Japanese-style peanuts, also known as Japanese peanuts or cracker nuts (widely known in the Spanish-speaking world as cacahuates japoneses or maní japonés), are a type of snack food made from peanuts that are coated in a wheat flour dough and then fried or deep-fried. They come in a variety of different flavors. The Mexican version's recipe for the extra-crunchy shell has ingredients such as wheat flour, soy sauce, water, sugar, monosodium glutamate, and citric acid. The snacks are often sold in sealed bags, but can also be found in bulk containers
History
Japanese-style peanuts were created in Mexico during the 1940s by Japanese immigrant Yoshihei Nakatani, the father of Yoshio and Carlos Nakatani. He lost his job after the mother-of-pearl button factory he worked at, named El Nuevo Japón, was forced to close after its proprietor came under suspicion of being a spy for the Empire of Japan.
Nakatani had to find alternatives to provide for his family. He obtained a job at La Merced Market, where he initially sold Mexican candies called muéganos [es]. Later, he developed a new variety of fried snacks he named oranda that he named after the like-named fish. He also created a new version of a snack that reminded him of his homeland, mamekashi (seeds covered with a layer of flour with spices), that he adapted to Mexican tastes. Nakatani sold them in packages decorated with a geisha design made by his daughter Elvia. While his children tended to the family business, Nakatani and his wife Emma sold the snacks on local streets. Sales of the snacks were so successful that Nakatani was able to obtain his own stall at the market. With the help of Nakatani's son Armando, the family established their business under the brand Nipón in the 1950s; the name was registered as a trademark in 1977.
Nakatani never registered the patent for the snack. As a result, various competitors made their own versions of Japanese-style peanuts.
A Japanese version originated in Okinawa, called Takorina, has the image of a Mexican charro in the bag, and it is claimed to be called "Mexican-style peanuts", though the rumour has been disproven.
Megathreads and spaces to hang out:
- 📀 Come listen to music and Watch movies with your fellow Hexbears nerd, in Cy.tube
- 🔥 Read and talk about a current topics in the News Megathread
- ⚔ Come talk in the New Weekly PoC thread
- ✨ Talk with fellow Trans comrades in the New Weekly Trans thread
- 👊 Share your gains and goals with your comrades in the New Weekly Improvement thread
- 🧡 Disabled comm megathread
reminders:
- 💚 You nerds can join specific comms to see posts about all sorts of topics
- 💙 Hexbear’s algorithm prioritizes comments over upbears
- 💜 Sorting by new you nerd
- 🌈 If you ever want to make your own megathread, you can reserve a spot here nerd
- 🐶 Join the unofficial Hexbear-adjacent Mastodon instance toots.matapacos.dog
Links To Resources (Aid and Theory):
Aid:
Theory:
Is the fact that this post exists and is on the front page of reddit right now a teachable example of idealism/materialism at play? TIL Fire doesn't actually ignite materials, it just makes them reach their self combustion temperature
Like people have this unquestioned notion that fire is just this stuff that hops from one thing to another for no particular reason, but when you give it a moment's thought you'll realize "Fire" is a thing that arises from a certain set of material conditions.
Maybe, but I think this is more just semantics pervertry. There's no reason to even have the word 'ignite' if it doesn't mean 'when something catches fire.' It's like saying "Nothing ever touches anything because there's always a gap between atoms" which is just a really useless statement because the definition of 'touch' that would require atomic nuclei to come into contact is completely useless. It's just notional fetishism.
the fire causes the material conditions for its own existence where possible. the same way mold grows towards sugar/moisture/whatever it needs to grow. the same way a tree or a flower will grow towards the sun. the same way a human eats and drinks and breathes to fuel the chemistry that powers us. the same way a stone seeks to return to the earth.
the fire and fuel in a flame are in a dialectical relationship, the fuel may 'predominate' (be more 'fundamental' in some sense) in much the same way that the 'base' is more fundamental than the 'superstructure', yet the superstructure can shape the base in its own ways, it is a two way relationship even if the superstructure depends on the base. asymmetric dialectical relationships like this are what drive dialectical motion, the way that the matter/antimatter imbalance early in the universe (in matter's favor) determined our current unstable/changing matter-dominated world, rather than creating a perfectly stable unchanging empty eternity where matter and antimatter annihilated each other completely.
The day will come when the unsolved questions we have will be obvious and elementary. The Reimann Zeta Function? Yeah of course all primes lie within the critical line. Quantum Gravity? I learned that in the 10th grade. Why are basically all amino acids left-handed? What didn't you read your science textbook in grade school? Although fire is a pretty well understood phenomena, the fact that it's still pretty mysterious to people is okay by me.
That people think of fire as a thing that spreads in order to find more material to feed on rather than a quality of a given object dependent on certain material conditions isn't too surprising, it works well enough for most people in most scenarios they would encounter. It would be nice if people had a more dialectical understanding of the physical sciences but that's in a long list of things that I wish could change about people.
absolutely not. 99% of yankkkees have gone out of their way for decades to avoid grappling intellectually with anything, and especially with material conditions
Death to America
A Reddit link was detected in your comment. Here are links to the same location on alternative frontends that protect your privacy.