Hugorfonics

Ok, so then it's comparable in that regard. I don't think Aerys was like Viserys or Lysa and to write off his cruelty as madness is not only feeding into Robert's propaganda, another curel and mentally unstable King but is an affront to actual mental illness that's seen in the likes of Dany and Tyrion.

I think it'd be more correct to say cruel then mad. For instance Lysa and Viserys in their last moments were rambling nonsense, very patchface like behavior while Aerys was ordering around the last defenses of his kingdom and of course planning on blowing up his crib so he can be reborn as godzilla which like, is fucking bonkers except that Dany pulled a similar scheme which turned out to be successful. I don't feel like arguing the amount of arrows vs Ser Useless' cabbage patch amount of smallfolks, but Robert and his council feared a dothraki invasion and felt like this heinous order would prevent that, I mean Eddard made them feel like real pieces of shit but they stayed true which implies the level of severity they thought probable. There's also Jorah who knows both styles well and seems to favor the dothraki in a battle.

Stannis? Like I agree this probabaly gotta be one of the worst ways of going out, but loads of historical people took the Aerys and Stannis approach and burned folk alive and its heinous and evil and just all around grimey, but I think insanity is a misdiagnosis. Imo the only character I'd truly refer to as mad is Patchface, (and more and more so Cersei, but not there yet. Who clearly does have a cruel streak while patchface seems chill) How's it not comparable? An innocent child who's minding their own business was thrust into the game when their guardians didn't take attempted murder lightly. Obviously we know what happens with Drogo but Dany is now game which serves the same purpose, civil war brought to you by the mad state. Would it have been better to shoot em up like Walder did Robb, or simply cut off his head like Ned? Probably, but only for a couple more minutes. But the fact remains is Aerys would only be a cruel and unusual king if he didn't preside over westeros. We see things like Cerseis walk of shame or like the Karstark soldiers put into crow cages, everything Theons been through, I mean take one decision made by judge Randyll and convince me it wasn't cruel or unusual.

Then there's Stannis who likes to do both. My issue with labeling Aerys is mad is the same I have with labeling Victarion stupid. Like it kinda fits, but these labels fit nearly everybody. For all the hate the Dothraki get, Westerosi are also mad stupid. I agree that like ordering the hit of Ned and Robert when it's only sure to flame the fires of Arryn and Tully was so politically incompetent it could be called insane, but this is also almost exactly how I look at Robert's hit on Dany. Then on the flip side, executing both Starks or banishing Griff may seem like perhaps the inncorect politically asutue move but it does have its own benefits as well and were in fact I think made by a rational person. Yes because Robert told them too already, it's like when Brienne was talking about her presumably bedtime stories of Robert riding to save the realm and Jaimes like what kinda fuckin za are you smoking? For instance it's the same reason the realm is convinced Rheagar was an abducting rapist who harassed Lyanna for lols, it's probably not true, or perhaps greatly exaggerated.

Who doesnt? Theon and Ashas uncle for example is in self imprisonment and has his sister conspiring against him. Also what clinic, Robert Baratheons propaganda? Look, I do think Aerys combated his mental health but I think the same of Robert for instance. And Stannis, and Dany, Euron, Joff, Viserys and ya know, Moonboy for all I know. And with Joff we see the levels to the progression of his madness likewise Dany looked at the "man who had once been her brother," the madness like Jaime says in Aerys, its due to the poisoning of Varys. It's also a bit peculiar that Jaime doesn't mouth off on Aerys' insanity but instead was simply taken back by his cruelty. I don't think it's as simple as incestuous dumbasses fucked themselves incompetent, I think it's more that any absolutist regime will undoubtedly breed someone detached from reality where their tyranny will surely lead to carnage and travesty. But on the flip side we got Dany who's also bred with this same detached reality and of course to brother and sister and even throws up some red flags but while carnage and travesty looks possible for her it's surely not guaranteed as she's not a cruel person. Wait are you saying that like these mythoses blend into each other and like most of history is bullshit or stolen? Cuz if so, I agree! I don't see how you got that but that's not what Reborn does, right? The next ones supposed to stop the others? Ok my theories on theories, first is Azor Ahai reborn is team human. Good guy and bad guy are just words after all, so not only do I think good guys like Dany, Jon and Tyrion and Stannis (if you consider them good guys) are almost inevitably Azor Ahai but so are baddies like Stannis and Tyrion (if you'd like to put them here) and Victarion and Ramsay. I think Azor Ahai is not going to be like a Video Game achievement with a notification in the corner but stay ambiguous but with the prophecy check list in place and the eventual triumph of humanity due to like, if not holding hands then some type of cooperation that'll save humanity, I think lots of Azor Ahais are out there. So obviously I don't belive in one hero or really the matter of bloodlines tbh. I do think that's the meat of the story but the moover I think is Sansa, she's the reason the world spins and the real story or good story moves after all. So I do think the pie was poisoned not the wine, and it was due to Tyrion sending Petyr and Olenna conspiring against his life with plots to kidnap Sansa (individually of course, plan was Highgarden but LF betrayed her.) (I'm not a believer in gods or fate but I like to think that something upstairs saw Tyrions pie in front of him and summoned a lesser being to take the hit and allowed the hero (an azor ahai) to continue his path. They chose the king.) So I also think that since Sansa moves mountains without trying she eventually will soon try and the 7 kingdoms, or at least the interesting parts, will fall to her knees.

"Strike! Now, while the castle sleeps." Renly looked back at Ser Boros again and dropped his voice to an urgent whisper. "We must get Joffrey away from his mother and take him in hand. Protector or no, the man who holds the king holds the kingdom. We should seize Myrcella and Tommen as well. Once we have her children, Cersei will not dare oppose us. The council will confirm you as Lord Protector and make Joffrey your ward." To me, the parallels here reflects off of one of England's most infamous tyrants, Richard iii, also a bit of tyrant Cromwell because of the lord protector bit. Anyway, something along those lines is why Eddard turned the plan down, deceitful, dishonorable, disproportionately dislikable. He said as much to Petyr when pitched pretty much the same play. Political or not, it would have been morally bankrupt, to the outer world and to thy inner self, but the real question is would it have been pragmatic? “Cersei will not dare oppose us.” Uh, maybe? But Tywin will dare. Stannis dare, Balon dare and Euron dare. Oberyn, JonC, Mance, Dany, dare. The world is dark and full of straphangers. Obviously Ned didn't make every decision correctly, but I believe here he certainly did as in victory or defeat it would have destroyed his honor, but I also see a very slim chance of victory as he would have made himself public enemy number one of Westeros.

It was kinda a joke. And if you need to label some chapter a b and c then these fit the mark. All I said that got us into this was, also in a joking way, that Italy was booming financially for centuries until Napoleon pulled up and drained em, which is why I labeled him a colonist over a conqueror. Which is also just some label to fit a b or c.

Never said it wasnt! In fact I said things implying Scotland was a nationality like a thousand years ago, with its occasional ups and down.

Morse sense of course, but more accurate? Lol, so true story. My cousin asked "whos your fav emeperor?" without thinking I said Palpatine, I thought hed like it, he likes him more then me, but he didnt, he said "real emperor", again without thinking, Napoleon, cuz duh. Still mad, idk why, "roman emperor" he stressed, i did think, and with a big ass smile I said Charles V. Lol, its complicated stuff. Its also complicated stuff. Peace

Yould think I set off an alarm. I thought the way he talked to his nieces and nephews was disgusting and his plan to arrest them in their mothers arms while their father was warm as close to evil as possible. And foolish of course, I could go on for days about why I dislike one of the most unlikable characters but tbh, I didn't mean to pull the alarm, was more of a cheap shot at Florent which I did feel kinda funny about after posting. (sry) Thats how the humanists thought, I dont see what thats got to do with them. And if you wanna go down that road then the classics were taught in school until like the 1960s. Different things happen at different times that look roughly the same. Dont be such a stickler. From Donatello microwaving his first piece of pizza to Napoleons campaign in Italy, things were innovative and rich. Besides, the Reformation was mostly a Germaic thing while the Romance kept it largely cruising. Its in between the middle ages and the duel revs where money and free thinking became rampant, it ridiculous to separate it based on what they thought at the time. Well it seems based on that ulr you supplied and your stance on America just being some united states, which is what like the conservative party in Jacksonian times thought, Ive arrived at the conclusion that you only think ethnonationalism is the only way of creating a nationalist state. Which to me is just bonkers. Yea of course. The idea of pure Magyar blood is ridiculous since inception to victories to defeats, plus with Vienna down the block, Hungarian blood is diverse. But what do you mean they didn't identify as Hungarians? Obviously there was no flag and not everyone spoke Hungarian, but there were semi autonomous lords who had an invested interest in what they considered Hungary. I mean I really dismiss the fact that there were other cultures there as irrelevant. I dont think your right about that. If the Pope said jump, Christendom had a crusade. Charlamagne was crowned Augustus, there is a continuum that existed in the early middle ages, only for it to morph into another continuum. Right... That sounds kinda familiar, He didnt conquer Rome? But now, with the anglo saxons, Im very sus to not group them into some sort of greater Viking world. You sound like a Maester. There is the perception of the law and norms and there is reality.

Meh. Not really. Italy was nice and inventive and rich. lol. Ridiculous So what are you doing? I found discussing asoiaf as often pointless like when large parts of the internet support Renly despite him being cruel, narrow minded, a craven and a loser, but it still passes the time. Ethnonationalism is not nationalism. Thats just some racist gobbledygook brought to you by the nazis and proto nazis. The Hungarians have been "ethnonationalist" since Stephen, more like the 9th cent. (obviously it was conquered here and there.) And, again, ethnonationalism isnt nationalism. Spoke and wrote in latin? Believed in Jesus and his roman bishops? Bede called himself British, English or Roman? I thought it was Roman. Also ridiculous. Classy. They didnt win the war either lol. Now theyll be smallfolk, and as Tyrion noted its awfully similar. Theyll raise the dogs and pyramids. The culture will change, sure. It wont turn into something unrecognizable though, Ghiscari culture is still strong. Theres more to a culture then its vice. I dont understand the building part, we still do construction, and still take pride in our architecture. Well, idk. The Pilgrams colonized America or Massachusetts? Obviously just the tiny bit, but I don't think its really wrong to say the other. Dragonstone is part of Westeros. Yea, Id say with Gaul it has to be colonization. The Greeks were weird though, while they did fight off the indigenous their colonies really don't seem to work for the mothership. At least in classic terms, nation states were not a thing there and the colony was kind of its own being. Which really isnt the case for the rest of history. Honestly I think the term immigrant may even hit closer to the mark. Post Alexander, and that all really changes though.

Not really, your just being dramatic. They'll just revert to serfdom or the like as it is in the Sunset. Smallfolk. They'll continue to grow olives, wear togas, eat dogs and live under pyramids. Ghiscari culture is not disappearing. I agree Aegons not a colonizer, but his great granddad was. I explained above. So Caesar conquered Rome, and Italy, maybe Egypt, probably Greece but I'd say he colonized Gaul. Likewise Napoleon robbed em blind, for all extensive purposes the Renaissance ended when he showed up. Spain, Germany, all of em were just run by king brother. That was the whole thing like in Beligum and such they expected liberal liberation and was treated like occupied territory. (Not all em of course, don't wanna come across as too much of a Napoleon basher, just the Ridley Scott movie lol, so boring! Should be called Josephine) Lol well, there ya go. I didn't know that, but I love chicken masala so I totally understand. Idk, I always rolled my eyes at that line of thinking, especially since my nation existed in 1776, clearly before the French Revolution lol. Asian nations aside, I don't see how Hungary hasn't always been an "ethnic" nation state, except like all the links with Austria, which calls itself Rome. Because everyone did. The English called themselves Roman pretty much until the Anglo Saxons, which is way past them actually being Roman. Like St Patrik called himself Roman. Definitely by 1500 England France and Spain are well defined nation states with their own culture and history and prospects. It's just the Germans who didn't always bend the knee to Rome, I mean Vienna, were more ambiguous with their nation state. I also don't understand why they say the French Rev united Germany when they were actually at odds with each other. Like I don't get why the Germans get to rewrite history, who won the war? Lol

I think to reduce Ghiscari culture as slavery is extremely simplistic and stereotypical, just like reducing Ironborn culture to reaving. And of course both, by nearly any definition, can be considered colonizers lol.

Maybe some did? But generally, I mean Indian culture is huge, Bollywood is like the biggest thing. Many different religions and customs that stayed strong or even went the other way, like tea. (Or was that Chinese?) The civilizing aspect is really just an excuse, or justification. But if you wanna go down that road, explaining mass democracy or whatever is still not going to make it distinctly different.

Yea, no one's defending colonialism here, what I'm saying is just because UK outlawed Sati doesn't mean they "ultimately want them to be distinctly different than they currently are, culturally." Right, like Indians were still Indian, but of course colonized. Right but there is a thing that's southern culture, and it's not a slavery thing, especially now a days. The shavepets aren't adopting a new culture, like they still wear togas and eat sus food on a stick It is interesting that the confederate flag can often be seen as cultural and heritage or whatever which is a lie brought to you by like the daughters of the confederacy and them. And I do wonder about the parallels with the sons of the harpy and their perceived logo, which is really just a symbol of hate and a corrupt regime and the champions of the lost cause, the daughters of the confederacy and the klan.

Word. Threads been nothing but lectures. https://www.thoughtco.com/colonialism-definition-and-examples-5112779 This was pretty good I think, but didn't say that like cultural genocide or whatever is a requisite for colonialism

Selmy is to a few, Idk what that's got to do with it tho She outlawed a few laws, like slavery and involuntary gladiator fights but I don't remember her making new laws. I don't think it is. I also don't think that's what she's doing, she wears the damn floppy ears. Yes she outlawed slavery and tore down their patron the harpy but their culture goes beyond Harpy. You don't think the dragon left a mark? KG for example is a Targaryen invention, and every boyhood dream.

So for the sake if, whatever, I'd say colonies can fall into two parts, both kinda the same. So one, would be like Leopold II, just straight takeover bloodsucking and murderous. The other, would be like ancients or like the pilgrims. Still working for the mothership but less severe and still murderous but less. Also though, there's integration and mixing of cultures, which you don't really find in the 19th/20th century. Aegon did not work for the mothership. However Aegons ancestor probably did. So did the Targaryens colonize Westeros? Of course they did, they settled on Dragonstone. Since this is just one part of the greater land, England to Brittania or Massachusetts to America, we can safely put Targs in the not 19th cent which implies, you know some sort of like Thanksgiving like meeting, which did end in blood but maybe leftovers. I mean even after subduing and integrating with Dragonstonians its at the heart of Westeros so I think we can safely assume there was some type of integration. Fastforward like a hundred years with Aegon and his floorboard, Targaryens are Westerosi. Can't colonize yourself, plus there was no mothership.

Hell yeah! Or maybe spike a drink like sweet Cersei, or fill him up with crossbow bolts like Dontos! A million ways to die in the west-eros. Yeah for sure, I was a bit rash. I disliked his rudness to Brienne and his plans for kidnapping Sansa but I was totally a fan of his hubris and drive. Not to mention his recent success in tracking her down. I agree, it's a shame he's getting written off but totally agree that Sansa with her hands dirty opens up a whole new world.

That's brilliant! Out of all pathological liars, LFs the worst.

He cut Tyrion off

Ahh ninjad! Totally! Never liked that guy, now it's Sansa ls turn to put a beating on these knights!

Now we know why he takes so long to write, he can hardly read his handwritten! Very very cool! I love how different it is! Brienne Sandor fight! Kill the mouse I love that thats bolded!

Legelized weed and canceled student debt.

Of course they do Dio describes the battle. . What makes you think the Romans didn't see the barbarians as ugly idiots? Or that it's not all about looks? I think it's pretty obvious that Cleos blood and kingdom did it for Antony and Caeser