[Other voices:] The cycle of Durianrider-style defamation continues.

(1) Some guy got tens of thousands of views for his short video clips calling her a Neo-Nazi.
(2) Perhaps for this reason (i.e., motivated by view-counts) he then doubled down and tried to further back up these accusations over a period of about a year.
(3) Following the same pattern whereby Durianrider encouraged members of his audience to take action against me, members of this guy's audience managed to get this married couple's (allegedly Neo-Nazi) "retreat" canceled, managed to get them kicked off of some neo-pagan website they'd been participating in, and she vaguely claims she and her husband are now considering moving into a new house "for safety reasons" —i.e., because of this obloquy.
(4) She admits that she is personal friends with Evelina Hahne (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evelina_Hahne) who is a member (or leader) of a tiny political party called Alternative for Sweden (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_for_Sweden) but insists that she is not involved with politics in any way herself. This waffling reveals that the extent to which she actually is a Neo-Nazi is irrelevant: the overweening question is merely of the consequences of someone calling her a Neo-Nazi on social media.

It's an imperfect parallel, but absolutely nobody was interested in what my sex life actually was when Durianrider made accusations against me (nobody even asked me about that in interviews at the time)… the controversy exclusively concerned the consequences of the allegations about my sex life being made (for an audience of hundreds of thousands of idiots looking for an excuse to punish someone for their perceived moral inferiority).

The glorification of the Vikings (their history, their religion, their politics) overlaps with Neo-Nazi ideology to an even greater extent than the study of Ancient Rome. In my own idiom, it is all a little too Golden Axe for its own good.

I remarked to a friend recently that one of my reasons for not learning one of those languages is that it would inevitably draw me into the debunking of myths that now glorify the Vikings in retrospect. I admit, it is not too late for me to change my mind and start learning Finnish, but the average Finn would be truly horrified to hear what I have to say about the Vikings, generally, and about Viking religion, specifically.

I'm reminded of Schopenhauer's commentary on the culture of fighting duels in Europe: "the point of honor" had nothing to do with whether or not the accusation was true, but merely whether or not the other man would dare to say it. The medieval logic was, "If you dare to say this about me publicly, these are the consequences" —true or false. The fact that one man had slept with another man's wife, for example, was of no significance: the point of honor to be addressed was that one man insulted the other by saying that he had done so.

We also have an unresolved question of "taking responsibility for our own political views" —past, present and future. What does it mean for a Communist to take responsibility for being a Communist, today? What does it mean for us to say that we have freedom of speech, and freedom to support any political party we may choose, if the consequences for choosing an unpopular party entail denunciation, obloquy, unemployability or even death?

Communism, although dangerous, has become the ideology of foppish and effete elites —so much so that it's hard to take it seriously. Neo-Nazism, by contrast, has become the ideology of the ignorant, especially in prisons. I don't think anyone knows, now, what "taking it seriously" would really mean. Many mainstream religions are equally dangerous, or even more so, and yet nobody takes atheism seriously. We cannot really articulate the danger and difficulty of these political ideologies without taking nihilism seriously. These are illnesses that cannot be properly perceived without the contrast provided by their antidotes.

It's not about sex: how HBO will ruin Season 3 of HOTD.

You may not believe me, but there are a few people in the audience who have been waiting since 2022 for this. Trust me, I've had messages from them. ;-)

LINK: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usmhWltm1hc

Envy is Information You Can Work With.

Google tells me I'm the first person to use the phrase, "Envy is Information You Can Work With". Hard to believe someone hasn't said it before, frankly.

• If you want to do 200 push-ups today, you can do it.
• If you want to start studying a new language today, you can do it.
• If you want to do humanitarian work, you can do it.
• Reading Aristotle or Thucydides? What's stopping you?

You can take this as positive encouragement OR NOT. If you respond so negatively to the suggestion that there's a better person you could be five years from now, if you figure out what kind of person you want to be and do the work, your response tells me something about you: reacting so negatively to these suggestions doesn't tell the world anything about me —it's neither a critique of the advice, nor of the person giving it.

Debunking the Dunning Kruger Effect: Nihilism and Religious Attitudes Disguised as Science.

The Science of Stupidity.

Link to the Youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRK-njQIiWw

Link to the podcast version: https://open.spotify.com/episode/7zivATFIzj1fJ2q5GxQA6I

^ This is Spotify, but if you search around you can find the same podcast episode on every other major platform… wherever podcasts are "sold".

It'll make a writer out of me. This spinal injury. ;-)

If this is your political philosophy, live your life accordingly.

Possibly foreshadowing my (long awaited?) return to podcasting about "the philosophy of" ASOIAF and its adaptations. Quite possibly.

LINK: https://youtu.be/BKSygw-xqR4

A Lottery: Elite Education in the Western World.

This one has interesting connections to what I've published in all three books, so far: (1) No More Manifestos, obviously, (2) Future of an Illusion, cryptically, and (3) Blood in the Snow, positively esoterically. Nobody will recognize what I'm doing (in these decades) as the proposal of a new kind of "philosophy of education"… BUT IT IS. ;-)

And this is now on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, etc., as never before.

LINK: https://open.spotify.com/episode/4sM3mWvKQp7lCPs90hVrBI

Ocean acidification update: yes, this is the end of the world.

Quote,

"Earth’s oceans have become approximately 30% more acidic since the industrial revolution began more than 200 years ago… Analyses of coral skeletons from the past century revealed that CO2 has been accumulating in North American waters faster than in the atmosphere, driving rapid acidification."

Digression: you may not be aware that the ocean both absorbs and also emits carbon dioxide, with the ("net") balance between the two changing due to a variety of bizarre factors… such as how much wind is stirring up "deep" (relatively high-carbon) water in the so-called "cold tongue" of the South Pacific. Yes, in case you hadn't noticed that 21st century rappers have run out of endearing stage names, the English language has become so depleted that we have had to resort to "cold tongue" as jargon.

"The ocean becomes more acidified when carbon dioxide dissolves to form an acid that releases hydrogen and bicarbonate ions, lowering the water’s pH level… Organic matter — dead plants and animals — sinks to the bottom of the ocean, where it decomposes and releases carbon dioxide back into the water. Upwelling surfaces this CO2 rich water, increasing the acidity of subsurface and surface zones."

Could we propose a total ban on the idiom "carbon rich"? This use of the adjective rich for anything other than vegan chocolate pudding substitutes… ?

"Between 1888 and 2020, coral skeletons indicate that CO2 in seawater increased at a rate that outpaced the addition of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. [Emphasis added —EM] The magnitude of acidification was also higher 100 to 200 meters below the surface, even though ocean acidification is typically characterized as a surface process."

Here's the point at which I disagree with the article being quoted:

"'This is no time for nihilism. The ocean is not destroyed,' …"

On the contrary, the time for nihilism is now. Right now. Before it's too late.

You are your addictions: you are the excuses you've made for yourself.

[And now, a few new words added in 2026:]

"Addiction" has become a socially acceptable way to explain evil, cruel and malicious behavior —it is more socially acceptable to explain behavior as "an addiction" rather than even inquiring into the possibility of true evil, cruelty and malice.

Of course, there are other categories to consider: rather than dealing with laziness and self-indulgence, for example, it would be more socially acceptable to explain the given behavior as "an addiction".

Why is it socially acceptable? (1) The concept of addiction is separate from the identity of the addict, whereas other personal characteristics are not. (2) This separation between addiction and identity implies the possibility of a treatment or cure: we are willing to assume that the addiction can be removed while the addict remains. (3) The very idea of addiction reduces personal responsibility and dilutes the concept of the motive cause.

If someone becomes a prostitute "for an addiction" or "because of an addiction" we are expected (culturally) to avoid questioning any other motivations or (incurable) personal characteristics that created this situation; even with murder, the crime is thought of in a totally different way as soon as the concept of addiction is involved.

Accomplishing nothing in particular over several years: if this is explained as the result of "an addiction" (to video games, to pornography, or both, for example) we avoid thinking through the real motivations and questions of character that created the situation —even if it is a situation unlikely to be investigated as thoroughly as the scene of a murder or the sudden choice to change careers and become a prostitute.

Addiction is a category that prevents clear thinking about the addict and the decisions they make. The possibility that the video game addict may be an evil person, with truly dark and terrible motivations for the decisions they make, and the notion that they should be held responsible, barely emerges from the smokescreen created as soon as the behavior is placed in this category.

At this moment, I have a very serious spinal injury: either it can be cured or it cannot, either I can recover or I cannot. I am my spinal injury. I am my disability. There is no real separation between the two of us. The whole moral character of the problem changes if I claim that the spinal injury is a result of an addiction. Perhaps an addiction to exercise at the gym, for example. Now we have a very different question: either I can overcome the addiction or I cannot. And now we all imagine that the addiction is something very different from the person who suffers from it, as a parasite is different from the host that carries it, and so on.

"The excuses are harder to quit than the thing itself" has been my catchphrase for many years: the very concept of addiction is a kind of excuse-making mechanism. I do not think there is a falsifiable, scientific reality to "pornography addiction" in the same sense that there is a falsifiable, scientific reality to my spinal injury —nor in the same sense that there's a falsifiable, scientific reality to diabetes. If it doesn't show up on an x-ray or a blood test, it doesn't exist.

Yeah. That's nihilism, baby. I don't care if your therapist told you that you're still some wonderful person "underneath" your addiction, as if it were a mask you could remove: in this case, I do not believe in the distinction between the mask and the face. I am my spinal injury, and you are your addictions: you are the excuses you've made for yourself.

Jaclyn Glenn's legal team demands the deletion of an old blog post that barely mentions her existence.

Yes, the title was long enough already, but I could add the adjective Estonian in there: it's not every day that I get threatening emails from law firms in Estonia… or, if it is, I really haven't been paying attention to… uh… "fan mail" lately.

Here is the original text of the blog post (that presumably nobody will remember) still visible via "the wayback machine" on archive dot org. Thereafter, you'll see the… law firm's attempt to intimidate me.

——————————

[Sunday, January 2nd, 2022]

Q&A;: What About Pornography? (Will There Be "Quit Porn" Videos on ABLC?)

Hey Eisel,

Thanks for your awesome videos on video games. I was considering buying a Nintendo Switch but will now never buy one after your many videos on video games and Nintendo products. Can you make similar related videos on people having ruining their lives with porn and such? I think that's the last hurdle I have for sobriety really, I don't drink, don't smoke, no video games, no meat or animal products, but there is still porn that is prevalent in my life.

Your videos that show people who really effed themselves by falling into their addictions and then your commentary on those, really drives home the message for these other things.

Also I did want fame and wealth too, but that's not the end goal anymore. You're right that I should make the effort in trying out things just for the sake of doing them, even if I end up as a failure in them and nothing comes about it, the fact that I tried is meaningful enough, more meaningful than the success ever would be. I don't want to end up like those "successful" people who do nothing but waste their lives all day.

Thanks

———[My reply ensues.]———

Hi _________,

I'm really "a moderate" on both of these issues, but I'm perceived as an extremist, because we live in such an immoderate culture.

From my biased perspective, is it possible to play SOME video games? My honest belief (applied to myself and my daughter) is, "yes", but I keep having encounters with particular examples of people who are so susceptible to addictive behavior that it seems the answer may be "no" --i.e., I may be rather too moderate (although I'm perceived as extreme in my critique of video games).

To give an example, I often point to "Pacman C.E." as a positive example of a game that can be played for a maximum of five minutes (this exists as an 8-bit Famicom cartridge, but is primarily played on emulators).

However, I've received emails from people who were SERIOUSLY ADDICTED to games that were even more simplistic than that --games that lasted two or three minutes that they would play, repetitiously, for many hours.

Now, as you know, I'm living in a country and culture where the vast majority of people think it's totally acceptable for adult men to spend 20 hours per week playing video games --so I'm perceived as an extremist in any case.

So, by the same token, at what point is pornography a problem for people?

If we're talking about 5 minutes here and there (say, 35 minutes per week, even if not distributed evenly as 5 minutes per day), then I really don't see the problem.

And it's very difficult for me to imagine anyone being stupid enough to spend hours watching porn (it's just fundamentally boring, IMHO).  It's very difficult for me to imagine porn as an addictive behavior.

Human sexuality is innate, curiosity is innate, and being curious about what other people look like naked (etc.) seems to me anodyne enough --so I do not put pornography in the same category as video games (nor in the same category as gambling).

Do people ruin their lives watching pornography?

Do people fail courses in university because they're spending too much time watching pornography?

The equivalent, for video games, is at epidemic levels: a large percentage of high school and university students are either failing in school, or learning nothing in school while passing, precisely because of video games.  However, is there a significant percentage of people ruining their lives (in this same way) by spending a similar number of hours watching pornography?

How many people per year get fired from their jobs because they stayed awake all night watching pornography?  (The equivalent does indeed happen with video games, stereotypically with MMORPGS.)

So, in short, I'm skeptical that pornography really presents the same kind of cultural problem (as video game playing).

The counter-examples I have seen are either (1) people who were addicted to drugs (e.g., a meth addict who would watch pornography for many hours, but it was clearly meth --not porn-- that was the fundamental problem), and (2) people who were seriously mentally disabled (and/or insane) who would have had many of the same problems without pornography in their lives.

So, honestly, my perception is that the inclusion of pornography in the same category as video games may be "a false equivalency".

——————————

Details of the original claim are included below to help you better understand and respond to the claim against you.

Name of claimant: Ahmet Teke

Rightsholder represented: Rulta OU

Description of claim: To Whom It May Concern, We are writing to you as Rulta OÜ, a copyright protection company resident at Harju maakond, Tallinn, Kesklinna linnaosa, Tartu mnt 67/1-13b, 10115 Estonia, with the registration code 14640476 in Tartu County Court Registration Department, the duly authorized representatives of Jaclyn Glenn ("The Client"), the sole owner and the user of the alias/pseudonym/stage name/username/sobriquet/alternative name "Jaclyn Glenn". It has come to our attention that the below-stated URLs of your website contains copyrighted content originally belongs