Tachanka

joined 2 years ago
[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 17 points 1 year ago

the British empire forces open china's markets so they can flood it with opium from India, in order to make money

they were bringing civilization very-intelligent

The American government voluntarily purchases mass produced opiates from the Chinese government

frothingfash the barbaric asiatic commies are literally poisoning us

[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago

like saying hello to an old friend

[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago

non-Americans are always real quick to call us out for not doing anything to control our government

those particular non-Amerikkkans are probably communists, anarchists, and third worlders who are getting bombed by Amerikkkans. the non-Americans who are saying it's rude to harass politicians on date night are probably liberal and conservative capitalist non-Amerikkkans in NATO aligned countries. If it seems like non-Amerikkkans are contradictory in their critiques, it's because they're not one person, but a large group of people; So large in fact that they make up the entire planet besides Amerikkka. amerikkka

[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 19 points 1 year ago

"[...]a Zoroastrian named Vilma ritualistically shaved my testicles. There really is nothing like a shorn scrotum... it's breathtaking- I highly suggest you try it." - Dr. Evil

[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

The Chinese had it all figured out with the 1 child policy: have 1 so you're below population replacement rate, and the reserve army of labor still shrinks, and wages go up, but at the same time you get to raise a tiny little comrade.

spoilerdon't take this post as a serious assessment of all the ramifications of the 1 child policy pls, it's a shitpost

[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago

if only academic rigor and methodology were major determinants for what becomes relevant, and things weren't signal boosted solely for their political ramifications in an existing superstructure

[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 14 points 1 year ago

another MAGA maggot guns down 20 migrants at the border after downloading "great replacement theory" directly into his brain for 8 years straight, directly from mainstream news networks: i sleep

someone posts pig poop balls: REAL SHIT

[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 18 points 1 year ago

not as unlikely as you think!

[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 26 points 1 year ago (3 children)

oooaaaaaaauhhh america has won the cultural victory... even the mighty nation of zhong guo is makin 'jaks

[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 99 points 1 year ago (6 children)

register new twitter account

put palestinian flag in bio

say some holocaust denial bullshit to make palestinians look antisemitic

collect paycheck from CIA

all in a day's work

[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The catholic church isn't

you can't be catholic and not be fully into what the pope says, according to the catholic church.

Well that's how protestantism started, which circles back to my point about religions being internally diverse. Hence they're prone to schisms when their institutions are too inflexible.

if you think the pope is wrong the punishment is excommunication - they kick you straight the fuck out.

This is exactly the kind of rigidity which leads to diversity because people will branch off and form their own churches as a result. These aren't different religions. They're different branches of the same religion. Internal diversity.

Also, my inlaws are all catholics. half of them are chuds who hate the "woke pope" for being too "liberal commie" and the other half are a bunch of party animals who've never touched a bible outside of church. the rigidity in the church hierarchy among the clergy does not really apply to the churchgoers themselves, who can be quite diverse in their personal interpretations and practices of their own religions.

[–] Tachanka@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This makes a lot more sense once you no longer incorrectly see religion as a set of beliefs and correctly see religion as a set of practices

I see religion as a set of belief and practices. There was certainly an over-emphasis on the belief side of things and an under-emphasis on the practice side of things when the modern academic field of secular religious studies first began in the 1800s, but I wouldn't say that it's entirely incorrect to consider beliefs and entirely correct to consider practices. There's no academic consensus on what even constitutes a religion, but I think most of the time both beliefs and practices play into it.

view more: ‹ prev next ›