I don't know how true this is but I think a lot of seafaring cultures didn't understand how you can sail into the wind (tacking). I mean you could probably go back in time thousands of years and show folks how to add a keel and how to point your sail correctly, no real "tech" needed.
DoubleShot
joined 2 years ago
In WW2 the British kinda/sorta invaded Iceland against their will. Ostensibly to "secure" Iceland from falling to the Nazis but the Icelanders weren't really given a choice in the matter IIRC.
I have a half-baked idea of using Che to push kids left in the way chuds use Teddy Roosevelt or Marcus Aurelius. Seriously, reading about Che it's almost like he's some fictional character come to life.
And I've always wanted to do some drunk hexbear posting, just never got around to it.
“So, let me get this straight. You live in your momma’s basement, but you got a Coach purse,”
This person does not really exist outside of Dave Ramsay's head. He takes two different, unrelated data points ("young people are driving luxury good growth" and "more young people are living together") and tries to mash them together like a kid trying to mash together a Duplo and a Lego. It doesn't occur to him that there can be wealth disparities within Gen Z; that the wealthier end are buying Coach purses while a very large other group is living at home.
And fuck this guy, like most "investment advisors" this guy doesn't actually know jack shit about things but he has to pretend he does so he sounds like a "trusted financial advisor". Nearly every investment advisor is a glorified car salesman.
Per the twitter user who posted it, it's satire.
Yes, because the gospels fundamentally contradict. One gospel mentions King Herod killing babies but he died in 4 BCE. Another gospel talks about a census as the reason Mary & Joseph were in Bethlehem, but the first Roman census in that region was in 6 CE (and it was for Judah, not Galilee where Bethlehem was but the author just likely screwed that up).
Hey, I'm a BCE/CE Enjoyer, so I'll defend it.
You need some point in history to be year "0". There is no way you will get the whole world agreeing to one point of reference, not to mention how difficult it would be get everyone to start using that new point anyway. So we have to go with the birth of Jesus (or what people thought it was, we don't actually know when Jesus was born).
But the BC/AD terms just reinforce Christian social domination. We can't do anything about the actual year 0, but we can at least try and make the terminology neutral. And it makes evangelicals pissy, which is always fun.
This is a great point.