Who do you WANT to win the Iron Throne?
Posted 25 October 2011 - 11:53 AM
I used to support Renly, because I thought he would make a good king even if he was a bit daft at times and I would have been happy with Dany on the throne as well with, in both cases, Robb on the throne as King in the North. But now, Renly and Robb are dead and I have really started to doubt whether Dany would actually make a good Queen, so I'm finding it hard to decide who I want to win the throne.
Stannis I consider to be too cruel and too in thrall to Melisandre and her God. I know Davos thinks he is hard but fair, but I'm not very encouraged by the fact that he's embraced the whole burning people alive thing!
I see Jon as Lord Commander of the Night's Watch, but not King. It just doesn't sit right because he himself seems to have no desire to claim the Iron Throne. He might dream of being Lord of Winterfell, but not the King!
Dany, as I said, has gone down in my estimation and I really question her belief that she has a divine right to be Queen.
Tommen, obviously, doesn't actually have much right to be King but it strikes me that he could be quite a good one if he was taken away from his mother for long enough!
I don't really think any of them would make great rulers! Mance Rayder would be a much better King, imo, because I like the ideals of the Wildlings.
Posted 28 October 2011 - 09:18 AM
He might never have thought of himself in that position, but he would be conscientious.
Also, he believes everyone has a talent, and it is best to make use of that talent rather than forcing that person into a specific mold.
(For example, Sam). This would be an invaluable trait in a ruler.
Dany isn't the best choice for sole ruler, though in conjunction with someone else she might do well.
Stannis is too "letter of the law." He can't bend, so one day he'll break.
Tommen is a cipher, but I hope he survives (but not as king).
Tyrion would never be accepted by the nobility or by the smallfolk.
Littlefinger is too lowborn and prefers to operate in the shadows.
Aegon? If there was ever a red herring (and a red shirt), it's Aegon.
Posted 28 October 2011 - 09:52 AM
Edited by Stannis the Great, 28 October 2011 - 09:54 AM.
Posted 28 October 2011 - 10:02 AM
Let's face it. The laws of Westeros are screwy, filled with contradictions and double-standards. Going through the books, I wondered who "I"would have joined with had I been in this fictional setting. It's certainly not an easy decision, although some choices are easier than others.
Here are my candidates (but feel free to add any plausible ones I missed):
Pros- Due to the ignorance of the masses and loyalty to law, Jauffre would be the rightful king after Robert. If everyone put aside ambitions and morals and just accepted this there would be absolutely no bloodshed.
Cons- The child king was a monster; well destined to be worse than the Mad King by the time he was done. He was a mere child unaware of politics and Cersei whispering advice offers no comfort. Those who knew what he was would have to swallow their honor in order to avoid a war. This was something Ned and Stannis couldn't do.
Pros- Technically the heir to the throne due to Robert having no legitimate children. He is blunt and honorable and doesn't bend from his perceived justice. He isn't easily manipulative and has much history of combat.
Cons- Getting him on the throne requires significant bloodshed. It also would be so difficult to side with him considering how little support he had to his claim; knowing it would likely be a losing battle. Most don't know/believe he's the rightful heir and think of him as a pretender. Also, his blunt, uncompromising personality puts off most people. This might be good for the politics of a king, but people want someone they like to be on the throne; leading to...
Pros- Pretty much everyone wanted him on the throne. He had incredible support and siding with him would have likely ended in victory with him on the iron seat. He was charming and seemed to have potential to be a decent king; at least not evil.
Cons- He had no legitimate claim. He was mimicking Robert in his approach which would unfortunently lead to war, although perhaps would have been swifter. He was also green in combat as Catelyn often noted. Some military history would help in being a ruler.
Pros- The north wanted him as their ruler. They wished to have someone who understood them and lived among them to rule. Having a king in the south govern them mimicked America's civil war where the north was trying to control the south. Rob had combat prowess and was kind.
Cons- Succeeding in separation from the south would cause heavy war. He never came close to truly being free to rule. He was also a little young to be a ruler. Also, distancing himself from the south would cause them to neglect the north's needs (such as trouble at the wall).
Pros- The iron men wanted him to rule.
Cons- Once again, heavy bloodshed. His people are ruthless by nature (mimicking the Dothraki) and his rebellions have always hurt the iron islands (costing him two sons in the first and a ward of the third). He is belligerent and doesn't understand when he cannot win.
Pros- While not one of the five technically, she is a potential candidate to support. She could be the rightful queen from one perspective. She is kind, just, and naturally hates slavery. She has dragons and siding with her might eventually lead to a smoother victory than some.
Cons- Invading Westeros would lead to many deaths, no matter which way the war goes. She is an outsider and likely most would not accept her. She is rather ignorant of Westeros despite wishing to rule it.
So, if you were a soldier who would you have joined? Being logical about this no one has the right to be king. Stannis thinks he has the right, but how did Robert? Daenerys thinks she does, but how did Aegon the conquerer? Logically, I would side with the one who most people WANTED on the throne. Houses siding with a king is a medieval way of voting in a sense. Yes, we all love Daenerys but she doesn't have much support at all in Westeros. It doesn't seem fair for someone who was only an infant on the continent to just come over and rule it.
So, who should rule? I'd probably side with Renly (despite how that went, lol). He had the largest army of any of the self-proclaimed kings, and I don't see him becoming King Aerys. If the majority wanted him to be king, then he probably should be. As he said, the oldest sibling being heir is a fool's law and just simplifies things to avoid conflict; but is not logical. The only way to avoid war would be to side with Jauffre, but he would be such a poor king that I feel war would be a better option just to get him off the seat.
Posted 28 October 2011 - 10:14 AM
So what does it take to obtain power and to use this power in a beneficial way? Does it take force, deception, manipulation, coercion as many seem to assume who propogate leaders like Tywin, Littlefinger or even Tyrion? (Or Stannis for that matter, for surely nobody would follow him if not forced to) That's a person who advances their own self interest by dominating others. However, often such people will find themselves challenged by others and even deposed eventually when their peers find out that they're willing to harm others and thus damage the interests of the group. They would thus not be considered worthy of leadership.
Is then the leadership more effective that combines empathy with social intelligence? A person with the ability to negotiate conflicts, to share ressources fairly or to assert group norms. From your own experience you will probably have noticed that such socially competent, active and engaging individuals often rise to positions of authority, even if they don't exactly strive for them. As Lao Tzu said “To lead the people, walk behind them."
However, once the person is in charge, he may change because of the corruptive nature of power. They would be more likely to act on their impulses, feelings, wishes, thus inducing them to behave in a more aggressive way toward their subordinates.
Thus a person is needed who possesses a great deal of social intelligence and is still likely to heed the advice of others, to cooperate and be modest.
Obviously that's not possible in a perfect way, but a person who doesn't exactly seek power is more likely to empathize with others imho then a person who already feels entitled to power.
Now the least desirable types would surely be the ones who only ever want to advance themselves, aka Littlefinger, Tywin or Cersei Lannister. Tyrion and Stannis also don't exactly own a lot of social intelligence, whence they are so little beloved by their peers. I must withhold judgement of Aegon though I believe he seems to lack impulse controll which isn't a big problem in a boy, but in a king could be unforgivable. Tommen didn't show any capabilites that would recommend him in any way - which may be due to his age, but since he already sits the Iron Throne age doesn't excuse him.
I won't consider Renly or Robb since they are dead. Joffrey is a no brainer anyway.
So far Daenerys would be a possible good choice. A great number of people seems to like to follow her and trust her decisions to fairly allocate ressources. She doesn't lack empathy. However she also tends to act on her whims to her detriment.
Jon Snow would be a good candidate as well. He rose through the hierarchy ranks exactly because of his ability to look out for others, not for his own interest. He has shown a remarkable ability to juggle conflicting interests, even though he didn't quite manage to convince everybody that he acted in the common interest. That he doesn't even consider the Iron Throne at the moment is actually an argument in favour of him. (but may be due to him not knowing his origins - it's likely that he would consider the Iron Throne if he knew)
So - I would support him.
Of dead people Rhaegar seems a good choice of a leader too. We don't know much about him, but he seems to be modest and interested in the interests of the realm. Hmm, on the other hand - he did abduct Lyanna....
Posted 28 October 2011 - 10:37 AM
I want a Senat put in its place.
Varys, Illyrio, Littlefinger, and Doran - since they've been working to make this happen.
add in a representative from the wall - Dollorous Edd since Jon is Gone -baby-gone
from the North - Rickon will have to do. Sansa is too dumb, and Arya is no one.
East - Stannis will have to be removed since he thinks he's a king, so maybe his daughter, or Patchface
West - Tyrion
South - Doran already there.
Riverlands - I guess Littlefinger fits that spot.
You'll have to get rid of Dany and all the others that think somehow they deserve to be a Monarch.
If you need a representative from across the Narrow Sea I like Illyrio, or perhaps that banker, he seems pretty levelheaded, and has a cool hat.
Edited by DocBean, 28 October 2011 - 10:40 AM.
Posted 28 October 2011 - 11:06 AM
I don't want to see Danearys on the iron throne, she's proven that she's not fit to rule a kingdom.
Stannis won't take the throne (at least not permanently), because nobody would want him as a ruler.
So, I'm casting my vote for Bran, with Jon or Tyrion as his hand.
Edited by Walder_Frey, 28 October 2011 - 11:07 AM.
Posted 28 October 2011 - 11:52 AM
Posted 28 October 2011 - 12:27 PM
1. Smart -- as evidenced by cyvasse strength
2. Wise beyond her years (mentioned by a couple of people)
3. Brave -- mentioned by Tyrion and during AFFC
4. Charming -- immediately won the hearts of the Martells
Where Joffrey got all the bad parts of Tywin, Cersei, and Jaime, Myrcella seems to have inherited their strengths. A yet to be developed character, but she's shown potential as a future queen.
Posted 28 October 2011 - 12:33 PM
Edited by JKeats, 28 October 2011 - 12:34 PM.
Posted 28 October 2011 - 12:41 PM
Posted 28 October 2011 - 12:47 PM
On that note, Jon Targ/Stark would have to be my second choice. I like Dany as well, but so far she's shown too much of a penchant for brutal, cruel killings (MMD and the crucified slavers), and not enough of a thinking approach to be effective.
Third choice would be Aegon/Young Griff than. He seems to be relatively nice and well-learned, if a little impulsive and emotional but that's to be expected for a young teenager.
I actually think the ideal ruling combo would be Renly as King and Stannis as his hand if only they had been able to unite against the Lannisters. They seem to complement each other really well with Renly bringing the charm and Stannis bringing the justice/fear.
Posted 28 October 2011 - 01:12 PM
Since the question is "want" I'd go along with this 100%. I just don't think it would ever happen for the reason you mention and many others, which is a shame. I like the long leash Doran gives to his family, and how he manages to support them, reign them in, or pick up the pieces in the aftermath when he cannot. Even when the plans go awry (and most have so far re: power in Westeros as a whole), Dorne as a nation has still come out unscathed so far in all of this (other than some national pride and passion) which is an important point in his favor.
When I read the books I still find myself siding with Stannis' claim, though the people and other houses would hate him quickly and raise holy hell in no time. I like Dany's claim (and like Dany well enough), but I think her story ends when she finally gets "home", and who knows what view the people of Westeros will have of another Targ after events at the end of ADWD-through-TWoW. "Want" aside, I think we are going to be stuck with the Tyrells ultimately.
Posted 28 October 2011 - 01:12 PM
One's dead and the other's doomed
Edited by Black Crow, 28 October 2011 - 01:13 PM.
Posted 28 October 2011 - 01:31 PM
He brings the support of what's shaping up to be the most kickass family in Westeros: House Stark. He's apparently an amazing negotiator, a berserker warrior, and he apparently has the potential to be a magical badass.
Stannis isn't enough of a creative thinker, Aegon has no actual leadership experience and is (through no fault of his own) accustomed to relying too heavily on other people, Dany hasn't been shown to be good at creative problem-solving as a ruler, Doran is too cautious, Arianne is too unthinkingly bold, the Tyrells are too insular, the Lannisters are too selfish. Rickon's too wild, Bran did a horrible thing to Hodor out of selfishness and pride (not an indication that giving Bran ultimate power as a greenseer and a king would end up being a good thing), Arya's an assassin but not a ruler, and Sansa is a great political operator but not a warrior.
Posted 28 October 2011 - 01:34 PM
Posted 28 October 2011 - 01:36 PM
am I the only one that wants a Senate?
I can see the political posters already.