Remembering That Time The Soviets Pulled A 1:1 Recreation Of A B-29 (pictured) Out Of Their Asses, Slapped

Taxes?

ICELANDIC CANNOT BE REAL BRO-

SO MUCH FOR IT BEING IMPOSSIBLE TO READ IT'S STILL EASEIR THAN SWEDISH

"hænder kniv i dig og hitter ikke" like sure it doesn't WORK in Danish Grammar but if you said this to someone they would understand it. The nordic unity is real.

[throws a meat cleaver at you and misses] [throws a meat cleaver at you and misses] [throws a meat cleaver at you and misses] Dude stay still jesus christ [throws a meat cleaver at you and misses] [throws a meat cleaver at you and misses] [throws a meat cleaver at you and misses]

Pictures like these keep me alive.

The thought that they are out there, waiting to be experienced.

If I'm ever asking myself "why am I alive?", I tell myself "To see places like these"

Moral duty.

"I do not believe in God, I believe in humans." This is usually what I say when people ask me if I'm religious, and there is meaning behind it. Religion is many things, but it is not neccesarry for humans. Most organised religions make a great deal out of the idea that we need to be good to each other, usually with the promise of a blissful heaving and/or the threat of a miserable hell. I do not believe such a sentiment, but moreover...

I do not believe we need a reason to be good.

Stoicism is sometimes described as 'positive nihilism' and that really shines here. I do not believe there will be consequences for our actions. I do not believe there needs to be. Because our actions will be judged, and are judged, by ourselves. And while there may be a heaven and hell, I do know for sure that I have a life, right now, so trying to make THAT a good experience is definitely worth it.

We have a moral duty to do good. To do our best. This moral duty transends.... absoloutely jack squat. This moral duty is one that we owe to ourselves, the 'promise' being that we can die at peace with our life choices, and the 'threat' being that we die with regrets. Personally, the thought of dying with regrets isn't even that scary, though I do go to great lengths to avoid it. But I know that if tomorrow was my last day, I would not have any real regrets (though my early passing would be regrettable).

Does this mean religion is total bs? No, not really. (i pressed post like the moron i am, editing in the remainder of the post now)

But Kant said "Do good things because they are good" and that is all you need to get started. If you find yourself asking why you are doing this, tell yourself: "because its good" and then do it.

Finally, we are about to go to some confusing places. See, the reason you do good things for good reasons is actually... inherently egotistical. You do it to feel good about yourself! This is a kinda nihilistic thing to think about, but I'll tell you how I rationally came to terms with it: A person is ONE person. So all that truly matters to that person is them being happy, satisfied, loved. Now, when you do what's best for society, you give up happiness but fortify your satisfaction and love, both recieved and given. How does any of it make sense? Well, here it is, straight from Niels Overgaard himself: "You are both the most and the least important person in the universe." What this means is that every action you take should, at the end of the day, go towards making you a happier, more complete person, but that you should recognise that being humble and treating yourself like the least important person in any social situation. This has some complex social implications which I won't go over right now, but just understand that you love yourself because litterally everything you do, you do to be either a happier, or a more complete person, however difficult that may be to believe.

With that, I love you all - Anthony

We force their prices down under the threat of murder and re-animation. Imagine just how horrible that really is - being torn apart alive, just to (unwillingly) be 'cured' back into a form capable of trading. And your protectors, the golems? Their villager friends are forced to build them under slave-like conditions, so that we can remelt them into usable iron. Villagers live in sustainable, small communities all until WE come into the picture with our swords and industrial machinery.

But the bitter, awful truth? The villagers are evil beings too. They have banished thousands of their own, hence the pillager/evoker/vindicator/witches (less sure about the witches, as they are shown to live alone). These people are forced to gather together, creating huge mansions where they practice the occult an an attempt to get on decent terms with otherwise hostile mobs. Ever thought about why woodland mansions are so rare, yet villages so common? The woodland mansions also contain many... shall we say, observations, about the world. The inhabitants are men of science and knowledge, pursuing magic and truth. They may be evil, but they are the closest thing to the player in game. And they are only evil because of the villagers. At the end of the day, the Player will annihalate mansions and enslave villagers (sometimes even enslaving vindicators for fun, as they arent very useful for work). The vindicators (and gang) know this. They know of the Player's evil. That's why they are hostile, and why pillager patrols will lock eyes with the player even if they are far enough away that the Player is not a threat (no other hostile mob will look at the player without taking some action like attacking, fleeing, or whatever).

So why do we view Illigers, who keep to themselves in their faraway mansions deep in forests, as evil, while villagers, who have doomed them to this fate and refute all technological progress past mastering their own limited trade, are considered good?

It's simple. The villigers are useful to us. They give us things that we want. That's why we 'protect' them, so that they can make us more powerful. Ever noticed how a raid can only ever happen if YOU enter a village with a bad omen? Neither pillagers nor illigers want to harm the villages themselves. They are trying, in desperation, to halt the Players progress and save themselves. That's why if you leave the raid and come back, they will just have killed everyone, then gone home.

Actually, thinking it over, a big part of what the evokers search for is eternal life, right? They create vexes out of thin air but they can't make them last. Maybe that's why they imprison allays, to study them. Anyways, they have somewhat succeeded? They have totems that can reverse death, but they can't seem to use them (given that they die as normal and instead drop the totem on the ground). But the player can. The player can still die, but he (btw i'm calling the player a he cuz the default skin in Steve) respawns. And his progress remains. For some reason, the Player is beyond death itself. And interestingly, Zombies and Skeletons always look like players (zombies do occasionally spawn as villagers, but rarely). Even the dead version of players still walk around, their flesh rotting and resporatory system unable to breathe without creating a hissing sound. They are also capable, in theory, to equip any item, if it's put into their hands. The same goes for armor. Even skeletons, beings that have no flesh living tissue, walk around. They are able to use a bow, and are scarily fast when they aren't aiming. The player is so far beyond death that even his own decaying or decayed bodies roam around and interact with the world around them.

Absolutely hate it when minecraft stories portray villagers as stupid/inferior to the player/s 👎👎👎👎👎 Big thumbs down👎

On Sisyphus (And why Camus imagines him happy)

The story of Sisyphus is one that hits particularly close to home, and I'm sure I don't need to explain what it's about.

Similarly, Albert Camus' interpritation of the story, the one that ends with "One must imagine Sisyphus happy" has become pretty famous too, albiet more of a meme. There's a lot to unpack here, but I litterally have nothing better to do, so let's find out why Sisyphus is one lucky guy.

Sisyphus attempts to outsmart the gods, and as punishment, he must roll a boulder up a hill, knowing that it will roll back down once he reaches the top. Not only is that pretty funny, it also seems disgustingly similar to how modern life works. Doing laundry, waiting for the weekend, you name it.

It is a common thought that these things are tedious and eat up our limited time on earth, thus making us miserable. With that mindset, you would imagine Sisyphus as the most miserable human on earth. After all, he has been condemned to spending the rest of his life only working a menial task without any reward or meaning with the task at hand.

This was undoubtedly what the gods had in mind when they handed out this punishment, but Camus claims that it isn't all that bad. Personally, the line in "The Myth of Sisyphus" (which is the essay Camus wrote on the matter) that sticks with me the most is: "One always finds [their] burden", which I try to remember before I make a decision that supposedly will make my life easier.

After all, the people wealth large enough to never have to partake in work or laundry or any of these things do not enjoy a perpetual state of bliss and unconcern (unconcern is apperently a word). Their burdens simply lie elsewhere.

What am I getting at with all this? Well, I'm saying that, provided he was given enough time to accept his situation, Sisyphus wouldn't actually be happier if he was one day let back into the world and relieved of his boulder hauling duties. He would probably be happy for a while, but he would eventually find his burden, and go back to hauling a now metaphorical boulder.

So far we've established why Sisyphus would be equally miserable with or without his boulder, but why then is Sisyphus supposed to be happy?

Well, it basically boils down to a misleading segway. See, Sisyphus doesn't have to be miserable when he hauls that shitty boulder. It sounds insane, and Camus even states the absurdity of it. But if Sisyphus wanted to defy the gods one last time, could he? Could he end up happier than before he even got his punishment and end up with the last laugh? Yes, he could, and here's how.

The key is not to recognise the abusrdity of the situation. Instead of thinking about what a waste of time and how meaningless this task is, Sisyphus must instead do the opposite: Attempt to do the task to his absoloute best ability, without yielding to the idea that this task is, inherently, meaningless.

Should he succeed in this fundemental rework of his way of thinking, he will start enjoying the work. See, humans have a deep need to do a good job. When you procrastinate, or cut corners, or whatever, you will feel a tiny hit of misery (probably shame). That's just how we work. But the opposite applies too. If you truly commit to your task, no matter how meaningless or ineffecient it is, you will get a tiny reward.

If Sisyphus decides to push that boulder with all his might, every day, knowing damn well it will roll down again, he will be happy. He has defied his own misery, and found meaning in the most meaningless of tasks. And when the boulder rolls down, he will breathe a satisfied sigh, and walk back down to start pushing again.

Sounds pretty absurd, huh? One must imagine the people that are free to do menial tasks everyday happy? Well, you are free to imagine anyone any way you like. But I certainly imagine Sisyphus happy, along with any garbage worker and bus driver that find joy in their work.

"How do you do, fellow alligators"

There's a reason for that, you know. When the body is near death, the brain decides that ultimately, it wants to not die, and so it goes into a special, extremely harmful state where it presses every body on the keyboard and releases as many positive chemicals it can, to try and keep itself awake. What you are doing is effectively the same as huffing gasoline. You are getting high on your body's very last survival mechanism to try and prevent a total organ shutdown. And you enjoy it.

if u starve for long enough u start feeling like ur high sometimes its my fav thing ever

Why I think self-pity is the bane of our joy

Stoicism is an old philosophy which is only now starting to have a modern rennecaince with new ideas and concepts. This is great, because it allows us to develop brand new doctrine to fit the world around us, and terrible, because it means we don't have the answer for everything. However, one of the things that are being explored the most as of now is self-pity. This is a very prevalent state of mind in the western world, where it has become so common to complain about the small things that it can seem almost competitive.

Our ability to complain has combined with our ever-rising standard of living to create cartoonish complaints that we are gasping to share with the world around us, who are trying to voice their complaints. As Vers writes: "Alle kalder ud, men ingen gider at svare" (Everybody needs to be heard, but nobody is willing to listen). This has lead Neils Overgaard, a man I deeply respect and look up to, to create what he calls the "immigrant test": Basically, you take whatever thing is bothering you in the moment, and you imagine that you have to tell it to a mother of 5 children who has left Sudan, crossed the Sahara, been illegally exported across the Mediterranean, and finally landed in Greece, ready to live out the rest of her life at the lowest bottom of our society. Your task is now to look her in the eyes, and tell her about the problem that is letting you down, and if you think you can do that, THEN it is worth thinking about.

Self-pity is not the same as complaining, though. I would argue that self-pity is what happens when you systematically feel rightious to complain and the world around you validates this feeling. And what you're doing on a psychological level is train your mind to focus on the negatives and hold on to them, so that you can pass them on to others. Surely, my friends, a brain that only notices and focuses on the bad things is not a happy one, right?

So how do YOU avoid self-pity and the need to complain in general? Well, you're not out of options (though it may be tempting to say that you are). In this post, my advice will be to FORTIFY. Back in the day, people used to say "man up", but that's kinda turned into a toxic thing that means "push it down", and it's also only for men. So now we have the new word "fortify", which is much better. How do you fortify? That's up to you, but it should ultimately make you a more emotionally resilient person. Focusing on the next step can be a great way of fortifying, for example:

Your car breaks down on your way to work. You are going to be late. Do you: A. Have your mood be ruined over the situation, complain to your boss when they ask you why you are late, and get pissy when you get the repair bill? B. Accept that the situation is out of your hands, focus on getting your car towed and finding another way to get to work, and calmly explain to your boss that your car broke down and you still showed up ready to work?

It's entirely up to you, but option B is not only a calmer, more pleasant way to handle the situation, but it also makes you a more resilient being in the future, because your brain will recognise your handling of the situation and be calmer the next time something unpredictable comes up, thus marking the start of a good spiral.

There will be more in the next post, to make it easier to digest.

Love you all! - Anthony

Being happy isn't hard, letting go of the idea that you need to be happy is.

Ironically, you are happier when you accept you can't be happy all the time and it is okay to be neutral or even sad for long periods of time.

Nothing is worse than being anxious that you're wasting your life being sad, when in reality your life is being wasted on WORRYING about being sad. All emotions are pure, no feelings are wrong.

Enjoy the good times, appreciate the rest.