Roberts Rebellion

[OldGimletEye]

Stalin rule like that for 30 straight years and despite all the purges, censorship and oppression. The people of Russia consider him a national hero.

Well, except for when Krushchev denounced him around 1956 or so. But, anyway, if Stalin is your idea of good leader, then I guess were operating in very two different universes. Probably explains the source of our disagreement.

[Kaibaman]

Well, except for when Krushchev denounced him around 1956 or so. But, anyway, if Stalin is your idea of good leader, then I guess were operating in very two different universes. Probably explains the source of our disagreement.

No I'm just saying that the people of Westeros aren't gonna get all uppity about Dany distorting history to reflect her family in a good light while you are claiming that they are going to wise up and rebel against the evil dictator which is Daenerys Targaryen. Well Westeros is not America and with the Baratheons and Lannisters having already rewritten much history to their liking. I don't see why its wrong for Dany to do the same?

[Wavey Sauce]

I am confused what you think needs to be discussed more. Pretty obvious the rebellion was more then justified.

 

As far as the actual war the time lines and battles are a mess though, being his first book not everything was as crisp. but yea...

[OldGimletEye]

No I'm just saying that the people of Westeros aren't gonna get all uppity about Dany distorting history to reflect her family in a good light while you are claiming that they are going to wise up and rebel against the evil dictator which is Daenerys Targaryen. Well Westeros is not America and with the Baratheons and Lannisters having already rewritten much history to their liking. I don't see why its wrong for Dany to do the same?

Number one, there are people in Westeros who know the truth. I doubt very seriously the North and the Vale are just going to buy Dany's fucked up version of events. If Dany tries to push some bullshit down their throats, I hope they fight her tooth and nail. And let's not assume Dany automatically wins that conflict, if it should happen.

If Dany is able to completely supress the truth about RR, Westeros will just go back to the same old shit. It has a chance to progress. But, if Dany kills the truth, then that chance is gone. I still maintain that the idea of a monarch being legitimately removed is a good idea.The fact Robert and the Lannisters rewrote history (but only in part) doesn't give Dany some kind of pass to do something wrong, no more than Aerys actions gave Robert some kind of pass to do wrong things.

[Wavey Sauce]

Number one, there are people in Westeros who know the truth. I doubt very seriously the North and the Vale are just going to buy Dany's fucked up version of events. If Dany tries to push some bullshit down their throats, I hope they fight her tooth and nail. And let's not assume Dany automatically wins that conflict, if it should happen.

If Dany is able to completely supress the truth about RR, Westeros will just go back to the same old shit. It has a chance to progress. But, if Dany kills the truth, then that chance is gone. I still maintain that the idea of a monarch being legitimately removed is a good idea.The fact Robert and the Lannisters rewrote history (but only in part) doesn't give Dany some kind of pass to do something wrong, no more than Aerys actions gave Robert some kind of pass to do wrong things.

Not a dany fan at all but for the most part she seems to not hide from the truth at all, and knows her dad was a dirt merchant wacko

[Hugorfonics]

I don't think the rebellion was really justified. Removing Aerys from power was justified, killing Rhaegars kids and imprisoning Aerys' was not.

As the story goes, Jon A was in a corner with no way out but hostility to Aerys. However that's the story from Robert and the citidal, both anti Targaryens. 

[Kaibaman]

 

Not a dany fan at all but for the most part she seems to not hide from the truth at all, and knows her dad was a dirt merchant wacko

Maybe but sometimes in order to create stability a ruler has to whitewash the truth. The fact is in most non-democratic nations, I regime must appear to be infallible in order to retain absolute power. 

[OldGimletEye]

 

Not a dany fan at all but for the most part she seems to not hide from the truth at all, and knows her dad was a dirt merchant wacko

I am not really saying Dany will act that way. I'm mostly arguing against arguments that Dany is somehow entitled to act that way or that she ought to act that way. I realized awhile ago that most of my grudges, concerning Dany, isn't so much about her as it is some of the opinions held by her fandom.

[Kaibaman]

Number one, there are people in Westeros who know the truth. I doubt very seriously the North and the Vale are just going to buy Dany's fucked up version of events. If Dany tries to push some bullshit down their throats, I hope they fight her tooth and nail. And let's not assume Dany automatically wins that conflict, if it should happen.

If Dany is able to completely supress the truth about RR, Westeros will just go back to the same old shit. It has a chance to progress. But, if Dany kills the truth, then that chance is gone. I still maintain that the idea of a monarch being legitimately removed is a good idea.The fact Robert and the Lannisters rewrote history (but only in part) doesn't give Dany some kind of pass to do something wrong, no more than Aerys actions gave Robert some kind of pass to do wrong things.

How do you think the Lannisters have written the history of the War of Five Kings and the Red Wedding? Do you think under their thumb the Maesters of the Citadel are going to portray Robb as a hero and the Starks as the good guys fighting for a righteous cause? Like I said history is written by the winners and I don't think the Northerners will fight them tooth and nail for denigrating the Young Wolf and his compatriots in their account of history.

[OldGimletEye]

Maybe but sometimes in order to create stability a ruler has to whitewash the truth. The fact is in most non-democratic nations, I regime must appear to be infallible in order to retain absolute power. 

Yes, we all understand that the Khaleesi National Party has great admiration for the ideology of Joffrey Baratheon and Tywin Lannister.

[Lord Lannister]

Economic wise, Robert plunged the IT into 6 million debt,while Aerys's treasure was flowing with gold. 

As mentioned, that was more Tywin's doing than Aerys's. Who fired him for being too good at his job. Economic prosperity for some reason wasn't enough to keep his people from rebelling regardless. I guess gold doesn't much matter when you can be burned alive at any time to give your king a hard on. Even if Robert hadn't rebelled, without Tywin Aerys probably would've spent all the kingdom's money on one of his silly schemes like building a new wall north of the existing Wall, a marble city south of the Blackwater, invading Braavos or building underwater canals in the Dornish deserts.

[OldGimletEye]

How do you think the Lannisters have written the history of the War of Five Kings and the Red Wedding? Do you think under their thumb the Maesters of the Citadel are going to portray Robb as a hero and the Starks as the good guys fighting for a righteous cause? Like I said history is written by the winners and I don't think the Northerners will fight them tooth and nail for denigrating the Young Wolf and his compatriots in their account of history.

And you think I am trying to defend the actions of the Lannister regime? Or their lies? I think it's the KNP that are fans of Tywin Lannister and Joffrey Baratheion and their methods. Not me.

Like I said history is written by the winners and I don't think the Northerners will fight them tooth and nail for denigrating the Young Wolf and his compatriots in their account of history.

Okay. So, I guess the Northerners are completely cool with the Lannister backed Bolton regime in the North. If you say so. 

[Kaibaman]

As mentioned, that was more Tywin's doing than Aerys's. Who fired him for being too good at his job. Economic prosperity for some reason wasn't enough to keep his people from rebelling regardless. I guess gold doesn't much matter when you can be burned alive at any time to give your king a hard on. Even if Robert hadn't rebelled, without Tywin Aerys probably would've spent all the kingdom's money on one of his silly schemes like building a new wall north of the existing Wall, a marble city south of the Blackwater, invading Braavos or building underwater canals in the Dornish deserts.

Well in some ways not getting into Tywin's pocket was a wise decision. Look how that worked out for Robert what with him owing the Lannisters a shit ton of gold and letting them take over the court and the government. Yeah getting really cozy with Tywin and the Lannisters has done wonders for the kingdom.

[Kaibaman]

 

And you think I am trying to defend the actions of the Lannister regime? I think it's the KNP that are fans of Tywin Lannister and Joffrey Baratheion. Not me.

Okay. So, I guess the Northerners are completely cool with the Lannister backed Bolton regime in the North. If you say so. 

Have you heard of the saying "a good government cannot survive without good propaganda"? Joseph Goebbels said it and its quite true because while Hitler and his goons committed some awful shit, the Nazi regime didn't have much unrest or internal rebellions at least from its German citizens because they carefully manipulated what the public needed to know. Now wouldn't Dany also want to ensure that she and her dynasty has the love and support of the majority of the people in the kingdom for generations to come?

[OldGimletEye]

 

Have you heard of the saying "a good government cannot survive without good propaganda"? Joseph Goebbels said it and its quite true because while Hitler and his goons committed some awful shit, the Nazi regime didn't have much unrest or internal rebellions at least from its German citizens because they carefully manipulated what the public needed to know. Now wouldn't Dany also want to ensure that she and her dynasty has the love and support of the majority of the people in the kingdom for generations to come?

Hitler. Stalin. The Lannisters. Whose next, Pol Pot? Maybe Fulgencio Batista? 
Or mabye, Kim II Sung? Maybe, if someone even drops a picture of Dany, on accident, she can have them killed,along with their entire family, like ol' Kim would do. That ought to keep her in power. Though, I don't think that is really good for the people of Westeros.

 

 

[Wavey Sauce]

Maybe but sometimes in order to create stability a ruler has to whitewash the truth. The fact is in most non-democratic nations, I regime must appear to be infallible in order to retain absolute power. 

 

No need to white wash anything. She isn't her dad. She is a different person. She would also make herself look dumb doing that. Is better to proclaim that she is not her father and understands what he did wrong

 

There is nobody in Westeros she could really fool. Smart move is to show that she knows her dad was a fiend

[Shierak Qiya]

I'm not saying that Robert's Rebellion was wrong. However the overthrowing of an established dynasty which has ruled for three centuries, founded and shaped the kingdom has caused quite a destabilizing effect on the realm. Then there's the fact that Robert was a piss poor king and his heir turning out not only as cruel as his predecessor but also a bastard only exacerbated the problems already plaguing the realm. The way I see it the Baratheon dynasty was pretty much a powder keg waiting to go off but I doubt even guys like Varys and Littlefinger could have imaged things would have gone as bad as the War of the Five Kings and such.

But now that the realm is in total disarray with most of the rebel houses either vanquished or on their last legs as well as the fact that the Targaryens now have a good chance of returning to power. I do wonder how history will remember Robert and his rebellion?

I'm in agreement.  Let's not forget, despite his reputation (and we know reputations are mostly influenced by the side that won), Aerys surrounded himself with the finest Kingsguard and very competent Small Council.  The realm prospered.  We also need to consider the theory proposed in "Southron Ambitions".  If there is any truth to the Starks, Baratheons, and Tullys attempting to overpower the throne, Aerys was well within his rights to protect his dynasty, in whatever way he chooses.  Rebellion is illegal and not playing by the rules.  If the Southron Ambitions is true, then Rickard, Robert, and Hoster were all already engaged in treason.  Their lives were forfeit as traitors. 

[Minstral]

I'm in agreement.  Let's not forget, despite his reputation (and we know reputations are mostly influenced by the side that won), Aerys surrounded himself with the finest Kingsguard and very competent Small Council.  The realm prospered.  We also need to consider the theory proposed in "Southron Ambitions".  If there is any truth to the Starks, Baratheons, and Tullys attempting to overpower the throne, Aerys was well within his rights to protect his dynasty, in whatever way he chooses.  Rebellion is illegal and not playing by the rules.  If the Southron Ambitions is true, then Rickard, Robert, and Hoster were all already engaged in treason.  Their lives were forfeit as traitors. 

The very same Small Council that failed at containing the rebellion, whereein the Mad King would kill and/or exile them for failure. There is a difference in the man at the beginning of his reign, where he was somewhat of a reformer, and the man at the end that helped destroy his own government.

As to the whole "Southron Ambitions" thing, well for one we don't actually know what the concept was or what they were proposing. SO judging them as traitors premature. Furthermore, factionalism is certainly a thing in the setting, middle ages, and today, and at no point would a king act as Aerys unless he wants to commit political suicide. Monarchs that were mentally unstable, or outright insane, would often be ruled by a council of regents. So no, Aerys was certainly not "well within his rights" in acting the way he did. He acted as a man out of control.

[John Doe]

I'm in agreement.  Let's not forget, despite his reputation (and we know reputations are mostly influenced by the side that won), Aerys surrounded himself with the finest Kingsguard and very competent Small Council.  The realm prospered.  We also need to consider the theory proposed in "Southron Ambitions".  If there is any truth to the Starks, Baratheons, and Tullys attempting to overpower the throne, Aerys was well within his rights to protect his dynasty, in whatever way he chooses.  Rebellion is illegal and not playing by the rules.  If the Southron Ambitions is true, then Rickard, Robert, and Hoster were all already engaged in treason.  Their lives were forfeit as traitors. 

1. Even Barristan admitted Aerys was mad. Jaime, whose thoughts we know, thinks this as well. Aerys' reputation is not something the winners made up, or even needed to influence.

2. The realm prospered because Tywin ruled for 20 years. Until the mad king got rid of him in his paranoia. Plus Pycelle was corrupt.

3. As the poster above said, he wasn't. Especially since he promised a fair trial and roasted Rickard instead. You'd think with such a fine kingsguard he wouldn't need to resort to such cheap tricks.

[khal drogon]

The rebellion was not itself unjustified. I would agree that it is a war for survival of three of the major houses. But the injustices done by the rebels were on par with what Aerys did. And did the kings who replaced them were better, No. This all makes me feel RR is justified but it has improved nothing.