Gentle nerd freak of the pacific northwest. All nation states are vermin.

  • 0 Posts
  • 49 Comments
Joined 5 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 26th, 2024

help-circle



  • First time I quit i was sick and cigarettes tasted awful for a week, so I figured if I had already gone a week without I might as well quit. Whenever I got a craving I thought about how disgusting they tasted with a cold, and imagined spongey lungs filling with black tar till I gave myself a shiver of disgust.

    I started up again years later while traveling, then quit for good while visiting my parents for 2 months - I know I’m too embarrassed to smoke around my parents.




  • As medieval and renaissance scholars regained interest in the pagan past, they wrote about it in latin. That’s why we still largely use the latinized names.

    These scholars used latin partly because it was the lingua franca of their elite audience, but also that way the only people who could read it would have had a proper church education. And thus less likely to be lead from the path of righteousness by these pagans and all their wicked thinkin’.

    This practice of using latin for religiously risque material continues well into the modern period, where the sexy parts of native american myths were marked by an abrupt shift into latin. I believe the first scientific account of penguin necrophilia was written in latin as well.




  • “Edomite!”

    I was getting onto a bus, someone looked me over and spat out the word. It was clear from the tone that it was an insult, but it also sounded suspiciously bronze age, so I was very excited to find out what it meant.

    Turns out it’s a biblical reference used by some black nationalist groups in the US to refer to white people as unclean or diseased. Edom was one of several late bronze age Canaanite kingdoms. At one point the torah describes them as slightly paler and dirty, hence the insult.










  • I’m not sure that link does have good info.

    That’s a 0 point comment on ask historians, from 11 years ago, with no sources listed, no details and little explanation. The follow-up comments have a little more info but only from 1870, and even then it’s only talking about land not wealth. Also the only source linked is a NY Review of Books article that 404s.

    I think it’s fairly safe to assume that wealth inequality was lower before industrialization. That really supercharges the power of capital, encouraging and rewarding larger and larger accumulations of capital. Before that it’s also much harder to get reliable data.

    Aristotle in the politics mentions a plan to cap wealth inequality at 1:5. Once you have more than 5 times the poorest citizen, your wealth is redistributed. He thinks it too radical, but could you imagine anyone talking about capping CEO pay at 5 times the janitor? That’s unthinkable to us.