Dany's harm no child under twelve

[El Guapo]

Ehm, since he shoots those with silver fringes, or gold fringes, or no fringe at all (plain), it's pretty evident he's not singling out only the slavers actually.

I don't think plain fringe means no fringe at all, but I could be wrong. However as I stated before the only people that were described as being in the plaza were the good masters and other well to do Astapori and their slaves.

The crowds were being held back at the edge of the plaza.

[Mikkel]

But you are saying there definitely were some non slavers in tokars?

I'm not buying the innocent merchants and traders were all out there in tokars.

Yes, I'm saying that it's extremely unlikely that there weren't. If it was a garment worn only by slavers, why then is it described as being permitted to free men? Now I realize that "being permitted" and "worn by" is not strictly synonymous, but it's close enough that I'm sure there's free men, who are not slavers, wearing tokars.

[nirolo]

Not Slavers, not Good Masters, but freeborn men. I'm not saying every freeborn man wore a Tokar, of course.

What is irrefutable is that anyone wearing a tokar is born free. But this tells us nothing regarding what fraction of freeborns actually wear the tokar. 1 in 10? 1 in 100?

In fact, the quotes I've provided indicate that only a small fraction of freeborn men can afford it since it's a "master's garment and a sign of wealth and power."

[Lord Bronn Stokeworth]

No it doesn't.

The only way to qualify what Dany did as genocide is if social classes become a protected group under the UN definition of genocide. IF that's true, then slaves would become a social class. In which case any intent to bring bodily or mental harm to the slaves as a social class would qualify as genocide. It is undeniable that the slavery as an institution brings tremendous bodily and mental harm to the slaves. As such, it would qualify as genocide -- that is if you are bent on describing what Dany did as genocide.

Except that slavery isn't annihilating a social class or anyone else. It's hurting people such as when Drogo attacked the Lambmen village. But Drogo wasn't enslaving the entirety of the Lambmen.

The following quotes don't prove it per se, but they do seem to indicate that only the elites wear the tokar:

Quote 1:

Slaves and servants lined the ways, while the slavers and their women donned their tokars to look down from their stepped pyramids.

Quote 2:

The tokar was a master’s garment, a sign of wealth and power.

About the quotes, in SoS it is described as what freemen wear. In Dance, slavers. It could be for three reasons.

1. Dany was wrong in SoS.

2. Dany is rewriting the facts in her head to ignore that she put a lot of non-slave owners to death in Astapor.

3. GRRM intentionally or unintentionally changed it.

[Ludd]

OK how about translating Dany's actions into our known historical world.

Let us say Dany was Cleopatra, allied with the rebellious Roman slaves of Spartacus.

Dany orders every Roman patrician wearing a Toga (Tokar) to be executed. The Romans were of course major slavers and wearing a toga was the sign of a rick patrician Roman ie a slave OWNER.

Would it have been genocide, simply war and strategy or a massacre.

[Jasta11]

The tokar is also a symbol of slavery, as it is also known as a master's garment.

ETA: The tokar has really been a source of confusion, and as such, Dany really shouldn't have used it to identify slavers as there were likely freeborn who possessed tokars for festivals, ceremonies, etc., who wore them to see her and the dragons, as previously brought up.

I appreciate the fact that you like Dany without trying to utterly whitewash her every action like some other people do.

When we're reduced to petty arguments over who exactly was caught in whoesale slaughter, it's time for me to quit this thread.

[DaarioKnowsBest]

Yes, I'm saying that it's extremely unlikely that there weren't. If it was a garment worn only by slavers, why then is it described as being permitted to free men? Now I realize that "being permitted" and "worn by" is not strictly synonymous, but it's close enough that I'm sure there's free men, who are not slavers, wearing tokars.

I'm not sure of it at all, I just think the fringe is so the richer slavers set themselves apart from the lower status slavers.

Merchant isn't manual labor but you still need to move around to do it in most cases. I don't think they are all out there in tokars trading. Unless they owned booths and had slaves sell their stuff for them.

[TheMysteriousOne]

Except that slavery isn't annihilating a social class or anyone else. It's hurting people such as when Drogo attacked the Lambmen village. But Drogo wasn't enslaving the entirety of the Lambmen.

About the quotes, in SoS it is described as what freemen wear. In Dance, slavers. It could be for three reasons.

1. Dany was wrong in SoS.

2. Dany is rewriting the facts in her head to ignore that she put a lot of non-slave owners to death in Astapor.

3. GRRM intentionally or unintentionally changed it.

The garment was a clumsy thing, a long loose shapeless sheet that had to be wound around her hips and under an arm and over a shoulder, its dangling fringes carefully layered and displayed. Wound too loose, it was like to fall off; wound too tight, it would tangle, trip, and bind. Even wound properly, the tokar required its wearer to hold it in place with the left hand. Walking in a tokar demanded small, mincing steps and exquisite balance, lest one tread upon those heavy trailing fringes. It was not a garment meant for any man who had to work. The tokar was a master’s garment, a sign of wealth and power.

I always assumed that Dany came to that conclusion by herself, due to her own personal experiences with wearing the tokar, and watching others in the tokar.

[C0bR]

OK how about translating Dany's actions into our known historical world.

Let us say Dany was Cleopatra, allied with the rebellious Roman slaves of Spartacus.

Dany orders every Roman patrician wearing a Toga (Tokar) to be executed. The Romans were of course major slavers and wearing a toga was the sign of a rick patrician Roman ie a slave OWNER.

Would it have been genocide, simply war and strategy or a massacre.

Except for the fact that toga was a sign of Roman citizenship - for both patricians and plebs and not every pleb owned a slave.

The situation is in fact exactly the same. Even the impracticality of the garment.

[Mikkel]

What is irrefutable is that anyone wearing a tokar is born free. But this tells us nothing regarding what fraction of freeborns actually wear the tokar. 1 in 10? 1 in 100?

In fact, the quotes I've provided indicate that only a small fraction of freeborn men can afford it since it's a "master's garment and a sign of wealth and power."

That's much later, in Meereen. I'll grant that it's likely a similar situation in Astapor though. I also think it's beside the point how large a fraction of the freeborns can afford a tokar. The only remotely interesting metric is what percentage of tokar-wearers are not slavers - something we have no data to say either way.

[DaarioKnowsBest]

Here we go, Astapor is purposefully exactly like Rome

[Nymeria Stone]

Too much going over the Tokar /12 year old thing in my opinion. I really believe she actually meant "kill the slavers, but harm no child". GRRM just used some pretty words, but Dany's intention seemed clear. If she had actually slaughtered kids and innocent free people as some like to say, I think we would see further consequence. She may have been genocide, tried to play God and stuff, but... guys. Come on. Don't overreact it.

[nirolo]

Except that slavery isn't annihilating a social class or anyone else. It's hurting people such as when Drogo attacked the Lambmen village. But Drogo wasn't enslaving the entirety of the Lambmen..

The UN convention says with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part. Just because the institution of slavery doesn't annihilate the entire slave population doesn't mean the practices used by the slave maters don't destroy significant portions of the slaves.

For example for every unsullied that survives, 3 dies in the process. And cutting off boys' genitals does nothing to prevent them from reproducing, amiright?

Not to mention raising a hand against a master is enough to condemn a man to death.

Regardless, if you want to use social class as part of your definition of genocide, then slavery itself becomes a genocidal institution.

[Mikkel]

Too much going over the Tokar /12 year old thing in my opinion. I really believe that she actually meant "kill the slavers, but harm no child". GRRM just used some pretty words, but Dany's intention seemed clear. If she had actually slaughterd kids and innocent freemans as some like to say, I think we would see further consequence. She may have been genocide, tried to play God and stuff, but... guys. Come on. Don't overreact it.

If she meant to say "kill the slavers" she should have said "kill the slavers". Much is made of the fact that the Unsullied follow their orders to the letter, and the orders they got was "kill anyone wearing a Tokar (unless they're kids)"

[Lord Bronn Stokeworth]

The UN convention says with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part. Just because the institution of slavery doesn't annihilate the entire slave population doesn't mean the practices used by the slave maters don't destroy significant portions of the slaves.

For example for every unsullied that survives, 3 dies in the process. And cutting off boys' genitals does nothing to prevent them from reproducing, amiright?

Not to mention raising a hand against a master is enough to condemn a man to death.

Regardless, if you want to use social class as part of your definition of genocide, then slavery itself becomes a genocidal institution.

But slavers (such as the Dothraki) are not actually trying to destroy the civilizations they are taking the slaves from.

And as people pointed out, for the most part, the slavers aren't actually trying to destroy the slave class.

[nirolo]

That's much later, in Meereen. I'll grant that it's likely a similar situation in Astapor though. I also think it's beside the point how large a fraction of the freeborns can afford a tokar. The only remotely interesting metric is what percentage of tokar-wearers are not slavers - something we have no data to say either way.

I think Dany went after tokar wearers because she thought they were powerful slave masters (which includes slavers) and she thought their elimination was necessary to stop slavery in Astapor.

[SeanF]

IMHO, Slavers and free citizens are mostly be one and the same. Most free citizens will own at least one slave.

[Usrnmhsnomning]

IMHO, Slavers and free citizens are mostly be one and the same. Most free citizens will own at least one slave.

To which we come full circle; is it really justified to kill someone for owning a slave? Tyrion certainly remarks that most slaves he sees in Essos live better than the average Westerosi peasant. As it is, I'm out of this thread. It's just head-desk material in here.

[Nymeria Stone]

If she meant to say "kill the slavers" she should have said "kill the slavers". Much is made of the fact that the Unsullied follow their orders to the letter, and the orders they got was "kill anyone wearing a Tokar (unless they're kids)"

But still, her intention was obviously to kill the slavers and free the slaves. Dany views herself as a savior, so she wouldn't allow or command the death of free people. It would be completely illogical.

[nirolo]

But slavers (such as the Dothraki) are not actually trying to destroy the civilizations they are taking the slaves from.

And as people pointed out, for the most part, the slavers aren't actually trying to destroy the slave class.

The slavers are destroying the slave class by denying them their peoplehood.

In fact, it's impossible for the institution of slavery not to be genocidal since the minute a person enters into bondage, that person ceases to be a person and is turned into a property.

Simply put, to enslave is to destroy.