I've written it before, that I thought I'd learned the bible through cultural osmosis, and now that I'm reading (first a kids bible because he's a kid and I'm barely literate) I've come to realize that I'm totally wrong and virtually nothing has been passed through cultural osmosis.
Continuing through the second part of Notes from the Underground, the main character is really insufferable. I hate to say it, but I see a younger version of myself in him, and thank God I've grown out of being such an insufferable jerk (though I guess I've grown into being a different kind of insufferable jerk?)
I just finished the part where he decided to interject into a party he had no business being in spending money earmarked for his servant's pay (when he already owed a lot of money one of the people at the party), and he admits he doesn't even like anyone who's going.
At the beginning of the book he said he was a terrible person, but it wasn't until the second part that it became clear he was telling the truth.
I just finished the part where he decided to interject into a party he had no business being in spending money earmarked for his servant's pay (when he already owed a lot of money one of the people at the party), and he admits he doesn't even like anyone who's going.
At the beginning of the book he said he was a terrible person, but it wasn't until the second part that it became clear he was telling the truth.
It doesn't matter what exactly they wanted to make it, a Barbie movie was never going to be for me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6F0kTDwJNA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6F0kTDwJNA
Not American, and not really a partisan. I'm a centrist who is presently leaning quite right, but in the past leaned quite left. The same answers aren't correct all the time.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/jul/12/russian-spies-ukraine-suspected-duping-fbi-censor-/
Russian spies infiltrated Ukraine to trick the FBI into censoring the Kremlin's enemies.
Sure is a good thing the FBI doesn't induce big tech into silencing arbitrary protected speech.
Russian spies infiltrated Ukraine to trick the FBI into censoring the Kremlin's enemies.
Sure is a good thing the FBI doesn't induce big tech into silencing arbitrary protected speech.
unlock the ion inhibitors.
"I'm not sure that's such a good--"
I SAID UNLOCK THE ION INHIBITORS!
"I'm not sure that's such a good--"
I SAID UNLOCK THE ION INHIBITORS!
😑 You mean to tell me that a new sequel to a classic game series made in 2023 is going to have elements nobody cares for and everyone should probably just ignore it because it's just a bunch of privileged losers wearing the old property like a skin suit? I'm shocked.
That they can pretend is false.
Malinformation is information that is true, that they agree is true, but is inconvenient for the establishment narrative.
The fact that they have a name for that and they intend to try to control it should be a total mask off moment.
Malinformation is information that is true, that they agree is true, but is inconvenient for the establishment narrative.
The fact that they have a name for that and they intend to try to control it should be a total mask off moment.
At least the nice thing now is they aren't even pretending they care about the health of babies. It turns out they're the prime candidate for "fuck you, got mine"
I'm not an "America love it or leave it" guy, but if the founding fathers and patriotism are offensive, maybe it is time to go live in those allegedly perfect places that aren't America?
I think there's some conversations that should be had whose elements are specifically split along partisan lines.
Why are there homeless people when the government is taking half of my income? My great grandfather didn't pay income tax at all.
If you think about that question, it's split right down the middle. Part of it is "left", part of it is "right", but really, it's a question that everyone should be asking -- What's the effectiveness of the single most expensive thing we pay for by an order of magnitude? Instead we fight over "left" and "right" which successfully distracts from the question we can all agree on.
Why are there homeless people when the government is taking half of my income? My great grandfather didn't pay income tax at all.
If you think about that question, it's split right down the middle. Part of it is "left", part of it is "right", but really, it's a question that everyone should be asking -- What's the effectiveness of the single most expensive thing we pay for by an order of magnitude? Instead we fight over "left" and "right" which successfully distracts from the question we can all agree on.
Happy to have you as long as you'd like to stay. I feel bad we had to dump the database, can't explain the failure.
Even conservative versus progressive in that era wasn't necessarily so simple.
The Puritans were a new and quite different sect of christianity, so the conservative bet would have been to go with the Anglican Church that had existed for sometime at that point, and the really conservative bet would have been to go with the Roman Catholic Church which had existed for a millennium and had massive political power at that point.
Now, on the other hand the Puritans also represented an attempt to return to a more pure morality that wasn't held up by the current institutions of the churches in europe,. So in that sense they were more conservative, but it just goes to show you that it's a complicated and multifaceted discussion.
If we even go back 100 years, we think that we can relate those people to the present day, but the devil's in the details, and I think that most people on both sides of political spectrum might be shocked to discover just how different those people were than us. Their entire way of living was different. Things that we consider to be just the way of the world were completely alien for the way those people thought back then. 100 years ago, so-called progressives of the time believed in eugenics, something today we consider overwhelmingly taboo. The father of Canadian public healthcare, Tommy Douglas, was a strong proponent of eugenics.
Corporations as we conceive of them today were just on the cusp of existing around the 1600s. Imagine a world so alien that the modern conception of the corporation which has become one of the biggest things that we are constantly talking about it didn't even exist. Not to mention other things such as income taxes, modern police forces, healthcare that wasn't insane and based on 2000 year old false theories from the Greeks...
The Puritans were a new and quite different sect of christianity, so the conservative bet would have been to go with the Anglican Church that had existed for sometime at that point, and the really conservative bet would have been to go with the Roman Catholic Church which had existed for a millennium and had massive political power at that point.
Now, on the other hand the Puritans also represented an attempt to return to a more pure morality that wasn't held up by the current institutions of the churches in europe,. So in that sense they were more conservative, but it just goes to show you that it's a complicated and multifaceted discussion.
If we even go back 100 years, we think that we can relate those people to the present day, but the devil's in the details, and I think that most people on both sides of political spectrum might be shocked to discover just how different those people were than us. Their entire way of living was different. Things that we consider to be just the way of the world were completely alien for the way those people thought back then. 100 years ago, so-called progressives of the time believed in eugenics, something today we consider overwhelmingly taboo. The father of Canadian public healthcare, Tommy Douglas, was a strong proponent of eugenics.
Corporations as we conceive of them today were just on the cusp of existing around the 1600s. Imagine a world so alien that the modern conception of the corporation which has become one of the biggest things that we are constantly talking about it didn't even exist. Not to mention other things such as income taxes, modern police forces, healthcare that wasn't insane and based on 2000 year old false theories from the Greeks...
Attracting investment isn't success, creating green energy is success.
Attracting investment is only success if you want to make money, not if you want to get off fossil fuels.
Attracting investment is only success if you want to make money, not if you want to get off fossil fuels.
Are you sure that you can apply modern standards of left or right wing to the late 1600s? It seems that as you go that far back and you apply postmodern views to enlightenment era events, you end up with a lens distorted by the events that came since.
@ImortisInglorian Since you're the only other user, letting you know I'm dumping the database and starting over on my lemmy instance today. You'll have to create your account again. Sorry, I don't know what happened but it's not federating with near anything anymore.