OBS Chapter 2299
Chapter 2299
Chapter 2299
Vostagg explained everything very clearly.
Vandall understood.
Emotionally, he was supportive. Sif was his friend, and from that perspective, he didn't want anything to really happen to her.
Secondly, he had never really thought about what Vostagg said before.
Vanaheim… to be honest, it's a place that's both familiar and unfamiliar to most Asgardians. Firstly, their origins are well-known; Asgardians and Vanaheimers are essentially of the same origin and share similar cultures. Secondly, the other side is quite powerful.
Therefore, the Asgardians are quite familiar with Vanaheim.
As for being unfamiliar with something... that's a problem for the Asgardians themselves.
That's the problem with the Asgardians... There's nothing we can do, Asgard is just too blessed.
When Asgard was built, the first two god-kings considered everything they could think of. They were afraid that their descendants would suffer, so they left almost everything the best to their descendants, resulting in Asgard being built into a paradise... Of course, this also owes to the generous contributions of many cosmic civilizations.
what?
Why are you so generous?
Damn, have you forgotten what Asgard's primary role is?
They're pirates!
To put it simply, don't be fooled by Asgard's current appearance of a glorious civilization. In reality, every single blade of grass and every tree in Asgard was stolen!
The most typical example is Asgard's original foundation, the very land beneath their feet, which they seized. They directly destroyed a planet and took over its continents!
All the necessary sunlight, air, and water were stolen.
There was nothing they could do; although Asgard were gods, they didn't actually have the legendary ability to create the world.
Like their close relatives, they are essentially predatory civilizations.
Predatory civilizations share a common trait: the pursuit of absolute military superiority. This means they demand that their military strength exceed the combined strength of all other powers, including even their allies. For example, before the Second Greco-Persian War in 480 BC, ancient Athens possessed 147 warships, while all other city-states combined had only 131. During the height of the British Empire, their shipbuilding plan was that for every capital ship possessed by any other industrialized nation, Britain would have a corresponding capital ship. In other words, Britain's total number of capital ships was greater than or equal to the combined total of all other nations. The United States alone spends more on its military than the combined military spending of the nine countries ranked second to tenth globally, seven of which are allies of the United States. One might question why all predatory civilizations consistently demand absolute military superiority; isn't relative military superiority sufficient? For instance, if the leading power has 40 capital ships, the second has 30, and the third has 20, then the leading power maintains a relative military advantage capable of defeating any of the others. However, predatory civilizations don't think about things that way. They consider that if the strongest power fights the second-strongest, with 40 capital ships against 30, and 15 ships remain after the battle, then the original third-strongest with 20 ships becomes the new strongest, and the old strongest becomes second (the ancestors of the British Empire must have been furious with Churchill). Therefore, the absolute military advantage that predatory civilizations pursue is that their strength remains the greatest even after eliminating everyone else.
Some may still wonder, even with a relative military advantage, why do all predatory civilizations pursue absolute military superiority—one that can even suppress their allies—when the dominant civilization with 40 capital ships can unite with the third-largest with 20?
As we mentioned earlier, all empires ruled by packs of predators will ultimately collapse due to the unchecked and ever-growing greed of these packs. The targets of predatory civilizations include their own citizens, military allies, and other nations. Ancient Athens is the earliest example of a predatory civilization. At that time, there was less concealment and sophistication, so we can use Ancient Athens as an example for analysis: The allied city-states of Ancient Athens can be divided into two main categories: the first category includes allies that provided troops (partners in external raids); the second category includes allied states that provided tribute and non-alliance targets for raiding. Ancient Athens' modus operandi was to plunder other nations together with its military allies. The spoils were divided among the pack, followed by a share among its own citizens, and the remainder was distributed among its military allies. It's important to note that while predatory civilizations share among their own citizens and military allies, this doesn't mean they won't plunder them; it simply means their methods are more subtle and covert. As predatory civilizations expand, they will eventually encounter resource depletion or untouchable obstacles, like Sparta or China today. To satisfy their insatiable greed, the pack will turn its blades on former allies and ultimately, their own people. Ready-made examples are right before our eyes: look at the EU's soaring energy prices and collapsing Euro, and then at the US's enormous profits in finance, military, and energy conglomerates. It's clear that the US's actions are aimed at the EU. The military allies of predatory civilizations aren't stupid either. They know they are being exploited, but they tolerate it for now, as long as the leader is strong and they can at least get a share. At the same time, they understand they are like dogs in a primitive hunting tribe: when prey is plentiful, they have bones to gnaw on, but when winter comes and food is scarce, they will be killed by their masters. Therefore, once the leader shows signs of weakness, they are not hesitant to bare their fangs, vying for a chance to become the leader themselves. Therefore, for a predatory civilization, everyone is a target of plunder, everyone is an enemy, and they must maintain an absolute military advantage over everyone, including allies.
The next question is whether it is possible for a predatory civilization to transform into a productive civilization in order to end this vicious cycle?
The answer is yes, it's possible, but extremely difficult and rare. For a maritime, predatory civilization like ancient Athens, there hasn't been one to date. For example, Britain was once the world's factory, with a very strong industrial foundation. However, after World War II, British industry declined continuously and was quickly surpassed by Germany, which was reduced to ruins. The British complained that the Germans' factories were all destroyed, so their new factories used new machines, and their old factories and machines couldn't compete, hence their industrial decline. Anyone in the know can tell this is utter nonsense. Incidentally, making things up is a traditional skill of the Onssa (a term referring to a specific type of civilization), something other countries simply can't match. An old factory can gradually upgrade and replace its machines with new ones. Even during the replacement process, the old machines can still contribute some production capacity and profits, so the financial and risk pressures are much greater than with a new factory. They also have existing skilled workers, sales channels, and market share—it's much easier than starting a new factory from scratch. The real reason is that even after Britain lost its leading position in World War II, it remained a predatory civilization, albeit in a more covert form through financial and technological plunder. Nearly a century later, London remains the world's second-largest financial center, second only to New York. Predatory behavior inherently rejects productive activity. Creating wealth through production is simply too arduous and exhausting. Nations accustomed to easily acquiring enormous wealth through plunder—not just wolves, but also the lambs and fodder within a predatory civilization—are unlikely to engage in arduous, low-profit productive work.
Therefore, America's so-called "reindustrialization" is a joke.
It's impossible for me to work; I'll never work in my life.
As mentioned earlier, a predatory civilization coupled with wolf pack rule is terrifying during its expansion phase. They acquire enormous wealth through plunder, use that wealth to build a more powerful army, and that more powerful army can plunder even more wealth... It's a snowball effect of rapid development.
However, predatory civilizations face an inescapable dilemma: all ecosystems must be pyramid-shaped, meaning the number of provider sheep must far exceed the number of predator wolves. A wolf needs ten or even a hundred sheep to sustain itself, while a wolf with only one sheep is destined for destruction. As predatory civilizations rapidly plunder, they eventually reach a point of zero marginal utility. All the fat sheep to plunder have been taken; the remaining sheep are either scarce and weak, or too tough to plunder, making further raiding unprofitable. What do the wolves do then? Control their appetite? Only foolish wolves would do that. Clever wolves will plunder even more, their knives not only targeting external enemies but also their own prey and allies, taking as much as they can. At this point, it's no longer just greed at play; it's about accumulating wealth before collapse, increasing their chances of survival. Therefore, even if a predatory civilization maintains absolute military superiority, the entire system will gradually collapse as its productivity is exhausted. This is inherent to the structure of a wolf-dominated predatory civilization and is unavoidable. However, in history, we can see that predatory civilizations, in their decline from their peak, often encounter a formidable obstacle they can no longer exploit. This is because the provider always possesses greater productivity than the predator. The party with greater productivity is more likely to evolve a powerful resister. This resister doesn't even need to be as powerful as the predatory civilization; just the ability to resist is enough to trigger fear in the predatory civilization. A familiar scenario in Chinese history is that after a country or regime suffers a defeat in a foreign war, it returns to its former glory, rebuilding its strength and preparing for war, and avenging itself ten or even a century later. This is because China has always been a productive civilization. Only productive civilizations possess this resilience, as their wealth and productivity come from internal sources, not from external plunder. Predatory civilizations, on the other hand, derive their wealth primarily from external plunder. After a crucial defeat in World War I, all previously submissive nations become unwilling to be plundered, even if they remain weaker than the dominant power. They know that the dominant power can no longer afford to deplete its weakened military strength. Reduced plundering profits lead to a lack of funds for military development, and a weakened military further reduces the benefits of plunder. The more rapid the snowballing growth of a predatory civilization during its expansion phase, the more violent its current avalanche-like collapse. When a predatory civilization reaches this stage, it no longer dares to directly confront challengers, so it resorts to its traditional disruptive tactics, inciting allies and subordinates to engage in confrontation. However, while disruptive tactics are disgusting, they're not exactly fun either.
In fact, one of the reasons why Odin was so violent back then was this.
Of course, Odin did not form a complete logical chain, but he was very clear that Asgard could not continue with its previous pattern.
But as mentioned above, transformation is never that simple.
Otherwise, so many people wouldn't have followed Hela's rebellion; the benefits were simply too great.
Many people fundamentally disagreed with Odin's reform ideas. In this situation, there was no other option but a brutal purge. In fact, one could argue that the reason Hela's rebellion resulted in such devastating losses was essentially Odin settling scores!
Those who did not acknowledge Odin either joined Hela in the rebellion or were sent by Odin to confront the rebels head-on!
To put it bluntly, they're just going to their deaths!
Including Valkyries!
That's right. Among Odin's most loyal Valkyrie forces, there were many who actually opposed Odin's transformation. After all, Asgard had always been this way, so why change?
This also explains why Odin, seemingly out of his mind, sent the Valkyries to face Hela alone... Honestly, shouldn't the plan have been for Odin to hold off Hela while the Valkyries and others killed off all of Hela's supporters, and then everyone ganged up on Hela? Why didn't Odin act at the beginning, but waited until all the Valkyries were dead before finally sealing Hela away? Isn't that strange?
If it's to purge all potential opponents, then the logic makes sense!
Hela's rebellion was essentially a bloody purge of the interest groups within Asgard by Odin.
Hela was merely a pawn in his game... It can only be said that Hela's rebellion was absolutely not a mistake!
In a sense, Odin was indeed an excellent monarch.
A ruthless political machine!
If a monarch is a good person... then he's doomed, he's definitely a terrible monarch!
Can a leader who is too morally upright still wield power? Machiavelli, in *The Prince*, offers a chilling answer: while virtue is important, appearing virtuous is even more crucial. In his view, politics is not a moral lesson, but a power game. A successful prince cannot always be kind; he must know when to feign kindness and when to be ruthless. It's not about being a saint, but about surviving and winning. Imagine a leader who only talks about principles but cannot handle complex situations; his morality will quickly become synonymous with weakness. Machiavelli says such a person is unfit to be a prince and may even endanger the state. However, he doesn't advocate utter shamelessness but emphasizes "flexibility." Sometimes, one must learn to be as cunning as a fox and as tough as a lion. Those who outwardly display reverence and morality while secretly calculating are the ones who truly control the situation.
And Odin clearly did a fantastic job!