages as well. 

I have never done this before, so it may take a little time and fine-tuning to get it right. Also, it will take time to process these updates on all 46,236+ articles, plus a yet undecided number of other pages. Thank you for your patience and assistance! Let me know if you have any questions or suggestions. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 00:03, 11 September 2018 (EDT)

:''And if this all sounds like nonsense, doesn't make sense, or doesn't seem to matter, that's fine. Just let me know if anything catches fire, and other than that, I'll try to stay out of the way and not break anything.'' --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 00:15, 11 September 2018 (EDT)

==Overflow business==

Conservapedia has already reached 686,043,027 visits. It was a only a short time ago that I heard this site had reached 600,000,000 visits. Andy deserves a lot of credit and should be proud for having built such a successful conservative website under his helm. Thanks, Andy! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 15:17, 18 October 2018 (EDT)
=== Conservapedia - Alexa rankings ===
[[File:Conservapedia v Rush page views.png|thumbnail|400px|center|November 2007 Conservapedia vs. Rush Limbaugh]]
{{Clear}}
[[File:Alexa.jpg||thumbnail|400px|center|April 2008]]
{{Clear}}
[[File:ConservapediaAlexaMay2010.jpg|thumbnail|400px|center|May 2010]]
{{Clear}}
[[File:Conservapedia web traffic in 2010 and 2011.png|thumbnail|400px|center|2011 and 2012]]
{{Clear}}
[[File:Conservapedia - Alexa ranking - December 23 2018.png|thumbnail|400px|center|12-23-2018]]

== Hi everyone ==

I'm new here. Is there anything important I should know before doing stuff? How do I add images to articles? How do I get around CAPTCHA's? Thanks, [[User:Edenfaithful|Edenfaithful]] ([[User talk:Edenfaithful|talk]]) 09:24, 25 December 2018 (EST)
:Make substantial edits, show your good faith, obey Conservapedia's rules, and establish a good reputation. Then Andy will promote you to SkipCAPCHA. [[User:Shobson20|Shobson20]] ([[User talk:Shobson20|talk]]) 11:54, 25 December 2018 (EST)
== Millenials mispronouncing common English words ==

Some Millenials do so much social media instead of hearing voices on TV and radio (unless it's their peers or near-peers on YouTube) and texting instead of talking to friends, that they mispronounce what were thought to be common English words. I saw one pronounce "thorough" thō’ rō’ instead of thur’-ō. Another had taught her mom to say osurring instead of occuring. It's really jarring when it happens. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 16:42, 22 January 2019 (EST)

== Question (VargasMilan's April fool's joke that DavidB4 fell for) ==

Why is cream more expensive than milk? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 21:10, 1 April 2019 (EDT)

:There is less of it produced. Depending on the cow breed, age, period, diet, and more, raw milk typically consists of about 3.5% – 5% cream, with the rest being what we know as "skim milk" (what is left after the cream is skimmed off the top). Skim milk (which used to be considered almost worthless, and fed to animals or used in lower-quality cooking) is now sold as a health food, as are 1% fat and 2% fat milks. Even "Whole milk" has some cream removed, bringing it down to 3.25% cream. However, there is only so much cream they can take out of the standard milk supply. Cream is needed for a variety of dairy products, such as cheeses, butter, and ice cream, and it is also used as-is in some cases, such as adding to coffee. Basically, it goes back to supply and demand. There is a somewhat limited supply (compared to skim milk), and great deal of demand. Besides, cream is considered the best part, so they know they can charge people more for the best milk product. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:55, 1 April 2019 (EDT)

::Wrong! It's because the cows ''hate'' to squat over those little cartons.

::Hope everyone had a great April Fool's day, especially DavidB, who fell for my prank. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 15:28, 2 April 2019 (EDT)

:::I wondered if there was a relation between the date and the odd question...Sorry, I'll try to assume the worst in everyone from now on, rather than taking the time to answer even odd questions. ;) --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 18:46, 2 April 2019 (EDT)
::::Uhhh....Thanks, Conservative. I think. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 21:41, 2 April 2019 (EDT)

:::::He he! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 22:57, 2 April 2019 (EDT)

== Don't bite the newbie editors via reversions ==
CP needs research assistants, copy editors, and people to do maintenance and formatting work, not just content contributers. Most wikis have a Don't Bite the Newbies policy. I find [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221367707_Don't_bite_the_newbies_How_reverts_affect_the_quantity_and_quality_of_Wikipedia_work this archived discussion useful.] If CP doesn't have an official policy, it still is useful for CP Admins to know that reverting newcomers has the effect of limiting CP's user base. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 14:05, 28 July 2019 (EDT)
:Other than people inserting nonsense and/pushing misleading/errant liberal/leftist tripe, I think this was an excellent post. A little politeness and diplomacy goes a long way.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:23, 28 July 2019 (EDT)
::Oftentimes, new editors try to change the POV of articles, copy info from Wikipedia, or made other edits which are unencyclopedic (on an encyclopedia). Rob has a good point on treating new editors with respect, but it '''cannot''' be at the expense of the quality of CP's articles. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:26, 28 July 2019 (EDT)
:::It shouldn't be at the expense of limiting CP's user and contributor base, either. Perhaps 90/10 has a negative impact, sometimes. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']] 14:53, 28 July 2019 (EDT)

== In the News ==

Maybe this should be added to In the News:
“Kavanaugh accuser's lawyer said allegations could help undermine abortion rulings: 'Part of what motivated Christine'” reports Fox News. (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/christine-blasey-ford-attorney-says-she-came-forward-to-get-asterisk-on-kavanaughs-name-ahead-of-abortion-rulings.amp) - JobsNotMobs

== Added topic ==

Hello!

I noticed that some image upload requests I made have been up for a few weeks and not handled yet. DavidB4 usually takes care of these, but I'm sure he has a lot on his plate, so I was wondering if maybe another admin with upload privileges could add them in. I think there's one other guy waiting on his requests, too. No rush, just wanted to ask. Thank you!
[[User:Teakin88|Teakin88]] ([[User talk:Teakin88|talk]]) 11:41, 2 November 2019 (EDT)

:Thanks for the heads-up! Unfortunately, there's an apparent backlog at the page, so that's why the requests are taking so long. It's not uncommon for such requests to take so long. I let DavidB4 know about your message. Since your requested images are not from Wikimedia Commons, I, unfortunately, cannot upload them myself because of my lack of expertise regarding licensing (I'm sure they're appropriate to upload, but I'd rather let more knowledgeable editors handle such images). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:20, 2 November 2019 (EDT)

::I have been hoping another admin would help, but if not, I'll get there eventually. I have a lot going on IRL for me right now, so I haven't had much time to help out here. Sorry for the wait! --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:28, 5 November 2019 (EST)

:::Unfortunately, I don't know enough about copyright law to help with the non-commons images. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:26, 5 November 2019 (EST)

== Pages for expansion ==

Hello! As you can see, I am new here, and have just started editing. May I ask, is there a page for stub articles or articles that need to be expanded? Thank you. {{unsigned|Malcolmdavis}}

:We don't have a page like that. The best thing to do is look for stubs in the topics you're interested in, and expand those.

:Very important -- always use reliable sources and encyclopedic wording, and adhere to CP's style guidelines. I have posted some helpful links on your user talk page. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:00, 12 December 2019 (EST)

::While we don't have a managed page like that, the wiki can give you a list of pages with very little contnet. This includes disambiguation pages, index pages, and other stuff so it is a little messy. However, you could try taking a look at [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:ShortPages&limit=300&offset=240 Special:ShortPages] and see what you find. It' snot a clean list or easy to use, but you can try it if you would like. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 21:04, 12 December 2019 (EST)

==Top conservative Twitter accounts suspended while everyone is getting ready for the holidays==

Two of my [[Essay:Top conservatives on Twitter]] list members were suspended this week: Linda Suhler [a PhD] (387,460) and CC (300,300) @ChatbyCC, formerly known as Christie Chat). They have been on my list since August 1, 2015 and January 3, 2017, respectively. Twitter announced that they will be suspending accounts at-will in the future. There is no way the suspensions of these two accounts are not strategic by Twitter to promote liberalism. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 01:06, 20 December 2019 (EST)

:Typical. Basically they have built a massive network, where most people are. Now they are quietly de latforming all conservatives, in an attempt to make liberalism look like the norm. Only the conservatives see it happening, so everyone else is oblivious that it is more of a psyops move than a culture shift. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 11:54, 20 December 2019 (EST)

== How to add an image file to Conservapedia? ==

Just curious, how do I add an image in the form of a file to [[Conservapedia]] so I can use it to add to pages? Also, which types of images am I allowed to "borrow" from the internet? Thanks! - Liberaltears
:[[Conservapedia:Image upload requests]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 19:20, 20 January 2020 (EST)

::Thanks! [[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]] (8:12, 20 January 2020)

:::As for which images you can use, you should ideally find ones which have been released as [[Public Domain]] or under a [[Creative Commons]] license. Some good sources are listed below. If you especially want an image wich is not available under one of these conditions, and there is no suitable substitute, it may still be usable under the [[Fair use]] doctrine, but it's better not to do this; I can give a second opinion as to whether it might be okay to use an image in this way, but I'm not a lawyer.

:::*[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page WikiMedia Commons]
:::*[https://www.flickr.com/search/?license=2%2C3%2C4%2C5%2C6%2C9 Flickr]
:::*[https://pixabay.com PixaBay]
:::*[https://morguefile.com Morguefile.com]
:::*[http://www.publicdomainpictures.net PublicDomainPictures.net]
:::--[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 23:31, 20 January 2020 (EST)
:::: Thanks! [[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]] 1:23, 21 January 2020

== Iowa Caucuses ==

Hello everyone! I just wanted to let it be known; I noticed that some additions had been made to my page on the [[2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses]], and I in turn edited some of that and made more additions myself, mostly revolving around whether the caucus was in fact rigged by the Democrats to deny Sanders a clear victory. Personally, I have no trouble believing that it was, but since it hasn't been definitively proven, I've changed the language a bit to make it more a matter of opinion, while leaving up all the information and sources that show the basis for this opinion, and how likely it is that the results were in fact manipulated. Just wanted to let everyone know about that. -[[User:Teakin88|Teakin88]]

== Template permission request ==

Hello, I'd like to request [[Conservapedia]] sysop permission to make a template titled "Template:Republican establishment". --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]] ([[User talk:Liberaltears|talk]]) 11:07, 8 March 2020 (EDT)
:I dunno; is this an effort to divide the GOP establishment and Tea Party from Trump Republicans in an election year? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 12:49, 8 March 2020 (EDT)
::No, I'm not trying to promote division, I just thought that it could be a productive addition to Conservapedia to use for specification purposes on many of the pages regarding establishment Republicans and groups such as the [[National Republican Senatorial Committee|NRSC]]. --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]] ([[User talk:Liberaltears|talk]]) 13:12, 8 March 2020 (EDT)
::So do I have permission to create the template or not? --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]] ([[User talk:Liberaltears|talk]]) 23:41, 8 March 2020 (EDT)
:::I don't quite understand the use case for this template...What will it contain? --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:54, 31 March 2020 (EDT)

== Strange occurrence... ==

Can someone tell me what just happened? I remember making a page creation on [[Eugene Scalia]] just about half an hour ago as well as a few other edits, but it seems that they were somehow reverted/hidden mysteriously and I couldn't find any log details on it. I know that there was a server error or something similar to such just a few minutes ago, but I'm not sure how that would cause a revert of my edits. --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]] ([[User talk:Liberaltears|talk]]) 12:48, 23 March 2020 (EDT)

:So sorry! That was a hosting glitch. Please repost those edits - you might still have them in your cache in your browser. Thanks for understanding!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 13:50, 23 March 2020 (EDT)

::Terry H's MPR post also disappeared. Nothing under Terry's H's contribs for today. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 14:07, 23 March 2020 (EDT)

:::My browser is set on private mode, so I can't re-access the information. Would the data be saved elsewhere? --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]] ([[User talk:Liberaltears|talk]]) 14:44, 23 March 2020 (EDT)

::::Beats me. My computer crashed about the same time. I had the MPR Template open when it did with Terry's post, but when I rebooted it disappeared completely. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 15:56, 23 March 2020 (EDT)

:::::Hopefully the [[Deep state]] didn't hack the server and our computers and proceed to bleach bit the data. You get the joke? --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]] ([[User talk:Liberaltears|talk]]) 16:29, 23 March 2020 (EDT)

::::::Could be, could be! Maybe they were reading Conservapedia, got fed up and couldn't take anymore. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 16:41, 23 March 2020 (EDT)

:::::::Maybe Hillary's Deep state shilleries got triggered! --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]] ([[User talk:Liberaltears|talk]]) 16:55, 23 March 2020 (EDT)

::::::::No. It was the Chinese intelligence service [[AI]] that read all the [[ChiCom flu]], [[Chinese virus]], [[CCP virus]], ''et al'' redirects created in the last few days. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 17:08, 23 March 2020 (EDT)

:::::::::Ah, so that's why...haha!
:::::::::Liberaltears, it sounds like that data is gone. Sorry! Andy is right--your browser could potentially hold on to recent posts, but only until the browser is closed. If it is still open from then, literally try using the back button dozens of times until you reach the edit page for the article when you made the post. If you have closed your browser since then, though, the private browsing mode would have prompted it to be purged. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 17:45, 23 March 2020 (EDT)

::::::::::You're right, the original data was purged. However, I took the effort and recreated the page on [[Eugene Scalia]]. --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 18:07, 23 March 2020 (EDT)

Sorry about that--I know it is a real nuisance to re-write content! The problem should be fixed now--let us know if you have more issues like this. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 01:48, 24 March 2020 (EDT)
:Alright, thank you DavidB4! --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 11:02, 24 March 2020 (EDT)

::And...it still isn't fixed. Sorry, I'm seeing errors again too. We're looking into it. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:24, 24 March 2020 (EDT)

Just curious, does it occur for any of you that while you're trying to make a significant edit, when you click the "preview" option to just to make sure you didn't make a huge mistake, especially if it's regarding a template, that the loading appears to take forever and that the preview simply doesn't show up? That happened to me while I was creating the page on [[Kelli Ward]], and it was somewhat of a nuisance. --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 17:27, 24 March 2020 (EDT)

:I've had that happen before. I typically find that when that happens, if I open another conservapedia page in a new tab, it fails to load. I think when you try to see a preview, it contacts the server. If the server is having a problem, the preview will also fail to work, therefore. If I try just submitting an edit when that is happening, it usually fails too. It seems like loading a preview could be done using client-side scripts (right in your browser), but from experience, I would say it does not. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 18:25, 24 March 2020 (EDT)

::As far as today went, while I was editing, all [[Conservapedia]] pages loaded well most of the time when I open them in a new tab, although the server did seem somewhat slower than usual. However, the "preview" option for editing still doesn't work for all pages whose content is above around 100 bytes. For instance, it works if I'm making a redirect page, but not for content pages.

::By the way DavidB4, since you're around, I was wondering when you might finish uploading all the images for [[Conservapedia:Image_upload_requests#Photo_requests.2C_2.2F7.2F20|this long list]]. No rush or anything, but I'm largely curious if some of my image requests [[Conservapedia:Image_upload_requests#February_26.2C_2020_image_requests_by_Liberaltears|here]] and [[Conservapedia:Image_upload_requests#March_16.2C_2020_image_requests_by_Liberaltears|here]] that aren't covered under a Creative Commons or Public Domain license can be uploaded under the Fair Use license. Thanks! --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 18:46, 24 March 2020 (EDT)

:::You're right, the preview isn't working at all for me, now.
:::In regard to the upload requests, I'm trying to get through them a few at a time, but there is a serious backlog, and it looks like I'm the only one working on it right now. I will try to give it more priority, but it is definitely going to take me some time. Thank you for understanding! What I can see by skimming through the list is that you have a lot from WikiMedia Commons and Flickr...that's good! I'll just check each one to make sure they are usable as I go. As for the other sources, I will need to check one-by-one. As examples though, ballotpedia.org and studybreaks.com do not seem to publish a copyright policy, so I must assume that their content is under full copyright. It would be better if we could use a different sources, but if there are no others available, we might be able to use these. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 16:06, 31 March 2020 (EDT)
::::Alright, thank you DavidB4! --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 16:09, 31 March 2020 (EDT)

== Improvising [[Template:Officeholder/senator]]... ==

Hello, I'd like to request an [[Conservapedia:Administrators|administrator]] to make a following change to [[Template:Officeholder/senator]], since I can't simply edit it due to the template being locked. As far as I know, whenever the template is used in a page, all the information needs to be filled properly for everything to appear in the correct manner. This means that if the information about the state isn't filled in, {{{state}}} will show up, and if the terms aren't filled in, {{{terms}}} will show up, etc. (the only exception is the “|succeeded=”, as “Incumbent (no successor)” shows up if left blank) However, the “|former=(y or n)” is the only exception, as if it's left out, it's automatically assumed that “former=n”, as it's only necessary to imply that a senator has left office. I would like to request replacing this part with a part such that:

*when using the [[Template:Officeholder/senator]], it would be filled as “|status=(s, j, or f)”
*if the information is not inputted, “{{{status}}}” would simply show up before “U.S. Senator from {{{state}}}”
*if “|status=s”, then “Senior” will show up before “U.S. Senator from {{{state}}}”
*if “|status=j”, then “Junior” will show up before “U.S. Senator from {{{state}}}”
*if “|status=f”, then “Former” will show up before “U.S. Senator from {{{state}}}”
*if “|status=(anything filled in except for s, j, or f)”, then “{{{status}}}” will show up before “U.S. Senator from {{{state}}}”
--[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 15:39, 31 March 2020 (EDT)
:Oh, that's a problem. Writing/editing templates gives me a headache, but I might be able to fix this. If it is unlocked, would you be able to fix it? --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 15:47, 31 March 2020 (EDT)

::No, unfortunately I wouldn't be able to do it by myself. Having joined this site less than a year ago ([[Special:Log/Liberaltears|see here]]), I have gained much experience with [[CP]] formatting, but I'm not a hard-core expert, especially not with formatting for creating/improvising templates. While I can somewhat comprehend how certain inputs in template source codes correspond to certain functions (as I've done such in analyzing to fix [[Template:Officeholder/state representative|this template]]), I don't know enough to add in all the necessary information for my proposed improvisation. Since the template was locked anyway, I was hoping that a sysop would be able to do it. --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 16:08, 31 March 2020 (EDT)

:::Update: I was able to improvise the template. --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 13:21, 3 April 2020 (EDT)

== Fixing a mistake using the Infobox officeholder template... ==

Hello, I just created [[Donald Bolduc|this page]] that includes [[Template:Infobox officeholder]], but I don't understand how the formatting works when adding military info. I analyzed the source of the template, but I still don't understand how to fix the error. Can someone figure it out and fix it on the page? I have no idea. Thanks! --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 22:41, 10 April 2020 (EDT)
:I went through the same thing on Gen. [[Mike Flynn]]'s page. It was a nightmare. [https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Michael_T._Flynn&action=edit#editform Here's how I fixed it, if it's any help.] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 22:57, 12 April 2020 (EDT)

::I just added a "|military=y" in the template in the [[Donald Bolduc]] page, but that didn't seem to make a difference. Also, the template used in the [[Michael T. Flynn]] page is [[Template:Officeholder]], and the one used in the [[Donald Bolduc]] page is [[Template:Infobox officeholder]]. --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 23:10, 12 April 2020 (EDT)

== Question about files that can be uploaded under Fair use... ==

Just curious, can Getty images be uploaded to [[CP]] under the Fair Use license? Thanks! --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 13:51, 14 April 2020 (EDT)
:Probably not. That's why Getty has a watermark. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 14:02, 14 April 2020 (EDT)

::Okay, thank you RobSmith! --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 14:10, 14 April 2020 (EDT)

:::Agreed, Getty is a company which makes money from the sale of images. This sort of company is not going to appreciate it if we try to make a "Fair Use" claim on them. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 14:16, 14 April 2020 (EDT)

::::Thank you for the further specification, DavidB4! --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 14:25, 14 April 2020 (EDT)

== Please look into this ==

https://www.conservapedia.com/Communications_Act_of_1934 this page is pretty vauge then has a hyper-link to this liberal site https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/LSB10082.pdf which is written by this democrat liberal who works for the ACLU of all places. https://www.aclu.org/news/by/kate-ruane/ so if someone could change this or look into it, thanks.
:FAS is a [[CIA]] front; I don't know if it should be described as "liberal". Sounds conspiratorial. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]] 17:17, 18 April 2020 (EDT)

== Changing font colors... ==
{| class="wikitable" style="float:right"
|-bgcolor=#cccccc
|- valign="center"
| [[File:SenatorCollins.jpg|237px]] || [[File:Sara Gideon.jpg|200px]]
|-
| <center>'''[[Susan Collins]]''' (likely nominee)</center> || <center>'''[[Sara Gideon]]''' (likely nominee)[[File:Democraticpartyusalogo.png|right|20px]]</center>
|}
Just curious, how do I make words appear in a dark red or dark blue color? I know how the formatting works, but I'm not sure what keywords to use for dark red and dark blue. Thanks! --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 20:19, 25 April 2020 (EDT)
:Dark red I've had problems with so I use brown; for dark blue try boldening.
Red

Brown

'''Dark blue'''

Not sure if this helps, but it's the best I can do. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]] 20:47, 25 April 2020 (EDT)

:Thanks for the suggestion RobSmith, and here's the thing. So I created [[United States Senate election in Maine, 2020|this page]], and I was initially thinking of using dark red and dark blue for the font colors in the wikitable for [[Susan Collins]] and [[Sara Gideon]] respectively, thinking that it would contrast with the generic red/blue colors for internal links, but after closely observing the colors after your reply, it turns out that the regular red and blue colors differ from the generic colors for wikified text. However, there is also another problem. For the situation where I'm trying to change the font color, it seems that apparently font color can't be changed in a wikitable, or something else. I used a wikitable as I couldn't figure out a way to put one image directly to the left of another, and it seems that this issue with font color formatting arises.. --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 21:43, 25 April 2020 (EDT)
::So are you trying to contrast GOP for red and Dem for blue? Maybe a miniicon like this or somesuch formatting. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]] 22:02, 25 April 2020 (EDT)
:::Great suggestion RobSmith; I just tried it and I think it works quite well! --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 22:34, 25 April 2020 (EDT)

:::If it helps, you can also use a hex color code, like <code><nowiki>style="color:#000000"</nowiki></code> to indicate black. With a little trial and error (or a [https://www.w3schools.com/colors/colors_picker.asp hex color picking tool]) you could probably get it pretty close. If you want to match a specific color, you can get that code too. You could take a screenshot of that color, open it in a photo editor which tells you color codes (like gimp), and get the exact code you need. Or, if you use Firefox, open the menu, and select "Web Developer", then "Eyedropper" and move the pointer the color you want the code for. Using the default style, red links seem to be about "#c60000" and blue links seem to be about "#3366bb". I didn't test those though, so slight tweaks may be needed to get it exactly right. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 22:12, 25 April 2020 (EDT)
::::That's a great idea DavidB4, but the problem is that I can't figure out a way to code that into the source properly. I tried using <code><nowiki></nowiki></code>, but it didn't seem to work. I think it probably has to do with the way the wikitable functions, but I'm not entirely sure. Since I used what RobSmith suggested, the party affiliations are distinguished, so I suppose the font colors don't really need to be changed, though I do very much appreciate your suggestion! --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 22:34, 25 April 2020 (EDT)

::::I am curious though, is there a way such that if two images are aligned to the right, that one image is directly to the left of the other? --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 22:37, 25 April 2020 (EDT)

:::::For plain text, you can just use "<nowiki>Colored text</nowiki>". Wouldn't that work? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the problem. Anyway, I'm glad Rob's suggestion is working! --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 00:40, 26 April 2020 (EDT)

== McSally Derangement Syndrome ==

Just wondering, is it about time for [[Conservapedia]] to coin the term "McSally Derangement Syndrome" and make a page about it? After all, the [[liberal]] hatred for [[Martha McSally]] has been getting worse and worse, given the [[snowflake]]s erupting all over the internet, the [[establishment]] media being somewhat biased towards the senator, and even idiotic websites having been created as smears, all for the purpose of trying to oust McSally this election year. --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 12:39, 3 May 2020 (EDT)

:I tend to shy away from inventing terms, but I'm not firmly opposed to it, if this seems like a useful topic to others. I suspect that most snowflakes doesn't even know who McSally is, but they do know who Trump is. This seems to better justify having an article on the latter than the former. --[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 00:32, 5 May 2020 (EDT)

::About [[TDS]], it seems that [[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] already created the page a few years ago. And about McSally, while some [[snowflake]]s may not have heard of her, those who do tend to despise her and constantly tout her likely 2020 [[Democrat]] opponent [[Mark Kelly]]. For example, after the "liberal hack" rebuke against Manu Raju, there was a massive left-wing meltdown that McSally would *dare insult a CNN reporter*. Many have also used McSally's vote against [[Obamacare]] to ridiculously argue that she is somehow opposed to protection for [[pre-existing condition]]s, despite the fact that the Republican-led repeal efforts ''does'' provide a certain degree of protection for such. Also, on ''[[The Hill]]'', I always notice in the articles about the senator that the comment sections are filled to the brim with idiotic liberal remarks, such as touting [[Mark Kelly]]'s little-known military record while blatantly ignoring McSally's Air Force record as a combat fighter for two decades (I noticed the idiocy when citing ''The Hill'' as a biased [[establishment]] media outlet [[United_States_Senate_elections,_2020#Establishment_media.2FDemocrat_collusion|here]]). And that's not to mention the "opinion" articles on AZ Central attacking the senator. As well as the threat by a Tuscon man in 2018, etc. Overall, given this as a major election year, liberals are pouring a massive effort to unseat McSally, and their nonsensical rhetoric getting out of hand. Thus, I suppose whether the page should be made or not could be up for consideration at the moment, as it's possible other editors may have certain disagreements. And I do appreciate your input, DavidB4! --[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User talk:Liberaltears|Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe]]''''' 01:08, 5 May 2020 (EDT)

== ICO file to highlight Conservapedia tab on browser ==

Most websites have a little jpg pic for the tab, like wikipedia or wordpress have a blue letter W.
This helps people keep track of sites when they have multiple tabs open.
It is done with a tiny image file with an .ico extension.
It would need to be inserted somewhere in the site settings.
(Without an ico or icon file, the tab presents on the browser as a plain blank rectangle.)

== Information Box ==

I've been working on a page for a World War I battle recently, and I want to add an information box at the top to include some of the basic facts and statistics. But I don't know for sure if I need to create a new template for that, or if there's an existing one I can apply: some exist for other wars like the Revolutionary War, but I can't tell if they will carry over to World War I or another conflict. Any ideas? -[[Teakin88]]

:I'm using the WWII battle Template on [[2020 Leftist insurrection]]. You could just cut n paste that one. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]] 23:39, 2 August 2020 (EDT)

::Thanks Rob! That was very useful. -[[Teakin88]]

== Is it OK for me to copy stuff I wrote on Wikipedia to here? ==

I am primarily a Wikipedia editor. (Feel free to check me out, my username is the same there.) I don't really prefer reading here because I think this site is very opinionated and derogatory to many people, and I do not agree with all the views of this site, even though I am a Christian. However, I don't really mind copying my contributions to this and other wikis. Is it OK (for non-politically related subjects)? Thanks! [[User:Félix An|Félix An]] ([[User talk:Félix An|talk]]) 21:40, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

:If it's your own work in your own words, then I believe it's fine. —[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May Dataclarifier be well!]] | [[Special:Contributions/Liberaltears|Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot!]]''''' Thursday, 21:43, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

::Thanks! Which sources can I cite here that are considered "reliable"? [[User:Félix An|Félix An]] ([[User talk:Félix An|talk]]) 21:53, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

:::I don't believe there to be a very detailed guide on that. Just go with sources that you can instinctually trust and don't seem sketchy. For example, Wikipedia should ''not'' be cited unless it's to prove the latter's [[Leftist roots of Wikipedia|liberal bias]]. Most conservative sites like [[Breitbart]], [[Townhall.com]], and the [[Daily Caller]] are great. Just keep in mind that the main reason for citing references is to back up whatever points you're trying to make on the articles you're editing on. If you cite anything that contains inappropriate language/content in any context, then it's important that you specify in the reference whatever that needs to warned for readers. Hope this helps. —[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May Dataclarifier be well!]] | [[Special:Contributions/Liberaltears|Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot!]]''''' Thursday, 22:07, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

== Access Issues ==

Has anyone else been encountering serious problems accessing Conservapedia the last few days? It seems like half the time I get on here, I'm met with an error message: "Internal Server Error," "Gateway Timeout," "Unauthorized," etc. It isn't all the time, but it's often enough to be frustrating, and if I'm not the only one, it needs to be sorted out. -[[Teakin88]]
:The [[DNC]] and their allied [[CCP]] hackers don't like the message getting out, so they are attempting to suppress information. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]] 15:06, 10 August 2020 (EDT)
::My recent edits have disappeared--again. Does anyone know what is going on??? -[[Teakin88]]
:::I have no idea what's happening either. Also, I had just mentioned about the issue [[Talk:Main_Page#Server_errors|here]]. —[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May Dataclarifier be well!]] | [[Special:Contributions/Liberaltears|Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot!]]''''' Wednesday, 11:04, 19 August 2020 (EDT)
::::Continuing to figure things out now. We have and will restore some of the edits. Sorry for the unexpected disruption!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:42, 19 August 2020 (EDT)

== Request to change article on homosexuality ==

Hey, nice work guys, I really love the articles. One thing I have noticed though is the lack of articles like "arguments FOR homosexuality." Now, I'm just as God-fearing as the rest of you, and I refuse to buy into the Homosexual Agenda as well, but if we want this place to maintain its non-partisanship, we should address both sides and deal with the Left's arguments accordingly. I was thinking about changing the existing debate articles by also including arguments for both sides. I have seen these leftists bring up some terrible points lately and I have just wanted to address them with this wonderful community - LeftistSchools
:You have to be an expert to talk about certain things discreetly. After all, the Bible says about some: "What they do is too shameful to discuss." Is that how you spell God-fearing? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 10:07, 25 August 2020 (EDT)

::I'd suggest a Debate page rather than a mainspace article at this point. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]] 12:43, 25 August 2020 (EDT)

:::My bad, I missed that typo when I was writing this up. It has been fixed. I believe you referenced Ephesians 5:12? Just before that verse, does it not also say that we should "Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them?" I agree with RobSmith in that a debate page should be set up. Active discussion must be involved if we are to expose the deeds of darkness - [[User:LeftistSchools]]

::::Verse 12 actually reads, ''For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret.'' [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]] 18:46, 25 August 2020 (EDT)

:::The Holy Apostle says to expose "the futile works of darkness" ''by contrast'' through seeking "complete goodness and right living and truth." It is also written, "cast not your pearls before swine, lest they trample them." The argument is over. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 20:16, 25 August 2020 (EDT)

==Ham and eggs==

If you say you have ham and eggs, you must have at least ''some'' ham or ''some'' eggs. If you switch steak for ham and switch oatmeal for eggs, how can you still say you have "ham and eggs"? That shouldn't be difficult to understand. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 10:36, 25 August 2020 (EDT)

== Night mode ==

Just wondering, is it just me, or is night mode not around anymore? Usually for a certain time period when night mode's on, account creation is disabled for everyone (except administrators), and editing is limited to those with the "Administrator" or "edit" tag. This usually prevents trolls from vandalizing when most editors aren't as active on CP. —[[User:Liberaltears|Liberaltears]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May Dataclarifier's mother be all well!]]''''' Wednesday, 13:56, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

== More server issues ==

Is it just me, or does it occur for anyone else editing that CP would function normally for around nine minutes, then won't load for the next six minutes, with the process repeating? —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>Liberaltears</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Thursday, 23:47, 23 September 2020 (EDT)
:I typically can make 2 or 3 edits, purge the history for the past hour, and can re-edit. I'm rotating between 4 browsers to do it. It's been happening for about 3 days. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 00:07, 24 September 2020 (EDT)
::Ah, I see. I'll try purging my browser cache and see if it helps to at least partially resolve the nuisance. Thanks for the reply! —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>Liberaltears</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Thursday, 00:15, 24 September 2020 (EDT)

== Hello ==

I'm new to Conservapedia, and I was wondering if there is a category for articles that need improvements? Such as spell-checking, adding wikilinks to dead-end articles, etc. Things that are easy to help me get familiar with the process of editing here. Thanks. [[User:MAGAViking|MAGAViking]] ([[User talk:MAGAViking|talk]]) 19:27, 24 October 2020 (EDT)
:If you look at the left side on any CP page and under "Edit Console", there's a link that says "Special pages". That lists some maintenance reports, including dead-end pages, etc. —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>'''LT'''</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Saturday, 19:36, 24 October 2020 (EDT)
(ec)
:No, but that's a good idea. Here's a suggestion: you could look at [https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:PopularPages Popular Pages], and begin with the newer ones that seemingly are receiving the most traffic right now. Thanks! [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 19:38, 24 October 2020 (EDT)
::Thank you for the suggestions! [[User:MAGAViking|MAGAViking]] ([[User talk:MAGAViking|talk]]) 19:45, 24 October 2020 (EDT)

== "President Biden" ==

So, although I hope and pray that the courts do the right thing and invalidate the voter fraud occurring, there is of course the possibility that Joe Biden will be taking the oath of office on January 20th.

However, since it is now obvious that he will have only done so by stealing the election, I think it is necessary for Conservapedia to determine its policy on referring to Trump and Biden in that scenario. My position is, since Biden did not lawfully win the election, he cannot truly be considered President, and therefore the page(s) devoted to him should not label him as such. Similarly, the page on Donald Trump should state that he remains the actual President (though of course an explanation will be necessary, that he is not able at the moment to exercise the powers of the Presidency).

Again, that's my position. What say others? -[[Teakin88]]

:Do you believe everything the [[MSM]] and [[Big Tech]] says? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 15:43, 6 November 2020 (EST)

::No. I do believe that the Democrats will try to steal it, and that the institutions which are supposed to stand in the way of that are too corrupt to be automatically trusted to do so. So my question remains--is the Conservapedia policy going to be to continue to acknowledge Trump as the lawful President, even if the worst comes to pass? [[User:Teakin88|Teakin88]]
:::Trump remains the President and Joe Biden remains a suspected agent of a foreign power. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]]

::::I don't think the presidential election is over in Wisconsin. As the old saying goes, [https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/additional-benford-analysis-chicago-pittsburg-like-milwaukee-show-likely-voter-fraud-benefiting-biden/ a picture is worth a thousand words]. —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>'''LT'''</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Saturday, 15:06, 7 November 2020 (EST)

== 2020 results ==

Georgia and North Carolina have finally been called, giving Biden a winning Electoral College tally of 306 to 232. The popular vote was 51 percent (78.7 million) for Biden to 47 percent (73.1 million) for Trump. The total presidential vote was 13.2 percent higher than in 2016.[https://cookpolitical.com/2020-national-popular-vote-tracker?] On election day, Biden's net approval was at +6.2 compared to -12.8 for Trump.[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president/trumpbidenfavorability.html] On election day 2016, Clinton had a net approval of -12.6 while Trump had -21.[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president/clintontrumpfavorability.html] So Trump could cover a 8.4 gap in his favorability numbers, but apparently not a 19 point gap.

From the chart, I'd say the Trump campaign was on track until the riots hit at the end of May. In others words, we can't blame covid. But we can blame Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, who refused to send in the troops to recover the two police stations that were siezed by the rioters -- at least not without a request from the local governor. What are we to make of the Democratic governors, who sacrificed their own states to the rioters rather than request federal aid? Are they telling their own voters that they are a bunch of racists who had it coming? Jay Inslee in Washington State was reelected by a whopping margin of 57 percent to 43 percent. Inslee called up 200 guardsmen to clear the highways at one point, but only laughed when asked about CHAZ. The state is so blue that riots aren't even controversial.

There is also the odd phenomenon of Republican candidates being nearly tied with Democrats in the House vote and in other downballot votes, despite the fact that Republicans lost the White House by a significant margin. We can expect a Republican sweep in the midterms. Four years of Trump news has exhausted all of us. It seems that a significant number of voters were hoping that ousting Trump and electing Republicans to Congress would give us a break from all the drama. Of course, the problem here is not so much anything Trump has actually done as the hysterical way that the media reacts to him. I certainly hope Trump is not back in 2024 and that the nomination goes to someone like Vice President Mike Pence or Senator Tom Cotton. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:22, 15 November 2020 (EST)

:The ticket-splitting may have been more in some liberal-leaning districts like the ones that propelled [[Young Kim]], Maria Elvira Salazar, Carlos Gimenez, Michelle Steel to victory. —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>'''LT'''</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Sunday, 00:39, 15 November 2020 (EST)

:Also, the problem with a candidate other than Trump is that they may not have the populist-approach appeal to some voters that were crucial to his 2016 victory. By the way PeterKa, do you live in Washington? —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>'''LT'''</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Sunday, 00:44, 15 November 2020 (EST)
::As of late, I have not followed the 2020 election news closely. But knowing that Donald Trump is a "New Yorker fighter", he will likely run again in 2024 if he does not win in 2020. He may launch a news website/channel too as a prelude to 2024. In addition, Trump has a big ego which could also cause him to run in 2024 should he lose the 2020 election. Furthermore, I can't see Trump letting his very loyal fans down.
::U.S. President [[Grover Cleveland]] was elected non-consecutive terms and he was a New Yorker.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:17, 15 November 2020 (EST)
:::Yeah, I got to vote against Inslee and the state's appalling plan to teach sex education starting in the fifth grade.[https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2020/february/parents-alarmed-at-washington-state-k-12-sexxx-ed-that-would-offer-varieties-of-sexual-stimulation] Sadly, there is not much reason for a conservative to vote in Washington State.
:::In the argot of campaign strategists, Trump commits the sins of going off message and shooting down (attacking targets not worthy of his attention). Just by fixing those problems, he could go up 2 to 3 points in the polls. He'll be 78 on election day 2024. That's a year older than Biden is now. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 02:51, 15 November 2020 (EST)
::::Trump has a lot of energy (I think he might have ADHD). He is like the energy bunny. Barring circulatory problems such as a stroke or heart attack, Trump will run again in 2024.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 07:56, 15 November 2020 (EST)

== Continuous loading problems ==

CP continues to have loading problems. Often I'm trying to edit the House elections page, and after some updates, the site won't load for a few minutes. This type of issue happens over and over, and it drains my time. When will this be resolved? I really like editing here, though I wish the site could be more efficient than it currently is. Thanks! —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>'''LT'''</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Monday, 23:08, 15 November 2020 (EST)

:I'm suspecting that, like last time, this may be the result of attempted DDOS attacks by leftists who don't want people to see the truth as it comes out. They're becoming increasingly desperate and they wouldn't be acting this way if they didn't have anything to fear. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 21:12, 16 November 2020 (EST)

::A larger problem with CP right now is that page views don't go up the way it used to, which probably could've been caused by those very server errors currently wasting my time. My page creations months ago such as [[Dan Forest|this]], [[Mike Bishop|this]], [[Bruce Poliquin|this]], and [[Abigail Spanberger|this]] all quickly got very high numbers despite very few revisions for them. If those leftists were trying to block off people from seeing the truth we're putting out, especially with updates related to the presidential, Senate, and House elections, they might've partially succeeded. Based off [[Special:Statistics|here]], it seems that total page views are going up steadily, though I don't know what pages account for that, though [[Drudge Report alternatives|this]] seems like one of them. However, ever since those series of annoying problems in August, CP's page view numbers for new page creations has dwindled over time. Now, one of my observations is that CP eliminated the www. from its URL, which may or may not have an impact. Another thing I noticed is that much of the page views could've simply been siphoned off to [[403.shtml|here]] due to those 403.shtml errors popping up. Right now, I just hope Andy can fix those loading problems soon, as I often am trying to update the [[2020 U.S. House elections]] page and find out three seconds later that the page won't load. —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>'''LT'''</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Tuesday, 21:29, 16 November 2020 (EST)

::Aaand we just got DDOSed for a day. Wow. Leftists are p*ssed. [[User:Sievert 81|Sievert 81]] ([[User talk:Sievert 81|talk]]) 19:07, 17 November 2020 (EST)

== Conceding an election: Carter versus Trump ==

Fer nearly two weeks, the media has been whining about Trump's failure to concede gracefully. Okay, I guess he should. But what Democrat has ever conceded gracefully? The ''New York Times'' is still running articles that accuse Nixon of stealing the 1968 election from Humphrey by communicating with the South Vietnamese president. In 2016, Hillary's campaign wanted the Electoral College briefed on Trump's supposed treason with the Russians. Were they supposed to undo the popular vote? Meanwhile, Carter's former aides are fighting for vindication by accusing Reagan of conspiring with the ayatollahs. Here is Anne Coulter, brillant as usual: "[https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2020/11/18/gee-why-cant-trump-accept-defeat-like-the-democrats-n2580328 Gee, Why Can't Trump Accept Defeat Like the Democrats?]" [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 08:29, 19 November 2020 (EST)

:Given the circumstances of this election, it's obvious that there was unprecedented fraud in favor of Biden. Also, Ann Coulter hasn't been on the right side of the issues every time; [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/ann-coulter-says-trump-deserves-to-lose-will-vote-for-him-anyway remember when she said Trump "deserved" to lose]? The lack of progress in reaching some goals in border security had nearly all to do with the Trump agenda blocked by the courts, so blaming it on Trump was rather unfair and ridiculous. —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>'''LT'''</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Thursday, 08:38, 19 November 2020 (EST)

::[https://imgur.com/g7iOP5l Here] is a 1988 ''Playboy'' cover promoting the "October surprise" theory of the 1980 election that I thought was pretty funny. ("Mom, I just got it for the crazy conspiracy theory! Honest!")
::Trump's political career was both created and undone by ''Celebrity Apprentice'' and CNN, with Jeff Zucker presiding over both. Biden could be our most anti-Christian president ever, a Christian-bashing Catholic backed up by a Marxist pope and a Catholic-hating veep. Obama was elected as a Christian and shifted to Christian-bashing toward the end of his first term. We had five unitarian presidents, namely Jefferson, John Adams, John Quincy Adams, Filmore, and Taft. Perhaps Pence can bring us back to Nicene-creed orthodoxy.
::Liberals remain hysterical about whatever Trump happens to be doing. ''[https://www.huffpost.com/entry/republicans-trump-2020-election-democracy_n_5fb6fefec5b618e45b469b6b?ul HuffPost]'' is accusing him of "undermining democracy." Stacy Abrams lost the 2018 Georgia governor's race by 50 to 49 point margin. Ever since, she has been accusing Republicans of "voter suppression," whatever that means. But she isn't undermining democracy, at least not to according to the liberal media. In fact, they treat Abrams as a hero precisely because of this unsportsmanlike behavior.
::As for Coulter, I think she has been giving Trump good advise. When the rioters took the police station in Minneapolis, she immediately tweeted that Trump should send in the troops. This was certianly a missed opportunity, one of the few Trump had to reset the race in his favor. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 05:29, 20 November 2020 (EST)

== Biden opens the border. What happened to covid? ==

What is the No. 1 policy priority of the incoming Biden administration? Covid? Global warming? Racial justice? No, no, and no. It is increasing the level of immigration in order to create more Democrat voters. With the media in peak covid hysteria, Biden has announced that he is going to let in more illegal immigrants. This is on top of the increase in legal refugees that he told us about last week. Not only will he stop wall construction, but he will also freeze deportations for 100 days. This may be a preliminary to ending deportation altogether. If that's not incentive enough, illegals will get free health care, including the covid vaccine. This is early, specific, action that suggests that Biden prioritizes opening the border over almost every other issue.

Current American citizens are not the constituency that Biden is appealing to. Only 34 percent of Americans want an increase in immigration, according to Gallup's lastest poll of this issue, which was taken on May 28-June 4. The idea of giving illegal immigrants free health care is both hugely unpopular and economically unsustainable. You can think of Bidenism as a reversed image of democracy. The country would be run, not for the benefit its citizens or even its current residents, but for non-citizens who now live outside its boundaries. See "[https://issuesinsights.com/2020/11/20/bidens-covid-mask-slips-when-it-comes-to-illegal-immigration/ Poll: 67% Of Likely Voters Say Illegal Immigration Is A Serious Problem, Most Believe Democrats Don't Want To Stop It]" and "[https://issuesinsights.com/2020/11/20/bidens-covid-mask-slips-when-it-comes-to-illegal-immigration/ Biden’s COVID Plan: Close The Economy, Open The Border]." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 23:29, 20 November 2020 (EST)

== The future of the Republican party ==

Vice President Mike Pence looks awesomely presidential in [https://youtu.be/mJEBgjQIekE this video]. You won't get past a Pence-led Space Force, you filthy Martians! [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 12:34, 22 November 2020 (EST)

== An observation about the Gateway Timeouts ==

The Gateway Timeouts always appear to happen at the same frequency in terms of their occurrence. They seem to show up three times every hour, lasting for five minutes each time then going away for fifteen minutes only to show up again. —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>'''LT'''</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Tuesday, 22:52, 23 November 2020 (EST)

== What happened to Matt Drudge? ==

For many years, Matt Drudge was the top source of conservative news. In 2018-2019, his site gradually moved to the left. Nowadays, it is just another news aggregator. Viewship has declined sharply. What kind of business model is that? Perhaps Drudge sold out to some liberal billionaire. But who, when, and why? [https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/matt-drudge-logs-off This story] follows the rabbit hole as far down as it goes. In the summer on 2019, Drudge switched the site's advertising account to a company owned by Margaret Otto. She lives in Mountain View, California and is the wife of Adrian Otto, an executive at Google. The pair has been managing server traffic for the Drudge Report since at least 2005.

The writer didn't come up with anyone beside the Ottos who is directly connected to the site: no interns, no editors, no sign of what happened to Drudge himself. It seems that everything is automated. Drudge Report is in the process of the being transformed into a scam site. Since August, it has been running "hidden ads" they charge the advertiser for, but that don't actually appear on the site. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 04:08, 26 November 2020 (EST)

== Happy Thanksgiving! ==

Happy Thanksgiving, and THANK YOU to all the dedicated, hardworking editors on CP here! —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>'''LT'''</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Friday, 22:57, 26 November 2020 (EST)

== Saxon math ==

In a Biden presidency, the teacher's unions will be in driver's seat when it comes to education policy. So we can expect a lot more "anti-racist education." Pretty much every Democrat, including Biden himself, has called Trump a racist. Calling Trump supporters racists is common as well. Biden calls us "uglies" and "chumps." In short, "anti-racist" really means anti-American. A lot of parents may soon give homeschooling another look.

''[https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/11/k12_why_john_saxon_is_the_brightest_star_in_math_education.html American Thinker]'' has an enthusiastic report on Saxon math, a popular sequence of homeschooling classes. Saxon got a frontpage ''National Review'' story back in the 1980s. ''AT'' recommends the pre-2007 editions. On Amazon, I didn't find later editions for sale, aside from a couple of workbooks. The ''[https://nypost.com/2020/03/16/how-to-home-school-your-kids-like-a-pro-during-coronavirus-quarantine/ New York Post]'' also recommends Saxon. [https://www.hillsdale.net/news/20180726/students-to-get-new-math-texbooks Here] is a story about a school that switched from Saxon to another brand. The teachers complained that Saxon is repetitious. But is that really a flaw? The teacher can always adjust the pace and not every student needs to cover every problem. [https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED365728 Here] is a 1993 study that found that the Saxon method was effective. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 09:05, 27 November 2020 (EST)

== New topic: Trump Victory ==

How are you all feeling about Trump's likelihood of being named victor in the presidential election? His team's lawsuits don't seem to have had any positive results. I'm starting to lose faith that he'll be awarded a second term by the Electoral College. --[[User:IScott|IScott]] ([[User talk:IScott|talk]]) 18:14, 4 December 2020 (EST)

:The more illegal vote fraud committed by the Democrats that gets exposed (and more and more of it is getting exposed day by day), the less and less likely it is that the Democrats will be able to retain any semblance of power, much less get Biden into the White House. Not only is Trump getting his second term (as, by all rights, Biden basically legally forfeited the election the moment it was discovered that the Democrats illegally cheated on his behalf), but it's a given that there will be massive fallout from this as he invokes EO 13848 (regarding illegal foreign interference in a United States election), which would allow the Trump administration to legally seize the assets of companies (including Facebook, Twitter and Google/YouTube) and individuals (which could even include members of the liberal media) that were complicit (whether by aiding or covering up) in said foreign interference. This may very well also lead to the end of the Democrat Party as many of its members, along with their operatives, end up going to prison and face military tribunals for electoral fraud, sedition, insurrection (with intent of violently overthrowing the duly elected US Government) and many other crimes - and in the case of Democrats who committed treason (and there are quite a few of them), they would potentially face execution for that crime. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 18:47, 4 December 2020 (EST)

::Wait, we can contact the Trump Campaign and show Conservapedia sources the necessary evidence. --[[User:United States|United States]] ([[User talk:United States|talk]]) 18:48, 4 December 2020 (EST)
:::The Secretary of State for California certified for Biden today.[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-04/biden-clinches-electoral-college-win-as-california-certifies] That gives the Democrats a certified majority in the Electoral College. So it is no longer possible for election fraud lawsuits to overturn the election. I suppose we could go the Hillary Clinton route and demand that the Electoral College be briefed on Hunter's corruption and how Joe is a treasonous stooge of China, or at least was for many years. In July, the Supreme Court affirmed unanimously that state laws binding electors are valid.[https://nypost.com/2020/07/06/scotus-presidential-electors-must-pick-their-states-popular-vote-winner/] Thirty-two states have laws of this kind. The governors count the electors's votes. They can presumably disregard votes of the kind that SCOTUS has now ruled illegal. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:26, 5 December 2020 (EST)
::::California is just very Democrat, how about the toss-ups? --'''United States''' 11:08, 5 December 2020 (EST)
:::::[https://www.270towin.com/maps/2020-election-certification-status Here] is the certification site. Only Missouri and New Jersey remain uncertified at this point. Trump can't win without Pennsylvania. The U.S. Third Circuit upheld Pennsylvania's certification on November 27, so the legal options seem to have run out there. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 12:13, 5 December 2020 (EST)

::::::That looks absolutely bogus to me (and may, in fact, be one of numerous psy-ops ploys being employed by the Left to try to demoralize and discourage our side) and I'm not about to buy it, especially considering that Trump still has other avenues to go to get the illegal Democrat vote fraud overturned in the swing states and elsewhere. In addition to him invoking EO 13848, if the SCOTUS is intimidated by the criminals in the Democrat Party to not rule as they should and declare the election in Trump's favor (which he rightfully won anyway, as all votes that came in ''after'' the closing of polls at 8:00 p.m. local time are invalid and don't count under federal election rules), then he'll have no choice but to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 against the Democrats, their operatives and their brownshirts to deep-six their illegal coup (which the vote fraud they're committing is a part of). [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 13:54, 5 December 2020 (EST)
:::::::Various states encouraged non-citizens to vote, notably California. But these states tend to be "deep blue" anyway. So this type of fraud would effect the popular vote more than the Electoral College vote. Every state should require voter ID. Whether fraud is an issue or not, it would make people take the process of voting more seriously.

:::::::The latest is that the Dems are calling for Trump's lawyers to be sanctioned. What about Gore's lawyers, who pushed the "hand recount" nonsense back in 2000? There was no basis in Florida law for counting votes by hand. Furthermore, there is no reason to think that this method is more accurate than a machine count. Ron Klain, who headed Gore's recount effort, is now White House chief of staff. In short, there is no shame in trying to cheat your way to victory if you are a Democrat. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:03, 5 December 2020 (EST)

::::::::The thing with that is, though, those who were witnesses first-hand to the vote fraud as they took part in it are now starting to feel shame and are speaking out against it due to the reawakening of their consciences. The more hardcore "true believer" Democrats may not feel that way now, but they're going to have their "come to Jesus" moment the moment arrests for vote fraud (and related crimes) start being made. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 13:15, 6 December 2020 (EST)

:::::::::Also, Biden again defended China. That just gives me a headache. --[[User:United States|United States]] ([[User talk:United States|talk]]) 13:15, 6 December 2020 (EST)

== Will fraud allegations keep Republicans from the Georgia polls? ==

The Russia collusion hoax went on for years. Hillary could spend $2 billion on her campaign and millions voted. But up against Russian bots and $100,000 worth of ridiculous Facebook ads, she didn't have a chance. I don't recall that the media ever worried about the sanity of people who believed such nonsense.

When Mueller finally testified, it turned out that the man was an empty shell, or at any rate a guy with better things to do than read the Mueller Report or worry about whether Russians were colluding with "Trimp," as he called the president. Liberals didn't skip a beat. They moved right along to the Ukraine phone call issue. Why can't Trump ask anyone he likes to investigate Biden? Running for president certainly didn't give Trump any kind of immunity.

That's why it's so thoughtful of the media to be concerned that Georgia Republicans will become so discombobulated by the allegations of fraud in the presidential election that they will neglect to vote in the all-important Senate runoffs on January 5. See "[https://www.ajc.com/politics/faith-shaken-in-system-trumps-georgia-supporters-consider-skipping-us-senate-runoffs/4KPPDIUSVBEFZD6OTTPGUAQ2SE/ Faith shaken in system, Trump’s Georgia supporters consider skipping U.S. Senate runoffs]." The headline may sound like parody, but this article is the real deal. Apparently, there was a townhall where attendees asked the state Republican chairwoman why Republicans should invest time or money in the runoffs. What do want to bet those people were Democrats? [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 06:50, 6 December 2020 (EST)
:Rumor is, Durham has expanded his probe to include election fraud. Durham was appointed as special counsel in October. Special Counsels must be appointed from outside government. THis means Durham must have privately retired as a US Attorney at some point. Is firing a Special Counsel an impeachable offense? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 15:37, 6 December 2020 (EST)
::Patrick Fitzgerald, special counsel in the Plame case, was also a serving U.S. attorney. He was appointed by Comey, who had "full power of the attorney general." The regulations were issued by the attorney general, so the AG can override them. Every special counsel appointment has been irregular in one way or another. Special counsels are supposed to investigate crimes, but communicating with Russians isn't a crime. That didn't slow Mueller down. Unlike Comey, Rosenstien did not the have the full power of the AG. He got around the regulation by appointing Mueller as a "special assistant." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 02:06, 7 December 2020 (EST)

== Attention Hong Kong burglers: Carrie Lam's house is full of cash ==

Hong Kong is a major banking center, but the banks are too afraid of U.S. sanctions to let Chief Executive Carrie Lam open an account: "[https://www.businessinsider.com/hk-leader-doesnt-have-bank-account-because-of-us-sanctions-2020-11 Hong Kong's leader is being paid in cash due to US sanctions. Carrie Lam earns $56,000 a month and says money is piling up at her house]." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 02:19, 7 December 2020 (EST)

== Attempted murder of election fraud witness ==

On the main page, there is a headline on the "In the News" column that claims to link to an article with a video of an apparent attempted murder of an election fraud witness. However, on that very same article, an editor's note claims that it is not an attempted hit on a fraud witness. I think this headline should be removed from the main page as soon as possible, to ensure that Conservapedia maintains its credibility. --[[User:Toby Chester|Toby Chester]] ([[User talk:Toby Chester|talk]]) 06:17, 9 December 2020 (EST)

== History of Conservapedia ==

I was looking at the [https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/conservapedia.com Alexa ranking] and statistics on this site and as I noticed the 'similar sites by audience overlap' statistic. I thought to myself, "I wonder if there are other good conservative sites out there," thinking that this would lead me to them. I was mistaken for one. When I saw 'Rationalwiki.org', I thought it would be another good conservative site like this one, hence 'rational', but it's swarming with liberals. I was a little annoyed at first, but some of their content funny, just because it's so wrong. As I was browsing the site, I came upon Conservapedia's article. Evidently, they have an extensive network of (mis)information about this site. If the liberals are going to write our history, I think the admins should create a page on this site detailing the history of Conservapedia from a conservative point of view. -[[User:Mark Adams|Mark Adams]][[User Talk:MAdams|(Discuss with me) ]] 10:33, 18 January 2021 (EST)

==RfC==
I propose we establish a Conservapedia Project page for dispute resolution and editors to air their grievances against other editors, rather than clog up Andy's talk page. I propose we call it [[Conservapedia:Kangeroo Court]], unless somebody has a better name. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 21:32, 31 January 2021 (EST)
:Hmm, good idea. After all, then Andy won't have to deal with notifications about users posting on his talk page on arguments he appears to take no interest in involving himself in. —[[User:Liberaltears|<code>'''LT'''</code>]]'''''[[User:Liberaltears/mail|May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!]]''''' Monday, 12:25, 1 February 2021 (EST)
::If Andy wants to get involved in one of these peeing contests, there's nothing stopping him. This would encourage users to resolvd problems among themselves. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 14:15, 1 February 2021 (EST)

:::I think we should just stick to keeping Conservapedia simple. Having dispute resolution pages can end up being a mess, like it is on Wikipedia. [[User:Bytemsbu|Bytemsbu]] ([[User talk:Bytemsbu|talk]]) 21:05, 1 February 2021 (EST)

::::Every dispute doesn't' have to be resolved. The idea now is simply to keep trolls off Andy's talk page and give editors a place to air grievances, which may or may not be legit. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 21:17, 1 February 2021 (EST)
{{Warning collapse
|reason=Off topic; personal attack
|content=:::::You're starting again with the false accusations, Rob. You should've left well enough alone when Karajou removed this section and took that for the signal he was sending you, but now you're making like the proverbial "dog with a bone" that just won't drop it and let it go (especially now with your attempts to appeal to other editors here). [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 21:27, 1 February 2021 (EST)
::::::You're only continuing to prove my point (and Karajou's point) every time you do this, Rob. Ever since you decided to go rogue and bend a knee to the Biden regime with that post on my talk page falsely accusing me of "trolling" while leaving a link to that DHS note (which appears to have been the moment that you snapped), you've been getting progressively worse. The only reason you put that warning template up to hide what I have to say is because you don't like what I have to say, and only liberals resort to that kind of censorship for similar such reasons - and every time you do this, you only further prove that point. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 21:46, 1 February 2021 (EST)}}
:::The Kangaroo Court will reduce the incidence of divisive flame wars, giving aggrieved parties a place to vent their <s>spleens</s> differences. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 00:08, 2 February 2021 (EST)
No one is going to post on a forum with a title like the one proposed. This page is as good a place as any for the "Why is RobSmith so mean?" discussion. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:28, 2 February 2021 (EST)
:The objective is to establish a process where editors know they will be heard. Right now, Andy's talk page is the first and last resort for complaints and disputes. Some (probably if not most) are too trivial to deal with, which Andy doesn't have time to deal with. This leaves some editors frustrated for not getting resolution to their problems.
:A Kangaroo court will give all editors a chance to present their case with evidence before objective viewers. The viewers can then reject it without merit, or possibly render a decision one or both parties. The decision of course is without any enforcement mechanism, and blocking editors can cite as a second offense if the user doesn't mend their ways. Andy of course would be the Final Court of Appeal, but only after the Kangaroo Court rendered a decision.
:Sysops would be the only group of editors with direct access to making a complaint against a Sysop on Andy's talk page, by-passing the Kangaroo Court, and eliminating the frivolous cases we've seen in the past. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]][[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]] 01:04, 2 February 2021 (EST)
{{Warning collapse
|reason=DFTT
|content=:I'd like to let this drop and move on, but RobS is clearly unwilling to and he's letting it affect both his judgement and his ability to do his job. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 00:45, 2 February 2021 (EST)}}
Nothing wrong with this "Kangaroo Court" idea. Except the name, and that name would be a deal-killer. I don't like to copy names from other projects. But maybe "Board of Arbitration" would fit better.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 08:06, 2 February 2021 (EST)

Texit

2021-02-01T19:19:46Z

TerryH: Created page with "'''Texit''' is the common name for any political movement within the United States State of Texas to regain the independence Texas initially enjoyed following the..."

'''Texit''' is the common name for any political movement within the [[United States]] [[State]] of [[Texas]] to regain the independence Texas initially enjoyed following the Battle of San Jacinto and the establishment of the [[Republic of Texas]] in 1836.

Today a [Texas Nationalist Movement https://tnm.me/] now exists. Mr. Daniel O. Miller founded it in 1995 during the [[President of the United States of America|Presidency]] of [[William Jefferson Clinton]] (*1992-2001). This group has advocated for Texas independence ever since, through three subsequent Presidencies.

Recently (25 January 2021), State Representative Kyle Biedermann ([[Republican Party|R]]-Fredericksburg, Comal [[County]], Texas) introduced a bill – the ''Texas Independence Referendum Act'' – to call a public question on the matter of Texas independence on 2 November 2021. If the vote is in favor, then the bill provides that a committee, with members appointed by the [[Lieutenant Governor]] and the Speaker of the Texas State House, consider the "most efficient method" of achieving Texas independence.

[[Category:Politics]] [[Category:Texas]]

War game

2021-02-01T19:12:53Z

TerryH: Created page with "A '''war game''' is a high-level simulation of a possible armed conflict. More broadly, it is a metaphor for simulating a political, legal, or other conflict that does not nec..."

A '''war game''' is a high-level simulation of a possible armed conflict. More broadly, it is a metaphor for simulating a political, legal, or other conflict that does not necessarily involve force of arms. As such it is a valuable tool in strategic and operational planning, whether for an [[army]] (or [[navy]]), a company, or a political movement.

[[Category:Conflict]]

Main Page

2020-12-01T03:22:35Z

TerryH:

{|style="border-spacing:8px; margin:0px -8px;"
|style="width:50%; border:1px solid #ffdcdc; background:#fffbfb; vertical-align:top; color:#000;"|
{|width="100%" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background:#fffbfb;"
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#ffdcdc; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #ffa4a4; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Featured on Conservapedia[[Template:Mainpageleft|.]]</h2>
|-
|style="color:#000;"| {{mainpageleft}}
|}

|style="width:50%; border:1px solid #cedff2; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top"|
{| width="100%" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;"
! <h2 style="margin:0; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">[[Conservapedia:In the News|In the News]][https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Template:Mainpageright&action=edit .] ''what the [[MSM]] isn't fully covering''.</h2>
|-
|style="color:#000;"| {{mainpageright}}
|}
|}
{{conservatism}}
[[Category:Conservapedia]]

Martha Mitchell

2020-10-20T15:51:59Z

TerryH: Created page with "'''Martha Mitchell''' (2 September 1918 - 31 May 1976), wife of United States Attorney General John N. Mitchell, sounded the first public warnings about the scandal hi..."

'''Martha Mitchell''' (2 September 1918 - 31 May 1976), wife of [[United States]] [[Attorney General]] John N. Mitchell, sounded the first public warnings about the scandal history now calls [[Watergate]]. For this she was the target of the first known modern instance of political [[gaslighting]]. History mis-remembers her for her tendency to talk out of turn and exaggerate her own sense of self-importance. In fact, her life and end serve as a warning to anyone who tries to "take down" "powerful people" without sufficent backup and allies.

== Early life ==
Martha Elizabeth Beall was born on 2 September 1918 in Pine Bluff, [[Arkansas]]. She was the only child of George Beall, a cotton broker. When her family lost much of its money in the [[Great Depression]], she switched from private school to public school.

She first married Clyde Jennings, Jr., an officer in the [[United States Army]], in 1946, after the [[Second World War]]. They divorced in 1957. In that same year she met the up-and-coming [[lawyer]] John N. Mitchell, and married him in December of 1957.

== Role in the Watergate affair ==
John N. Mitchell became friends with the future [[President of the United States|President]] [[Richard M. Nixon]] when their respective law firms merged, to form the firm of Nixon, Mudge, Rose, Guthrie, Alexander and Mitchell.<ref name=Goudsmit>Goudsmit L., "Remembering Martha Mitchell," ''Pundicity,'' 20 October 2020. <http://goudsmit.pundicity.com/24662/remembering-martha-mitchell> Also appears at: <https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2020/10/20/accountability/news-media/remembering-martha-mitchell/></ref> In 1969, the newly elected President Nixon named Mitchell his Attorney General.

In 1972, Mitchell left the Nixon administration and ultimately became director of the Finance Committee for the Re-election of the President, known to history as simply "Committee to Re-Elect the President," or CREEP for short. At about this time, Martha Mitchell gained a reputation for listening in on her husband's telephone calls and meetings, and then gossiping about these to her [[media]] friends. And one of the things she liked to "gossip" about, were the "dirty tricks" by CREEP officers to ensure Nixon's re-election. These included the initial bugging of the Democratic National Committee offices in the Watergate apartments.

In the middle of June 1972, the Mitchells traveled to Newport Beach, [[California]], to attend some fund-raisers, presumably for CREEP. While there, John Mitchell received warning about his wife's tendency to "gossip." So he hired former [[Federal Bureau of Investigation|FBI]] Agent Steve King to isolate Martha and ensure that she would ''not'' be talking anymore.<ref name=Frost>"Martha Mitchell: The Woman Nobody Believed About Watergate," ''All That's Interesting'', retrieved 20 October 2020. <https://allthatsinteresting.com/martha-mitchell></ref>

One week later (17 June 1972) came the Watergate Break-in.

Five days later (22 June 1972), former Agent King literally held Martha Mitchell captive in Newport News for four days.

Though of course John Mitchell was convicted of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury, no one ever charged him with subornation of kidnapping.

Martha Mitchell suffered public shame, got the blame when John Mitchell separated from her in 1973, and apparently never saw her daughter again. On 31 May 1976, Martha Mitchell, then in hospital at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, lapsed into coma. She subsequently died.

== References ==
{{reflist}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Mitchell, Martha}}
[[Category:History]] [[Category:Biography]] [[Category:United States History]]

The Manchurian Candidate

2020-09-23T22:49:14Z

TerryH: /* Faulty set-dressing */

{{Infobox Film
| name=The Manchurian Candidate
| image=ManchurianCandidateposter.jpg
| caption=
| director=John Frankenheimer
| producer=Howard W. Koch George Axelrod John Frankenheimer
| writer=Richard Condon (novel) George Axelrod (script)
| narrator=
| starring=Frank Sinatra Laurence Harvey Janet Leigh
| music=David Amram
| cinematography=Lionel Lindon
| editing=Ferris Webster
| distributor=United Artists
| released=October 24, 1962
| runtime=126 min
| country=USA
| language=English
| budget=
| gross=
| preceded_by=
| followed_by=
| website=
| amg_id=
| imdb_id=
}}
'''''The Manchurian Candidate''''' is a 1962 [[Hollywood]] film based on the idea that hypnosis could produce a man involuntarily programmed to commit murder, an idea popular at the time but now thoroughly discredited. (As is now well known, no one can be hypnotized against his will, and hypnosis cannot make anyone violate his conscience.) 
The plot is about a Chinese conspiracy to "[[brainwash]]" an American [[POW]] into becoming an unwitting assassin of a candidate for [[President of the United States]] and thus allowing a villain to become President. The film, based on the 1959 novel by Richard Condon and directed by John Frankenheimer, gained an almost [[cult]]-like following. It represented a new psychological twist in spy movies, playing upon widespread fears at the time that American POWs in Korea were being systematically brainwashed.<ref>It was later realized that sort of brainwashing depicted in the film was impossible. The Communist abused prisoners but made no attempt to control them once freed. On the fears see Susan L. Carruthers, "Redeeming The Captives: Hollywood and the Brainwashing of America's Prisoners of War in Korea." ''Film History'' 1998 10(3): 275-294</ref> It is considered by many to be the best political thriller ever made.
== Cast ==
* [[Frank Sinatra]] as Captain (later Major) Bennett Marco, [[United States Army|USA]], veteran of the [[Korean War]] and attached to Army G-2.
** [[Janet Leigh]] as Eugenie Rose "Rosie" Cheney, a girl who takes an interest in Major Marco.

* [[Laurence Harvey]] as former Staff Sergeant Raymond Shaw, USA, the war hero brainwashed by the enemy.
** James Gregory as [[United States Senate|Senator]] John Irkes Iselin of New York State; Shaw's stepfather and seeker of the nomination for Vice President.<ref name=Iselin>The identification of Senators Iselin and Jordan as Republicans is tentative. It is based on Raymond Shaw's identification of his first civilian employer, Holborn Gaines, as a Republican, an identification that he offers to his mother as proof that Mr. Gaines is not a Communist. Senators Iselin and Jordan constitute the New York delegation to the Senate because they clearly both reside in New York.</ref>
** [[Angela Lansbury]] as Eleanor Iselin, Raymond Shaw's mother and Senator Iselin's wife.<ref name=eleanor>The full name of Eleanor Iselin was never given in the film, but it did appear in the novel from which this film is adapted.</ref>
** Henry Silva as Chunjin, a Korean interpreter (and Communist spy).

* John McGiver as Senator Thomas Jordan, of New York, a political rival of Senator Iselin. He and Iselin despise one another.
** Leslie Parrish as Jocelyn "Jocie" Jordan; Senator Jordan's daughter, in love with Shaw.
* Khigh Dhiegh as Dr. Yen Lo, chief consulting psychiatrist, Pavlov Institute, Moscow
* James Edwards as Corporal Alan Melvin, USA, another veteran of Korea.

== Plot ==
{{spoiler}}
=== Prologue ===
On a dark night in Korea, Captain Bennett Marco and his patrol are ambushed, beaten senseless, and airlifted to a secret Sino-Soviet base in Manchuria, after their interpreter leads them into a trap. Three days later, the patrol reports in, except for two men who were killed. Captain Marco tells an incredible story of how his leading sergeant, Staff Sergeant Shaw, almost singlehandedly attacked an enemy machine-gun position and in the process killed an entire company of the enemy, and then led the patrol to safety. For this, Sgt. Shaw receives the [[Medal of Honor]].

=== Return from Korea ===
Upon his return from Korea, Shaw is horrified and disgusted to see that his mother and stepfather have organized a welcoming committee that behaves like a "disgusting three-ring circus." In fact, his stepfather, whom Shaw has always detested, is up for re-election and has used the Medal of Honor ceremony as political theater.

Captain Marco, freshly promoted to the rank of Major, is assigned to Army G-2 (i.e., Intelligence). But soon he is plagued by a chilling recurring dream: that not only was his story of Sgt. Shaw's heroism a lie, but in fact the patrol had been subject to [[brainwashing]], and that at a demonstration before several senior Soviet and Chinese officers, Shaw strangled one member of the patrol and shot another—which is to say, he personally murdered the very two men whom Marco would later list as killed in action.

The Army G-2 discounts his story and assigns him to the Public Relations Corps. This appointment proves disastrous, as Marco's assignment, the Secretary of Defense, loses his temper in a confrontation with Senator Iselin (who is a thinly-disguised parody of Senator [[Joseph McCarthy]], or rather the now-traditional [[liberal]] caricature of that real-life politician). Marco is reassigned to the G-2, who orders him to go away on leave. In his travels, he meets his eventual wife Rosie, who reaches out to him even though at first he tries to run away.

Marco is not the only member of the patrol to be plagued by a strange dream. Corporal Alan Melvin also dreams of sitting in a room full of Soviet and Chinese senior officers and other officials, and watching as Shaw strangles one of his buddies and shoots another at point-blank range. Melvin's wife encourages him to write to Shaw, which he does. Independently of one another, each man, when asked how he feels about Shaw, says in a monotone that Shaw is a wonderful person. The truth, however, is vastly different: Raymond Shaw, far from being attractive, is personally repulsive.

Marco traces Shaw to [[New York City]], where Shaw at first was the confidential assistant to well-known newspaper columnist Holborn Gaines (probably suggested by [[Walter Lippmann]]), and now writes the column himself after Mr. Gaines has been found murdered in his bed. When Marco finally comes to Shaw's apartment, he is horrified to confront Chunjin, the former interpreter to the patrol who was also present in the interrogation session that Marco recalls in his recurring dream. He lashes out at Chunjin and repeatedly roars questions at him about Raymond's obsessive behavior with his hands before he committed the murders, and why Chunjin himself was present, not as a captive, but as a capt''or''. He is arrested, but the G-2 vouches for him, and Rosie comes to take him home.

Marco then calls on Shaw to apologize for his behavior and explain his tortured dream. Shaw shocks him by saying that he had had a letter from another member of the patrol who was having similar dreams. Because this is the first person other than Marco to be reporting strange dreams, Marco rushes to Washington at once. There the G-2 convenes a meeting of his staff and questions Marco more closely. Marco identifies two known Soviet and Chinese officials from his dream, and the G-2 announces that he believes Marco's story and has formed a joint [[CIA]]/[[DIA]]/[[FBI]] team to investigate Raymond Shaw. Marco is assigned to this team as military liaison.

=== The investigation ===
Marco concentrates on Shaw and even encourages Shaw to tell him a sad story: he had once met a lovely and kind young woman, the daughter of Senator Jordan (the other Senator from New York State), and his mother had written an offensive letter in Shaw's name and forced Shaw to sign it. The next day, Marco meets Shaw in a bar and finds Shaw playing a game of [[solitaire]]. Marco barely hears the bartender tell another customer a story of how he had encouraged his brother-in-law to take a [[taxicab]] to [[Central Park]] and jump in the lake. And then Marco is stupefied when Shaw does exactly that. Marco follows Shaw and arrives in time to see Shaw jump in the lake, but Shaw has no memory of having done this. Nevertheless, Marco now remembers that Raymond had been playing with an imaginary—or perhaps not imaginary—deck of cards during the high-level Sino-Soviet briefing that Marco recalls in his dreams.

Marco asks the other members of the special task force about this, and they conclude that Raymond Shaw is acting under an elaborate series of suggestions implanted in his mind through [[hypnotism]]. They also identify the likely trigger: the queen of diamonds, a symbol of his mother.

What neither Marco nor even Shaw himself realizes is that Shaw's own mother is his "American operator" who gives him his orders. His mother first arranges for him to meet Senator Jordan's daughter Jocelyn again and even to marry her. But when this fails to create any fellow-feeling between Senators Jordan and Iselin, Shaw's mother then gives Shaw an order to kill Senator Jordan, and to kill Jocelyn as well.

=== The unraveling ===
Shaw retains no memory of any of his "assignments." Such is the nature of his programming that he will kill on order and then forget that he has done so, so that he will have no guilty conscience. But the sudden death of Jocelyn Jordan upsets him greatly, even though he does not yet realize that he was responsible for her death. He is so upset that he now is plagued with his own recurring dreams of the Manchurian interrogation session. In desperation he calls Marco, who meets Shaw at his hotel across the street from [[Madison Square Garden]], where the Republican National Convention is taking place, and Senator Iselin has just won the Vice-Presidential nomination. Marco brings with him a "forced deck" containing fifty-two queens of diamonds. Marco uses these to induce Shaw to confess to the following:

# The night action for which Shaw received the Medal of Honor never took place as reported.
# In fact, the entire patrol had been abducted and taken to a secret base, where specialists from the [[Ivan Pavlov|Pavlov]] Institute in Moscow hypnotized them all, but especially Shaw.
# Shaw murdered the two men whom Marco would later report as killed in action.
# Shaw then killed his columnist boss, purely as a test of his conditioning.
# Shaw did indeed jump in the lake at Central Park, after the bartender accidentally triggered his post-hypnotic suggestion.
# Shaw then killed Senator Jordan and the young woman whom he had married only twenty-four hours before.
# All of the above are part of a larger plan, though Shaw does not know the details.

Marco then takes a gamble: he displays all fifty-two queens of diamonds and then, in his command voice, tells Shaw that his days as a programmed assassin are over.

=== The final action ===
Marco orders Shaw to talk to his American operator, learn the details of the operation (which is connected with that same convention where John Iselin has become a candidate for Vice President), and report back to Marco. Instead of reporting, Shaw gives every outward sign of continuing with his programmed assignment: to take a gun into a projection room and from that vantage point to shoot the Presidential nominee in the middle of his speech. His mother has arranged this so that Senator Iselin, can step forward and accept the Presidential nomination by default.

Marco, on the convention floor, spots the light from the projection room and races to that room as fast as he can get there. He arrives in time to see Shaw shoot, not the Presidential nominee, but Senator Iselin and his own mother. Shaw then puts on his Medal of Honor, and tells Marco that no one could possibly have stopped Senator Iselin and his mother, and that he had to do the job himself. Then, guilt-ridden over the shootings and all the other murders he has committed, Shaw puts the muzzle of his high-powered rifle to his own forehead and pulls the trigger.

=== Memorable quotations ===
When asked how he feels about Raymond Shaw as a person, Marco and Corporal Melvin both say: {{cquote|Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I have ever met in my life.}}

When Marco lashes out at Chunjin, he roars out these questions:{{cquote|What was Raymond doing with his hands? How did the old ladies turn into Russians? What were you doing there?}}

The trigger phrase for the hypnotic suggestions:{{cquote|Why don't you pass the time by playing a little solitaire?}}

The Presidential nominee says these words before Shaw fires the fatal shots:{{cquote|Nor would I ask of any fellow American, in defense of his freedom, that which I would not gladly give myself: my life before my liberty.}}

After Raymond's death, Marco, now engaged to Rosie, composes a revised Medal of Honor citation for Shaw, one more appropriate to his situation: {{cquote|Made to commit acts too unspeakable to be cited here, by an enemy who had captured his mind and his soul, he freed himself at last, and in the end heroically and unhesitatingly gave his life to save his country.}}

== Goofs ==
=== Contrivance or "Dramatic License" ===
Senator and Mrs. Iselin greet Sergeant Shaw with a banner reading "Johnny Iselin's Boy!" and spread it over his head for a [[Photo Opportunity|photo-op]]. That would likely never have been allowed to happen. In real life, no civilian, even the mother and stepfather of a Medal of Honor recipient, would have been allowed to get that close to an honoree, and certainly not to spread a venal-looking banner over his head and take an unauthorized photograph, not only of the honoree, but also of a [[general]] officer of the Army.

=== Factual errors ===
[[Image:Manchurian.jpg|right|200px|right|thumb|Cover for the recently released DVD edition]]
# When Senator Iselin announces on the floor of the Senate that "there are exactly fifty-seven card-carrying Communists in the Defense Department," and then rises to a point of order, he addresses the presiding officer as "Mister Speaker" by mistake. The correct title in the Senate is "Mister President."
# When Senator Jordan threatens Senator Iselin with expulsion from the Senate if he tries to secure the Vice Presidential nomination, he incorrectly describes the sanction as an impeachment. Senator Iselin then makes the identical mistake when threatening Senator Jordan in turn. [[Impeachment]] is an accusation against the President, Vice President, or other "civil officer" in the executive or judicial branches, and is always brought in the [[United States House of Representatives|House]] and ''then'' tried in the Senate. The Senate is the sole judge of the qualifications of his own members, and a motion to expel a Senator would be called just that: a motion to expel. The Senate, and only the Senate, would then debate and vote on it. (Expulsion, like conviction in an impeachment proceeding, requires a two-thirds vote.)

=== Faulty set-dressing ===
When Major Marco fights with Chunjin, he chops a slice out of a table with a karate stroke. This table was supposed to be a breakaway table. It was not. Frank Sinatra chopped a chunk out of a real table and injured himself very badly in so doing.<ref>Interview by Mr. Ben Mankiewicz (nephew of noted Hollywood director Joseph L. Mankiewicz) with Nancy and Tina Sinatra, daughters of the late Actor Frank Sinatra, in 2009, on the occasion of the long-delayed [[television]] airing of this film on the Turner Classic Movies channel.</ref>
{{endspoiler}}

== Themes and Receptions ==
=== Brainwashing ===
: ''Main Article: [[Brainwashing]]''

The 1950s was a time of intense interest in accounts of mind control, and the term "brainwashing" was coined in 1950. At a time of high Cold War tension, the book ''I Was Stalin's Prisoner'' (1952), a first-person account of US executive Robert A. Vogeler's experiences with [[mind control]] as a political prisoner in Hungary, produced derivative fiction. ''Brain-Washing in Red China'' (1951) and other writings by Edward Hunter proclaimed the danger and potentially devastating possibilities of brainwashing. Inaccurate reports to the effect that numerous American POW's had defected to the Chinese in Korea caused alarm; in fact there were only a few. Richard Condon's novel ''The Manchurian Candidate'' (1959), the basis for this film tapped into public fascination and concern over mind-control techniques. Novels by William Burroughs, A. E. van Vogt, and Francis Pollini all incorporate brainwashing themes. By the time of Walter Wager's ''Telefon'' (1975), the subject of brainwashing techniques had become passé.<ref>David Seed, "Brainwashing And Cold War Demonology." ''Prospects'' 1997 22: 535-573.</ref>

Some scholars have concluded there was no such brainwashing but it was a potent fear at the time. The film picks up and elaborates on this fear, and suggests that a "part light-induced, part drug-induced" technique would be effective. The 1954 film "Prisoner of War" starring [[Ronald Reagan]] portrays brainwashing POW's in Korea.

At the time of its release in 1962, the film defied plot analysis or genre categorization, but the film's subject of US soldiers brainwashed by Chinese forces during the Korean War found particular resonance in US popular culture. Beginning in 1952, popular journalists frightened and titillated their readers with sometimes dubious tales of Communist mind-control techniques.

Some critics who analyzed the film in 1962-63, however, saw the film as a [[leftist]] commentary on McCarthyism - the character of Senator John Irkes Iselin, the stepfather of Staff Sergeant Raymond Shaw, bears striking resemblances to Joseph McCarthy, if only as parody and burlesque. The film's real target was "Mom-ism," since it was the supposedly invasive upbringing of Raymond Shaw by his mother that made him a good candidate for brainwashing according to some, and viewed by others as a subtle attempt to help break down the nuclear family by [[liberals]].<ref>Susan L. Carruthers, "The Manchurian Candidate (1962) And The Cold War Brainwashing Scare." ''Historical Journal of Film, Radio And Television'' 1998 18(1): 75-94. 0143-9685</ref>

A key premise of the movie was that it was possible to [[brainwash]] or hypnotize an unsuspecting prisoner into committing murder. This was a widespread fear in the 1950s, and Ronald Reagan had starred in another film about brainwashing of American POWs in Korea.

:... a tall, bald Communist Chinese/Korean doctor-spylord Yen Lo ... introduces the captured, passive and impotent men, all drugged and hypnotized for a public demonstration of the powers of hypnotism.

Although the film was not a major hit, and its conspiracy plot was considered far-fetched, it anticipated the American obsession with conspiracy theories after Kennedy's assassination.

One year after the assassination of President [[John F. Kennedy]], the creative rights to the film reverted to Frank Sinatra. He was unable to come to financial terms with the production company ([[United Artists]]), so Sinatra shelved the film. At the time, some suspected that Frank Sinatra had the film pulled from circulation after the Kennedy assassination, in the fear that his film had provoked [[Lee Harvey Oswald]] to commit this act.<ref name=Osborne>Osborne, Robert. End-of-film commentary on ''The Manchurian Candidate''.</ref> However, Ben Mankiewicz now says that that was "a Hollywood version of an urban myth," and that Sinatra's real reason for shelving the picture, after the rights reverted to him, was the failure of [[United Artists]] to come to satisfactory terms with him with regard to royalties. The estate of Frank Sinatra finally settled the royalty issue in or about 2005.<ref name=Mankiewicz>Mankiewicz, Ben. Introduction to ''The Manchurian Candidate''.</ref>

=== Manipulation of fact ===
Eleanor Iselin engages in an interesting scheme of manipulation, and frankly avows that to her husband when he complains that she never tells him to give the same number twice of Communists in the Defense Department. By way of explanation, she says this:{{cquote|What are the newspapers of America writing about, and what are they saying? Are they saying, "Are there any Communists in the Defense Department?" Of course not! They're asking, "''How many'' Communists are there in the Defense Department"!}}

In short, by keeping the news organs and their readers and viewers guessing, Mrs. Iselin invites people to accept ''[[a priori]]'' that the Defense Department has Communists in it, although an objective observer ought to have noticed that when a man cannot tell the same story twice in succession, he is usually lying.

=== Manipulation of popular emotion ===
The primary purpose of Mrs. Iselin's plan is to manipulate the emotions of the people into accepting dictatorship in the belief that the country is under a dire threat. Mrs. Iselin avows as much to her son when she gives him his final assignment, not realizing that Major Marco has already "unconditioned" him. In fact, she predicts that the assassination of the named Presidential candidate will cause the American electorate {{cquote|to sweep us into the [[White House]] with powers that will make [[martial law]] look like [[anarchy]].}}

The facts of the matter are far more complex. In the film, the Communist threat ''does'' exist. But the person behind the campaign to popularize that threat ''is herself an agent of that threat.'' Or so she pretends, at least in her dealings with Soviet and Chinese agents that actually induce them to recruit and train an assassin and place that assassin at her disposal. What she actually intends is to seize power in America and then launch a war of revenge against her very helpers. That Mrs. Iselin would conceive that such a plan could actually work, only shows the profound megalomania that afflicts this character.

(Of course, Mrs. Iselin, having accused the Soviets of underestimating her, is herself guilty of underestimating her son. Once Raymond Shaw realizes that his mother is "the American operator," he holds her responsible for the death of his wife and proves himself quite capable of taking the ultimate revenge.)

=== Other themes ===
The movie featured a riveting performance by [[Angela Lansbury]]<ref>[https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001450/ IMDB website]</ref> as the brilliant, controlling mother who manipulated both her husband and her son to realize her dream of a communist takeover of the [[United States]]. Her husband was a parody of Senator [[Joseph McCarthy]]. Frank Sinatra had initially suggested to Director [[John Frankenheimer]] that he cast [[Lucille Ball]] as Mrs. Iselin. But Frankenheimer, who had previously cast and worked with Lansbury in another film, ''[[All Fall Down]]'', showed Sinatra a "rough cut" of a key scene in which Lansbury appeared, and Sinatra agreed that Angela Lansbury would be a better choice.<ref name=Osborne2>Osborne, Robert. Introduction to ''The Manchurian Candidate''.</ref>

== Recent Remake ==
The movie was remade with [[Denzel Washington]] in the Sinatra role and [[Liev Schreiber]] as a the assassin controlled by a [[microchip]] brain implant. The villains in the remake are not communists, but simply people with a vague political agenda.<ref>[http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/manchurian_candidate/about.php 'Rotten Tomatoes' Plot Summary]</ref> Critics and fans panned the remake.

==Colloquial Usage==
In modern-day usage, to describe a political candidate as a "Manchurian Candidate" is to say that they are hiding their real beliefs in hope of being elected, and afterwords able to advance their hidden agenda. [[Barack Obama]] is frequently accused of being a Muslim Manchurian Candidate, by [https://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=79411 WorldNetDaily] and other sources.

==Further reading==
* Carruthers, Susan L. "Redeeming The Captives: Hollywood and the Brainwashing of America's Prisoners of War in Korea." ''Film History'' 1998 10(3): 275-294. 0892-2160
* Carruthers, Susan L. "The Manchurian Candidate (1962) and the Cold War Brainwashing Scare." ''Historical Journal of Film, Radio And Television'' 1998 18(1): 75-94. 0143-9685
* Condon, Richard. ''The Manchurian Candidate‎'' (1959); 320 pages; the original novel [https://books.google.com/books?id=fmB9mXvRy1gC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22manchurian+candidate%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=2007&num=30&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpts and text search]
* Marks, John D. ''The search for the "Manchurian candidate": the CIA and mind control‎'' (1979) 242 pages; scholarly study of brainwashing
* Jacobson, Matthew Frye, and Gaspar González. ''What Have They Built You to Do? The Manchurian Candidate and Cold War America'' (2006) 288pp; full-scale scholarly interpretation of the film [https://books.google.com/books?id=yGBEDgEpVuQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22manchurian+candidate%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=2007&num=30&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpt and text search]
* Seed, David. '' Brainwashing: the fictions of mind control : a study of novels and films'' (2004) ch 5. [https://books.google.com/books?id=YsVFqZIuus0C&pg=PA106&dq=%22manchurian+candidate%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=2007&num=30&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpt and text search]

== See also ==
* [[Frank Sinatra]]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Manchurian Candidate, The}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Movies|Manchurian Candidate, The]]
[[Category:Cold War]]
[[Category:Greatest Conservative Movies]]
[[Category:Anti-Communism]]

The Manchurian Candidate

2020-09-23T22:46:28Z

TerryH: /* Faulty set-dressing */

{{Infobox Film
| name=The Manchurian Candidate
| image=ManchurianCandidateposter.jpg
| caption=
| director=John Frankenheimer
| producer=Howard W. Koch George Axelrod John Frankenheimer
| writer=Richard Condon (novel) George Axelrod (script)
| narrator=
| starring=Frank Sinatra Laurence Harvey Janet Leigh
| music=David Amram
| cinematography=Lionel Lindon
| editing=Ferris Webster
| distributor=United Artists
| released=October 24, 1962
| runtime=126 min
| country=USA
| language=English
| budget=
| gross=
| preceded_by=
| followed_by=
| website=
| amg_id=
| imdb_id=
}}
'''''The Manchurian Candidate''''' is a 1962 [[Hollywood]] film based on the idea that hypnosis could produce a man involuntarily programmed to commit murder, an idea popular at the time but now thoroughly discredited. (As is now well known, no one can be hypnotized against his will, and hypnosis cannot make anyone violate his conscience.) 
The plot is about a Chinese conspiracy to "[[brainwash]]" an American [[POW]] into becoming an unwitting assassin of a candidate for [[President of the United States]] and thus allowing a villain to become President. The film, based on the 1959 novel by Richard Condon and directed by John Frankenheimer, gained an almost [[cult]]-like following. It represented a new psychological twist in spy movies, playing upon widespread fears at the time that American POWs in Korea were being systematically brainwashed.<ref>It was later realized that sort of brainwashing depicted in the film was impossible. The Communist abused prisoners but made no attempt to control them once freed. On the fears see Susan L. Carruthers, "Redeeming The Captives: Hollywood and the Brainwashing of America's Prisoners of War in Korea." ''Film History'' 1998 10(3): 275-294</ref> It is considered by many to be the best political thriller ever made.
== Cast ==
* [[Frank Sinatra]] as Captain (later Major) Bennett Marco, [[United States Army|USA]], veteran of the [[Korean War]] and attached to Army G-2.
** [[Janet Leigh]] as Eugenie Rose "Rosie" Cheney, a girl who takes an interest in Major Marco.

* [[Laurence Harvey]] as former Staff Sergeant Raymond Shaw, USA, the war hero brainwashed by the enemy.
** James Gregory as [[United States Senate|Senator]] John Irkes Iselin of New York State; Shaw's stepfather and seeker of the nomination for Vice President.<ref name=Iselin>The identification of Senators Iselin and Jordan as Republicans is tentative. It is based on Raymond Shaw's identification of his first civilian employer, Holborn Gaines, as a Republican, an identification that he offers to his mother as proof that Mr. Gaines is not a Communist. Senators Iselin and Jordan constitute the New York delegation to the Senate because they clearly both reside in New York.</ref>
** [[Angela Lansbury]] as Eleanor Iselin, Raymond Shaw's mother and Senator Iselin's wife.<ref name=eleanor>The full name of Eleanor Iselin was never given in the film, but it did appear in the novel from which this film is adapted.</ref>
** Henry Silva as Chunjin, a Korean interpreter (and Communist spy).

* John McGiver as Senator Thomas Jordan, of New York, a political rival of Senator Iselin. He and Iselin despise one another.
** Leslie Parrish as Jocelyn "Jocie" Jordan; Senator Jordan's daughter, in love with Shaw.
* Khigh Dhiegh as Dr. Yen Lo, chief consulting psychiatrist, Pavlov Institute, Moscow
* James Edwards as Corporal Alan Melvin, USA, another veteran of Korea.

== Plot ==
{{spoiler}}
=== Prologue ===
On a dark night in Korea, Captain Bennett Marco and his patrol are ambushed, beaten senseless, and airlifted to a secret Sino-Soviet base in Manchuria, after their interpreter leads them into a trap. Three days later, the patrol reports in, except for two men who were killed. Captain Marco tells an incredible story of how his leading sergeant, Staff Sergeant Shaw, almost singlehandedly attacked an enemy machine-gun position and in the process killed an entire company of the enemy, and then led the patrol to safety. For this, Sgt. Shaw receives the [[Medal of Honor]].

=== Return from Korea ===
Upon his return from Korea, Shaw is horrified and disgusted to see that his mother and stepfather have organized a welcoming committee that behaves like a "disgusting three-ring circus." In fact, his stepfather, whom Shaw has always detested, is up for re-election and has used the Medal of Honor ceremony as political theater.

Captain Marco, freshly promoted to the rank of Major, is assigned to Army G-2 (i.e., Intelligence). But soon he is plagued by a chilling recurring dream: that not only was his story of Sgt. Shaw's heroism a lie, but in fact the patrol had been subject to [[brainwashing]], and that at a demonstration before several senior Soviet and Chinese officers, Shaw strangled one member of the patrol and shot another—which is to say, he personally murdered the very two men whom Marco would later list as killed in action.

The Army G-2 discounts his story and assigns him to the Public Relations Corps. This appointment proves disastrous, as Marco's assignment, the Secretary of Defense, loses his temper in a confrontation with Senator Iselin (who is a thinly-disguised parody of Senator [[Joseph McCarthy]], or rather the now-traditional [[liberal]] caricature of that real-life politician). Marco is reassigned to the G-2, who orders him to go away on leave. In his travels, he meets his eventual wife Rosie, who reaches out to him even though at first he tries to run away.

Marco is not the only member of the patrol to be plagued by a strange dream. Corporal Alan Melvin also dreams of sitting in a room full of Soviet and Chinese senior officers and other officials, and watching as Shaw strangles one of his buddies and shoots another at point-blank range. Melvin's wife encourages him to write to Shaw, which he does. Independently of one another, each man, when asked how he feels about Shaw, says in a monotone that Shaw is a wonderful person. The truth, however, is vastly different: Raymond Shaw, far from being attractive, is personally repulsive.

Marco traces Shaw to [[New York City]], where Shaw at first was the confidential assistant to well-known newspaper columnist Holborn Gaines (probably suggested by [[Walter Lippmann]]), and now writes the column himself after Mr. Gaines has been found murdered in his bed. When Marco finally comes to Shaw's apartment, he is horrified to confront Chunjin, the former interpreter to the patrol who was also present in the interrogation session that Marco recalls in his recurring dream. He lashes out at Chunjin and repeatedly roars questions at him about Raymond's obsessive behavior with his hands before he committed the murders, and why Chunjin himself was present, not as a captive, but as a capt''or''. He is arrested, but the G-2 vouches for him, and Rosie comes to take him home.

Marco then calls on Shaw to apologize for his behavior and explain his tortured dream. Shaw shocks him by saying that he had had a letter from another member of the patrol who was having similar dreams. Because this is the first person other than Marco to be reporting strange dreams, Marco rushes to Washington at once. There the G-2 convenes a meeting of his staff and questions Marco more closely. Marco identifies two known Soviet and Chinese officials from his dream, and the G-2 announces that he believes Marco's story and has formed a joint [[CIA]]/[[DIA]]/[[FBI]] team to investigate Raymond Shaw. Marco is assigned to this team as military liaison.

=== The investigation ===
Marco concentrates on Shaw and even encourages Shaw to tell him a sad story: he had once met a lovely and kind young woman, the daughter of Senator Jordan (the other Senator from New York State), and his mother had written an offensive letter in Shaw's name and forced Shaw to sign it. The next day, Marco meets Shaw in a bar and finds Shaw playing a game of [[solitaire]]. Marco barely hears the bartender tell another customer a story of how he had encouraged his brother-in-law to take a [[taxicab]] to [[Central Park]] and jump in the lake. And then Marco is stupefied when Shaw does exactly that. Marco follows Shaw and arrives in time to see Shaw jump in the lake, but Shaw has no memory of having done this. Nevertheless, Marco now remembers that Raymond had been playing with an imaginary—or perhaps not imaginary—deck of cards during the high-level Sino-Soviet briefing that Marco recalls in his dreams.

Marco asks the other members of the special task force about this, and they conclude that Raymond Shaw is acting under an elaborate series of suggestions implanted in his mind through [[hypnotism]]. They also identify the likely trigger: the queen of diamonds, a symbol of his mother.

What neither Marco nor even Shaw himself realizes is that Shaw's own mother is his "American operator" who gives him his orders. His mother first arranges for him to meet Senator Jordan's daughter Jocelyn again and even to marry her. But when this fails to create any fellow-feeling between Senators Jordan and Iselin, Shaw's mother then gives Shaw an order to kill Senator Jordan, and to kill Jocelyn as well.

=== The unraveling ===
Shaw retains no memory of any of his "assignments." Such is the nature of his programming that he will kill on order and then forget that he has done so, so that he will have no guilty conscience. But the sudden death of Jocelyn Jordan upsets him greatly, even though he does not yet realize that he was responsible for her death. He is so upset that he now is plagued with his own recurring dreams of the Manchurian interrogation session. In desperation he calls Marco, who meets Shaw at his hotel across the street from [[Madison Square Garden]], where the Republican National Convention is taking place, and Senator Iselin has just won the Vice-Presidential nomination. Marco brings with him a "forced deck" containing fifty-two queens of diamonds. Marco uses these to induce Shaw to confess to the following:

# The night action for which Shaw received the Medal of Honor never took place as reported.
# In fact, the entire patrol had been abducted and taken to a secret base, where specialists from the [[Ivan Pavlov|Pavlov]] Institute in Moscow hypnotized them all, but especially Shaw.
# Shaw murdered the two men whom Marco would later report as killed in action.
# Shaw then killed his columnist boss, purely as a test of his conditioning.
# Shaw did indeed jump in the lake at Central Park, after the bartender accidentally triggered his post-hypnotic suggestion.
# Shaw then killed Senator Jordan and the young woman whom he had married only twenty-four hours before.
# All of the above are part of a larger plan, though Shaw does not know the details.

Marco then takes a gamble: he displays all fifty-two queens of diamonds and then, in his command voice, tells Shaw that his days as a programmed assassin are over.

=== The final action ===
Marco orders Shaw to talk to his American operator, learn the details of the operation (which is connected with that same convention where John Iselin has become a candidate for Vice President), and report back to Marco. Instead of reporting, Shaw gives every outward sign of continuing with his programmed assignment: to take a gun into a projection room and from that vantage point to shoot the Presidential nominee in the middle of his speech. His mother has arranged this so that Senator Iselin, can step forward and accept the Presidential nomination by default.

Marco, on the convention floor, spots the light from the projection room and races to that room as fast as he can get there. He arrives in time to see Shaw shoot, not the Presidential nominee, but Senator Iselin and his own mother. Shaw then puts on his Medal of Honor, and tells Marco that no one could possibly have stopped Senator Iselin and his mother, and that he had to do the job himself. Then, guilt-ridden over the shootings and all the other murders he has committed, Shaw puts the muzzle of his high-powered rifle to his own forehead and pulls the trigger.

=== Memorable quotations ===
When asked how he feels about Raymond Shaw as a person, Marco and Corporal Melvin both say: {{cquote|Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I have ever met in my life.}}

When Marco lashes out at Chunjin, he roars out these questions:{{cquote|What was Raymond doing with his hands? How did the old ladies turn into Russians? What were you doing there?}}

The trigger phrase for the hypnotic suggestions:{{cquote|Why don't you pass the time by playing a little solitaire?}}

The Presidential nominee says these words before Shaw fires the fatal shots:{{cquote|Nor would I ask of any fellow American, in defense of his freedom, that which I would not gladly give myself: my life before my liberty.}}

After Raymond's death, Marco, now engaged to Rosie, composes a revised Medal of Honor citation for Shaw, one more appropriate to his situation: {{cquote|Made to commit acts too unspeakable to be cited here, by an enemy who had captured his mind and his soul, he freed himself at last, and in the end heroically and unhesitatingly gave his life to save his country.}}

== Goofs ==
=== Contrivance or "Dramatic License" ===
Senator and Mrs. Iselin greet Sergeant Shaw with a banner reading "Johnny Iselin's Boy!" and spread it over his head for a [[Photo Opportunity|photo-op]]. That would likely never have been allowed to happen. In real life, no civilian, even the mother and stepfather of a Medal of Honor recipient, would have been allowed to get that close to an honoree, and certainly not to spread a venal-looking banner over his head and take an unauthorized photograph, not only of the honoree, but also of a [[general]] officer of the Army.

=== Factual errors ===
[[Image:Manchurian.jpg|right|200px|right|thumb|Cover for the recently released DVD edition]]
# When Senator Iselin announces on the floor of the Senate that "there are exactly fifty-seven card-carrying Communists in the Defense Department," and then rises to a point of order, he addresses the presiding officer as "Mister Speaker" by mistake. The correct title in the Senate is "Mister President."
# When Senator Jordan threatens Senator Iselin with expulsion from the Senate if he tries to secure the Vice Presidential nomination, he incorrectly describes the sanction as an impeachment. Senator Iselin then makes the identical mistake when threatening Senator Jordan in turn. [[Impeachment]] is an accusation against the President, Vice President, or other "civil officer" in the executive or judicial branches, and is always brought in the [[United States House of Representatives|House]] and ''then'' tried in the Senate. The Senate is the sole judge of the qualifications of his own members, and a motion to expel a Senator would be called just that: a motion to expel. The Senate, and only the Senate, would then debate and vote on it. (Expulsion, like conviction in an impeachment proceeding, requires a two-thirds vote.)

=== Faulty set-dressing ===
When Major Marco fights with Chunjin, he chops a slice out of a table with a karate stroke. This table was supposed to be a breakaway table. It was not. Frank Sinatra chopped a chunk out of a real table and injured himself very badly in so doing.<ref>Interview by Mr. Robert Osborne with Nancy and Tina Sinatra, daughters of the late Actor Frank Sinatra, in 2009, on the occasion of the long-delayed [[television]] airing of this film on the Turner Classic Movies channel.</ref>
{{endspoiler}}

== Themes and Receptions ==
=== Brainwashing ===
: ''Main Article: [[Brainwashing]]''

The 1950s was a time of intense interest in accounts of mind control, and the term "brainwashing" was coined in 1950. At a time of high Cold War tension, the book ''I Was Stalin's Prisoner'' (1952), a first-person account of US executive Robert A. Vogeler's experiences with [[mind control]] as a political prisoner in Hungary, produced derivative fiction. ''Brain-Washing in Red China'' (1951) and other writings by Edward Hunter proclaimed the danger and potentially devastating possibilities of brainwashing. Inaccurate reports to the effect that numerous American POW's had defected to the Chinese in Korea caused alarm; in fact there were only a few. Richard Condon's novel ''The Manchurian Candidate'' (1959), the basis for this film tapped into public fascination and concern over mind-control techniques. Novels by William Burroughs, A. E. van Vogt, and Francis Pollini all incorporate brainwashing themes. By the time of Walter Wager's ''Telefon'' (1975), the subject of brainwashing techniques had become passé.<ref>David Seed, "Brainwashing And Cold War Demonology." ''Prospects'' 1997 22: 535-573.</ref>

Some scholars have concluded there was no such brainwashing but it was a potent fear at the time. The film picks up and elaborates on this fear, and suggests that a "part light-induced, part drug-induced" technique would be effective. The 1954 film "Prisoner of War" starring [[Ronald Reagan]] portrays brainwashing POW's in Korea.

At the time of its release in 1962, the film defied plot analysis or genre categorization, but the film's subject of US soldiers brainwashed by Chinese forces during the Korean War found particular resonance in US popular culture. Beginning in 1952, popular journalists frightened and titillated their readers with sometimes dubious tales of Communist mind-control techniques.

Some critics who analyzed the film in 1962-63, however, saw the film as a [[leftist]] commentary on McCarthyism - the character of Senator John Irkes Iselin, the stepfather of Staff Sergeant Raymond Shaw, bears striking resemblances to Joseph McCarthy, if only as parody and burlesque. The film's real target was "Mom-ism," since it was the supposedly invasive upbringing of Raymond Shaw by his mother that made him a good candidate for brainwashing according to some, and viewed by others as a subtle attempt to help break down the nuclear family by [[liberals]].<ref>Susan L. Carruthers, "The Manchurian Candidate (1962) And The Cold War Brainwashing Scare." ''Historical Journal of Film, Radio And Television'' 1998 18(1): 75-94. 0143-9685</ref>

A key premise of the movie was that it was possible to [[brainwash]] or hypnotize an unsuspecting prisoner into committing murder. This was a widespread fear in the 1950s, and Ronald Reagan had starred in another film about brainwashing of American POWs in Korea.

:... a tall, bald Communist Chinese/Korean doctor-spylord Yen Lo ... introduces the captured, passive and impotent men, all drugged and hypnotized for a public demonstration of the powers of hypnotism.

Although the film was not a major hit, and its conspiracy plot was considered far-fetched, it anticipated the American obsession with conspiracy theories after Kennedy's assassination.

One year after the assassination of President [[John F. Kennedy]], the creative rights to the film reverted to Frank Sinatra. He was unable to come to financial terms with the production company ([[United Artists]]), so Sinatra shelved the film. At the time, some suspected that Frank Sinatra had the film pulled from circulation after the Kennedy assassination, in the fear that his film had provoked [[Lee Harvey Oswald]] to commit this act.<ref name=Osborne>Osborne, Robert. End-of-film commentary on ''The Manchurian Candidate''.</ref> However, Ben Mankiewicz now says that that was "a Hollywood version of an urban myth," and that Sinatra's real reason for shelving the picture, after the rights reverted to him, was the failure of [[United Artists]] to come to satisfactory terms with him with regard to royalties. The estate of Frank Sinatra finally settled the royalty issue in or about 2005.<ref name=Mankiewicz>Mankiewicz, Ben. Introduction to ''The Manchurian Candidate''.</ref>

=== Manipulation of fact ===
Eleanor Iselin engages in an interesting scheme of manipulation, and frankly avows that to her husband when he complains that she never tells him to give the same number twice of Communists in the Defense Department. By way of explanation, she says this:{{cquote|What are the newspapers of America writing about, and what are they saying? Are they saying, "Are there any Communists in the Defense Department?" Of course not! They're asking, "''How many'' Communists are there in the Defense Department"!}}

In short, by keeping the news organs and their readers and viewers guessing, Mrs. Iselin invites people to accept ''[[a priori]]'' that the Defense Department has Communists in it, although an objective observer ought to have noticed that when a man cannot tell the same story twice in succession, he is usually lying.

=== Manipulation of popular emotion ===
The primary purpose of Mrs. Iselin's plan is to manipulate the emotions of the people into accepting dictatorship in the belief that the country is under a dire threat. Mrs. Iselin avows as much to her son when she gives him his final assignment, not realizing that Major Marco has already "unconditioned" him. In fact, she predicts that the assassination of the named Presidential candidate will cause the American electorate {{cquote|to sweep us into the [[White House]] with powers that will make [[martial law]] look like [[anarchy]].}}

The facts of the matter are far more complex. In the film, the Communist threat ''does'' exist. But the person behind the campaign to popularize that threat ''is herself an agent of that threat.'' Or so she pretends, at least in her dealings with Soviet and Chinese agents that actually induce them to recruit and train an assassin and place that assassin at her disposal. What she actually intends is to seize power in America and then launch a war of revenge against her very helpers. That Mrs. Iselin would conceive that such a plan could actually work, only shows the profound megalomania that afflicts this character.

(Of course, Mrs. Iselin, having accused the Soviets of underestimating her, is herself guilty of underestimating her son. Once Raymond Shaw realizes that his mother is "the American operator," he holds her responsible for the death of his wife and proves himself quite capable of taking the ultimate revenge.)

=== Other themes ===
The movie featured a riveting performance by [[Angela Lansbury]]<ref>[https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001450/ IMDB website]</ref> as the brilliant, controlling mother who manipulated both her husband and her son to realize her dream of a communist takeover of the [[United States]]. Her husband was a parody of Senator [[Joseph McCarthy]]. Frank Sinatra had initially suggested to Director [[John Frankenheimer]] that he cast [[Lucille Ball]] as Mrs. Iselin. But Frankenheimer, who had previously cast and worked with Lansbury in another film, ''[[All Fall Down]]'', showed Sinatra a "rough cut" of a key scene in which Lansbury appeared, and Sinatra agreed that Angela Lansbury would be a better choice.<ref name=Osborne2>Osborne, Robert. Introduction to ''The Manchurian Candidate''.</ref>

== Recent Remake ==
The movie was remade with [[Denzel Washington]] in the Sinatra role and [[Liev Schreiber]] as a the assassin controlled by a [[microchip]] brain implant. The villains in the remake are not communists, but simply people with a vague political agenda.<ref>[http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/manchurian_candidate/about.php 'Rotten Tomatoes' Plot Summary]</ref> Critics and fans panned the remake.

==Colloquial Usage==
In modern-day usage, to describe a political candidate as a "Manchurian Candidate" is to say that they are hiding their real beliefs in hope of being elected, and afterwords able to advance their hidden agenda. [[Barack Obama]] is frequently accused of being a Muslim Manchurian Candidate, by [https://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=79411 WorldNetDaily] and other sources.

==Further reading==
* Carruthers, Susan L. "Redeeming The Captives: Hollywood and the Brainwashing of America's Prisoners of War in Korea." ''Film History'' 1998 10(3): 275-294. 0892-2160
* Carruthers, Susan L. "The Manchurian Candidate (1962) and the Cold War Brainwashing Scare." ''Historical Journal of Film, Radio And Television'' 1998 18(1): 75-94. 0143-9685
* Condon, Richard. ''The Manchurian Candidate‎'' (1959); 320 pages; the original novel [https://books.google.com/books?id=fmB9mXvRy1gC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22manchurian+candidate%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=2007&num=30&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpts and text search]
* Marks, John D. ''The search for the "Manchurian candidate": the CIA and mind control‎'' (1979) 242 pages; scholarly study of brainwashing
* Jacobson, Matthew Frye, and Gaspar González. ''What Have They Built You to Do? The Manchurian Candidate and Cold War America'' (2006) 288pp; full-scale scholarly interpretation of the film [https://books.google.com/books?id=yGBEDgEpVuQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22manchurian+candidate%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=2007&num=30&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpt and text search]
* Seed, David. '' Brainwashing: the fictions of mind control : a study of novels and films'' (2004) ch 5. [https://books.google.com/books?id=YsVFqZIuus0C&pg=PA106&dq=%22manchurian+candidate%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=2007&num=30&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpt and text search]

== See also ==
* [[Frank Sinatra]]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Manchurian Candidate, The}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Movies|Manchurian Candidate, The]]
[[Category:Cold War]]
[[Category:Greatest Conservative Movies]]
[[Category:Anti-Communism]]

The Manchurian Candidate

2020-09-23T22:29:53Z

TerryH: Correct grammar in first paragraph.

{{Infobox Film
| name=The Manchurian Candidate
| image=ManchurianCandidateposter.jpg
| caption=
| director=John Frankenheimer
| producer=Howard W. Koch George Axelrod John Frankenheimer
| writer=Richard Condon (novel) George Axelrod (script)
| narrator=
| starring=Frank Sinatra Laurence Harvey Janet Leigh
| music=David Amram
| cinematography=Lionel Lindon
| editing=Ferris Webster
| distributor=United Artists
| released=October 24, 1962
| runtime=126 min
| country=USA
| language=English
| budget=
| gross=
| preceded_by=
| followed_by=
| website=
| amg_id=
| imdb_id=
}}
'''''The Manchurian Candidate''''' is a 1962 [[Hollywood]] film based on the idea that hypnosis could produce a man involuntarily programmed to commit murder, an idea popular at the time but now thoroughly discredited. (As is now well known, no one can be hypnotized against his will, and hypnosis cannot make anyone violate his conscience.) 
The plot is about a Chinese conspiracy to "[[brainwash]]" an American [[POW]] into becoming an unwitting assassin of a candidate for [[President of the United States]] and thus allowing a villain to become President. The film, based on the 1959 novel by Richard Condon and directed by John Frankenheimer, gained an almost [[cult]]-like following. It represented a new psychological twist in spy movies, playing upon widespread fears at the time that American POWs in Korea were being systematically brainwashed.<ref>It was later realized that sort of brainwashing depicted in the film was impossible. The Communist abused prisoners but made no attempt to control them once freed. On the fears see Susan L. Carruthers, "Redeeming The Captives: Hollywood and the Brainwashing of America's Prisoners of War in Korea." ''Film History'' 1998 10(3): 275-294</ref> It is considered by many to be the best political thriller ever made.
== Cast ==
* [[Frank Sinatra]] as Captain (later Major) Bennett Marco, [[United States Army|USA]], veteran of the [[Korean War]] and attached to Army G-2.
** [[Janet Leigh]] as Eugenie Rose "Rosie" Cheney, a girl who takes an interest in Major Marco.

* [[Laurence Harvey]] as former Staff Sergeant Raymond Shaw, USA, the war hero brainwashed by the enemy.
** James Gregory as [[United States Senate|Senator]] John Irkes Iselin of New York State; Shaw's stepfather and seeker of the nomination for Vice President.<ref name=Iselin>The identification of Senators Iselin and Jordan as Republicans is tentative. It is based on Raymond Shaw's identification of his first civilian employer, Holborn Gaines, as a Republican, an identification that he offers to his mother as proof that Mr. Gaines is not a Communist. Senators Iselin and Jordan constitute the New York delegation to the Senate because they clearly both reside in New York.</ref>
** [[Angela Lansbury]] as Eleanor Iselin, Raymond Shaw's mother and Senator Iselin's wife.<ref name=eleanor>The full name of Eleanor Iselin was never given in the film, but it did appear in the novel from which this film is adapted.</ref>
** Henry Silva as Chunjin, a Korean interpreter (and Communist spy).

* John McGiver as Senator Thomas Jordan, of New York, a political rival of Senator Iselin. He and Iselin despise one another.
** Leslie Parrish as Jocelyn "Jocie" Jordan; Senator Jordan's daughter, in love with Shaw.
* Khigh Dhiegh as Dr. Yen Lo, chief consulting psychiatrist, Pavlov Institute, Moscow
* James Edwards as Corporal Alan Melvin, USA, another veteran of Korea.

== Plot ==
{{spoiler}}
=== Prologue ===
On a dark night in Korea, Captain Bennett Marco and his patrol are ambushed, beaten senseless, and airlifted to a secret Sino-Soviet base in Manchuria, after their interpreter leads them into a trap. Three days later, the patrol reports in, except for two men who were killed. Captain Marco tells an incredible story of how his leading sergeant, Staff Sergeant Shaw, almost singlehandedly attacked an enemy machine-gun position and in the process killed an entire company of the enemy, and then led the patrol to safety. For this, Sgt. Shaw receives the [[Medal of Honor]].

=== Return from Korea ===
Upon his return from Korea, Shaw is horrified and disgusted to see that his mother and stepfather have organized a welcoming committee that behaves like a "disgusting three-ring circus." In fact, his stepfather, whom Shaw has always detested, is up for re-election and has used the Medal of Honor ceremony as political theater.

Captain Marco, freshly promoted to the rank of Major, is assigned to Army G-2 (i.e., Intelligence). But soon he is plagued by a chilling recurring dream: that not only was his story of Sgt. Shaw's heroism a lie, but in fact the patrol had been subject to [[brainwashing]], and that at a demonstration before several senior Soviet and Chinese officers, Shaw strangled one member of the patrol and shot another—which is to say, he personally murdered the very two men whom Marco would later list as killed in action.

The Army G-2 discounts his story and assigns him to the Public Relations Corps. This appointment proves disastrous, as Marco's assignment, the Secretary of Defense, loses his temper in a confrontation with Senator Iselin (who is a thinly-disguised parody of Senator [[Joseph McCarthy]], or rather the now-traditional [[liberal]] caricature of that real-life politician). Marco is reassigned to the G-2, who orders him to go away on leave. In his travels, he meets his eventual wife Rosie, who reaches out to him even though at first he tries to run away.

Marco is not the only member of the patrol to be plagued by a strange dream. Corporal Alan Melvin also dreams of sitting in a room full of Soviet and Chinese senior officers and other officials, and watching as Shaw strangles one of his buddies and shoots another at point-blank range. Melvin's wife encourages him to write to Shaw, which he does. Independently of one another, each man, when asked how he feels about Shaw, says in a monotone that Shaw is a wonderful person. The truth, however, is vastly different: Raymond Shaw, far from being attractive, is personally repulsive.

Marco traces Shaw to [[New York City]], where Shaw at first was the confidential assistant to well-known newspaper columnist Holborn Gaines (probably suggested by [[Walter Lippmann]]), and now writes the column himself after Mr. Gaines has been found murdered in his bed. When Marco finally comes to Shaw's apartment, he is horrified to confront Chunjin, the former interpreter to the patrol who was also present in the interrogation session that Marco recalls in his recurring dream. He lashes out at Chunjin and repeatedly roars questions at him about Raymond's obsessive behavior with his hands before he committed the murders, and why Chunjin himself was present, not as a captive, but as a capt''or''. He is arrested, but the G-2 vouches for him, and Rosie comes to take him home.

Marco then calls on Shaw to apologize for his behavior and explain his tortured dream. Shaw shocks him by saying that he had had a letter from another member of the patrol who was having similar dreams. Because this is the first person other than Marco to be reporting strange dreams, Marco rushes to Washington at once. There the G-2 convenes a meeting of his staff and questions Marco more closely. Marco identifies two known Soviet and Chinese officials from his dream, and the G-2 announces that he believes Marco's story and has formed a joint [[CIA]]/[[DIA]]/[[FBI]] team to investigate Raymond Shaw. Marco is assigned to this team as military liaison.

=== The investigation ===
Marco concentrates on Shaw and even encourages Shaw to tell him a sad story: he had once met a lovely and kind young woman, the daughter of Senator Jordan (the other Senator from New York State), and his mother had written an offensive letter in Shaw's name and forced Shaw to sign it. The next day, Marco meets Shaw in a bar and finds Shaw playing a game of [[solitaire]]. Marco barely hears the bartender tell another customer a story of how he had encouraged his brother-in-law to take a [[taxicab]] to [[Central Park]] and jump in the lake. And then Marco is stupefied when Shaw does exactly that. Marco follows Shaw and arrives in time to see Shaw jump in the lake, but Shaw has no memory of having done this. Nevertheless, Marco now remembers that Raymond had been playing with an imaginary—or perhaps not imaginary—deck of cards during the high-level Sino-Soviet briefing that Marco recalls in his dreams.

Marco asks the other members of the special task force about this, and they conclude that Raymond Shaw is acting under an elaborate series of suggestions implanted in his mind through [[hypnotism]]. They also identify the likely trigger: the queen of diamonds, a symbol of his mother.

What neither Marco nor even Shaw himself realizes is that Shaw's own mother is his "American operator" who gives him his orders. His mother first arranges for him to meet Senator Jordan's daughter Jocelyn again and even to marry her. But when this fails to create any fellow-feeling between Senators Jordan and Iselin, Shaw's mother then gives Shaw an order to kill Senator Jordan, and to kill Jocelyn as well.

=== The unraveling ===
Shaw retains no memory of any of his "assignments." Such is the nature of his programming that he will kill on order and then forget that he has done so, so that he will have no guilty conscience. But the sudden death of Jocelyn Jordan upsets him greatly, even though he does not yet realize that he was responsible for her death. He is so upset that he now is plagued with his own recurring dreams of the Manchurian interrogation session. In desperation he calls Marco, who meets Shaw at his hotel across the street from [[Madison Square Garden]], where the Republican National Convention is taking place, and Senator Iselin has just won the Vice-Presidential nomination. Marco brings with him a "forced deck" containing fifty-two queens of diamonds. Marco uses these to induce Shaw to confess to the following:

# The night action for which Shaw received the Medal of Honor never took place as reported.
# In fact, the entire patrol had been abducted and taken to a secret base, where specialists from the [[Ivan Pavlov|Pavlov]] Institute in Moscow hypnotized them all, but especially Shaw.
# Shaw murdered the two men whom Marco would later report as killed in action.
# Shaw then killed his columnist boss, purely as a test of his conditioning.
# Shaw did indeed jump in the lake at Central Park, after the bartender accidentally triggered his post-hypnotic suggestion.
# Shaw then killed Senator Jordan and the young woman whom he had married only twenty-four hours before.
# All of the above are part of a larger plan, though Shaw does not know the details.

Marco then takes a gamble: he displays all fifty-two queens of diamonds and then, in his command voice, tells Shaw that his days as a programmed assassin are over.

=== The final action ===
Marco orders Shaw to talk to his American operator, learn the details of the operation (which is connected with that same convention where John Iselin has become a candidate for Vice President), and report back to Marco. Instead of reporting, Shaw gives every outward sign of continuing with his programmed assignment: to take a gun into a projection room and from that vantage point to shoot the Presidential nominee in the middle of his speech. His mother has arranged this so that Senator Iselin, can step forward and accept the Presidential nomination by default.

Marco, on the convention floor, spots the light from the projection room and races to that room as fast as he can get there. He arrives in time to see Shaw shoot, not the Presidential nominee, but Senator Iselin and his own mother. Shaw then puts on his Medal of Honor, and tells Marco that no one could possibly have stopped Senator Iselin and his mother, and that he had to do the job himself. Then, guilt-ridden over the shootings and all the other murders he has committed, Shaw puts the muzzle of his high-powered rifle to his own forehead and pulls the trigger.

=== Memorable quotations ===
When asked how he feels about Raymond Shaw as a person, Marco and Corporal Melvin both say: {{cquote|Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I have ever met in my life.}}

When Marco lashes out at Chunjin, he roars out these questions:{{cquote|What was Raymond doing with his hands? How did the old ladies turn into Russians? What were you doing there?}}

The trigger phrase for the hypnotic suggestions:{{cquote|Why don't you pass the time by playing a little solitaire?}}

The Presidential nominee says these words before Shaw fires the fatal shots:{{cquote|Nor would I ask of any fellow American, in defense of his freedom, that which I would not gladly give myself: my life before my liberty.}}

After Raymond's death, Marco, now engaged to Rosie, composes a revised Medal of Honor citation for Shaw, one more appropriate to his situation: {{cquote|Made to commit acts too unspeakable to be cited here, by an enemy who had captured his mind and his soul, he freed himself at last, and in the end heroically and unhesitatingly gave his life to save his country.}}

== Goofs ==
=== Contrivance or "Dramatic License" ===
Senator and Mrs. Iselin greet Sergeant Shaw with a banner reading "Johnny Iselin's Boy!" and spread it over his head for a [[Photo Opportunity|photo-op]]. That would likely never have been allowed to happen. In real life, no civilian, even the mother and stepfather of a Medal of Honor recipient, would have been allowed to get that close to an honoree, and certainly not to spread a venal-looking banner over his head and take an unauthorized photograph, not only of the honoree, but also of a [[general]] officer of the Army.

=== Factual errors ===
[[Image:Manchurian.jpg|right|200px|right|thumb|Cover for the recently released DVD edition]]
# When Senator Iselin announces on the floor of the Senate that "there are exactly fifty-seven card-carrying Communists in the Defense Department," and then rises to a point of order, he addresses the presiding officer as "Mister Speaker" by mistake. The correct title in the Senate is "Mister President."
# When Senator Jordan threatens Senator Iselin with expulsion from the Senate if he tries to secure the Vice Presidential nomination, he incorrectly describes the sanction as an impeachment. Senator Iselin then makes the identical mistake when threatening Senator Jordan in turn. [[Impeachment]] is an accusation against the President, Vice President, or other "civil officer" in the executive or judicial branches, and is always brought in the [[United States House of Representatives|House]] and ''then'' tried in the Senate. The Senate is the sole judge of the qualifications of his own members, and a motion to expel a Senator would be called just that: a motion to expel. The Senate, and only the Senate, would then debate and vote on it. (Expulsion, like conviction in an impeachment proceeding, requires a two-thirds vote.)

=== Faulty set-dressing ===
When Major Marco fights with Chunjin, he chops a slice out of a table with a karate stroke. This table was supposed to be a breakaway table. It was not. Frank Sinatra chopped a chunk out of a real table and injured himself very badly in so doing.
{{endspoiler}}

== Themes and Receptions ==
=== Brainwashing ===
: ''Main Article: [[Brainwashing]]''

The 1950s was a time of intense interest in accounts of mind control, and the term "brainwashing" was coined in 1950. At a time of high Cold War tension, the book ''I Was Stalin's Prisoner'' (1952), a first-person account of US executive Robert A. Vogeler's experiences with [[mind control]] as a political prisoner in Hungary, produced derivative fiction. ''Brain-Washing in Red China'' (1951) and other writings by Edward Hunter proclaimed the danger and potentially devastating possibilities of brainwashing. Inaccurate reports to the effect that numerous American POW's had defected to the Chinese in Korea caused alarm; in fact there were only a few. Richard Condon's novel ''The Manchurian Candidate'' (1959), the basis for this film tapped into public fascination and concern over mind-control techniques. Novels by William Burroughs, A. E. van Vogt, and Francis Pollini all incorporate brainwashing themes. By the time of Walter Wager's ''Telefon'' (1975), the subject of brainwashing techniques had become passé.<ref>David Seed, "Brainwashing And Cold War Demonology." ''Prospects'' 1997 22: 535-573.</ref>

Some scholars have concluded there was no such brainwashing but it was a potent fear at the time. The film picks up and elaborates on this fear, and suggests that a "part light-induced, part drug-induced" technique would be effective. The 1954 film "Prisoner of War" starring [[Ronald Reagan]] portrays brainwashing POW's in Korea.

At the time of its release in 1962, the film defied plot analysis or genre categorization, but the film's subject of US soldiers brainwashed by Chinese forces during the Korean War found particular resonance in US popular culture. Beginning in 1952, popular journalists frightened and titillated their readers with sometimes dubious tales of Communist mind-control techniques.

Some critics who analyzed the film in 1962-63, however, saw the film as a [[leftist]] commentary on McCarthyism - the character of Senator John Irkes Iselin, the stepfather of Staff Sergeant Raymond Shaw, bears striking resemblances to Joseph McCarthy, if only as parody and burlesque. The film's real target was "Mom-ism," since it was the supposedly invasive upbringing of Raymond Shaw by his mother that made him a good candidate for brainwashing according to some, and viewed by others as a subtle attempt to help break down the nuclear family by [[liberals]].<ref>Susan L. Carruthers, "The Manchurian Candidate (1962) And The Cold War Brainwashing Scare." ''Historical Journal of Film, Radio And Television'' 1998 18(1): 75-94. 0143-9685</ref>

A key premise of the movie was that it was possible to [[brainwash]] or hypnotize an unsuspecting prisoner into committing murder. This was a widespread fear in the 1950s, and Ronald Reagan had starred in another film about brainwashing of American POWs in Korea.

:... a tall, bald Communist Chinese/Korean doctor-spylord Yen Lo ... introduces the captured, passive and impotent men, all drugged and hypnotized for a public demonstration of the powers of hypnotism.

Although the film was not a major hit, and its conspiracy plot was considered far-fetched, it anticipated the American obsession with conspiracy theories after Kennedy's assassination.

One year after the assassination of President [[John F. Kennedy]], the creative rights to the film reverted to Frank Sinatra. He was unable to come to financial terms with the production company ([[United Artists]]), so Sinatra shelved the film. At the time, some suspected that Frank Sinatra had the film pulled from circulation after the Kennedy assassination, in the fear that his film had provoked [[Lee Harvey Oswald]] to commit this act.<ref name=Osborne>Osborne, Robert. End-of-film commentary on ''The Manchurian Candidate''.</ref> However, Ben Mankiewicz now says that that was "a Hollywood version of an urban myth," and that Sinatra's real reason for shelving the picture, after the rights reverted to him, was the failure of [[United Artists]] to come to satisfactory terms with him with regard to royalties. The estate of Frank Sinatra finally settled the royalty issue in or about 2005.<ref name=Mankiewicz>Mankiewicz, Ben. Introduction to ''The Manchurian Candidate''.</ref>

=== Manipulation of fact ===
Eleanor Iselin engages in an interesting scheme of manipulation, and frankly avows that to her husband when he complains that she never tells him to give the same number twice of Communists in the Defense Department. By way of explanation, she says this:{{cquote|What are the newspapers of America writing about, and what are they saying? Are they saying, "Are there any Communists in the Defense Department?" Of course not! They're asking, "''How many'' Communists are there in the Defense Department"!}}

In short, by keeping the news organs and their readers and viewers guessing, Mrs. Iselin invites people to accept ''[[a priori]]'' that the Defense Department has Communists in it, although an objective observer ought to have noticed that when a man cannot tell the same story twice in succession, he is usually lying.

=== Manipulation of popular emotion ===
The primary purpose of Mrs. Iselin's plan is to manipulate the emotions of the people into accepting dictatorship in the belief that the country is under a dire threat. Mrs. Iselin avows as much to her son when she gives him his final assignment, not realizing that Major Marco has already "unconditioned" him. In fact, she predicts that the assassination of the named Presidential candidate will cause the American electorate {{cquote|to sweep us into the [[White House]] with powers that will make [[martial law]] look like [[anarchy]].}}

The facts of the matter are far more complex. In the film, the Communist threat ''does'' exist. But the person behind the campaign to popularize that threat ''is herself an agent of that threat.'' Or so she pretends, at least in her dealings with Soviet and Chinese agents that actually induce them to recruit and train an assassin and place that assassin at her disposal. What she actually intends is to seize power in America and then launch a war of revenge against her very helpers. That Mrs. Iselin would conceive that such a plan could actually work, only shows the profound megalomania that afflicts this character.

(Of course, Mrs. Iselin, having accused the Soviets of underestimating her, is herself guilty of underestimating her son. Once Raymond Shaw realizes that his mother is "the American operator," he holds her responsible for the death of his wife and proves himself quite capable of taking the ultimate revenge.)

=== Other themes ===
The movie featured a riveting performance by [[Angela Lansbury]]<ref>[https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001450/ IMDB website]</ref> as the brilliant, controlling mother who manipulated both her husband and her son to realize her dream of a communist takeover of the [[United States]]. Her husband was a parody of Senator [[Joseph McCarthy]]. Frank Sinatra had initially suggested to Director [[John Frankenheimer]] that he cast [[Lucille Ball]] as Mrs. Iselin. But Frankenheimer, who had previously cast and worked with Lansbury in another film, ''[[All Fall Down]]'', showed Sinatra a "rough cut" of a key scene in which Lansbury appeared, and Sinatra agreed that Angela Lansbury would be a better choice.<ref name=Osborne2>Osborne, Robert. Introduction to ''The Manchurian Candidate''.</ref>

== Recent Remake ==
The movie was remade with [[Denzel Washington]] in the Sinatra role and [[Liev Schreiber]] as a the assassin controlled by a [[microchip]] brain implant. The villains in the remake are not communists, but simply people with a vague political agenda.<ref>[http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/manchurian_candidate/about.php 'Rotten Tomatoes' Plot Summary]</ref> Critics and fans panned the remake.

==Colloquial Usage==
In modern-day usage, to describe a political candidate as a "Manchurian Candidate" is to say that they are hiding their real beliefs in hope of being elected, and afterwords able to advance their hidden agenda. [[Barack Obama]] is frequently accused of being a Muslim Manchurian Candidate, by [https://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=79411 WorldNetDaily] and other sources.

==Further reading==
* Carruthers, Susan L. "Redeeming The Captives: Hollywood and the Brainwashing of America's Prisoners of War in Korea." ''Film History'' 1998 10(3): 275-294. 0892-2160
* Carruthers, Susan L. "The Manchurian Candidate (1962) and the Cold War Brainwashing Scare." ''Historical Journal of Film, Radio And Television'' 1998 18(1): 75-94. 0143-9685
* Condon, Richard. ''The Manchurian Candidate‎'' (1959); 320 pages; the original novel [https://books.google.com/books?id=fmB9mXvRy1gC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22manchurian+candidate%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=2007&num=30&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpts and text search]
* Marks, John D. ''The search for the "Manchurian candidate": the CIA and mind control‎'' (1979) 242 pages; scholarly study of brainwashing
* Jacobson, Matthew Frye, and Gaspar González. ''What Have They Built You to Do? The Manchurian Candidate and Cold War America'' (2006) 288pp; full-scale scholarly interpretation of the film [https://books.google.com/books?id=yGBEDgEpVuQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22manchurian+candidate%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=2007&num=30&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpt and text search]
* Seed, David. '' Brainwashing: the fictions of mind control : a study of novels and films'' (2004) ch 5. [https://books.google.com/books?id=YsVFqZIuus0C&pg=PA106&dq=%22manchurian+candidate%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=2007&num=30&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpt and text search]

== See also ==
* [[Frank Sinatra]]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Manchurian Candidate, The}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Movies|Manchurian Candidate, The]]
[[Category:Cold War]]
[[Category:Greatest Conservative Movies]]
[[Category:Anti-Communism]]

Deepfake

2020-09-22T14:59:34Z

TerryH: /* The deepfake as a production tool */

The term '''Deepfake''' is a combination of the terms "deep learning" and "fake", which references movies, audio, or any other production which is produced by [[Artificial intelligence]].<ref>[https://www.politico.eu/article/spa-donald-trump-belgium-paris-climate-agreement-belgian-socialist-party-circulates-deep-fake-trump-video/ Belgian socialist party circulates ‘deep fake’ Donald Trump video]</ref>

Deepfake goes beyond impersonation. It creates a Computer Generated Image and even a Computer Generated Video of the subject, doing things that are often wildly out-of-character.

== In popular culture ==
The earliest cultural reference to anything approaching a deepfake was the [[motion picture]] ''[[The Manchurian Candidate]]'' in 1962. In it, [[China|Chinese]] operatives capture a [[United States Army]] patrol in [[Korea]] and condition them to say glowing things about one of their number. Whom the Chinese also program as an assassin. They use a treatment, part light-induced, part drug-induced, to drum false memories into their minds, and post-hypnotic commands into the mind of their chosen assassin.

Next was the [[television]] series ''Mission: Impossible'' from the 1960s and early 1970s. The "Impossible Missions Force" was a secret cadre of con artists who performed "impossible missions," first for the [[intelligence]] community, then in aid of [[law enforcement]]. Some of the most memorable – even frightening – confidence tricks they played on their targets involved the deepfake. The Force used a variety of techniques, from a directional sound "beamcast" that only the subject could hear, to surgical implants and hidden cameras and speakers, and even to kidnapping a subject, staging a medical intervention that he barely perceives, and returning him to his environment, ready to accept orders from Force members whom he will now trust implicitly.

== The deepfake as a production tool ==
At least one [[Hollywood]] motion picture studio has already used the deepfake to complete a motion-picture project after the leading actor died. When ''Star Wars Episode Nine: The Rise of Skywalker'' (2019) was in production, Actress Carrie Fisher, then portraying "[[General]] Leia Organa," died. To make her appearance in the film plausible, the studio generated footage of Fisher, in costume, giving "last orders" to her executive officer.

== The deepfake as a political tool ==
Author Linda Goudsmit (''The Book of Humanitarian Hoaxes: Killing America with "Kindness"'', ''Dear America: Who's Driving the Bus?'') warned on 22 September 2020 that the opponents of [[President of the United States|President]] [[Donald Trump]] might generate deepfake footage of him saying something outrageous and appearing to confirm their image of him as copying [[Adolf Hitler]], or something equally frightening.<ref>Goudsmit L, "Ultimate Election Malfeasance: Manipulation of Reality," on Pundicity and at Conservative News and Views, retrieved 22 September 2020. <http://goudsmit.pundicity.com/24574/ultimate-election-malfeasance-the-manipulation> <https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2020/09/22/accountability/news-media/deepfakes-ultimate-election-malfeasance/></ref>

==References==
{{reflist|1}}

[[Category:Technology]]
[[Category:Computers]]
[[Category:Psychology]]

Deepfake

2020-09-22T14:34:02Z

TerryH:

The term '''Deepfake''' is a combination of the terms "deep learning" and "fake", which references movies, audio, or any other production which is produced by [[Artificial intelligence]].<ref>[https://www.politico.eu/article/spa-donald-trump-belgium-paris-climate-agreement-belgian-socialist-party-circulates-deep-fake-trump-video/ Belgian socialist party circulates ‘deep fake’ Donald Trump video]</ref>

Deepfake goes beyond impersonation. It creates a Computer Generated Image and even a Computer Generated Video of the subject, doing things that are often wildly out-of-character.

== In popular culture ==
The earliest cultural reference to anything approaching a deepfake was the [[motion picture]] ''[[The Manchurian Candidate]]'' in 1962. In it, [[China|Chinese]] operatives capture a [[United States Army]] patrol in [[Korea]] and condition them to say glowing things about one of their number. Whom the Chinese also program as an assassin. They use a treatment, part light-induced, part drug-induced, to drum false memories into their minds, and post-hypnotic commands into the mind of their chosen assassin.

Next was the [[television]] series ''Mission: Impossible'' from the 1960s and early 1970s. The "Impossible Missions Force" was a secret cadre of con artists who performed "impossible missions," first for the [[intelligence]] community, then in aid of [[law enforcement]]. Some of the most memorable – even frightening – confidence tricks they played on their targets involved the deepfake. The Force used a variety of techniques, from a directional sound "beamcast" that only the subject could hear, to surgical implants and hidden cameras and speakers, and even to kidnapping a subject, staging a medical intervention that he barely perceives, and returning him to his environment, ready to accept orders from Force members whom he will now trust implicitly.

== The deepfake as a production tool ==
At least one [[Hollywood]] motion picture studio has already used the deepfake to complete a motion-picture project after the leading actor died. When ''Star Wars Episode Nine: The Rise of Skywalker'' (2019) was in production, Actress [[Carrie Fisher]], then portraying "[[General]] Leia Organa," died. To make her appearance in the film plausible, the studio generated footage of Fisher, in costume, giving "last orders" to her executive officer.

== The deepfake as a political tool ==
Author Linda Goudsmit (''The Book of Humanitarian Hoaxes: Killing America with "Kindness"'', ''Dear America: Who's Driving the Bus?'') warned on 22 September 2020 that the opponents of [[President of the United States|President]] [[Donald Trump]] might generate deepfake footage of him saying something outrageous and appearing to confirm their image of him as copying [[Adolf Hitler]], or something equally frightening.<ref>Goudsmit L, "Ultimate Election Malfeasance: Manipulation of Reality," on Pundicity and at Conservative News and Views, retrieved 22 September 2020. <http://goudsmit.pundicity.com/24574/ultimate-election-malfeasance-the-manipulation> <https://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2020/09/22/accountability/news-media/deepfakes-ultimate-election-malfeasance/></ref>

==References==
{{reflist|1}}

[[Category:Technology]]
[[Category:Computers]]
[[Category:Psychology]]

Anthony Fauci

2020-04-10T19:16:02Z

TerryH:

'''Anthony Fauci, M.D.''' is the current head of the [[National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases]], part of the [[National Institutes of Health]]. He has held that position since 1983.

Dr. Fauci is best known for his work on the [[Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome|AIDS]] outbreak of 1983 and following.

Today his performance is the subject of considerably controversy, in light of the [[coronavirus]] outbreak. Critics charge that he uses erroneous models that he does not adequately check, and makes recommendations for "forever" lifestyle changes that any individual patient would naturally refuse.
[[Category:Biography]][[Category:United States]]

Anthony Fauci

2020-04-10T19:15:21Z

TerryH: Created new article about Anthony Fauci.

'''Anthony Fauci, M.D.''' is the current head of the [[National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease]], part of the [[National Institutes of Health]]. He has held that position since 1983.

Dr. Fauci is best known for his work on the [[Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome|AIDS]] outbreak of 1983 and following.

Today his performance is the subject of considerably controversy, in light of the [[coronavirus]] outbreak. Critics charge that he uses erroneous models that he does not adequately check, and makes recommendations for "forever" lifestyle changes that any individual patient would naturally refuse.
[[Category:Biography]][[Category:United States]]

General strike

2020-03-24T18:57:09Z

TerryH: Created page with "A '''general strike''' is a strike that affects not merely one company, but every company and every field of human work in a country. General strikes are an extre..."

A '''general strike''' is a [[strike]] that affects not merely one company, but every company and every field of human [[work]] in a [[country]].

General strikes are an extreme form of [[protest]] intended to induce the [[government]] to enact laws friendly to "[[labor]]" as a political movement. But sometimes a political movement might call a general strike to aid in overthrowing the government or ending what that movement perceives as hostile occupation.

Notable general strikes in history include without limitation:

* A general strike called in the last years of Czarist [[Russia]] at about the time of the [[Russo-Japanese War]]
* A general strike called in [[Algiers]] in the last days of the [[France|French]] occupation of [[Algeria]]

[[Category:History]][[Category:Labor movement]][[Category:Politics]]

Zero population growth

2019-09-26T18:02:33Z

TerryH: Created page with "'''Zero Population Growth''' is a state of population balance, in which births and immigration exactly balance deaths and emigration. The term also refers to a political movem..."

'''Zero Population Growth''' is a state of population balance, in which births and immigration exactly balance deaths and emigration. The term also refers to a political movement with the aim of achieving this balance as a public-policy goal.

[[Category:Politics]]

Essay:Articles of Federation

2018-10-09T02:39:53Z

TerryH: /* A bit of Nine-eleven Truther */

{{Essay By|TerryH}}
'''Articles of Federation'''

[[File:Logo_Federation.svg|right]]In fifty years of watching various ''[[Star Trek]]'' [[television|series]] and [[Motion picture|movies]], few considered ''Star Trek'' [[politics]]. But ''Star Trek'' does have a political system. It must, to support the ships (or the fortress) of which the series speak. That system is the Articles of Federation.

= What are the Articles of Federation? =

The Articles of Federation of the United Federation of Planets mirror exactly the Charter of the [[United Nations]]. When Paramount licensed the ''Star Fleet Technical Manual'' in ca. 1977, that work led with the Articles of Federation. Replace “human” with “intelligent life-form,” Security Council with Federation Council, General Assembly with Supreme Assembly, etc. That’s all one needs. Except for one thing: the United Nations today does not have a permanent unified army, navy, or air force. Nor does it (yet) have a United Earth Space Probe Agency. In contrast, the Federation has Star Fleet.

This comes as no accident. The show ''Enterprise'' ends with the signing of the United Federal Charter, or at least a precursor. Captain Jonathan Archer, having a reputation as a great hero, makes a grand speech, and signs this Charter. These are in fact his last acts in command. (But ''not'' the last acts in his career. Clues in some of the last scripts say that Jonathan Archer rises to command Star Fleet. He then rises to lead the Federation as one of its first Presidents.)

== Articles of Federation v. The United Nations ==

So what do the Articles of Federation provide? The Federation Council, like the UN Security Council, has five permanent members. Humans somehow end up with two seats, one for [[Earth]] itself, the other for the Alpha Centauri A and B Concordium. (Recent reports say that Alpha Centauri C might have a “Class M” planet in orbit around it.<ref name="Proxima">William M, “[http://www.universetoday.com/130276/earth-like-planet-around-proxima-centauri-discovered/ Earth-like Planet Around Proxima Centauri Discovered],” ''Universe Today'', 14 August 2016.</ref>) Vulcans, Andorians, and Tellarites have one seat each. The ''Enterprise'' show, in its last season, describes how those three peoples got those seats.

=== One armed service subsumes all others ===

It also drops this hint to how Star Fleet grew beyond its beginnings as the UESPA and became the unified armed service for the Federation. Star Fleet accepts non-humans into its ranks, and treats them no differently from humans.<ref name="Vulcan">The first non-human to get a Star Fleet commission was the Vulcan representative, T’Pol. She didn’t trade in her form-fitting “cat suits” for a standard uniform.. But she attached to them all the accouterments of rank and unit assignment. See “These Are the Voyages,” last episode in ''Enterprise''.</ref> Simplicity itself. The Vulcan High Command dissolves before the ''Enterprise'' show finishes its run. It does so after what begins as rebellion quelling becomes a planet-wide scandal.<ref name="VulcansForge">“The Forge,” “The Awakening,” and “Kir’Shara” in ''Enterprise''</ref> The Andorian Imperial Guard presumably dissolves after Star Fleet sets up enough recruiting stations on Andoria.<ref name="Andoria">The name ''Andoria'' refers to the actual home of the Andorian race. This is an icy moon of a gas giant, ''Andor'', with Saturn-like rings.</ref> Tellarites likewise fold their armed services for the same reasons.

This might hint at plans to fold all the world’s military and security services into one. Imagine the [[United States of America|United ''States'']] armed services becoming the United ''Federal'' armed services. Imagine a Department (or Ministry) of Global [[KGB|Security]], and a [[GRU|Main Intelligence Directorate]]. At least the Federation does ''not'' have a Main ''Political'' Directorate. Perhaps that particular [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] institution was dying when ''The Next Generation'' came out. (Or does the ship’s counselor also function as a Deputy to the Captain for Political Work?)

== From xenophobia to unity: rise of the Federation ==

The Federation has its beginnings, in fact, in reaction to xenophobic scandal—on Earth ''and'' on Vulcan. On the latter world, a secret cabal in the Vulcan government bombs the United Earth Embassy in their capital city. They then blame the bombing on a philosophical sect claiming Vulcans have lost the “way of Surak,” their great philosophical reformer. And in fact, Captain Archer soon helps recover Surak’s lost texts. These provoke a revolution on Vulcan.

On Earth, a seething suspicion of all things [[Extraterrestrial life|ET]] takes hold after a very real [[September 11, 2001 attacks|September 11]] style attack leaving seven million people dead. Toward the end of the series, a xenophobic tycoon threatens an attack against Star Fleet unless all ET’s leave. Of course, Captain Archer “sees about that.”

=== A bit of Nine-eleven Truther ===

These fictitious events should remind everyone of the “Nine-eleven Truther” movement. Recall: authorities quickly identified nineteen Saudi Arabians and accused them of the [[September 11, 2001 attacks|Attacks of September 11, 2001]]. A ''Nine-eleven Truther'' holds those men either ''innocent of any wrongdoing, or excusable in that wrongdoing''. The Vulcan bombing scandal plays out the classical Truther narrative. ''Agents of the government itself committed the terrorist act and blamed their social outcasts for it''.

On Earth, the brief “Terra Prime War” simply reflects people not knowing when the larger war is over. But in an additional vicious twist, the xenophobes somehow engineer a Vulcan-Human hybrid child who later dies. Perhaps they knew it would die and hoped to gain points with the “There-you-sees.”

= Rights under the Articles? =

So: do Federation citizens truly govern themselves? On this the Articles of Federation are absolutely silent. Moreover, never once does any character mention a legislature, other than the Federation Council and Supreme Assembly. Nor does anyone mention an executive, other than the President of the Council or the occasional colonial governor. No elections take place. No one even ''pretends'' to have elections, as the old [[Soviet Union]] and [[Warsaw Pact]] member states did.

The Articles of Federation ''do'' speak of “intelligent life-form rights.” But the ''Star Trek'' canon mentions only those “rights” that derive from rules of civil or criminal procedure.<ref name="courtrules">See “Court Martial” in the original series.</ref> Or it mentions how to ''define'' an intelligent life form. Do “androids” have rights? Or holographic “persons”?<ref name="ftn6">See “The Measure of a Man” in ''The Next Generation'' and “Author, Author” in ''Voyager''.</ref> But the Articles of Federation ''do not'' guarantee ''property'' to anyone, except maybe personal property. (And who would steal that, when one can replicate anything one covets?)

== The Academy rules ==

Most likely, ''the academy'' governs the people. The government runs all lower, middle, and high schools. Beyond that, one goes either to Star Fleet Academy or to [[university]]. Obviously if one gets into Star Fleet Academy, and graduates, Star Fleet will “set one up for life.” If one goes to university, one must imagine some kind of Career Placement Board that ''selects'' one’s career. This Board would base its selection on:

# the aptitude the candidate shows for different areas of intelligent life-form endeavor, and
# the needs of society for certain kinds of jobholder.

So in theory, someone has your life planned out for you. And that someone is not your mother, father, or other guardian. It is the [[government]]. Or else it is the Combined Interlocking Board of Regents. The only place you ''really'' have to work at, would be Star Fleet Academy and any school of medicine. No one goes to ''business'' school. Instead they go to an ''organization and management'' school.

=== Management or art? ===

Today, the [[Yale University]] School of Organization and Management already offers a degree they call “Master of Public and Private Management.” In the ''Star Trek'' era, that degree would have a simpler name: Master of Management. And all management is public.

The Career Placement Board could also send a person to [[art]] school, [[music]] school, or [[journalism]] school. (The latter would prepare someone to report or perhaps comment for the government organ.) ''Everything'' depends on qualifying for admission, then getting a degree. The academy knows how many people society needs for what jobs. (This society has no ditch diggers. Robots dig the ditches on Earth, Vulcan, etc.)

''Inventors'' all work in government [[laboratory|laboratories]]. Imagine [[Thomas Alva Edison]], not as a laboratory owner, but as a chief project officer and government employee. Or else they work in university laboratories, that the government coddles with generous in-kind grants. One can assume Star Fleet always gets the best inventors the academy can find.

= Hosts, symbionts, and rare opportunities =

At least one Federation member society has its own unique education program. ''Trill'' society consists of two races living in harmony: a bipedal human-like ''host'' race, and a far less numerous race of worm-like ''symbionts''. A host will train for years even to be a ''candidate'' for Joining with a symbiont. Such Joining is a rare privilege. The Permanent Commission on Symbiosis reserves Joining for physically compatible hosts who show some kind of exceptional qualities.

''This is the only instance,'' apart from getting into Star Fleet Academy, in which an individual can truly distinguish himself or herself. (In fact, one Joined Trill character proves the worth of the Trill to the Federation. He successfully negotiates an end to a decades-long and bitter war with the ''Klingon Empire''.)

= Liberty? =

Aside from this extra-special circumstance, how ''[[liberty|free]]'' do the Articles of Federation make a person? One can safely assume no one, except a law-enforcement officer, a Star Fleet officer or enlisted person (especially a member of the security services), or a privileged person or his transporteer, ever carries a [[weapon]] of any kind. Most of the time, no one will arrest someone for holding or expressing a dissenting opinion. But ''nothing changes'' in human or Federal society. People, in or out of Star Fleet, seem to do what someone tells them. A [[dictator]] wearing velvet gloves wields no less authority for all that.

In fact, several programs have shown how dangerous this system can be. ''Deep Space Nine'' explored this in two distinct sub-arcs. An [[admiral]] orders a ''false-flag pseudo-op'' to excuse a Draconian crackdown on Earth society.<ref name="crackdown">See “Homefront” and “Paradise Lost” in ''Deep Space Nine''. In fact, the spectacle of Star Fleet Security troops patrolling civilian streets violates the [[Posse Comitatus Act]]. Or it would if the Federation had such an Act in force. Perhaps it doesn’t.</ref> A secret “section” in Star Fleet infects an innocent man, knowing he will shortly infect all others of his kind.<ref name="Section31">See “Inquisition,” “Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges,” and “Extreme Measures” in ''Deep Space Nine''. The second title repeats a quote by the [[Rome|Roman]] statesman Marcus Tullius [[Cicero]]. In English it reads, “In time of war, the laws fall silent.” See this [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter_arma_enim_silent_leges discussion] in Wikipedia for details.</ref> And in ''Insurrection'', an officer leads a rebellion after the Admiralty lets a despicable person corrupt it. Who can forget Lt. Cmdr. Data telling his captain, “Saddle up” and “Lock and load”? He sounds like a modern American [[militia]] activist!

== Watering the tree of liberty... ==

In each of those arcs, courageous officers fight against corrupt superiors as they would against external enemies. But why should they have to? Why don’t the Articles separate the powers of government? No one thought of any of this. And considering the revenues involved, someone should have. That they never did, shows they subscribed to, and promoted, a utopian view of government. The government always does right. Or if it does wrong, a courageous officer need only reach “the right people” to set it right.

The producers would have done better to expand the ''Insurrection'' story. ''Insurrection'' played in the last season of ''Deep Space Nine''. That project exposed festering corruption and elitism that should have infuriated the people. Its ending did ''not'' satisfy. Captain Picard, or even Commander Data, could and maybe ''should'' have started an open, large-scale rebellion. But of course ''Star Trek'' still had the baggage of Gene Roddenberry’s [[utopia]]n ethos. Neither he nor his successors could ever imagine a “War Between the Planets.” Much less could they imagine good coming out of such a conflict. (At least, they did not imagine this in the “regular” [[universe]]. In Jerome Bixby’s “Mirror, Mirror” universe, such a rebellion did take place.)

= References =
{{reflist|2}}
= Internal links =
*Essay 1: [[Essay:Star Trek: A Tarnished Jubilee|''Star Trek'': A Tarnished Jubilee]]
*Essay 2: [[Essay:Communism: the Star Trek economy|Communism: the ''Star Trek'' economy]]
*Essay 4: [[Essay:Philosophy and Theology in Star Trek|Philosophy and theology in ''Star Trek'']]
*Essay 5: [[Essay:Star Trek Science Controversies|Scientific controversies]]
*Essay 6: [[Essay:Future in and of Star Trek|The future in, and of, ''Star Trek'']]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Articles of Federation}}

Essay:Star Trek: A Tarnished Jubilee

2018-10-09T02:23:53Z

TerryH:

{{Essay By|TerryH}}
'''Star Trek: a Tarnished Jubilee'''

[[File:The Shuttle Enterprise - GPN-2000-001363.jpg|thumb|350px|right|The space shuttle ''Enterprise'', with the then administrator of [[NASA]], the creator of ''[[Star Trek]]'', and the original cast posing before it.]]Fifty years ago this fall (8 September 1966), a new kind of [[science fiction]] [[television]] show had its premiere. Mr. Gene Roddenberry, who created it, did not rely on dazzling but absurd effects. He left that to his competitor, Irwin Allen. Instead, Roddenberry relied on character development. His show had characters people could not only believe, but love. That single element of the writer’s craft guaranteed the success of ''[[Star Trek franchise|Star Trek]].'' No other dramatic franchise in science fiction comes close. Four successor series, a fifth in development, and now thirteen [[motion picture]]s, attest to that success.

This fall, ''Star Trek'' celebrates its Golden Jubilee. Or does it? In fact, though a viewer can believe the ''characters'', he cannot believe the ''setting''. More than the particular setting of a ship of explorers, or a floating fortress, matters here. The ''world that supports these things'' should have some grounding in reality. And in many telling ways, the world of Star Trek departs from reality. And it pretends to work, in ways it never could.

= The Star Trek craft =

By many accounts, the ''Star Trek'' franchise began to fail in 2006. The most recent three motion pictures might have saved it—but most fans of the franchise dispute this. The reasons for that failure lie beyond scope here. They have to do with the ''craft'' of the franchise. Randall S. Ingermanson, author of ''Oxygen'' and ''The Fifth Man'', among other works, once defined three things a successful writer or project must have: content, craft and connections. Fans agree the most recent ''Star Trek'' show to air, failed miserably at its craft. Viewers stopped watching. Advertisers refused to support it. So executives canceled it, and served notice halfway through the fourth season.

Three years later, the producers risked alienating their old fan base. In effect they started over. The last three films play out in an “original series” era radically differently from its original. They have ''no'' continuity with most of the five weekly series.<ref name=altuniverse>Clues in the three films that have shown so far, suggest they take place in an “alternate universe.” Parallel universes allegedly multiply with each choice someone makes, or any event subject to random chance.</ref>

But those objecting to this “reboot,” fail to understand that their ''original'' vision had fatal flaws. No reboot can repair those. They strike at the heart of [[politics]], [[economics]], [[philosophy]], and [[theology]]. These, more even than twisted [[biology]] and [[physics]], make this a ''tarnished'' jubilee.

= A few good things =

To be fair, ''Star Trek'' didn’t get everything wrong. The original series especially sounded many hopeful notes. More to the point, the producers and writers commented sharply, ''and justly'', on social issues of our era.

First they placed a human-alien hybrid, and a woman of color, on the regular bridge watch. This watch also included a Japanese and, beginning in the second season, a Russian.<ref name="RussianJoke">The Soviet news organ, ''Pravda'', complained about the absence of a Russian officer on board. Roddenberry introduced Ensign Pavel Chekov to address that complaint. But he also played a running joke on ''Pravda''. Chekov always asserted that all high human achievements began in Russia. He made several hilariously absurd assertions along this line. Still, viewers saw a Russian and a Japanese sitting at a combined console. After centuries of war between those two countries, ''that'' surely resonated.</ref> This spoke volumes against [[racism]].<ref name="DeepSouthDiscrim">Television stations in some Deep South markets—but not Richmond, Virginia—refused to air the show on that ground.</ref> So did some of the stories that show told. One features two strangers—white on one side, black on the other, but having the black pigment on different sizes. They fight constantly, and try to play on the sympathies of [[Captain]] James T. Kirk and his officers. Those officers eventually visit the home world of these strangers. ''The strangers’ respective races have annihilated one another.'' The two strangers disembark, bitter to the end. A sad Captain Kirk leaves them to stew in the juice they and their fellow ethnics boiled up.<ref name="LastBattlefield">“Let That Be Your Last Battlefield” in the original series. Frank Gorshin and Lou Antonio played the two warring strangers.</ref>

In another story, the white Captain Kirk, and his black female bridge officer, kiss one another—on screen. True, the natives of the world they were then visiting forced them to do this. But Kirk and Uhura object to the natives applying (telekinetic) force, ''not'' to being intimate despite their racial differences.<ref name="Plato">“Plato’s Stepchildren” in the original series</ref> (Nichelle Nichols, the actress, did say the studio executives expressed squeamishness about the kiss. She seems to have told them to “kiss off”!)

== Sexism remains at first ==

The ''Star Trek'' franchise took longer to discuss the ''[[sexism]]'' and even ''[[misogyny]]'' of the original production era. Tragically, one actress, playing a junior officer, did a show in which her captain assaulted her in her quarters.<ref name="EnemyWithin">“The Enemy Within” in the original series</ref> A few weeks later, a studio executive ''assaulted the actress back-stage''.<ref name="GraceLee">Whitney GL. ''The Longest Trek: My Tour of the Galaxy.'' Quill Driver Books, 1998. ISBN 1884956033. Cited by Moyer JW, “[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/05/04/star-trek-actress-grace-lee-whitney-who-alleged-sexual-assault-by-tv-executive-dead-at-85/ Grace Lee Whitney, ‘Star Trek’ actress who alleged sexual assault by TV executive, dead at 85],” ''The Washington Post'', 4 May 2015. Retrieved 14 August 2016</ref> The more ranking executives refused to act. This actress left the show, and turned to [[Alcoholic drinks|drink]] to deaden the pain.<ref name="Drinking">Grace Lee Whitney admits she had a drinking problem before the incident. She took one drink. Then she found herself in a locked room with a man not willing to take “No” for an answer. But after leaving the show, she drank more heavily.</ref> In later years, another generation of executives brought this actress back for two cameo appearances – the likely price of her silence. For reasons she never fully explained, she took the name of the offending executive with her to her grave.

As if this did not give enough offense, the last episode of the series<ref name="Lester">“Turnabout Intruder” in the original series. The sudden death of former President Dwight D. Eisenhower forced the network to postpone the airing of this episode for two and a half months.</ref> featured a woman switching bodies with Kirk. She did this after the “old boy network” at the Admiralty, as she saw it, limited her career choices. This made such sexism, at a critical point in ''Star Trek'' “[[history]],” ''canonical''. At least one fan cried “Shame!” on that fact.

At least the later shows did away with the last traces of such sexism. The producers designed new uniforms that would show less. They accepted scripts that in some cases reversed male and female roles. And they removed all trace of the “old boy network” of the original series. The show ''Voyager'' featured the consummation of this removal. In it, a woman (Captain Kathryn Janeway) held the command, and the lead.

= Why the Star Trek world cannot work =

Reforms like these do not contradict reality. They enhance society. Despite anything [[Barack Obama]] or [[Hillary Clinton]] says, most human beings do not appreciate racism or sexism. But the writers of the various shows and films project a supporting “world” that cannot work. [[Human]]s have tried many features of it already. Results have varied from less-than-stellar to disastrous. And no one connected with the ''Star Trek'' franchise, and few fans, even acknowledge this. Or if they do, they insist such results need not play out.

Further installments in this series will examine the failings of ''Star Trek'' in detail. The obvious objection—that no extraterrestrial civilization can exist—does not matter here. The allegorical references to society, present and “ideal,” do matter. So also do the more concrete references and projections. In this context, discussion will lead, and concentrate more, on the social or “soft” sciences first.

= References =

{{reflist|2}}

= Internal Links =

*Essay 2: [[Essay:Communism: the Star Trek economy|Communism: the ''Star Trek'' economy]]
*Essay 3: [[Essay:Articles of Federation|Articles of Federation]]
*Essay 4: [[Essay:Philosophy and Theology in Star Trek|Philosophy and theology in ''Star Trek'']]
*Essay 5: [[Essay:Star Trek Science Controversies|Scientific controversies]]
*Essay 6: [[Essay:Future in and of Star Trek|The future in, and of, ''Star Trek'']]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Star Trek: A Tarnished Jubilee}}

Smart meter

2018-10-05T16:04:37Z

TerryH:

A '''smart meter''' is any instrument for measuring usage of [[electricity]], [[natural gas]], or [[water]], that communicates by [[radio]] with the utility provider and facilitates more frequent measurement of usage, or remote control of the provision of service.

[[Category:Electricity]]

Smart meter

2018-10-05T16:01:48Z

TerryH: Created page with "A '''smart meter''' is any instrument for measuring usage of electricity, natural gas, or water, that communicates by radio with the utility provider and facil..."

Brett Kavanaugh

2018-09-29T14:27:52Z

TerryH:

:''See also: [[Kavanaugh smear]]s''
[[File:Judge Brett Kavanaugh.jpg|250px|right|Justice Brett Kavanaugh, presently of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Official portrait.]]
'''Brett Kavanaugh''' is a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the [[D.C. Circuit]], and President [[Donald Trump]]'s nominee to the vacancy on the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] left by the retirement of Justice [[Anthony Kennedy]]. Kavanaugh is thought to be [[pro-life]], and dissented from a decision that required the [[Trump Administration]] to be complicit in granting a right to an [[abortion]] by an [[illegal alien]] 17-year-old girl.

Kavanaugh is [[conservative]] and supported by [[Ann Coulter]] and many others for the [[U.S. Supreme Court]]. He is opposed to [[illegal immigration]], and has written several opinions supporting an [[America First]] philosophy.<ref>Binder, John (July 4, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/07/04/america-first-scotus-choice-judge-brett-kavanaugh-applies-trumps-economic-patriotism-to-the-law/ ‘America First’ SCOTUS Choice: Judge Brett Kavanaugh Applies Trump’s Economic Patriotism to the Law]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved July 5, 2018.</ref><ref>Merriam, Jesse (July 6, 2018). [https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/07/06/kavanaugh_the_right_pick_for_trump_137446.html Kavanaugh the Right Pick for Trump]. ''RealClearPolitics''. Retrieved July 7, 2018.</ref><ref>Binder, John (July 10, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/07/10/experts-praise-kavanaugh-will-safeguard-american-workers-and-sovereignty/ Experts Praise Kavanaugh: Will Safeguard American Workers and Sovereignty]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved July 10, 2018.</ref> He is also a strong opponent of the [[administrative state]],<ref>Gershman, Jacob (July 9, 2018). [https://www.wsj.com/articles/nominee-has-shown-deep-skepticism-of-regulatory-state-1531186402 Brett Kavanaugh Has Shown Deep Skepticism of Regulatory State]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. Retrieved July 10, 2018.</ref><ref>Bravin, Jess; Kendall, Brent (August 31, 2018). [https://www.wsj.com/articles/brett-kavanaughs-record-shows-push-to-restrain-the-regulatory-state-1535737394 Brett Kavanaugh’s Record Shows Push to Restrain the Regulatory State]. ''The Wall Street Journal''. Retrieved August 31, 2018.</ref> and he has made conservative rulings on social issues such as [[Second Amendment]] rights.<ref>Hurley, Lawrence (July 9, 2018). [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-trump-kavanaugh-newsmaker/washington-insider-kavanaugh-boasts-conservative-credentials-idUSKBN1K004F Washington insider Kavanaugh boasts conservative credentials]. ''Reuters''. Retrieved July 11, 2018.</ref><ref>Hawkins, Awr (July 9, 2018). [https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/07/09/brett-kavanaugh-semiautomatic-rifles-are-constitutionally-protected/ Brett Kavanaugh: ‘Semiautomatic Rifles Are Constitutionally Protected’]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved July 11, 2018.</ref> Some conservatives believe that he relies too much on faulty court precedents<ref>Adelmann, Bob (July 10, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/29496-trump-supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaugh-relies-heavily-on-judicial-precedents Trump Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Relies Heavily on Judicial Precedents]. ''The New American''. Retrieved July 10, 2018.</ref> and have criticized a ruling that was too supportive of [[Obamacare]].<ref>Wolverton, Joe (July 14, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/29537-trump-scotus-nom-kavanaugh-has-big-government-biases Trump SCOTUS Nominee Kavanaugh Has Big Government Biases]. ''The New American''. Retrieved July 14, 2018.</ref> The [[Never Trump movement]] is more divided. Some Never-Tumpers, such as [[David French]], assert that a Justice Kavanaugh would have a judicial philosophy closer to that of Roberts or Kennedy than Alito or Scalia.<ref>[https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-potential-pick/ Brett Kavanaugh Is an Excellent Judge, but Is He the Best Choice?]</ref> Others, such as Peter Wehner and [[Ben Sasse]], have praised Kavanaugh, although his appointment is unlikely to prompt them to start supporting President Trump.<ref>[https://mobile.twitter.com/Peter_Wehner/status/1016518790518067200]</ref><ref>[https://www.mediaite.com/tv/sen-ben-sasse-praises-trump-over-scotus-picks-kavanaugh-and-gorsuch-hes-done-a-great-job/]</ref> Democrats and the Left, on the other hand, had a completely hysterical reaction to his nomination because he is not a [[Judicial activism|judicial activist]].<ref>Kirkwood, R. Cort (July 10, 2018). [https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/29504-democrats-collapse-in-hysterics-over-kavanaugh Democrats Hysterical Over Kavanaugh]. ''The New American''. Retrieved July 10, 2018.</ref>

Much of the criticism of Kavanaugh is bizarre. For example, some claim that because Kavanaugh married a woman who once worked as a secretary to President [[George W. Bush]], Kavanaugh is therefore somehow part of the Bush network. Another criticism, coming primarily from [[dark money]] types, relates to Kavanaugh's ruling that upheld the constitutionality of limits on contributions to political parties in ''Republican Nat'l Comm. v. FEC'', 698 F. Supp. 2d 150 (D.D.C. 2010).<ref>[http://www.onecitizenspeaking.com/2018/07/supreme-court-is-bret-kavanaugh-part-of-a-bush-trump-deal.html SUPREME COURT: IS BRET KAVANAUGH PART OF A BUSH-TRUMP DEAL?]</ref>

==Liberal smears==
:''Main article: [[Kavanaugh smear]]''

== Interesting Facts about Kavanaugh ==

* In 1991, Kavanaugh clerked for Third Circuit Judge Walter Stapleton in the same year in which Stapled authored the majority opinion (joined mostly by future Justice [[Sam Alito]]) in ''[[Planned Parenthood v. Casey]]'', before that case was reviewed and decided by the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] in 1992.

*Kavanaugh's only argument in the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] was in a case concerning attorney-client privilege and whether it extended past the death the client, [[Vince Foster]]<ref>https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/97-1192.ZS.html</ref>

*Kavanaugh reportedly strongly opposed the publication of salacious details in the Starr Report while Kavanaugh was working for [[Ken Starr]] on the Lewinsky matter, but Ken Starr overruled him and published it anyway.

*Kavanaugh has had an exceptional record of his opinions being embraced by the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] on appeal, whereby the Supreme Court has adopted Kavanaugh's views 13 times and reversed him only once.

*Kavanaugh is more active than Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] in dissenting from denials of petitions to accept a case (or rehearing of a case)

*In 2017, Kavanaugh gave a speech praising the former Chief Justice [[William Rehnquist]] for his opinions on several controversial issues, including [[prayer]] and [[abortion]].<ref>http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-kavanaugh-rehnquist-20180711-story.html</ref>

== Criticism of Kavanaugh contraceptive mandate ==

Conservatives have criticized Judge Kavanaugh for conceding that the government has a "compelling interest" in promoting contraception. Defendants of Judge Kavanaugh has said he was merely following the Supreme Court's decision in ''[[Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores|Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.]]'' (2014), as lower courts are bound to do.<ref>https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/judge-brett-kavanaughs-impeccable-record-of-constitutional-conservatism/</ref> But Judge Kavanaugh actually went further in the direction of [[Planned Parenthood]] than the Supreme Court had.

In his dissent in a related case, ''Priests for Life v. HHS'',<ref>https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/425C0AE29F10AFD785257E4B00767BF5/$file/13-5368.pdf (see pp. 28-52 of this pdf)</ref>
Judge Kavanaugh first says<ref>on p. 4 of the opinion (p. 31 of the pdf)</ref> that it is necessary to decide whether or not the government has a compelling interest in promoting contraception, because that is a step in applying [[RFRA]] to the plaintiff's claim to be exempt from [[Obamacare]]'s contraceptive mandate.

Then Judge Kavanaugh discusses at length<ref>p. 15-19 of the opinion, pp. 42-46 of the pdf.</ref> the issue of compelling interest. Judge Kavanaugh concedes that the Supreme Court "did not formally hold" that the government has a compelling interest in promoting contraception. He should have stopped there, but he didn't.

Instead, Judge Kavanaugh took an ambiguous statement from a concurring opinion by his old boss Justice Kennedy, combined it with the opinion of the four dissenting Justices, and concluded that "a majority of the Justices in Hobby Lobby (Justice Kennedy plus the four dissenters) would suggest that the Government has a compelling interest in facilitating women’s access to contraception."

Judge Kavanaugh then wrote a long paragraph full of Planned Parenthood propaganda, containing many factual assertions about the alleged "numerous benefits" of contraception, benefits which he claimed are "commonly accepted" even though they are all disputed and rebuttable, and not supported by evidence in the record (not that any of the assertions should be subject to judicial fact finding anyway).

In ''Hobby Lobby'' the Supreme Court assumed without deciding that contraception is a compelling interest, and Judge Kavanaugh should have done likewise. Instead, he appears to have gone out of his way to hold that the federal government has a legitimate interest, even a compelling interest, to promote contraception or facilitate access to contraception.

In fact, the Supreme Court has never found or held that there is any public purpose or social benefit, let alone a compelling interest, to justify federal legislation promoting contraception. Without such a finding, the entire contraceptive mandate should have been thrown out, not just for religious objectors.

The federal government began funding contraception after the passage of Title X in 1970, but apparently no one has ever challenged the constitutionality of Title X as to whether it served a legitimate public purpose. Contrast that to New Deal passage of Social Security and Unemployment Compensation programs, which were upheld by the Supreme Court in 1938 based on a finding that those programs were justified because they "provide for the ... general welfare of the United States" as provided in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.

It may be true, as Judge Kavanaugh says, that the alleged "numerous benefits" of contraception are "commonly accepted" as a result of 50 years of Planned Parenthood's federally funded propaganda, but that does not mean they have been found to be true. A valid public purpose is needed to compel private conduct, and no valid public purpose or social benefit has ever been recognized by the Supreme Court.

On another note, although Kavanaugh's argumentation was in a dissent that has no legal weight whatsoever, it is still troubling because it was rooted in the idea that assumptions for the sake of scenario creation are identical to arguments intended to have a reasonable person interpret them as being implicit adjudication. This idea has the potential to cause damage on two fronts. First, it paves the way for incorrect interpretations of Hobby Lobby by future lawyers and judges. And second, it opens a pathway to abuse of discretion by future judges due to conflation of terms.

== References ==
{{reflist}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Kavanaugh, Brett}}
[[Category:Judges]]
[[Category:Conservatives]]
[[Category:George W. Bush Administration]]

File:Judge Brett Kavanaugh.jpg

2018-09-29T14:23:54Z

TerryH: Protected "File:Judge Brett Kavanaugh.jpg": Image protection policy ([Edit=Administrators only] (indefinite) [Move=Administrators only] (indefinite) [Upload=Administrators only] (indefinite))

Justice Brett Kavanaugh. By U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit - https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/home.nsf/content/vl+-+judges+-+bmk, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=52414945

File:Judge Brett Kavanaugh.jpg

2018-09-29T14:23:14Z

TerryH: Justice Brett Kavanaugh. By U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit - https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/home.nsf/content/vl+-+judges+-+bmk, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=52414945

Vigilance committee

2018-08-01T17:04:45Z

TerryH: Created page with "A '''vigilance committee''' is an ''ad hoc'' group of citizens that forms to take summary action against lawbreakers in time of social collapse, or whenever normal lawful..."

A '''vigilance committee''' is an ''ad hoc'' group of [[citizen]]s that forms to take summary action against lawbreakers in time of social collapse, or whenever normal lawful processes fail or appear to have failed.

A ''vigilante'' is either a member of a vigilance committee or one person taking such summary action on his or her own cognizance.

[[Category:Law]][[Category:Activism]]

Battle of Athens (1946)

2018-08-01T17:02:00Z

TerryH: /* Literary parallel */

'''The Battle of Athens''' (2 August 1946) was a literal battle that took place in Athens, McMinn County, [[Tennessee]]. Several returning [[United States|U.S.]] veterans laid siege to the county [[jail]], after a corrupt [[sheriff]] had seized two [[ballot]] boxes to try to rig an [[election]]. The veterans took the jail using small arms and explosives. As such this is the most recent recorded instance of an armed insurrection against a [[government]] on American soil. It also demonstrated the importance of the [[Second Amendment]] to the U.S. Constitution in preserving American liberty.

= Background =
McMinn County, Tennessee, lies between the cities of [[Chattanooga]] and [[Knoxville]], in southeastern Tennessee. Its two main towns are Athens (the county seat) and Etowah. As of the 1940 census, it had a population of 30,781 people.

The following [[President]]ial election results might or might not be significant.<ref name=Leip>Leip D, ''Atlas of U.S. Presidential Election Results.'' Retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/></ref> [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]] did not carry McMinn County in 1932 or 1936. But he did carry the county in 1940 and 1944. He did so by lopsided margins that completely “flipped” in 1948.

The only other [[Democratic Party|Democrats]] who have carried McMinn County were [[Woodrow Wilson]] in 1912 and [[Jimmy Carter]] in 1976. These two did not carry McMinn County by the lopsided margins FDR enjoyed in 1940 and 1944. (Indeed, Wilson did not even have a majority.) In every other election, McMinn County has voted [[Republican Party|Republican]].

== The Paul Cantrell machine ==
These election results likely represent the influence of Paul Cantrell and the political machine he built.<ref name=ConstSoc>The Constitution Society, "The Battle of Athens." Retrieved 1 August 2018. <http://constitution.org/mil/tn/batathen.htm></ref> In 1932, Paul Cantrell, of Etowah, Tennessee, and his wealthy relatives took advantage of the economic devastation of the [[Great Depression]]. They backed FDR and the [[New Deal]] and worked hard to replace Republicans in county government. They succeeded. Paul Cantrell became Sheriff of McMinn County in 1936, and won re-election in 1938 and 1940. The Constitution Society describes his margins of victory as “slim.” But the sudden landslide victories of FDR in 1940 and 1944 suggest that might not have applied to the 1940 election. In 1942, Cantrell sought and won election and re-election to the State Senate. His chief deputy, Pat Mansfield, ran for Sheriff in those two elections and won each time.

The Cantrells and their allies took steps to cement their control.<ref>Natural News Blogs, “1946 Battle of Athens, Tennessee, and its Importance Today.” Retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://www.naturalnewsblogs.com/1946-battle-athens-tennessee-importance-today/></ref> In 1941, Cantrell machine operative and State Representative George Woods proposed “An Act to Redistrict McMinn County” in the Tennessee [[legislature]]. It reduced voting precincts from 23 to 12 and reduced [[Justice of the Peace|Justices of the Peace]] from 14 to 7. It passed, largely with the aid of the infamous machine of former Mayor E. H. Crump of [[Memphis]], Tennessee. His machine controlled most of Tennessee, including the governor’s office and one of Tennessee’s U.S. [[United States Senate|Senators]].

== Shakedowns and election fraud ==
Sheriff Cantrell also benefited from [[law]]s that vested too much power in county sheriffs.<ref name=Seiber>Seiber L., “The Battle of Athens,” American Heritage. Retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://www.americanheritage.com/content/battle-athens></ref> The sheriff and his deputies received a fee for every arrest they made. So they would board cross-country buses, drag off sleepy passengers, charge them with public [[Alcoholic drinks|drunkenness]], and demand and receive ransoms, i.e., [[fine]]s, of $16.50 per person for their release.
More lucrative were the kickbacks Cantrell and his deputies received from roadhouse owners. The deputies would let the roadhouses operate, but shake down less than influential patrons.

The county [[court]], still under Republican control, ordered the county to purchase Print-O-Matic voting machines. Suspicion had long prevailed that Paul Cantrell had won election in 1936 by swapping out preloaded ballot boxes for the real ones. In response to the order, Mr. Woods introduced another bill to abolish the court. It, too, passed, and the county sold the voting machines.

Outraged citizens petitioned the federal government for oversight of the elections in 1940, 1942, and 1944. The Department of Justice turned a deaf institutional ear. Recall again: FDR carried McMinn County by sudden landslides in 1940 and 1944.

In 1946, Cantrell and Mansfield decided to switch seats. They confidently expected to control this election, as they had controlled elections for ten years.

Such was the state of affairs when, beginning in 1945, McMinn County’s contingent in the [[United States Army]] began to come home from the [[Second World War]].

= The GI’s come back =
Veterans like William White, Knox Henry, Walter Ellis, and Jim Buttram returned to a town (Athens) they thought they knew, but didn’t. They had their back pay from the Army in their pockets and were used to drinking beer on leave. As such they made lucrative targets for Pat Mansfield’s deputies. In Bill White’s memoir we read this:

{{cquote|There were several beer joints and honky-tonks around Athens; we were pretty wild; we started having trouble with the law enforcement at that time because they started making a habit of picking up GIs and fining them heavily for most anything—they were kind of making a racket out of it.

After long hard years of service—most of us were hard-core veterans of World War II—we were used to drinking our liquor and our beer without being molested. When these things happened, the GIs got madder—the more GIs they arrested, the more they beat up, the madder we got …}}

Mansfield’s deputies treated black returnees worse. According to one account, Mansfield and his men were gunning down black veterans out of hand. The spectacle of blacks wearing the uniform surely rankled.

Beginning early in 1946 the veterans began meeting in secret to decide how to challenge the Cantrell-Mansfield machine at the ballot box. In May they had their own political party. Knox Henry stood for sheriff; four other veterans ran for other county offices. The Veterans’ Party ran on a simple but pointed slogan:

{{cquote|Your vote will be counted as cast.}}

To try to make sure of that, Jim Buttram, campaign manager for the Veterans’ Party, sent two telegrams on 22 July to Governor Jim McCord and U.S. Attorney General Tom Clark. In each, he asked for help in ensuring a fair election. Neither recipient ever answered those telegrams.

== As the election approaches… ==
In keeping with the above, the Veterans’ Party ran this advertisement in the 30 July issue of ''The Daily Post-Athenian'':

{{cquote|These young men fought and won a war for good government. They know what it takes and what it means to have a clean government—and they are energetic enough, honest enough and intelligent enough to give us good, clean government.}}

In the same issue, the Cantrell-Mansfield machine ran this advertisement:

{{cquote|Look at the facts—and you will vote for the Democratic ticket. The campaign fight is as old as the hills—it is the story of the outs wanting back in.}}

On 30 July 1946, sheriff’s deputies in a neighboring county arrested two McMinn County deputies and confiscated a shipment of liquor. The two deputies brazenly admitted they were carrying “election whiskey.” Mansfield completely disavowed them.

''The Daily Post-Athenian'' has one item of significance, on 31 July 1946. The Veterans of Foreign Wars post in neighboring Blount County announced they could send 450 veterans to McMinn County at need. This article appeared on the front page, but below, not above, the fold. In any event, Sheriff Mansfield responded by recruiting hundreds of armed deputies from out of county, and some from out of State.

{{cquote|It has come to my attention that certain elements intend to create a disturbance at and around the polls. … In order to see that law and order is maintained … I will have several hundred deputies patrolling the county.}}

To put matters into perspective, the sheriff had never fielded more than fifteen deputies on election day.

= August 1, 1946: the election =
Polls opened promptly at 9:00 a.m., to heavier turnout than McMinn County elections had ever seen. Two hundred deputies deployed “to keep order.” (We know this because a surviving audio tape gives that number.)<ref name=Green>Green M., The Battle of Athens, Tennessee in 1946. YouTube video retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmDp882eCd0></ref> Instead of keeping order, they brazenly intimidated voters whom they observed “voting the wrong way.” This suggests that in McMinn County, in those days, voters lacked the privacy screens they enjoy today.

At either 9:30 a.m. or 10:00 a.m., Walter Ellis, an election judge, protested the obvious intimidation. Mansfield’s deputies summarily arrested him and hauled him off to the county jail. A man named Fred West, of dubious identification, took his place as election judge.

Jim Buttram found 200 GI’s pounding on the door of the L. L. Shaefer jewelry store he was using as an office. He had dire news for them already. He had no answer to his telegrams to Gov. McCord and Attorney General Clark. At that point Otto Kennedy, a friendly political adviser, told them Cantrell had posted armed guards (not sheriff’s deputies) at every voting precinct. At least some veterans called for their fellow GI’s to mobilize and arm themselves. Kennedy offered the use of his Essankay Garage and Tire Shop for a meeting hall.

At 3:00 p.m. the GI’s who had called for mobilization had returned to the Essankay Garage, all armed.

== First blood ==
Tom Gillespie, a black farmer, tried to vote at his usual precinct—the 11th, at the Athens Water Works. Windy Wise, one of Cantrell’s guards, hurled a racial slur at him and told him he was voting at the wrong precinct. “I’ve always voted here,” he protested. In response Wise struck him with brass knuckles. Gillespie dropped his ballot and tried to leave. Wise shot him in the back.

A crowd immediately gathered in front of the Water Works. Pat Mansfield and several deputies loaded Gillespie into Mansfield’s police cruiser and took him to the jail.

Inside the Water Works, Deputy Karl Neil drew his sidearm and ordered five female poll watchers, including Mrs. H. A. Vestal, to leave. They did, under protest. Four GI’s remained to watch the ongoing ballot count: James Edward Vestal (Mrs. Vestal’s son), Charles Scott, Jr., Charles Hyde, and J. P. Cartwright. Neil ordered Hyde and Cartwright to “go up front and sit down,” so they couldn’t see the count. Hyde and Cartwright left the building. Charles Scott, Sr. sent word in to his son and to Ed Vestal: get out for your own safety. Vestal and the younger Scott stayed.

* 3:15 p.m.: Minis Wilburn, an “officer of the election” at Precinct 12 (Dixie Cafe, North White Street), beat GI Election Judge Bob Hairrell. This happened after Hairrell witnessed several voting irregularities, including letting minors vote, and paying cash for votes in full view.
* 3:55 p.m.: Mansfield and his deputies closed Precinct 12 five minutes early. They lifted a car and set it down in front of the door and also blocked the nearby alley with two other cars.

== The skirmish at the Water Works ==
At 4:15 p.m., the sheriff and about twelve deputies arrived at the Water Works precinct to keep everyone away. Inside, Windy Wise ordered Vestal and Scott to sit away from the ballot-count operation, but not to leave the building. In fact the deputies barricaded Vestal and Scott behind a counter and locked the door. The door was a plate-glass door set in a wooden frame. Vestal and Scott actually broke through this, shoved their way past Windy Wise and his men, and made it outside. Hands high, with Wise’s gun trained on them, they walked across the street and gained the safety of the crowd. They could do this because the crowd were angry and Wise, Neil, and company could not know whether they were armed or not. Furthermore, two newspaper reporters were present, and even Windy Wise would not shoot unarmed men in front of them.

At 4:55 p.m., Chief Deputy Boe Dunn arrived at the Water Works, with two hostages in tow: Felix Harrod and Tom Dooley. Dunn himself appropriated the ballot box and loaded it into his car to take it to the jail. Fifteen deputies aimed their service guns at the crowd as they left.

== Prepare for battle ==
At 5:10 p.m. the G.I.’s gathered at the Essankay Garage. In addition to scouring the county for privately held firearms, they unlocked the State Guard armory. There they acquired three M-1 rifles, five .45 semi-automatic pistols, and 24 British Enfield rifles.

Deputy Dunn made the serious tactical mistake of sending two deputies to the Essankay to arrest the GI’s. When they drew their weapons, the GI’s rushed out of the garage, tackled them, and dragged them inside. There they disarmed them and stripped off their clothes. Two more deputies who tried to reinforce the pair suffered similar capture. Three more deputies came, and the GI’s captured them, too. At 5:30 p.m. some citizen volunteers transported the seven deputies out of the town.

At 6:35 p.m., the sheriff’s men carried the Precinct 12 ballot box into the jail. They already had the Precinct 11 ballot box there, along with several GI’s (including Walter Ellis; see above) whom they held incommunicado and without formal charges.

Between 7:30 p.m. and 8:45 p.m., at least five hundred GI’s, all armed, took up station around the jail and on the rooftops of nearby buildings, including the Athens Power Plant. They left one door, at the rear, unguarded, so that those inside could escape with their lives any time they so chose.

Inside, Paul Cantrell, Pat Mansfield, State Rep. Woods, and fifty deputies started “going through the ballot boxes.” Judge Green’s account describes what the GI’s would find later: bunches of blank ballots, and various signs of preparation to burn ballots. These findings alone suggest an attempt to issue a rigged election count.

= The battle starts =
At about 9:00 p.m., Bill White issued an ultimatum: surrender the ballot boxes, or suffer siege and attack. White confessed later that he fired the shot that started the battle. But the Mobile Federalist Society tells a different account. According to it, Mansfield’s deputies fired first. Three GI’s, trying to warn passers-by of the danger, suffered wounds.

Firing waxed and waned for two hours. During this time, George Woods tried to summon aid from Birch Biggs of Polk County. Biggs ran a machine even more brutal than Cantrell’s. But Biggs would not intervene. Broughton Biggs, Birch’s son, by one account yelled at Woods, “Do you think I’m crazy?” Woods, bearing the sting of that rebuff, slunk out of town – though exactly when he made his escape, no source makes clear.

Mansfield and Cantrell tried to get Governor McCord to mobilize the Tennessee [[National Guard]]. Whether McCord issued that order or not, accounts differ. But all agree that the Guard did not engage the veterans. The commandant of the Guard doubtless knew that the sympathies of his force would lie with the ex-GI’s. Why? Because these Guardsmen were ex-GI’s themselves.

The besiegers did not and could not know this, of course. Worse, they had no radios and thus could not co-ordinate their fire. The brick walls of the jail withstood the fusillade. And as any soldier knows, until the enemy surrenders, the battle, and the war, continues.

As the siege dragged on, several soldiers made [[Molotov cocktail]]s and threw them. These proved ineffective. But at 2:30 a.m., the veterans acquired [[dynamite]]. At this time, an [[ambulance]] made its way to the jail. The veterans let it pass, thinking it had come to evacuate the wounded. Instead it evacuated Paul Cantrell and Pat Mansfield. ''They had just abandoned their command.''

= The battle ends =
At 2:48 a.m., the besiegers threw their dynamite, in sticks with lit fuses. One charge flipped Deputy Dunn’s car over. Another rocked the jailhouse porch on its foundation. A third flipped Pat Mansfield’s car (but of course, Mansfield had abandoned it with his command). A fourth damaged the jailhouse wall.

After that, the deputies, their commanding officers having deserted them, and facing obviously superior forces, surrendered.

The veterans took possession of the ballot boxes. They later certified that the Veterans’ Party had won all five races by 2 to 1 margins.

The townspeople vented their rage on the defeated Cantrell forces. One townsman, whose name appears on no record, slashed Wilburn’s throat. (He would recover—barely.) Anther townsman shot Biscuit Farris, the jail superintendent, in the jaw, shattering it. Several townsmen kicked and beat Windy Wise to unconsciousness. But the GI’s took command of the situation, sent the rioters home, and locked their prisoners in the jail overnight.

= Overwrought reporting =
In a classic example of “[[fake news]],” ''[[The New York Times]]'' actually reported that the GI’s, or their sympathizers, had ''slain'' Sheriff Mansfield. Recall that in fact Mansfield and Cantrell had fled during the battle. In fact, the battle concluded with not a single fatality. (A report by one source, that Tom Gillespie had died of his wound, has no corroboration.)

Knox Henry won election as sheriff. Pat Mansfield resigned his office on 4 August, effective immediately. Knox Henry took his place at once.

In the first days that followed, tensions ran high. The veterans feared a counterattack by forces owned by or loyal to Cantrell. No such attack ever came. They also governed as a vigilance committee to keep rioting and looting from breaking out. That ended with the recognition of Knox Henry as the new sheriff.

The “Boss Crump Machine” suffered blow after blow in the weeks that followed. A new Governor (Gordon Browning) and U.S. Senator (Estes Kefauver) won election that year.<ref name=Kefauver>The federal government remembers the name of Estes Kefauver to this day, having added his name to the Nashville Federal Building.</ref>

The “fake news” narrative of “lawlessness” by the veterans continued for a full year. In fact, no veteran was ever prosecuted. Windy Wise was sentenced to one to three years for shooting Gillespie.

Sadly, no current resident of Athens, Tennessee, remembers the events of that day. A single plaque commemorates the event. But not a single original structure remains.

= Film adaptation =
In 1992, the Hallmark Hall of Fame released ''An American Story'', a fictionalized account of the Battle of Athens.<ref name=Hallmark>''An American Story.'' Directed by John Gray. With Brad Johnson, Kathleen Quinlan, Tom Sizemore, et al. Hallmark Hall of Fame Productions, 1992. <https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103673/></ref> This project changes most of the names of the characters. It also changes key details of the election and the battle that followed:

# The shooting occurs at a Post Office precinct. The sheriff closes the polls early, an armed GI election judge objects, and a deputy calmly shoots the GI in the right flank. The deputies then remove two ballot boxes from that precinct.
# The chief veteran challenger is running for mayor, not sheriff.
# The first shot at the jail rings out when a deputy leans out of a window and harangues the besiegers. One besieger breaks discipline and fires a shot without orders.
# The veterans manage to get close enough to leave a demolition charge with wires and a detonator.

None of these things occurred as the movie depicts, of course. Nor does the movie depict any of the violent acts on the part of deputies. Perhaps the producers told this tame version of events to avoid lawsuits by any surviving members of the Cantrell, Mansfield, or Woods families.

Hallmark Media did not re-release ''An American Story.'' But an organization called the American Movement uploaded the full movie to YouTube.<ref name=YouTube>Viewers can view it here. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c-Dsg4X4Dk></ref>

= Literary parallel =
The only literary parallel to this event, and even this is far from exact, is ''Starship Troopers'' by Robert A. Heinlein (1959). Heinlein predicts a future in which humanity fights a third world war between a [[China|Chinese]]-dominated axis on one side, and an alliance among [[Russia]], the [[United Kingdom]], and America on the other. At the end of this war comes not mere depression but total social collapse.

Into this obvious power vacuum, step returning veterans from the war. In city after city they set up [[vigilance committee]]s to stem the rioting and looting they find. They sometimes must hang fellow veterans for taking part in the looting. In the face of that, they refuse to let anyone except returnees serve on their vigilance committees.

{{cquote|Just arbitrary at first. They trusted each other—a bit. They didn’t trust anyone else.}}

{{cquote|[We’re] not about to let any bleeding, profiteering, black market, double-time-for-overtime, Army-dodging, [unprintable] civilians have any say about it! They’ll do as they’re told, see? While us apes straighten things out!}}

The behavior of Knox Henry and his fellow returnees in the power vacuum that followed their victory over the Cantrells, closely mirrors this attitude. This suggests that, had law and order collapsed totally, and without the high mutual respect between returnees and townspeople, they might have acted similarly.

Heinlein never once alludes to the Battle of Athens. But the results of his writing are about the same as though he had researched it himself.

= References =
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Tennessee]]
[[Category:United States History]]

Molotov cocktail

2018-08-01T17:01:00Z

TerryH: Created page with "A '''Molotov cocktail''' is a hand-held incendiary device. One makes it by pouring gasoline into a narrow-necked bottle and stuffing that bottle with a cloth wick that dip..."

A '''Molotov cocktail''' is a hand-held incendiary device. One makes it by pouring [[gasoline]] into a narrow-necked bottle and stuffing that bottle with a cloth wick that dips into the gasoline. To use it, the user lights the wick and throws the bottle.

British Commonwealth speakers usually refer to these as "petrol bombs," using the British name for gasoline.

[[Category:Weapons]]

Battle of Athens (1946)

2018-08-01T16:57:11Z

TerryH:

'''The Battle of Athens''' (2 August 1946) was a literal battle that took place in Athens, McMinn County, [[Tennessee]]. Several returning [[United States|U.S.]] veterans laid siege to the county [[jail]], after a corrupt [[sheriff]] had seized two [[ballot]] boxes to try to rig an [[election]]. The veterans took the jail using small arms and explosives. As such this is the most recent recorded instance of an armed insurrection against a [[government]] on American soil. It also demonstrated the importance of the [[Second Amendment]] to the U.S. Constitution in preserving American liberty.

= Background =
McMinn County, Tennessee, lies between the cities of [[Chattanooga]] and [[Knoxville]], in southeastern Tennessee. Its two main towns are Athens (the county seat) and Etowah. As of the 1940 census, it had a population of 30,781 people.

The following [[President]]ial election results might or might not be significant.<ref name=Leip>Leip D, ''Atlas of U.S. Presidential Election Results.'' Retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/></ref> [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]] did not carry McMinn County in 1932 or 1936. But he did carry the county in 1940 and 1944. He did so by lopsided margins that completely “flipped” in 1948.

The only other [[Democratic Party|Democrats]] who have carried McMinn County were [[Woodrow Wilson]] in 1912 and [[Jimmy Carter]] in 1976. These two did not carry McMinn County by the lopsided margins FDR enjoyed in 1940 and 1944. (Indeed, Wilson did not even have a majority.) In every other election, McMinn County has voted [[Republican Party|Republican]].

== The Paul Cantrell machine ==
These election results likely represent the influence of Paul Cantrell and the political machine he built.<ref name=ConstSoc>The Constitution Society, "The Battle of Athens." Retrieved 1 August 2018. <http://constitution.org/mil/tn/batathen.htm></ref> In 1932, Paul Cantrell, of Etowah, Tennessee, and his wealthy relatives took advantage of the economic devastation of the [[Great Depression]]. They backed FDR and the [[New Deal]] and worked hard to replace Republicans in county government. They succeeded. Paul Cantrell became Sheriff of McMinn County in 1936, and won re-election in 1938 and 1940. The Constitution Society describes his margins of victory as “slim.” But the sudden landslide victories of FDR in 1940 and 1944 suggest that might not have applied to the 1940 election. In 1942, Cantrell sought and won election and re-election to the State Senate. His chief deputy, Pat Mansfield, ran for Sheriff in those two elections and won each time.

The Cantrells and their allies took steps to cement their control.<ref>Natural News Blogs, “1946 Battle of Athens, Tennessee, and its Importance Today.” Retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://www.naturalnewsblogs.com/1946-battle-athens-tennessee-importance-today/></ref> In 1941, Cantrell machine operative and State Representative George Woods proposed “An Act to Redistrict McMinn County” in the Tennessee [[legislature]]. It reduced voting precincts from 23 to 12 and reduced [[Justice of the Peace|Justices of the Peace]] from 14 to 7. It passed, largely with the aid of the infamous machine of former Mayor E. H. Crump of [[Memphis]], Tennessee. His machine controlled most of Tennessee, including the governor’s office and one of Tennessee’s U.S. [[United States Senate|Senators]].

== Shakedowns and election fraud ==
Sheriff Cantrell also benefited from [[law]]s that vested too much power in county sheriffs.<ref name=Seiber>Seiber L., “The Battle of Athens,” American Heritage. Retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://www.americanheritage.com/content/battle-athens></ref> The sheriff and his deputies received a fee for every arrest they made. So they would board cross-country buses, drag off sleepy passengers, charge them with public [[Alcoholic drinks|drunkenness]], and demand and receive ransoms, i.e., [[fine]]s, of $16.50 per person for their release.
More lucrative were the kickbacks Cantrell and his deputies received from roadhouse owners. The deputies would let the roadhouses operate, but shake down less than influential patrons.

The county [[court]], still under Republican control, ordered the county to purchase Print-O-Matic voting machines. Suspicion had long prevailed that Paul Cantrell had won election in 1936 by swapping out preloaded ballot boxes for the real ones. In response to the order, Mr. Woods introduced another bill to abolish the court. It, too, passed, and the county sold the voting machines.

Outraged citizens petitioned the federal government for oversight of the elections in 1940, 1942, and 1944. The Department of Justice turned a deaf institutional ear. Recall again: FDR carried McMinn County by sudden landslides in 1940 and 1944.

In 1946, Cantrell and Mansfield decided to switch seats. They confidently expected to control this election, as they had controlled elections for ten years.

Such was the state of affairs when, beginning in 1945, McMinn County’s contingent in the [[United States Army]] began to come home from the [[Second World War]].

= The GI’s come back =
Veterans like William White, Knox Henry, Walter Ellis, and Jim Buttram returned to a town (Athens) they thought they knew, but didn’t. They had their back pay from the Army in their pockets and were used to drinking beer on leave. As such they made lucrative targets for Pat Mansfield’s deputies. In Bill White’s memoir we read this:

{{cquote|There were several beer joints and honky-tonks around Athens; we were pretty wild; we started having trouble with the law enforcement at that time because they started making a habit of picking up GIs and fining them heavily for most anything—they were kind of making a racket out of it.

After long hard years of service—most of us were hard-core veterans of World War II—we were used to drinking our liquor and our beer without being molested. When these things happened, the GIs got madder—the more GIs they arrested, the more they beat up, the madder we got …}}

Mansfield’s deputies treated black returnees worse. According to one account, Mansfield and his men were gunning down black veterans out of hand. The spectacle of blacks wearing the uniform surely rankled.

Beginning early in 1946 the veterans began meeting in secret to decide how to challenge the Cantrell-Mansfield machine at the ballot box. In May they had their own political party. Knox Henry stood for sheriff; four other veterans ran for other county offices. The Veterans’ Party ran on a simple but pointed slogan:

{{cquote|Your vote will be counted as cast.}}

To try to make sure of that, Jim Buttram, campaign manager for the Veterans’ Party, sent two telegrams on 22 July to Governor Jim McCord and U.S. Attorney General Tom Clark. In each, he asked for help in ensuring a fair election. Neither recipient ever answered those telegrams.

== As the election approaches… ==
In keeping with the above, the Veterans’ Party ran this advertisement in the 30 July issue of ''The Daily Post-Athenian'':

{{cquote|These young men fought and won a war for good government. They know what it takes and what it means to have a clean government—and they are energetic enough, honest enough and intelligent enough to give us good, clean government.}}

In the same issue, the Cantrell-Mansfield machine ran this advertisement:

{{cquote|Look at the facts—and you will vote for the Democratic ticket. The campaign fight is as old as the hills—it is the story of the outs wanting back in.}}

On 30 July 1946, sheriff’s deputies in a neighboring county arrested two McMinn County deputies and confiscated a shipment of liquor. The two deputies brazenly admitted they were carrying “election whiskey.” Mansfield completely disavowed them.

''The Daily Post-Athenian'' has one item of significance, on 31 July 1946. The Veterans of Foreign Wars post in neighboring Blount County announced they could send 450 veterans to McMinn County at need. This article appeared on the front page, but below, not above, the fold. In any event, Sheriff Mansfield responded by recruiting hundreds of armed deputies from out of county, and some from out of State.

{{cquote|It has come to my attention that certain elements intend to create a disturbance at and around the polls. … In order to see that law and order is maintained … I will have several hundred deputies patrolling the county.}}

To put matters into perspective, the sheriff had never fielded more than fifteen deputies on election day.

= August 1, 1946: the election =
Polls opened promptly at 9:00 a.m., to heavier turnout than McMinn County elections had ever seen. Two hundred deputies deployed “to keep order.” (We know this because a surviving audio tape gives that number.)<ref name=Green>Green M., The Battle of Athens, Tennessee in 1946. YouTube video retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmDp882eCd0></ref> Instead of keeping order, they brazenly intimidated voters whom they observed “voting the wrong way.” This suggests that in McMinn County, in those days, voters lacked the privacy screens they enjoy today.

At either 9:30 a.m. or 10:00 a.m., Walter Ellis, an election judge, protested the obvious intimidation. Mansfield’s deputies summarily arrested him and hauled him off to the county jail. A man named Fred West, of dubious identification, took his place as election judge.

Jim Buttram found 200 GI’s pounding on the door of the L. L. Shaefer jewelry store he was using as an office. He had dire news for them already. He had no answer to his telegrams to Gov. McCord and Attorney General Clark. At that point Otto Kennedy, a friendly political adviser, told them Cantrell had posted armed guards (not sheriff’s deputies) at every voting precinct. At least some veterans called for their fellow GI’s to mobilize and arm themselves. Kennedy offered the use of his Essankay Garage and Tire Shop for a meeting hall.

At 3:00 p.m. the GI’s who had called for mobilization had returned to the Essankay Garage, all armed.

== First blood ==
Tom Gillespie, a black farmer, tried to vote at his usual precinct—the 11th, at the Athens Water Works. Windy Wise, one of Cantrell’s guards, hurled a racial slur at him and told him he was voting at the wrong precinct. “I’ve always voted here,” he protested. In response Wise struck him with brass knuckles. Gillespie dropped his ballot and tried to leave. Wise shot him in the back.

A crowd immediately gathered in front of the Water Works. Pat Mansfield and several deputies loaded Gillespie into Mansfield’s police cruiser and took him to the jail.

Inside the Water Works, Deputy Karl Neil drew his sidearm and ordered five female poll watchers, including Mrs. H. A. Vestal, to leave. They did, under protest. Four GI’s remained to watch the ongoing ballot count: James Edward Vestal (Mrs. Vestal’s son), Charles Scott, Jr., Charles Hyde, and J. P. Cartwright. Neil ordered Hyde and Cartwright to “go up front and sit down,” so they couldn’t see the count. Hyde and Cartwright left the building. Charles Scott, Sr. sent word in to his son and to Ed Vestal: get out for your own safety. Vestal and the younger Scott stayed.

* 3:15 p.m.: Minis Wilburn, an “officer of the election” at Precinct 12 (Dixie Cafe, North White Street), beat GI Election Judge Bob Hairrell. This happened after Hairrell witnessed several voting irregularities, including letting minors vote, and paying cash for votes in full view.
* 3:55 p.m.: Mansfield and his deputies closed Precinct 12 five minutes early. They lifted a car and set it down in front of the door and also blocked the nearby alley with two other cars.

== The skirmish at the Water Works ==
At 4:15 p.m., the sheriff and about twelve deputies arrived at the Water Works precinct to keep everyone away. Inside, Windy Wise ordered Vestal and Scott to sit away from the ballot-count operation, but not to leave the building. In fact the deputies barricaded Vestal and Scott behind a counter and locked the door. The door was a plate-glass door set in a wooden frame. Vestal and Scott actually broke through this, shoved their way past Windy Wise and his men, and made it outside. Hands high, with Wise’s gun trained on them, they walked across the street and gained the safety of the crowd. They could do this because the crowd were angry and Wise, Neil, and company could not know whether they were armed or not. Furthermore, two newspaper reporters were present, and even Windy Wise would not shoot unarmed men in front of them.

At 4:55 p.m., Chief Deputy Boe Dunn arrived at the Water Works, with two hostages in tow: Felix Harrod and Tom Dooley. Dunn himself appropriated the ballot box and loaded it into his car to take it to the jail. Fifteen deputies aimed their service guns at the crowd as they left.

== Prepare for battle ==
At 5:10 p.m. the G.I.’s gathered at the Essankay Garage. In addition to scouring the county for privately held firearms, they unlocked the State Guard armory. There they acquired three M-1 rifles, five .45 semi-automatic pistols, and 24 British Enfield rifles.

Deputy Dunn made the serious tactical mistake of sending two deputies to the Essankay to arrest the GI’s. When they drew their weapons, the GI’s rushed out of the garage, tackled them, and dragged them inside. There they disarmed them and stripped off their clothes. Two more deputies who tried to reinforce the pair suffered similar capture. Three more deputies came, and the GI’s captured them, too. At 5:30 p.m. some citizen volunteers transported the seven deputies out of the town.

At 6:35 p.m., the sheriff’s men carried the Precinct 12 ballot box into the jail. They already had the Precinct 11 ballot box there, along with several GI’s (including Walter Ellis; see above) whom they held incommunicado and without formal charges.

Between 7:30 p.m. and 8:45 p.m., at least five hundred GI’s, all armed, took up station around the jail and on the rooftops of nearby buildings, including the Athens Power Plant. They left one door, at the rear, unguarded, so that those inside could escape with their lives any time they so chose.

Inside, Paul Cantrell, Pat Mansfield, State Rep. Woods, and fifty deputies started “going through the ballot boxes.” Judge Green’s account describes what the GI’s would find later: bunches of blank ballots, and various signs of preparation to burn ballots. These findings alone suggest an attempt to issue a rigged election count.

= The battle starts =
At about 9:00 p.m., Bill White issued an ultimatum: surrender the ballot boxes, or suffer siege and attack. White confessed later that he fired the shot that started the battle. But the Mobile Federalist Society tells a different account. According to it, Mansfield’s deputies fired first. Three GI’s, trying to warn passers-by of the danger, suffered wounds.

Firing waxed and waned for two hours. During this time, George Woods tried to summon aid from Birch Biggs of Polk County. Biggs ran a machine even more brutal than Cantrell’s. But Biggs would not intervene. Broughton Biggs, Birch’s son, by one account yelled at Woods, “Do you think I’m crazy?” Woods, bearing the sting of that rebuff, slunk out of town – though exactly when he made his escape, no source makes clear.

Mansfield and Cantrell tried to get Governor McCord to mobilize the Tennessee [[National Guard]]. Whether McCord issued that order or not, accounts differ. But all agree that the Guard did not engage the veterans. The commandant of the Guard doubtless knew that the sympathies of his force would lie with the ex-GI’s. Why? Because these Guardsmen were ex-GI’s themselves.

The besiegers did not and could not know this, of course. Worse, they had no radios and thus could not co-ordinate their fire. The brick walls of the jail withstood the fusillade. And as any soldier knows, until the enemy surrenders, the battle, and the war, continues.

As the siege dragged on, several soldiers made [[Molotov cocktail]]s and threw them. These proved ineffective. But at 2:30 a.m., the veterans acquired [[dynamite]]. At this time, an [[ambulance]] made its way to the jail. The veterans let it pass, thinking it had come to evacuate the wounded. Instead it evacuated Paul Cantrell and Pat Mansfield. ''They had just abandoned their command.''

= The battle ends =
At 2:48 a.m., the besiegers threw their dynamite, in sticks with lit fuses. One charge flipped Deputy Dunn’s car over. Another rocked the jailhouse porch on its foundation. A third flipped Pat Mansfield’s car (but of course, Mansfield had abandoned it with his command). A fourth damaged the jailhouse wall.

After that, the deputies, their commanding officers having deserted them, and facing obviously superior forces, surrendered.

The veterans took possession of the ballot boxes. They later certified that the Veterans’ Party had won all five races by 2 to 1 margins.

The townspeople vented their rage on the defeated Cantrell forces. One townsman, whose name appears on no record, slashed Wilburn’s throat. (He would recover—barely.) Anther townsman shot Biscuit Farris, the jail superintendent, in the jaw, shattering it. Several townsmen kicked and beat Windy Wise to unconsciousness. But the GI’s took command of the situation, sent the rioters home, and locked their prisoners in the jail overnight.

= Overwrought reporting =
In a classic example of “[[fake news]],” ''[[The New York Times]]'' actually reported that the GI’s, or their sympathizers, had ''slain'' Sheriff Mansfield. Recall that in fact Mansfield and Cantrell had fled during the battle. In fact, the battle concluded with not a single fatality. (A report by one source, that Tom Gillespie had died of his wound, has no corroboration.)

Knox Henry won election as sheriff. Pat Mansfield resigned his office on 4 August, effective immediately. Knox Henry took his place at once.

In the first days that followed, tensions ran high. The veterans feared a counterattack by forces owned by or loyal to Cantrell. No such attack ever came. They also governed as a vigilance committee to keep rioting and looting from breaking out. That ended with the recognition of Knox Henry as the new sheriff.

The “Boss Crump Machine” suffered blow after blow in the weeks that followed. A new Governor (Gordon Browning) and U.S. Senator (Estes Kefauver) won election that year.<ref name=Kefauver>The federal government remembers the name of Estes Kefauver to this day, having added his name to the Nashville Federal Building.</ref>

The “fake news” narrative of “lawlessness” by the veterans continued for a full year. In fact, no veteran was ever prosecuted. Windy Wise was sentenced to one to three years for shooting Gillespie.

Sadly, no current resident of Athens, Tennessee, remembers the events of that day. A single plaque commemorates the event. But not a single original structure remains.

= Film adaptation =
In 1992, the Hallmark Hall of Fame released ''An American Story'', a fictionalized account of the Battle of Athens.<ref name=Hallmark>''An American Story.'' Directed by John Gray. With Brad Johnson, Kathleen Quinlan, Tom Sizemore, et al. Hallmark Hall of Fame Productions, 1992. <https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103673/></ref> This project changes most of the names of the characters. It also changes key details of the election and the battle that followed:

# The shooting occurs at a Post Office precinct. The sheriff closes the polls early, an armed GI election judge objects, and a deputy calmly shoots the GI in the right flank. The deputies then remove two ballot boxes from that precinct.
# The chief veteran challenger is running for mayor, not sheriff.
# The first shot at the jail rings out when a deputy leans out of a window and harangues the besiegers. One besieger breaks discipline and fires a shot without orders.
# The veterans manage to get close enough to leave a demolition charge with wires and a detonator.

None of these things occurred as the movie depicts, of course. Nor does the movie depict any of the violent acts on the part of deputies. Perhaps the producers told this tame version of events to avoid lawsuits by any surviving members of the Cantrell, Mansfield, or Woods families.

Hallmark Media did not re-release ''An American Story.'' But an organization called the American Movement uploaded the full movie to YouTube.<ref name=YouTube>Viewers can view it here. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c-Dsg4X4Dk></ref>

= Literary parallel =
The only literary parallel to this event, and even this is far from exact, is ''Starship Troopers'' by Robert A. Heinlein (1959). Heinlein predicts a future in which humanity fights a third world war between a Chinese-dominated axis on one side, and an alliance among Russia, the United Kingdom, and America on the other. At the end of this war comes not mere depression but total social collapse.

Into this obvious power vacuum, step returning veterans from the war. In city after city they set up vigilance committees to stem the rioting and looting they find. They sometimes must hang fellow veterans for taking part in the looting. In the face of that, they refuse to let anyone except returnees serve on their vigilance committees.

{{cquote|Just arbitrary at first. They trusted each other—a bit. They didn’t trust anyone else.}}

{{cquote|[We’re] not about to let any bleeding, profiteering, black market, double-time-for-overtime, Army-dodging, [unprintable] civilians have any say about it! They’ll do as they’re told, see? While us apes straighten things out!}}

The behavior of Knox Henry and his fellow returnees in the power vacuum that followed their victory over the Cantrells, closely mirrors this attitude. This suggests that, had law and order collapsed totally, and without the high mutual respect between returnees and townspeople, they might have acted similarly.

Heinlein never once alludes to the Battle of Athens. But the results of his writing are about the same as though he had researched it himself.

= References =
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Tennessee]]
[[Category:United States History]]

Battle of Athens (1946)

2018-08-01T16:35:04Z

TerryH: /* First blood */

'''The Battle of Athens''' (2 August 1946) was a literal battle that took place in Athens, McMinn County, [[Tennessee]]. Several returning [[United States|U.S.]] veterans laid siege to the county [[jail]], after a corrupt [[sheriff]] had seized two [[ballot]] boxes to try to rig an [[election]]. The veterans took the jail using small arms and explosives. As such this is the most recent recorded instance of an armed insurrection against a [[government]] on American soil. It also demonstrated the importance of the [[Second Amendment]] to the U.S. Constitution in preserving American liberty.

= Background =
McMinn County, Tennessee, lies between the cities of Chattanooga and Knoxville, in southeastern Tennessee. Its two main towns are Athens (the county seat) and Etowah. As of the 1940 census, it had a population of 30,781 people.

The following Presidential election results might or might not be significant.<ref name=Leip>Leip D, ''Atlas of U.S. Presidential Election Results.'' Retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/></ref> Franklin Delano Roosevelt did not carry McMinn County in 1932 or 1936. But he did carry the county in 1940 and 1944. He did so by lopsided margins that completely “flipped” in 1948.

The only other Democrats who have carried McMinn County were Woodrow Wilson in 1912 and Jimmy Carter in 1976. These two did not carry McMinn County by the lopsided margins FDR enjoyed in 1940 and 1944. (Indeed, Wilson did not even have a majority.) In every other election, McMinn County has voted Republican.

== The Paul Cantrell machine ==
These election results likely represent the influence of Paul Cantrell and the political machine he built.<ref name=ConstSoc>The Constitution Society, The Battle of Athens. Retrieved 1 August 2018. <http://constitution.org/mil/tn/batathen.htm></ref> In 1932, Paul Cantrell, of Etowah, Tennessee, and his wealthy relatives took advantage of the economic devastation of the Great Depression. They backed FDR and the New Deal and worked hard to replace Republicans in county government. They succeeded. Paul Cantrell became Sheriff of McMinn County in 1936, and won re-election in 1938 and 1940. The Constitution Society describes his margins of victory as “slim.” But the sudden landslide victories of FDR in 1940 and 1944 suggest that might not have applied to the 1940 election. In 1942, Cantrell sought and won election and re-election to the State Senate. His chief deputy, Pat Mansfield, ran for Sheriff in those two elections and won each time.

The Cantrells and their allies took steps to cement their control.<ref>Natural News Blogs, “1946 Battle of Athens, Tennessee, and its Importance Today.” Retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://www.naturalnewsblogs.com/1946-battle-athens-tennessee-importance-today/></ref> In 1941, Cantrell machine operative George Woods proposed “An Act to Redistrict McMinn County” in the Tennessee legislature. It reduced voting precincts from 23 to 12 and reduced Justices of the Peace from 14 to 7. It passed, largely with the aid of the infamous machine of former Mayor E. H. Crump of Memphis, Tennessee. His machine controlled most of Tennessee, including the governor’s office and one of Tennessee’s U.S. senators.

== Shakedowns and election fraud ==
Sheriff Cantrell also benefited from laws that vested too much power in county sheriffs.<ref name=Seiber>Seiber L., “The Battle of Athens,” American Heritage. Retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://www.americanheritage.com/content/battle-athens></ref> The sheriff and his deputies received a fee for every arrest they made. So they would board cross-country buses, drag off sleepy passengers, charge them with public [[Alcoholic drinks|drunkenness]], and demand and receive ransoms, i.e., [[fine]]s, of $16.50 per person for their release.
More lucrative were the kickbacks Cantrell and his deputies received from roadhouse owners. The deputies would let the roadhouses operate, but shake down less than influential patrons.

The county court, still under Republican control, ordered the county to purchase Print-O-Matic voting machines. Suspicion had long prevailed that Paul Cantrell had won election in 1936 by swapping out preloaded ballot boxes for the real ones. In response to the order, Mr. Woods introduced another bill to abolish the court. It, too, passed, and the county sold the voting machines.

Outraged citizens petitioned the federal government for oversight of the elections in 1940, 1942, and 1944. The Department of Justice turned a deaf institutional ear. Recall again: FDR carried McMinn County by sudden landslides in 1940 and 1944.

In 1946, Cantrell and Mansfield decided to switch seats. They confidently expected to control this election, as they had controlled elections for ten years.

Such was the state of affairs when, beginning in 1945, McMinn County’s contingent in the [[United States Army]] began to come home from the [[Second World War]].

= The GI’s come back =
Veterans like William White, Knox Henry, Walter Ellis, and Jim Buttram returned to a town (Athens) they thought they knew, but didn’t. They had their back pay from the Army in their pockets and were used to drinking beer on leave. As such they made lucrative targets for Pat Mansfield’s deputies. In Bill White’s memoir we read this:

{{cquote|There were several beer joints and honky-tonks around Athens; we were pretty wild; we started having trouble with the law enforcement at that time because they started making a habit of picking up GIs and fining them heavily for most anything—they were kind of making a racket out of it.

After long hard years of service—most of us were hard-core veterans of World War II—we were used to drinking our liquor and our beer without being molested. When these things happened, the GIs got madder—the more GIs they arrested, the more they beat up, the madder we got …}}

Mansfield’s deputies treated black returnees worse. According to one account, Mansfield and his men were gunning down black veterans out of hand. The spectacle of blacks wearing the uniform surely rankled.

Beginning early in 1946 the veterans began meeting in secret to decide how to challenge the Cantrell-Mansfield machine at the ballot box. In May they had their own political party. Knox Henry stood for sheriff; four other veterans ran for other county offices. The Veterans’ Party ran on a simple but pointed slogan:

{{cquote|Your vote will be counted as cast.}}

To try to make sure of that, Jim Buttram, campaign manager for the Veterans’ Party, sent two telegrams on 22 July to Governor Jim McCord and U.S. Attorney General Tom Clark. In each, he asked for help in ensuring a fair election. Neither recipient ever answered those telegrams.

== As the election approaches… ==
In keeping with the above, the Veterans’ Party ran this advertisement in the 30 July issue of ''The Daily Post-Athenian'':

{{cquote|These young men fought and won a war for good government. They know what it takes and what it means to have a clean government—and they are energetic enough, honest enough and intelligent enough to give us good, clean government.}}

In the same issue, the Cantrell-Mansfield machine ran this advertisement:

{{cquote|Look at the facts—and you will vote for the Democratic ticket. The campaign fight is as old as the hills—it is the story of the outs wanting back in.}}

On 30 July 1946, sheriff’s deputies in a neighboring county arrested two McMinn County deputies and confiscated a shipment of liquor. The two deputies brazenly admitted they were carrying “election whiskey.” Mansfield completely disavowed them.

''The Daily Post-Athenian'' has one item of significance, on 31 July 1946. The Veterans of Foreign Wars post in neighboring Blount County announced they could send 450 veterans to McMinn County at need. This article appeared on the front page, but below, not above, the fold. In any event, Sheriff Mansfield responded by recruiting hundreds of armed deputies from out of county, and some from out of State.

{{cquote|It has come to my attention that certain elements intend to create a disturbance at and around the polls. … In order to see that law and order is maintained … I will have several hundred deputies patrolling the county.}}

To put matters into perspective, the sheriff had never fielded more than fifteen deputies on election day.

= August 1, 1946: the election =
Polls opened promptly at 9:00 a.m., to heavier turnout than McMinn County elections had ever seen. Two hundred deputies deployed “to keep order.” (We know this because a surviving audio tape gives that number.)<ref name=Green>Green M., The Battle of Athens, Tennessee in 1946. YouTube video retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmDp882eCd0></ref> Instead of keeping order, they brazenly intimidated voters whom they observed “voting the wrong way.” This suggests that in McMinn County, in those days, voters lacked the privacy screens they enjoy today.

At either 9:30 a.m. or 10:00 a.m., Walter Ellis, an election judge, protested the obvious intimidation. Mansfield’s deputies summarily arrested him and hauled him off to the county jail. A man named Fred West, of dubious identification, took his place as election judge.

Jim Buttram found 200 GI’s pounding on the door of the L. L. Shaefer jewelry store he was using as an office. He had dire news for them already. He had no answer to his telegrams to Gov. McCord and Attorney General Clark. At that point Otto Kennedy, a friendly political adviser, told them Cantrell had posted armed guards (not sheriff’s deputies) at every voting precinct. At least some veterans called for their fellow GI’s to mobilize and arm themselves. Kennedy offered the use of his Essankay Garage and Tire Shop for a meeting hall.

At 3:00 p.m. the GI’s who had called for mobilization had returned to the Essankay Garage, all armed.

== First blood ==
Tom Gillespie, a black farmer, tried to vote at his usual precinct—the 11th, at the Athens Water Works. Windy Wise, one of Cantrell’s guards, hurled a racial slur at him and told him he was voting at the wrong precinct. “I’ve always voted here,” he protested. In response Wise struck him with brass knuckles. Gillespie dropped his ballot and tried to leave. Wise shot him in the back.

A crowd immediately gathered in front of the Water Works. Pat Mansfield and several deputies loaded Gillespie into Mansfield’s police cruiser and took him to the jail.

Inside the Water Works, Deputy Karl Neil drew his sidearm and ordered five female poll watchers, including Mrs. H. A. Vestal, to leave. They did, under protest. Four GI’s remained to watch the ongoing ballot count: James Edward Vestal (Mrs. Vestal’s son), Charles Scott, Jr., Charles Hyde, and J. P. Cartwright. Neil ordered Hyde and Cartwright to “go up front and sit down,” so they couldn’t see the count. Hyde and Cartwright left the building. Charles Scott, Sr. sent word in to his son and to Ed Vestal: get out for your own safety. Vestal and the younger Scott stayed.

* 3:15 p.m.: Minis Wilburn, an “officer of the election” at Precinct 12 (Dixie Cafe, North White Street), beat GI Election Judge Bob Hairrell. This happened after Hairrell witnessed several voting irregularities, including letting minors vote, and paying cash for votes in full view.
* 3:55 p.m.: Mansfield and his deputies closed Precinct 12 five minutes early. They lifted a car and set it down in front of the door and also blocked the nearby alley with two other cars.

== The skirmish at the Water Works ==
At 4:15 p.m., the sheriff and about twelve deputies arrived at the Water Works precinct to keep everyone away. Inside, Windy Wise ordered Vestal and Scott to sit away from the ballot-count operation, but not to leave the building. In fact the deputies barricaded Vestal and Scott behind a counter and locked the door. The door was a plate-glass door set in a wooden frame. Vestal and Scott actually broke through this, shoved their way past Windy Wise and his men, and made it outside. Hands high, with Wise’s gun trained on them, they walked across the street and gained the safety of the crowd. They could do this because the crowd were angry and Wise, Neil, and company could not know whether they were armed or not. Furthermore, two newspaper reporters were present, and even Windy Wise would not shoot unarmed men in front of them.

At 4:55 p.m., Chief Deputy Boe Dunn arrived at the Water Works, with two hostages in tow: Felix Harrod and Tom Dooley. Dunn himself appropriated the ballot box and loaded it into his car to take it to the jail. Fifteen deputies aimed their service guns at the crowd as they left.

== Prepare for battle ==
At 5:10 p.m. the G.I.’s gathered at the Essankay Garage. In addition to scouring the county for privately held firearms, they unlocked the State Guard armory. There they acquired three M-1 rifles, five .45 semi-automatic pistols, and 24 British Enfield rifles.

Deputy Dunn made the serious tactical mistake of sending two deputies to the Essankay to arrest the GI’s. When they drew their weapons, the GI’s rushed out of the garage, tackled them, and dragged them inside. There they disarmed them and stripped off their clothes. Two more deputies who tried to reinforce the pair suffered similar capture. Three more deputies came, and the GI’s captured them, too. At 5:30 p.m. some citizen volunteers transported the seven deputies out of the town.

At 6:35 p.m., the sheriff’s men carried the Precinct 12 ballot box into the jail. They already had the Precinct 11 ballot box there, along with several GI’s (including Walter Ellis; see above) whom they held incommunicado and without formal charges.

Between 7:30 p.m. and 8:45 p.m., at least five hundred GI’s, all armed, took up station around the jail and on the rooftops of nearby buildings, including the Athens Power Plant. They left one door, at the rear, unguarded, so that those inside could escape with their lives any time they so chose.

Inside, Paul Cantrell, Pat Mansfield, State Rep. Woods, and fifty deputies started “going through the ballot boxes.” Judge Green’s account describes what the GI’s would find later: bunches of blank ballots, and various signs of preparation to burn ballots. These findings alone suggest an attempt to issue a rigged election count.

= The battle starts =
At about 9:00 p.m., Bill White issued an ultimatum: surrender the ballot boxes, or suffer siege and attack. White confessed later that he fired the shot that started the battle. But the Mobile Federalist Society tells a different account. According to it, Mansfield’s deputies fired first. Three GI’s, trying to warn passers-by of the danger, suffered wounds.

Firing waxed and waned for two hours. During this time, George Woods tried to summon aid from Birch Biggs of Polk County. Biggs ran a machine even more brutal than Cantrell’s. But Biggs would not intervene. Broughton Biggs, Birch’s son, by one account yelled at Woods, “Do you think I’m crazy?” Woods, bearing the sting of that rebuff, slunk out of town.
Mansfield and Cantrell tried to get Governor McCord to mobilize the Tennessee National Guard. Whether McCord issued that order or not, accounts differ. But all agree that the Guard did not engage the veterans. The commandant of the Guard doubtless knew that the sympathies of his force would lie with the ex-GI’s. Why? Because these Guardsmen were ex-GI’s themselves.

The besiegers did not and could not know this, of course. Worse, they had no radios and thus could not co-ordinate their fire. The brick walls of the jail withstood the fusillade. And as any soldier knows, until the enemy surrenders, the battle, and the war, continues.

As the siege dragged on, several soldiers made Molotov cocktails and threw them. These proved ineffective. But at 2:30 a.m., the veterans acquired dynamite. At this time, an ambulance made its way to the jail. The veterans let it pass, thinking it had come to evacuate the wounded. Instead it evacuated Paul Cantrell and Pat Mansfield. ''They had just abandoned their command.''

= The battle ends =
At 2:48 a.m., the besiegers threw their dynamite, in sticks with lit fuses. One charge flipped Deputy Dunn’s car over. Another rocked the jailhouse porch on its foundation. A third flipped Pat Mansfield’s car (but of course, Mansfield had abandoned it with his command). A fourth damaged the jailhouse wall.

After that, the deputies, their commanding officers having deserted them, and facing obviously superior forces, surrendered.

The veterans took possession of the ballot boxes. They later certified that the Veterans’ Party had won all five races by 2 to 1 margins.

The townspeople vented their rage on the defeated Cantrell forces. One townsman, whose name appears on no record, slashed Wilburn’s throat. (He would recover—barely.) Anther townsman shot Biscuit Farris, the jail superintendent, in the jaw, shattering it. Several townsmen kicked and beat Windy Wise to unconsciousness. But the GI’s took command of the situation, sent the rioters home, and locked their prisoners in the jail overnight.

= Overwrought reporting =
In a classic example of “[[fake news]],” ''The New York Times'' actually reported that the GI’s, or their sympathizers, had ''slain'' Sheriff Mansfield. Recall that in fact Mansfield and Cantrell had fled during the battle. In fact, the battle concluded with not a single fatality. (A report by one source, that Tom Gillespie had died of his wound, has no corroboration.)

Knox Henry won election as sheriff. Pat Mansfield resigned his office on 4 August, effective immediately. Knox Henry took his place at once.

In the first days that followed, tensions ran high. The veterans feared a counterattack by forces owned by or loyal to Cantrell. No such attack ever came. They also governed as a vigilance committee to keep rioting and looting from breaking out. That ended with the recognition of Knox Henry as the new sheriff.

The “Boss Crump Machine” suffered blow after blow in the weeks that followed. A new Governor (Gordon Browning) and U.S. Senator (Estes Kefauver) won election that year.<ref name=Kefauver>The federal government remembers the name of Estes Kefauver to this day, having added his name to the Nashville Federal Building.</ref>

The “fake news” narrative of “lawlessness” by the veterans continued for a full year. In fact, no veteran was ever prosecuted. Windy Wise was sentenced to one to three years for shooting Gillespie.

Sadly, no current resident of Athens, Tennessee, remembers the events of that day. A single plaque commemorates the event. But not a single original structure remains.

= Film adaptation =
In 1992, the Hallmark Hall of Fame released ''An American Story'', a fictionalized account of the Battle of Athens.<ref name=Hallmark>''An American Story.'' Directed by John Gray. With Brad Johnson, Kathleen Quinlan, Tom Sizemore, et al. Hallmark Hall of Fame Productions, 1992. <https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103673/></ref> This project changes most of the names of the characters. It also changes key details of the election and the battle that followed:

# The shooting occurs at a Post Office precinct. The sheriff closes the polls early, an armed GI election judge objects, and a deputy calmly shoots the GI in the right flank. The deputies then remove two ballot boxes from that precinct.
# The chief veteran challenger is running for mayor, not sheriff.
# The first shot at the jail rings out when a deputy leans out of a window and harangues the besiegers. One besieger breaks discipline and fires a shot without orders.
# The veterans manage to get close enough to leave a demolition charge with wires and a detonator.

None of these things occurred as the movie depicts, of course. Nor does the movie depict any of the violent acts on the part of deputies. Perhaps the producers told this tame version of events to avoid lawsuits by any surviving members of the Cantrell, Mansfield, or Woods families.

Hallmark Media did not re-release An American Story. But an organization called the American Movement uploaded the full movie to YouTube.<ref name=YouTube>Viewers can view it here. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c-Dsg4X4Dk></ref>

= Literary parallel =
The only literary parallel to this event, and even this is far from exact, is ''Starship Troopers'' by Robert A. Heinlein (1959). Heinlein predicts a future in which humanity fights a third world war between a Chinese-dominated axis on one side, and an alliance among Russia, the United Kingdom, and America on the other. At the end of this war comes not mere depression but total social collapse.

Into this obvious power vacuum, step returning veterans from the war. In city after city they set up vigilance committees to stem the rioting and looting they find. They sometimes must hang fellow veterans for taking part in the looting. In the face of that, they refuse to let anyone except returnees serve on their vigilance committees.

{{cquote|Just arbitrary at first. They trusted each other—a bit. They didn’t trust anyone else.}}

{{cquote|[We’re] not about to let any bleeding, profiteering, black market, double-time-for-overtime, Army-dodging, [unprintable] civilians have any say about it! They’ll do as they’re told, see? While us apes straighten things out!}}

The behavior of Knox Henry and his fellow returnees in the power vacuum that followed their victory over the Cantrells, closely mirrors this attitude. This suggests that, had law and order collapsed totally, they might have acted similarly.

Heinlein never once alludes to the Battle of Athens. But the results of his writing are about the same as though he had researched it himself.

= References =
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Tennessee]]
[[Category:United States History]]

Battle of Athens (1946)

2018-08-01T16:33:55Z

TerryH: /* First blood */

'''The Battle of Athens''' (2 August 1946) was a literal battle that took place in Athens, McMinn County, [[Tennessee]]. Several returning [[United States|U.S.]] veterans laid siege to the county [[jail]], after a corrupt [[sheriff]] had seized two [[ballot]] boxes to try to rig an [[election]]. The veterans took the jail using small arms and explosives. As such this is the most recent recorded instance of an armed insurrection against a [[government]] on American soil. It also demonstrated the importance of the [[Second Amendment]] to the U.S. Constitution in preserving American liberty.

= Background =
McMinn County, Tennessee, lies between the cities of Chattanooga and Knoxville, in southeastern Tennessee. Its two main towns are Athens (the county seat) and Etowah. As of the 1940 census, it had a population of 30,781 people.

The following Presidential election results might or might not be significant.<ref name=Leip>Leip D, ''Atlas of U.S. Presidential Election Results.'' Retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/></ref> Franklin Delano Roosevelt did not carry McMinn County in 1932 or 1936. But he did carry the county in 1940 and 1944. He did so by lopsided margins that completely “flipped” in 1948.

The only other Democrats who have carried McMinn County were Woodrow Wilson in 1912 and Jimmy Carter in 1976. These two did not carry McMinn County by the lopsided margins FDR enjoyed in 1940 and 1944. (Indeed, Wilson did not even have a majority.) In every other election, McMinn County has voted Republican.

== The Paul Cantrell machine ==
These election results likely represent the influence of Paul Cantrell and the political machine he built.<ref name=ConstSoc>The Constitution Society, The Battle of Athens. Retrieved 1 August 2018. <http://constitution.org/mil/tn/batathen.htm></ref> In 1932, Paul Cantrell, of Etowah, Tennessee, and his wealthy relatives took advantage of the economic devastation of the Great Depression. They backed FDR and the New Deal and worked hard to replace Republicans in county government. They succeeded. Paul Cantrell became Sheriff of McMinn County in 1936, and won re-election in 1938 and 1940. The Constitution Society describes his margins of victory as “slim.” But the sudden landslide victories of FDR in 1940 and 1944 suggest that might not have applied to the 1940 election. In 1942, Cantrell sought and won election and re-election to the State Senate. His chief deputy, Pat Mansfield, ran for Sheriff in those two elections and won each time.

The Cantrells and their allies took steps to cement their control.<ref>Natural News Blogs, “1946 Battle of Athens, Tennessee, and its Importance Today.” Retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://www.naturalnewsblogs.com/1946-battle-athens-tennessee-importance-today/></ref> In 1941, Cantrell machine operative George Woods proposed “An Act to Redistrict McMinn County” in the Tennessee legislature. It reduced voting precincts from 23 to 12 and reduced Justices of the Peace from 14 to 7. It passed, largely with the aid of the infamous machine of former Mayor E. H. Crump of Memphis, Tennessee. His machine controlled most of Tennessee, including the governor’s office and one of Tennessee’s U.S. senators.

== Shakedowns and election fraud ==
Sheriff Cantrell also benefited from laws that vested too much power in county sheriffs.<ref name=Seiber>Seiber L., “The Battle of Athens,” American Heritage. Retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://www.americanheritage.com/content/battle-athens></ref> The sheriff and his deputies received a fee for every arrest they made. So they would board cross-country buses, drag off sleepy passengers, charge them with public [[Alcoholic drinks|drunkenness]], and demand and receive ransoms, i.e., [[fine]]s, of $16.50 per person for their release.
More lucrative were the kickbacks Cantrell and his deputies received from roadhouse owners. The deputies would let the roadhouses operate, but shake down less than influential patrons.

The county court, still under Republican control, ordered the county to purchase Print-O-Matic voting machines. Suspicion had long prevailed that Paul Cantrell had won election in 1936 by swapping out preloaded ballot boxes for the real ones. In response to the order, Mr. Woods introduced another bill to abolish the court. It, too, passed, and the county sold the voting machines.

Outraged citizens petitioned the federal government for oversight of the elections in 1940, 1942, and 1944. The Department of Justice turned a deaf institutional ear. Recall again: FDR carried McMinn County by sudden landslides in 1940 and 1944.

In 1946, Cantrell and Mansfield decided to switch seats. They confidently expected to control this election, as they had controlled elections for ten years.

Such was the state of affairs when, beginning in 1945, McMinn County’s contingent in the [[United States Army]] began to come home from the [[Second World War]].

= The GI’s come back =
Veterans like William White, Knox Henry, Walter Ellis, and Jim Buttram returned to a town (Athens) they thought they knew, but didn’t. They had their back pay from the Army in their pockets and were used to drinking beer on leave. As such they made lucrative targets for Pat Mansfield’s deputies. In Bill White’s memoir we read this:

{{cquote|There were several beer joints and honky-tonks around Athens; we were pretty wild; we started having trouble with the law enforcement at that time because they started making a habit of picking up GIs and fining them heavily for most anything—they were kind of making a racket out of it.

After long hard years of service—most of us were hard-core veterans of World War II—we were used to drinking our liquor and our beer without being molested. When these things happened, the GIs got madder—the more GIs they arrested, the more they beat up, the madder we got …}}

Mansfield’s deputies treated black returnees worse. According to one account, Mansfield and his men were gunning down black veterans out of hand. The spectacle of blacks wearing the uniform surely rankled.

Beginning early in 1946 the veterans began meeting in secret to decide how to challenge the Cantrell-Mansfield machine at the ballot box. In May they had their own political party. Knox Henry stood for sheriff; four other veterans ran for other county offices. The Veterans’ Party ran on a simple but pointed slogan:

{{cquote|Your vote will be counted as cast.}}

To try to make sure of that, Jim Buttram, campaign manager for the Veterans’ Party, sent two telegrams on 22 July to Governor Jim McCord and U.S. Attorney General Tom Clark. In each, he asked for help in ensuring a fair election. Neither recipient ever answered those telegrams.

== As the election approaches… ==
In keeping with the above, the Veterans’ Party ran this advertisement in the 30 July issue of ''The Daily Post-Athenian'':

{{cquote|These young men fought and won a war for good government. They know what it takes and what it means to have a clean government—and they are energetic enough, honest enough and intelligent enough to give us good, clean government.}}

In the same issue, the Cantrell-Mansfield machine ran this advertisement:

{{cquote|Look at the facts—and you will vote for the Democratic ticket. The campaign fight is as old as the hills—it is the story of the outs wanting back in.}}

On 30 July 1946, sheriff’s deputies in a neighboring county arrested two McMinn County deputies and confiscated a shipment of liquor. The two deputies brazenly admitted they were carrying “election whiskey.” Mansfield completely disavowed them.

''The Daily Post-Athenian'' has one item of significance, on 31 July 1946. The Veterans of Foreign Wars post in neighboring Blount County announced they could send 450 veterans to McMinn County at need. This article appeared on the front page, but below, not above, the fold. In any event, Sheriff Mansfield responded by recruiting hundreds of armed deputies from out of county, and some from out of State.

{{cquote|It has come to my attention that certain elements intend to create a disturbance at and around the polls. … In order to see that law and order is maintained … I will have several hundred deputies patrolling the county.}}

To put matters into perspective, the sheriff had never fielded more than fifteen deputies on election day.

= August 1, 1946: the election =
Polls opened promptly at 9:00 a.m., to heavier turnout than McMinn County elections had ever seen. Two hundred deputies deployed “to keep order.” (We know this because a surviving audio tape gives that number.)<ref name=Green>Green M., The Battle of Athens, Tennessee in 1946. YouTube video retrieved 1 August 2018. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmDp882eCd0></ref> Instead of keeping order, they brazenly intimidated voters whom they observed “voting the wrong way.” This suggests that in McMinn County, in those days, voters lacked the privacy screens they enjoy today.

At either 9:30 a.m. or 10:00 a.m., Walter Ellis, an election judge, protested the obvious intimidation. Mansfield’s deputies summarily arrested him and hauled him off to the county jail. A man named Fred West, of dubious identification, took his place as election judge.

Jim Buttram found 200 GI’s pounding on the door of the L. L. Shaefer jewelry store he was using as an office. He had dire news for them already. He had no answer to his telegrams to Gov. McCord and Attorney General Clark. At that point Otto Kennedy, a friendly political adviser, told them Cantrell had posted armed guards (not sheriff’s deputies) at every voting precinct. At least some veterans called for their fellow GI’s to mobilize and arm themselves. Kennedy offered the use of his Essankay Garage and Tire Shop for a meeting hall.

At 3:00 p.m. the GI’s who had called for mobilization had returned to the Essankay Garage, all armed.

== First blood ==
Tom Gillespie, a black farmer, tried to vote at his usual precinct—the 11th, at the Athens Water Works. Windy Wise, one of Cantrell’s guards, hurled a racial slur at him and told him he was voting at the wrong precinct. “I’ve always voted here,” he protested. In response Wise struck him with brass knuckles. Gillespie dropped his ballot and tried to leave. Wise shot him in the back.

A crowd immediately gathered in front of the Water Works. Pat Mansfield and several deputies loaded Gillespie into Mansfield’s police cruiser and took him to the jail.

Inside the Water Works, Deputy Karl Neil drew his sidearm and ordered five female poll waters, including Mrs. H. A. Vestal, to leave. They did, under protest. Four GI’s remained to watch the ongoing ballot count: James Edward Vestal (Mrs. Vestal’s son), Charles Scott, Jr., Charles Hyde, and J. P. Cartwright. Neil ordered Hyde and Cartwright to “go up front and sit down,” so they couldn’t see the count. Hyde and Cartwright left the building. Charles Scott, Sr. sent word in to his son and to Ed Vestal: get out for your own safety. Vestal and the younger Scott stayed.

* 3:15 p.m.: Minis Wilburn, an “officer of the election” at Precinct 12 (Dixie Cafe, North White Street), beat GI Election Judge Bob Hairrell. This happened after Hairrell witnessed several voting irregularities, including letting minors vote, and paying cash for votes in full view.
* 3:55 p.m.: Mansfield and his deputies closed Precinct 12 five minutes early. They lifted a car and set it down in front of the door and also blocked the nearby alley with two other cars.

== The skirmish at the Water Works ==
At 4:15 p.m., the sheriff and about twelve deputies arrived at the Water Works precinct to keep everyone away. Inside, Windy Wise ordered Vestal and Scott to sit away from the ballot-count operation, but not to leave the building. In fact the deputies barricaded Vestal and Scott behind a counter and locked the door. The door was a plate-glass door set in a wooden frame. Vestal and Scott actually broke through this, shoved their way past Windy Wise and his men, and made it outside. Hands high, with Wise’s gun trained on them, they walked across the street and gained the safety of the crowd. They could do this because the crowd were angry and Wise, Neil, and company could not know whether they were armed or not. Furthermore, two newspaper reporters were present, and even Windy Wise would not shoot unarmed men in front of them.

At 4:55 p.m., Chief Deputy Boe Dunn arrived at the Water Works, with two hostages in tow: Felix Harrod and Tom Dooley. Dunn himself appropriated the ballot box and loaded it into his car to take it to the jail. Fifteen deputies aimed their service guns at the crowd as they left.

== Prepare for battle ==
At 5:10 p.m. the G.I.’s gathered at the Essankay Garage. In addition to scouring the county for privately held firearms, they unlocked the State Guard armory. There they acquired three M-1 rifles, five .45 semi-automatic pistols, and 24 British Enfield rifles.

Deputy Dunn made the serious tactical mistake of sending two deputies to the Essankay to arrest the GI’s. When they drew their weapons, the GI’s rushed out of the garage, tackled them, and dragged them inside. There they disarmed them and stripped off their clothes. Two more deputies who tried to reinforce the pair suffered similar capture. Three more deputies came, and the GI’s captured them, too. At 5:30 p.m. some citizen volunteers transported the seven deputies out of the town.

At 6:35 p.m., the sheriff’s men carried the Precinct 12 ballot box into the jail. They already had the Precinct 11 ballot box there, along with several GI’s (including Walter Ellis; see above) whom they held incommunicado and without formal charges.

Between 7:30 p.m. and 8:45 p.m., at least five hundred GI’s, all armed, took up station around the jail and on the rooftops of nearby buildings, including the Athens Power Plant. They left one door, at the rear, unguarded, so that those inside could escape with their lives any time they so chose.

Inside, Paul Cantrell, Pat Mansfield, State Rep. Woods, and fifty deputies started “going through the ballot boxes.” Judge Green’s account describes what the GI’s would find later: bunches of blank ballots, and various signs of preparation to burn ballots. These findings alone suggest an attempt to issue a rigged election count.

= The battle starts =
At about 9:00 p.m., Bill White issued an ultimatum: surrender the ballot boxes, or suffer siege and attack. White confessed later that he fired the shot that started the battle. But the Mobile Federalist Society tells a different account. According to it, Mansfield’s deputies fired first. Three GI’s, trying to warn passers-by of the danger, suffered wounds.

Firing waxed and waned for two hours. During this time, George Woods tried to summon aid from Birch Biggs of Polk County. Biggs ran a machine even more brutal than Cantrell’s. But Biggs would not intervene. Broughton Biggs, Birch’s son, by one account yelled at Woods, “Do you think I’m crazy?” Woods, bearing the sting of that rebuff, slunk out of town.
Mansfield and Cantrell tried to get Governor McCord to mobilize the Tennessee National Guard. Whether McCord issued that order or not, accounts differ. But all agree that the Guard did not engage the veterans. The commandant of the Guard doubtless knew that the sympathies of his force would lie with the ex-GI’s. Why? Because these Guardsmen were ex-GI’s themselves.

The besiegers did not and could not know this, of course. Worse, they had no radios and thus could not co-ordinate their fire. The brick walls of the jail withstood the fusillade. And as any soldier knows, until the enemy surrenders, the battle, and the war, continues.

As the siege dragged on, several soldiers made Molotov cocktails and threw them. These proved ineffective. But at 2:30 a.m., the veterans acquired dynamite. At this time, an ambulance made its way to the jail. The veterans let it pass, thinking it had come to evacuate the wounded. Instead it evacuated Paul Cantrell and Pat Mansfield. ''They had just abandoned their command.''

= The battle ends =
At 2:48 a.m., the besiegers threw their dynamite, in sticks with lit fuses. One charge flipped Deputy Dunn’s car over. Another rocked the jailhouse porch on its foundation. A third flipped Pat Mansfield’s car (but of course, Mansfield had abandoned it with his command). A fourth damaged the jailhouse wall.

After that, the deputies, their commanding officers having deserted them, and facing obviously superior forces, surrendered.

The veterans took possession of the ballot boxes. They later certified that the Veterans’ Party had won all five races by 2 to 1 margins.

The townspeople vented their rage on the defeated Cantrell forces. One townsman, whose name appears on no record, slashed Wilburn’s throat. (He would recover—barely.) Anther townsman shot Biscuit Farris, the jail superintendent, in the jaw, shattering it. Several townsmen kicked and beat Windy Wise to unconsciousness. But the GI’s took command of the situation, sent the rioters home, and locked their prisoners in the jail overnight.

= Overwrought reporting =
In a classic example of “[[fake news]],” ''The New York Times'' actually reported that the GI’s, or their sympathizers, had ''slain'' Sheriff Mansfield. Recall that in fact Mansfield and Cantrell had fled during the battle. In fact, the battle concluded with not a single fatality. (A report by one source, that Tom Gillespie had died of his wound, has no corroboration.)

Knox Henry won election as sheriff. Pat Mansfield resigned his office on 4 August, effective immediately. Knox Henry took his place at once.

In the first days that followed, tensions ran high. The veterans feared a counterattack by forces owned by or loyal to Cantrell. No such attack ever came. They also governed as a vigilance committee to keep rioting and looting from breaking out. That ended with the recognition of Knox Henry as the new sheriff.

The “Boss Crump Machine” suffered blow after blow in the weeks that followed. A new Governor (Gordon Browning) and U.S. Senator (Estes Kefauver) won election that year.<ref name=Kefauver>The federal government remembers the name of Estes Kefauver to this day, having added his name to the Nashville Federal Building.</ref>

The “fake news” narrative of “lawlessness” by the veterans continued for a full year. In fact, no veteran was ever prosecuted. Windy Wise was sentenced to one to three years for shooting Gillespie.

Sadly, no current resident of Athens, Tennessee, remembers the events of that day. A single plaque commemorates the event. But not a single original structure remains.

= Film adaptation =
In 1992, the Hallmark Hall of Fame released ''An American Story'', a fictionalized account of the Battle of Athens.<ref name=Hallmark>''An American Story.'' Directed by John Gray. With Brad Johnson, Kathleen Quinlan, Tom Sizemore, et al. Hallmark Hall of Fame Productions, 1992. <https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103673/></ref> This project changes most of the names of the characters. It also changes key details of the election and the battle that followed:

# The shooting occurs at a Post Office precinct. The sheriff closes the polls early, an armed GI election judge objects, and a deputy calmly shoots the GI in the right flank. The deputies then remove two ballot boxes from that precinct.
# The chief veteran challenger is running for mayor, not sheriff.
# The first shot at the jail rings out when a deputy leans out of a window and harangues the besiegers. One besieger breaks discipline and fires a shot without orders.
# The veterans manage to get close enough to leave a demolition charge with wires and a detonator.

None of these things occurred as the movie depicts, of course. Nor does the movie depict any of the violent acts on the part of deputies. Perhaps the producers told this tame version of events to avoid lawsuits by any surviving members of the Cantrell, Mansfield, or Woods families.

Hallmark Media did not re-release An American Story. But an organization called the American Movement uploaded the full movie to YouTube.<ref name=YouTube>Viewers can view it here. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c-Dsg4X4Dk></ref>

= Literary parallel =
The only literary parallel to this event, and even this is far from exact, is ''Starship Troopers'' by Robert A. Heinlein (1959). Heinlein predicts a future in which humanity fights a third world war between a Chinese-dominated axis on one side, and an alliance among Russia, the United Kingdom, and America on the other. At the end of this war comes not mere depression but total social collapse.

Into this obvious power vacuum, step returning veterans from the war. In city after city they set up vigilance committees to stem the rioting and looting they find. They sometimes must hang fellow veterans for taking part in the looting. In the face of that, they refuse to let anyone except returnees serve on their vigilance committees.

{{cquote|Just arbitrary at first. They trusted each other—a bit. They didn’t trust anyone else.}}

{{cquote|[We’re] not about to let any bleeding, profiteering, black market, double-time-for-overtime, Army-dodging, [unprintable] civilians have any say about it! They’ll do as they’re told, see? While us apes straighten things out!}}

The behavior of Knox Henry and his fellow returnees in the power vacuum that followed their victory over the Cantrells, closely mirrors this attitude. This suggests that, had law and order collapsed totally, they might have acted similarly.

Heinlein never once alludes to the Battle of Athens. But the results of his writing are about the same as though he had researched it himself.

= References =
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Tennessee]]
[[Category:United States History]]