69 replies to this topic

[steveuk]

Was Churchill a monster for bombing Germany?

You can do better than that.

i think the story of Theon Grayjoy is an example of what could have happened if they'd kept the Targaryens alive. Even with a caring loving environment, even with a man he considered a brother, it took all of 5 seconds for Theon to go on the attack. Or to put it another way, do you think Arya could ever make peace with the Lannisters?

With Tyrion, or with Cersei's sane children? Possibly.

[lj cunningham]

Sending Elia back to Dorne in exhange for her abdication, and fostering Rhaenys, Aegon, and Viserys in the Vale, Winterfell, and Dragonstone, while building a narrative centered around how Aerys had gone mad and HAD to be overthrown might have kept the peace just as well. After all, Dorne, arguably the biggest military power in Westeros, has so far opted against open rebellion. Elia would have birthed Daenerys in Dorne, but her remaining children being hostages to the King and his two most trusted bannermen (Ned and Jon Arryn) would have kept them acquiescent, all the more if Robert gave them Jaime Lannister, the one who actually killed Aerys. Robert killed Rhaegar in single combat, which in Westeros tends to be seen as more "honorable" than assassination.

I'm probably too far in camp Stark to appreciate Tywin's handling of power, but I do believe an honorable exit might have been achieved. Looking to real-world parallels: Following the Restoration, all rebels were pardoned, except the actual regicides. Robert would have been seen as a rebel who slew the crown prince in the field of battle, but only Jaime would have been regarded as a traitor who committed the ultimate crime against the crown. With the Kingslayer delivered to Dorne, Elia and her children get a measure of justice, Sunspear gets behind Robert, and the Lannisters become expendable.

Dorne is actually the least populated of the seven kingdoms and I would think has the smallest group of armed forces. But I could definitely see how this might have worked. But would the Targayeans have grown up and followed Theon's path or dealt with similar daddy issues.

I sent this comment earlier, but Millarworld crashed on me at work...and the server's still not letting me in.

[Christian U]

Was Churchill a monster for bombing Germany?

No, but deliberately killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in the firebombings of Dresden and in other bombing campaigns targeting the population to no strategic effect wasn't the best choice.


Tywin is definitely depicted as morally despicable (which we tend to forgive him because he has other qualities and is quite a fascinating person - even likable, in his own way). He has, as Steve says, peasants and his own people slaughtered on general principle. At no point do we see him in any way concerned about this; he doesn't even have moral scruples (as opposed to Theon, who at least realised he's behaving monstrously).

Edited by Christian U, 16 May 2012 - 06:25 PM.

[Sarah Horrocks]

Suprised there's not more debate about Daenrys. The votes are evenly split on her being the best ruler vs. worst ruler. I think she'd be a great ruler. But I can see how if you've only watched the TV shows, they haven't really colored her in glory, and you don't really get much of a behind the scenes look into her thought processes.

[Ogul]

Yeah, it may be a divide between watchers and readers. I've only just started on the books, a few chapters in, and the first with Dany did give her a little more of a look into her mind, but from the show you just don't get much to redeem her, she seems furiously devoted only to ambition, with a very few incidents that show that she also cares about some people that are very close to her. I think the TV version of the character "beats the spread", would be a better ruler than the bottom half of the list, but I don't think she's the best by far. Actually, that's an interesting thing to note, what is your order? Mine would be:

Tyrion Lannister
Ned Stark
Arya Stark
Robb Stark
Renley Baratheon
Jon Snow
Daenerys Targaryen
Gendry
Sansa Stark
Varys
Littlefinger
Twyin Lannister
Stannis Baratheon
Theon Grayjoy
Jamie Lannister

That's ordered weighing things like moral compass/strength, intelligence and political guile, experience, and ability to command loyalty. The ones at the top excell in all or at least most categories, while those at the bottom, I believe, fail critically in at least one, and possibly all categories, at least as presented on the show thus far.

[Sarah Horrocks]

Why Jon Snow? He knows nothing. I know like Daenrys in the books, you get a better apprecation for him as a leader. But in the shows, he's portrayed as a very pretty sack of bricks. He's extremely naive.

Anyways:

Renly
Mance Rayder(he did get elected by the wildings, so he must be a very impressive man to unite that many disseperate tribes)
Daenrys
Cersei
Tyrion
Tywin
Bran Stark
Robb Stark
Margaery Tyrell
Cat
Stannis
Littlefinger
Varys
The Red Witch
Jaime Lanister
Theon
Joffrey

I didn't rate Arya because I don't think she has any ability to politics whatsoever. Gendry the same. I also didn't rate Ned because he is dead.

For the most part I weighted it to those who had the power and charasima to hold the Iron Throne, because constant war is going to be hard for me as a citizen. I just want to tend my crops.

[Chris D]

I also didn't rate Ned because he is dead.

That's weird. Because so is Renley. Also, you talk about Jon Snow being potrayed as naive in the show vs. in the books, something I believe you might have pointed out about Dany as well, yet Dany ranks high on your list.

Mance Rayder is an interesting choice, but to me he sounds like an anarchist. His rule would be a kind of survival of the fittest sort of deal. Basically sounds like he has the ultimate do what you want attitude. Which is all well and good until you realize it's chaos out there. My list of people who could potentially make good rulers in the future (and I'm going to exclude all people who have currently died on the show, because it's pointless...although if I wasn't going to exclude those people Rhaegar might rank fairly high on my list).

Tyrion (if I ignore that most people seem disgusted by his Imp nature and actually think he's the reason Joffrey is the dick he is)
Bran
Jon Snow
Dany
Robb Stark
Tywin
Margaery
Stanis
Arya (she's great, but she's a fighter not a ruler)
Jamie
Littlefinger
Varys (I trust both him and Littlefinger far less than Jamie)
Theon
Joffrey

Other characters that could be considered if we knew more about them would be Marcella and Tommen. They seem decent enough, but we hardly even know they exist.

[Jim Ohara]

Let's see:

Twyin
Robb
Stannis - these three have experience leading armies and ruling men. Plus they don't hesitate to fight. I know Robb doesn't want the throne, but I'm assuming for this he'd take it. They're hard men suited for hard times.

Jon
Ser Barristion
Ser Jorah
Sansa
Bran - they'd run very peaceful kingdoms, and are pretty much idealistic choices, but they'd need a very peaceful people and that's not always going to be the case. Their personalities suit a more civilized age.

Varys
Margaray
Tyrion
Littlefinger - the schemers who'd have the brains to rule, but I don't think they have the kind nature or the strength of those mentioned previously. Their reigns would be fraught with rebellion and schemes.

Jamie
Arya
Theon
Dany
Mance
Sam - bottom of the pack for me as their personalities are ill suited for such public rule and expectation. Though they'd each make great hands. I think that's an important aspect about leadership, and the people you need around you to help with the things you can't do.

[Sarah Horrocks]

That's weird. Because so is Renley. Also, you talk about Jon Snow being potrayed as naive in the show vs. in the books, something I believe you might have pointed out about Dany as well, yet Dany ranks high on your list.

Good point on Renly. I guess I mean, Ned died last season, so why is he on the list and not Robert Boratheon? Also as for Jon Snow vs. Danaerys--even in the books by this point he's fairly naive. I think Dany is doing fine personally, in the show. The way that she's survived and thrived in the wastelands is more impressive than any leadership Jon has done. Plus she has dragons, which gives her a huge edge on everyone else in the entire arena in terms of power. Dragons are a huge trump card when it comes to being able to hold the throne.

I'd rather the mother of dragons inside my walls, than outside, y'know.

Let's see:

Twyin
Robb
Stannis - these three have experience leading armies and ruling men. Plus they don't hesitate to fight. I know Robb doesn't want the throne, but I'm assuming for this he'd take it. They're hard men suited for hard times.

Jon
Ser Barristion
Ser Jorah
Sansa
Bran - they'd run very peaceful kingdoms, and are pretty much idealistic choices, but they'd need a very peaceful people and that's not always going to be the case. Their personalities suit a more civilized age.

Varys
Margaray
Tyrion
Littlefinger - the schemers who'd have the brains to rule, but I don't think they have the kind nature or the strength of those mentioned previously. Their reigns would be fraught with rebellion and schemes.

Jamie
Arya
Theon
Dany
Mance
Sam - bottom of the pack for me as their personalities are ill suited for such public rule and expectation. Though they'd each make great hands. I think that's an important aspect about leadership, and the people you need around you to help with the things you can't do.

Why is Mance at the bottom of your list? He's already "King beyond the Wall", which is a harder more earned title than the Iron Throne. The iron throne is probably a cake walk compared to uniting the wildlings. Plus Mance would bring freedom/women's rights to the lands. So as a citizen that's a huge bonus for me.

Also Mance leads a huge army by all indications.

Edited by Sarah Velez, 17 May 2012 - 08:34 PM.

[Chris D]

Plus Mance would bring freedom/women's rights to the lands. So as a citizen that's a huge bonus for me.

I'm not so sure he would. I know he promotes being free, but I think that means that anybody can rape anyone else, but the offended party is totally free to kill the attacker if they can. I might be wrong, though, that's just how it comes off to me.

[Jim Ohara]

Why is Mance at the bottom of your list? He's already "King beyond the Wall", which is a harder more earned title than the Iron Throne. The iron throne is probably a cake walk compared to uniting the wildlings. Plus Mance would bring freedom/women's rights to the lands. So as a citizen that's a huge bonus for me.

Also Mance leads a huge army by all indications.

Mostly because I think he's the man who would bring democracy throughout the lands. Abolishing lordships, promoting equal rights and the free trade for all men. Truly a new age for the country. And much like the French Revolution it's great 30 years after it's all over, but at the time you have bloodshed at record levels. Add into that that some people own dragons, while every lord has his own personal army and it'd get very very messy. Democracy comes over a long period of time. Mance strikes me as a man ahead of his time. Like Jon or Sansa or Dany they'd be Obama like, but the age needs a bit more of a GWB.

[Sarah Horrocks]

I'm not so sure he would. I know he promotes being free, but I think that means that anybody can rape anyone else, but the offended party is totally free to kill the attacker if they can. I might be wrong, though, that's just how it comes off to me.

Anybody can still rape anybody under the Westeros system, you're just not allowed to kill them back if they are a lord, where as under Mance you're free to pursue justice against anyone.

Compare the agency and freedom of someone like YGritte to someone like Sansa.

Mostly because I think he's the man who would bring democracy throughout the lands. Abolishing lordships, promoting equal rights and the free trade for all men. Truly a new age for the country. And much like the French Revolution it's great 30 years after it's all over, but at the time you have bloodshed at record levels. Add into that that some people own dragons, while every lord has his own personal army and it'd get very very messy. Democracy comes over a long period of time. Mance strikes me as a man ahead of his time. Like Jon or Sansa or Dany they'd be Obama like, but the age needs a bit more of a GWB.

Now is the perfect time. The country is already in a civil war. The citizenry is already seeing their crops ruined, their way of life destroyed--it's time to rise up against the feudal system and get some rights. And Mance is the man for the job.

Mance 2012.

[Chris D]

Anybody can still rape anybody under the Westeros system, you're just not allowed to kill them back if they are a lord, where as under Mance you're free to pursue justice against anyone.

Compare the agency and freedom of someone like YGritte to someone like Sansa.

Solid point.

Now is the perfect time. The country is already in a civil war. The citizenry is already seeing their crops ruined, their way of life destroyed--it's time to rise up against the feudal system and get some rights. And Mance is the man for the job.

Mance 2012.

Mance might be a great leader for a revolution, but I'm not sure he'd be the right guy once the dust settles. Really, I don't know much about him at this point.

[Jim Ohara]

Now is the perfect time. The country is already in a civil war. The citizenry is already seeing their crops ruined, their way of life destroyed--it's time to rise up against the feudal system and get some rights. And Mance is the man for the job.

Mance 2012.

I heard he wasn't even born in Westeros. Has anyone ever seen his birth certificate?

[Ogul]

Why Jon Snow? He knows nothing. I know like Daenrys in the books, you get a better apprecation for him as a leader. But in the shows, he's portrayed as a very pretty sack of bricks. He's extremely naive.

I think they both come off as naive and dim sometimes, but I trust Jon's moral judgement slightly ahead of Dany's, and I think he has a better understanding of politics than she does (which is saying a lot given how little he knows). I also rated Arya reasonably high because she can stand toe to toe with Tywin Lannister, so I have faith in her ability to deal with politics, especially with some good supporters. I left people off my list if they didn't make the official poll listing, but if they had been I also would have voted fairly high for Kat and Bran, with Anne Bolynn somewhere in the middle (she seems to have good judgement but there's too little to go on in the show so far).

Also, considering this topic I realized what a perfect dichotomy Ned and Little Finger make. I mean, I trust Ned's moral judgement considerably, but not his grasp of politics and pragmatism, while I trust Little Finger to make the savvy and pragmatic choices, but not necessarily the morally right ones. Someone with both traits would be perfect.

[Sarah Horrocks]

What's an example of something that makes you think Jon understands politics? He really stepped in it at Crastor's. He seems to be too interested in doing the right thing, which as we've seen in the game of thrones just gets your head chopped off.

Danny has at least been leading her little band and has had to make tough political decisions already. Plus she's immune to fire, which is a plus. Though I suppose with Jon he has the giant wolf.

[Ogul]

What's an example of something that makes you think Jon understands politics? He really stepped in it at Crastor's. He seems to be too interested in doing the right thing, which as we've seen in the game of thrones just gets your head chopped off.

He's not too savvy about stuff beyond the wall, but he is far more aware of the dynamics between the southern families, he was raised in a noble house. And don't get started on "stepping into it" when you're promoting little miss "#### you, I'm a dragon princess. . . rawr." He's definitely too motivated by what's right relative to what's practical, which is why I put him close to the middle of the list, but I still put that sort of person an edge over people who prioritize what's practical entirely over what's right. It's a balance that's needed.

[Jim Ohara]

Am I the only one who thinks Catelyn Stark is possibly the worst person of all to rule? "I'm going to seize Tyrion Lannister, lock him away and put him through a kangaroo court where he'll be sentenced to death. And then the matter will be settled and we'll go back to normal." Everything she does seems to be incredibly stupid.

Makes me wonder if more people would be rooting for Tywin if Tyrion had his head cut off while at the Vale. Would that have been any different from what happened to Ned (innocent man imprisoned and executed for a crime he didn't commit)? Does the proud nobility of House Stark rest on the quick blade of Bronn the sellsword?

[Ogul]

Makes me wonder if more people would be rooting for Tywin if Tyrion had his head cut off while at the Vale. Would that have been any different from what happened to Ned (innocent man imprisoned and executed for a crime he didn't commit)? Does the proud nobility of House Stark rest on the quick blade of Bronn the sellsword?

I'm not sure where this anti-Stark impulse comes from, but I won't indulge it. The situations were quite different there, Tyrion was certainly being railroaded, but it was due to a mistake, Kat had evidence to support her claims for justice, even if it did turn out to be false evidence, whereas there was nothing just about Ned's death.

In any case, yes Katelyn has sometimes behaved rashly in certain very specific cases, but otherwise she tends to be fairly moderate and literate in politics, cautioning deliberation and due consideration of issues.

[Chris D]

Am I the only one who thinks Catelyn Stark is possibly the worst person of all to rule?

You're not alone. I actually saw her as basically the person most at fault for everything that's happened. I feel like she pushed Ned into being the hand of the king and then she recklessly went after Tyrion, which got Ned in deep shit. In the books, I actually think she is far worse, doing all kinds of stupid stuff.