Can You Say, “Conservapedia”?

Saturday, the P-I made my day by telling me about Conservapedia, the Right-Wing Christian answer to the free online encyclopedia Wikipedia. I’ll make fun of Conservapedia momentarily, but first a few words on why it’s important to know things.

I have never contributed to Wikipedia because I don’t know anything more than, say, Socrates. Like Socrates, I know that Socrates knew nothing except that he knew nothing, and that Plato was his bitch. That would make a heck of a Wikipedia entry wouldn’t it?: “Socrates, circa 470-399 BC, self-acknowledged ignoramus. Everything Plato knew, he learned from Socrates.”

But don’t do as I do, do as I say: Know things.

Some say all you have to do is read the Bible, and then you’ll know everything you need to know. Since I’ve read it, that would make me cool, but I can shoot this notion down with just two words: April, fifteenth. Not in the Bible! But you need to know it! Joseph and Mary knew that taxes were due the same time she was. They wouldn’t have if they’d only gone by what was in the Bible in their day.

A woman I met was incensed when told to appear at a later hearing after pleading innocent to a minor charge. She said, “That’s not fair, I said I was innocent, why didn’t they believe me? Why are they making me do more stuff?” I guess it wasn’t enough that other people all around her have had this happen to them, throughout all of her life. It had to happen to her before it could get her attention. Don’t be that way. Pay attention to how others are being rooked, you’re in the same line.

One of the redeeming features of Conservapedia is its creators clearly agree on the point that I’ve been making, that it’s important to know stuff that isn’t in the Bible. That’s why they don’t only quote the Bible in their articles. Another redeeming feature is that it is still an open wiki, like Wikipedia. So anyone can edit it.

I am sorely tempted. Whenever I see a new encyclopedia I always check its math entries. So I looked up “Algebra” on Conservapedia to see algebra defined as arithmetic with letters used to stand for numbers. That’s like defining brain surgery as the rearrangement of brains with knives, as opposed to sledgehammers. There were no footnotes or references to direct the reader to more information. All that hard work, all those centuries, reduced to “algebra uses letters that stand for numbers.”

I’m also tempted to delete thousands of excess uses of the word “great.” Plutarch “wrote Plutarch’s Lives and many great essays.” “Cervantes wrote Don Quixote, a great satirical novel.” The United States “is widely considered one of the greatest and most powerful nations on Earth.” It recalls the old Chris Farley Show on SNL. Farley to Paul McCartney: “…you remember when you were with The Beatles?” McCartney: “Yeah, sure.” Farley: “That was awesome!”

Anitra found this bit concerning George Washington: “Washington is perhaps the only person other than Jesus who declined enormous worldly power... “ That should be amended to “Washington is perhaps the only slave owner who ever declined other enormous worldly power.”

My favorite article on Conservapedia is the “Greek empire” entry under “Ancient Terms G.” Except for the initial definition (the Greek empire was the land controlled by Ancient Greece) the entire article consists of answers from contributors to the question “For what would you thank the Ancient Greek Civilization?”

Answers include such gems as “the insightful literature of Plato and Aristotle, especially The Republic, which I have read several times,” “I would like to thank the classical Greek civilization for the catapult,” and, best of all, “I would like to thank classical Greek civilization for the invention of man-boy love affairs.”

That’s some damn fine stupid writing!

Triple Bypass

It seems the story last week was less about the Kim family than, “How can you and YOUR family avoid dying if trapped in your car on a back road in Oregon in a blizzard?” TV news teams showed us how to assemble survival kits. On CNN, Anderson Cooper said, “Next hour: the survivalists’ Rule of Threes and what it means for you.”

That sounded very important so I had to wait for it. I often use a Rule of Threes when writing this column. For example let’s say I wanted to call attention to the fact that the winter solstice is approaching and how that means we can expect colder weather. I might remind you of three fun winter solstice events. There’s the (1) Annual Pigs Balanced On Their Noses Gala, the (2) Annual Pigs Squealing and Running Away Festival, and the (3) Annual The Planet’s Tilting the Wrong Way Again Observation.

It doesn’t matter who you are, if you are Goldilocks or if you are the Council of Nicea or if you are you, or whoever, threes are going to get your attention better than twos, fours, or seventeens. Threes are just enough to make you notice but not enough to induce a trance and result in your being possessed and dancing wildly until the god is done with you and leaves you exhausted and near death.

Which reminds me, we were talking about survival. So when Anderson Cooper told us about the survivalists’ Rule of Threes he mentioned the three rules: (1) You can survive only three hours in severe weather without shelter, (2) You can survive only three days without water, and (3) You can survive only three weeks without food.

Therefore, they say, it’s essential to get shelter first. Where have we heard that before?

While I’m trying to remember, I’ll let you all contemplate (1) the report by the Public Health Department that said they had to deal with 94 deaths of homeless people in King County last year. Or (2) the fact that we’ve exceeded that number this year. Or (3) the fact that if the same percentage of all housed people died in King County every year it would be declared a disaster area.

Oh, I remember. I said it. We need shelter first, because it doesn’t take a blizzard to kill you if all the doors in the city are locked to you.

They now say there was a well-stocked lodge within two miles of the Kim’s car that they could have reached had they known about it. But in the city there’s only enough shelter space to shelter about half the people who are homeless.

Meanwhile, Tom Rasmussen recently told a bunch of activists that the Human Services Department told him, when he asked, that the city’s shelters have no capacity problems.

I have three comments concerning that.

(1) The Human Services Department doesn’t keep track of shelter turn-aways, so their opinion on the subject is baseless. It would have been better if Tom Rassmussen had asked somebody who knew something about it, like the countless homeless people who have been turned away from shelters, who are all just trying their best, every cold night, to do what Anderson Cooper told the vast American TV viewing audience to do. So as not to end up on the Public Health Department’s roster of the dead.

(2) Rasmussen probably bases his perception in part on the truth that some homeless people won’t apply for shelter. What he chooses to ignore is that those who avoid the shelters cite dangerous overcrowding as their chief reason. So large numbers of non-applicants or zero turn-aways would not be evidence that the shelters are operating at capacity, but that the vote from the street is that the overcrowding has become intolerable.

(3) Because he was aiming for a triple, Anderson Cooper neglected to mention rule (4): You can survive only three months without love.

I’m not feeling the love.

Self-Perspect

In these times of uncertainty and stress, nothing makes us feel more stable and secure than being annoyed the same way day after day.

First there was WTO. I won’t even get started on that. Then there was the cancelled New Year’s gathering on the Seattle Center grounds.

Now they implode the King Dome two blocks from where I live and I have to stay indoors because I might be struck by flying dust motes.

All of this reminds me that I haven’t ever discussed here what StreetWrites does to justify it’s existence to me.

Oh, sure, there have been articles in the Real Change for years now about StreetWrites, our writing workshop and support group for homeless and low income writers that spawns a good deal of the poetry in these pages and more and more of the prose. But I haven’t written any of those articles, so my unique perspective hasn’t been
perspected. Let’s rectify that.

My favorite StreetWrites activity, in line with what I’ve been discussing, as regards stability and security, is the topical writing exercise. This is a practice begun by our founder, Freeman, “who needs no first name.”

Freeman, who should be called Freewoman, began by just asking the collected group to write when they met on workshop nights. They said, “What about?” So she said, “I don’t know.” And then she threw out a subject like, “What’s the meaning of life?” And they liked it. There is no explaining human nature. Each workshop I could barely contain my dread, waiting for the next announced topic.

Freeman, in workshop, Feb.29: “What are your symbols?”

Me: Symbols are very interesting, and I'm very glad you have decided to ask me about them. Everything about symbols is symbolic, and that's what makes them so great.

First let me answer the question, "What is a symbol?"

The word symbol comes from the ancient Greek, syn bolein, a verb
phrase meaning to toss together. Therefore, the mother of all symbols is the tossed salad. Other popular symbols of symbols have been the three bean salad, and more recently, the Caesar salad.

Symbols do not have to be vegetarian however. Nor do they have to be
tossed, although it helps. Take pigs, for example. Pigs are symbols.
If you toss a pig, that is a better symbol. If it flies through the
air by itself that's even better. Now imagine a whole herd of pigs
flying through the air. Now you have one fine symbol. Gosh, what are
you going to do with it?

Freeman, in workshop, March 14: “Three questions. First, what is justice?”

Me: Justice is what you have got when you got what was coming to you.

“What is social justice?”

Me: Suppose it was a bunch of people that was coming to you. That would be social justice.

“What is economic justice?”

Me: Suppose it was a bunch of money that was coming to you. That would be economic justice.

Other examples.

It might be a lot of tickling that was coming to you. Don't look now,
but here comes the tickle monster. That would be tickle justice.

Or maybe a truckload of ice cream was coming to you. If you step aside at the last minute, and they let you have the ice cream, that would be ice cream justice. If you don't step aside at the last minute, that would be truck justice.

Freeman, in workshop, March 7, “What is love?

Me: Thanks once again for asking such a wonderful thought-provoking
question!

Needless to say, some of my thoughts are getting very irritated at
being provoked all the time, and a couple of them are in the woods
right now looking for sticks to poke you with.

But all in all we love being provoked, because it reminds us that we
are still here putting up with it. Instead of making boring new
friends in a pine box. Thank you, thank you.

So we have thought of one meaning of the word "love". I love it when
you motivate me to get out more. I love it when you remind me that my true purpose in life must be something else. I love the good things that you do to me, unwittingly.

So much that I'll be back for more, next time. Ooh, Baby!