Thread:Blue in the Red Zone/@comment-681745-20190727080646/@comment-26279493-20190727200459

Dangit, just wrote a reply and my machine ate it.

Sorry if my short entries are making you uncomfortable. They were intended to form more of an outline than a finished product. You're absolutely right to question them.

Having seen some of the trolling you've been facing here, I thought it might be nice to add a bit more explanation of what this WIKI is, what it's defending and what it opposes. The small battles can be so consuming that the overall reason for them can get lost. I was hoping to give some of the overall strategy of the battle.

So, I added some of the basics. In the US, in the 70's, the ERA was reintroduced, and the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade. Phyllis Schlafly came to National prominence as an organizer and leader of the reactionary resistence to ERA, Roe, and feminism. Andy Schlafly is her son, and Conservapedia is part of his attempt to continue his mother's work. Aside from attacking him personally, or attacking his tactics, I thought it might be good to understand the underlying "premise" of Conservapedia.

The Documents in the "Charters of Freedom" category, and pages for them that I created were intended to form an outline of what Liberalism has become and what we are defending. Maybe, eventually, the liberal progression that led to the idea of female self-determination, and Roe and ERA could be added too. Reference of those documents was also intended to appeal to more traditionally conservative thinking, (that's our history and our heritage and we're brave enough to continue what our ancestors began), and give these young trolls something to think about. Conservative v Reactionary

Reactionary politics have been around for a long time, and some of this stuff happened so long ago that these guys may not even be able to recognize it, or even know what they're fighting against when they oppose Liberalism.

I've got most of the outline posted now, and if you think it's unnecessary, or doesn't make sense, I'll remove it.

I'll try to get those pages completed now. You're absolutely correct to question incomplete pages.

Most importantly, what do you, as managing editor, think of the idea? Suggestions, criticism and direction are welcome