• @glimse
        link
        528 months ago

        Israel’s got us beat by a lot, man. In the US we have grasps for religious power (some successful) but it doesn’t describe everyone in government

        • @GoTeamBoobies
          link
          178 months ago

          Go to Utah. The Mormon church has a lot more influence on politics, than people want to admit?

          • @glimse
            link
            268 months ago

            Ohh I’m very aware of SLC. I’m speaking of the country as a whole, though

            • @psmgx
              link
              17 months ago

              Have you been to SLC? Mostly not Mormon. Meanwhile places like Provo are 98% LDS

              • @glimse
                link
                17 months ago

                I’ve never been to Utah period but I know that the LDS owns like 1/4 of SLC

          • @glimse
            link
            78 months ago

            True but Israel’s been that way since its inception. An entire country made FOR religion

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -78 months ago

          It’s almost…Like when everyone in government is of the same religion, it’s similar to everyone in government being of no religion at all.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        138 months ago

        There sadly are even more countries that are completely under control of religious leaders. Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Iran, Afghanistan, … Vatican City (they even have something like their own military).

          • @Blue_Morpho
            link
            18 months ago

            Bring back the Borgias! Now that was a Pope who knew how to party!

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        38 months ago

        They’re all already greased up and there’s an inflatable pool with green jello right there.

  • @rtxn
    link
    English
    988 months ago

    I think I missed the “mysticism and spirituality” period. Twenty years ago I knew India for cows, castes, and crap in the rivers.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      30
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Skin whitening is not unlike tanning in the west, an indication of status/wealth. In India lighter skin shows you don’t need to work outside. In the west tan skin shows you can take vacations.

      And in both cases people fake it with creams and tanning salons. And it becomes so entrenched people don’t realize why they are actually doing it. Just like makeup and clothing choices.

      Yes, there are problematic racial undertones…and in general is definitely fucked up…but I think it’s more complicated than just a race thing. I mean, people in the West are literally exposing themselves to cancer causing UV to fake the look of having recently taken a trip to Hawaii or whatever, which is also kinda fucked up.

      • @TankovayaDiviziya
        link
        38 months ago

        Pretty sure lighter complexion in non-white countries is status symbol in the same way tanning is among white Westerners. You don’t need to work outside means you are affluent enough not to do so. Getting tanned means you are also affluent enough to go on holidays abroad to somewhere exotic.

        Before the European colonisation in non-white majority countries, light skin has always been seen as status symbol. The racial aspect came later upon Western colonialism.

      • @Leviathan
        link
        28 months ago

        In the west tan skin shows you can take vacations.

        What? I see a dude with a tan in the middle of winter and I automatically think “he spends way to much time in tanning booths” and “that’s a lot of skin damage”. I never once thought “that guy can afford vacations”. If that’s the effect they’re going for they need better PR.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          118 months ago

          Your take away from what I wrote was that I think people should never expose themselves to the sun/UV? The benefits of moderate UV exposure are completely irrelevant to the point I was making.

          I just explained how they are comparable and really don’t know what else to tell you. Maybe someone else can give it a go.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              68 months ago

              I’m not in any way shape or form doing that. This is abundantly clear from what I wrote.

              I was only comparing cosmetic skin whitening to cosmetic skin darkening, since they are completely comparable and I have already explained how.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          48 months ago

          But the natural production of pigment in response to sunlight isn’t nearly comparable to chemically changing tones or caking on makeup to hide your ethnicity.

          My asian “whitening creams” are called “brightening creams” in the West. They remove redness. They don’t chemically alter your ethnicity.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          48 months ago

          I think you’re missing the point.

          Some cultures find tanned skin to be beautiful, others find light skin to be beautiful.

          In either case, wealthier people can achieve either darker or lighter skin by spending more or less time in the sun.

          Poorer people who’s length of exposure to the sun is a function of their work, can emulate lighter or darker skin with various lotions and potions.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              48 months ago

              You sound like a real idiot.

              People will perceive beauty according to societal and cultural norms established over millennia.

              You can’t tell someone what they ought to find beautiful.

              It’s not racist, given that we’re taking about variations within a single race, not comparisons between races.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  28 months ago

                  Imposing your own ideas on what other cultures ought to feel is the height of arrogance.

                  Similarly, it’s incredibly arrogant to presume that your own “enlightened” attitudes will be more prevalent in the future.

  • @Starkstruck
    link
    448 months ago

    On the bright side, you need a tech tutorial, they’ve got your back.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      40
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Yeah, but it’s often in the form of a YouTube video with narration that’s not always so easy to understand. I miss written tutorials, but most of the good ones I find these days tend to come from Central/Eastern European forum posts.

  • @ZeroTHM
    link
    398 months ago

    Don’t forget scammers!

  • @SlopppyEngineer
    link
    388 months ago

    Germany f*d up so bad we’re still using them as a meme after most of a century. Never go full Germany.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    348 months ago

    I guess Germany after the 30’s (and maybe even after 1919), France after the whole Revolution and Napoleon thing, the UK after voting to KEKW their economy, Norway after being ruled by Sweden… The list probably goes on

    • @RunawayFixer
      link
      148 months ago

      Which french revolution? ;) There’s lots of people who saw and still see the whole french revolution thing as a net positive. The UK has never had a good proper revolution and it shows.

      Napoleon did a lot of things, but those bad things were in line with the absolutist rulers from before the revolution, he just happened to be more successful at it. But he also did many good things during his rule. Fe, the Napoleonic code was hugely influential worldwide and a major change for the good. 2 centuries later it doesn’t hold up as well in the countries that still use the same justice system, but for it’s time, it was really good. Overall, I’d say Napoleon still has a stellar reputation, unlike India.

      How was Norway worse after they last gained independence from Sweden?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        58 months ago

        never had a good proper revolution

        Are you forgetting or discounting the English Revolution and Glorious Revolution?

        • @RunawayFixer
          link
          68 months ago

          I’m discounting that one yes. The powerful politicians that came out on top (all who were already upper class and power brokers beforehand), called it a revolution, but there was no class/societal upheaval, redistribution of wealth/land or anything else like happened in the many popular revolutions in Paris. It was just a change of government with some help from a foreign power at the end. A forced change of government or coup d’etat can alo be called a revolution, but it’s pretty obvious that it’s not the same thing as fe the 1789 revolution in Paris.

          I’ll refine my previous statement: what the UK needs is a good proper popular revolution.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        38 months ago

        A lot of good came out of it in the end, but I doubt the French felt great after the battle at Waterloo and the resulting peace treaty

        • @RunawayFixer
          link
          68 months ago

          For France that was a great peace treaty, way better than what many French people would have expected, Talleyrand had worked wonders. After Waterloo there were many who would have wanted a complete dismemberment of France, but instead the pre Waterloo negotiations were followed and a relatively strong state was created, with all the territorial gains of Louis 14 left intact.

          That peace was also far better for French people than Napoleon’s endless large scale wars of the prior 15 years. It’s that massive death toll that we should blame Napoleon for, not the treaty of Vienna. And after a bit of a respite, the french did kick out the Bourbons again, so that peace did work out ok for France. It was easily a far better peace than the “peace” of Versailles after WW1.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            28 months ago

            Yeah I guess you’re right that it came out about as well as it possibly could for France. I still feel there was a significant bit of humiliation at play for the great power that France was at the time, but then again it took a coalition to get there and this was an army of a country torn between monarchists and republicans.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        18 months ago

        The UK had to murder his king to get a parliament though :D and tbh the french revolution was a great moment, but also a hugely violent one, and the people did not prevail. The liberals did.

    • @systemglitch
      link
      38 months ago

      That just touches on leadership issues, not the people. So I don’t think it is valid in this context.

        • @systemglitch
          link
          18 months ago

          It’s still a leadership issue and not a people issue. I can see why someone would want to relate the two, but it’s not a just comparison on this case.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    338 months ago

    This is insanely relevant to me right now. I left India in 2004 and I am there right now for my cousins wedding. I legit hate it everywhere I look. Love my family, but idk if I want to come back.

  • @psycho_driver
    link
    228 months ago

    Also the land of abhorrent javascript horrors.

  • spez
    link
    fedilink
    English
    228 months ago

    4chan is gonna know the world through the perspective of an average 4chan user.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      42
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Rapists and shit being India’s image is far, far from being exclusive to anons on 4chan…

      • spez
        link
        fedilink
        English
        58 months ago

        I unfortunately have to agree on the rapists front because of the impotent fucks sitting in the parliament sucking each other on religion, but the shitting part has gotten considerably better in my region and in India overall, though.

        • lad
          link
          fedilink
          68 months ago

          It may have gotten better but the image is going to take quite some time to be changed, unfortunately

          It’s good that the conditions become better, though

        • @Blue_Morpho
          link
          18 months ago

          11% still seems really high. In a crowd of 100 people, 11 are going to be pooping in front of you.

          • spez
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            It’s relative improvement, it might seem really high to people in the west but for us it’s been quite a difference.

    • @Zehzin
      link
      1
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      deleted by creator

    • @Clbull
      link
      28 months ago

      America has been full of New Thought/LoA grifters like these too: Neville Goddard, Napoleon Hill, Joseph Murphy, to name a few.

  • HorreC
    link
    fedilink
    148 months ago

    Thought to myself “San Francisco isnt a country”

  • balderdash
    link
    fedilink
    11
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Good luck with this post OP lmao

    edit: Did way better than I expected. Maybe I think too poorly of Lemmings