Who is the most Machiavellian character in the story?

[dmo862000]

Well? Littlefinger? Stannis? Tywin? Walder Frey? Who acts the most in accordance with Machiavelli's The Prince. And sure The Prince could be considered satire for you smartasses but there's a reason the 'Mach Test' exists. So who is it?

[dmo862000]

Apparently a stupid question based on the fact that it is quickly plummeting.

[LordStoneheart]

Lollys

[dmo862000]

Dumb topic on my part apparently.

[Fanless Mace]

The most effective Machiavellian remains undetected and in good favor of the court. (Which was, after all, Machiavelli's intent, to save his own ass by becoming both indispensable and unobjectionable. I oversimplify of course...)

By that count, Littlefinger is doing rather well. So is Varys. Tywin played the game well until...well...he lost.

But my money's on Moonboy.

[LordStoneheart]

Dumb topic on my part apparently.

It's a good topic, but it's either just a little slow right now on the boards or its been discussed many times before.

In short, LF and Tywin.

[Shah]

I'm going with Twyin Lannister. Nothing really matters to him besides retaining power and his name. Littlefinger seems more humane than Twyin, and kinder. I think if Littlefinger could have Sansa (who looks like Cat, but prettier) and a great house, he would be satisfied where as Twyin wants the best.

[ache]

I think Varys wins this one. He seems prepared to do pretty much anything to achieve his ends but he himself remains a shadow. He is not visibly collecting wealth or power or influence in the way Littlefinger so brazenly does, he seems more of a hollow man . I really don't think anyone has a clue of his real mission. He is presented as a Targaryen supporter right now but I think they're just one step in his plan, I think his real motivation is still hidden.

Littlefinger is good at the ambition and lack of morality part but if it weren't for the sometimes inexplicable stupidity and apathy of most of Westeros, he'd have been well out of the game by now.

[James Arryn]

LF isn't really Machievellian. I mean, not in terms of his actual political theory; if you mean the word as it is misused, as a synonym for ruthless and devious, sure LF or Varys could fit.

But in terms of actually fleshed out Machievellian strategies, from what we know, I would say the top ones are:

1) Renly. Fully grasps the balance points and the various kinds of political currency. Seems capable of assessing each situation in a big picture way, without getting trapped into self-defining habits. Always aware of how political military decisions are, and vice versa. Moves quickly when called for, moves patiently when called for, and all actions are contextualized.

2) Jon Arryn. Limited information, but what we know impresses. Decisive but not rash. Aware of the value of resolving potential conflicts with a minimum of actual conflict. Deals in possibles. Is respected, loved and feared. Great ally, bad enemy. No hangovers.

3) Tyrion Lannister. He's more mercurial than his father, and too prone to conflating the personal and the political, but is also a little more flexible and a little less monochromatic. Tywin actually talks a great game in a Machievellian sense...is the clearest example of lion and fox, and in theory seems to understand the value of shaping perceptions. But his actual actions contain too many defining moments whose real-time effect should be to engender more fear of co-existence than of resistance. Tyrion on the other hand seems to be entirely phlegmatic and situation specific. He is very aware of the value of image, but for w/e reason has a hard time actually controlling it.

Varys is impossible to evaluate because we're not even certain about his endgame, nor can he be evaluated on how he handles direct power, as he hasn't had any.

Edit: new and improved Jaime is a real comer. Might be among the best when all is said and done. And in general the Tyrells are all very Machiavellian.

[ache]

Littlefinger seems more humane than Twyin, and kinder. I think if Littlefinger could have Sansa (who looks like Cat, but prettier) and a great house, he would be satisfied where as Twyin wants the best.

I can't agree that Littlefinger is kinder or more humane than...anyone at all really. He took possession of an 11 year old girl so he could force her into sexual slavery in one of his brothels. I also don't think he cared about Cat or cares about Sansa. I think he simply covets them and would/will be quite happy to use them for his own purposes.

[Shah]

I can't agree that Littlefinger is kinder or more humane than...anyone at all really. He took possession of an 11 year old girl so he could force her into sexual slavery in one of his brothels. I also don't think he cared about Cat or cares about Sansa. I think he simply covets them and would/will be quite happy to use them for his own purposes.

And Twyin had a girl of 13/14 raped by guards. He order the death of children, not even, babies and their mother.

I do think that Littlefinger cared about Cat, when he killed Lysa he had said he had only loved Cat. He could of easily swayed the emotionally unstable (At the moment) Sansa and convince the love-struck Lysa to show kindness to Sansa which, knowing Sansa, would have had Sansa believing that maybe it was the ale talking. That would have worked in Littlefinger's favor, would it not? Having house Eyrie and Sansa Stark under his wing. I do not think Littlefinger cares about Sansa, I do not doubt for a second that LF would kill Sansa for Cat. LF could wed Sansa much easily than he could with Cat, and Sansa's inheritance is stronger. I think LF cares about Sansa simply because she looks like Cat and Cat is dead, not for Sansa herself.

LF is without a doubt one of the worst characters, but is he worse than Twyin? As ruthless as Twyin is for power and his name?

[Djinn]

I would add Euron, Doran, Oleanna, Roose to the list of candidates.

[grand old duke of stark]

I would add Euron, Doran, Oleanna, Roose to the list of candidates.

And Wyman Manderly.

My candidate is Tywin. He isn't a Prince but acts for one. He is clear on his strategies and is absolutely ruthless in carrying them out. I do think LF and Varys can out-think him and--more importantly--do not have the achilles heel of having untrustworthy children because you didn't give them the type of love they craved. But in terms of ruling and acting, Tywin.

[Arya kiddin']

Shitmouth

[Tynned Lannistark]

And Wyman Manderly.

My candidate is Tywin. He isn't a Prince but acts for one. He is clear on his strategies and is absolutely ruthless in carrying them out. I do think LF and Varys can out-think him and--more importantly--do not have the achilles heel of having untrustworthy children because you didn't give them the type of love they craved. But in terms of ruling and acting, Tywin.

Well said. I am not a Tywin fan. Always thought he was overrated for some of his strategic moves, ignoring his mistakes and his arrogance which made him lose a lot, including his own life. I think there are smarter players.

However, in terms of actually ruling Twin acts like he has read and learned The Prince.

[Talleyrand]

Hodor, he's just Verbal Kint-ing it right now.

[Littlefingers In The Air]

Randyll

[Arthur Dayne's Honor]

Hot Pie

[Queen Daenerys Stormborn]

A long time since I read the Prince. Never read the discourses on Livy. I understand Machiavellianism just refers to Machiavelli’s attack on the Christian vision of politics in the Prince and not his republicanism/virtue theory in his Livy commentary. The latter was his ideal political vision, the Prince was advice for real rulers in Italy at the time.

Machiavelli thinks the aim of Prince’s efforts are to maintain and expand his principality. He needs to defeat external opponents and control internal ones. I remember a lot of the Prince was a matter of fact commentary on how you do this in different states; the way France/Turkey differ, etc.

Love/fear; Machiavelli thinks it is best to have the affection of your subjects. They should like you, you are stronger if you are loved. However, sometimes this is not possible, so it is better to be feared than loved if there is a trade-off. Can’t remember the reason for this. Probably because fear appeals more to self-interest which is the baser motivation.

Must not be hated though. Fear should not lead into hate. Hate seems to be mean being capricious. Unjust taxes, arbitrariness, seizing lands, laying hands on your rivals’ women. Being effeminate too I think, inconstant. So this might be mainly about letting people know where they stand, and giving your subjects security. Example of Ceasare here, put a really brutal guy in charge, let him wipe out his enemies, then executed him so his distanced himself from the hate.

Appearing honest/prepared to be dishonest; you have to look like you adhere to conventional political morality but in certain circumstances breaking the rules is necessary. You must hide this as best you can (or something). So sometimes you are going to have to really play dirty, but you need to be seen not to play dirty.

Other stuff; wipe out your enemies all at once, do it in a single stroke etc.

Fortune is a women. Machiavelli is a patriarchal dick. Everyone depends on fortune but she is a women. She can be mastered if you beat/fuck her hard enough …

O

kay, so that’s all I remember. People seemed to confuse devious, cunning bad with Machiavellian. It is not so though.

How do people measure up?

Littlefinger? Big no.

Guy is much too full of himself and announces his deceitfulness and untrustworthiness. Neither loved nor feared. Not really a prince anyway, go away Littlefinger.

Varys; dunno. Roose; didn’t he boast about treacherously stabbing his own king? Or have I got that wrong. Anyway, not really a contender.

Tywin; kind of. As mentioned, fox, lion and beast. All elements we associate with Tywin. All in the Prince. People do trust Tywin really, but he has pulled some very underhanded actions. He is hated in Dorne though, maybe not anywhere else. People don’t think he is arbitrary or inconstant. However, he made no effort to be liked or loved. He just believed in being feared because he was overcompensating for Tytos. Still, has some resonances of the Prince. If GrrM intended anyone to parallel the Prince it might have been Tywin, but he’s far from being an exact match. Maybe GrrM thinks he’s more convincing than he is. Maybe not. Maybe the parallels are incidental (that fox and lion thing does seem suggestive though).

Renly; don’t really know enough. Wanted to make a clean sweep of the Targ heirs. Would have moved swiftly on Cersei, honor be damned. Popular, amassed loads of support. Might have had lots of potential but I’m not working with much.

Tyrion; not sure. I think his view of politics might be close to Machiavelli’s, if anyone’s is.

Dany is very anti-Machiavellian. On Machiavelli’s rubric poor girl does everything wrong. Oh well.

[rmholt]

My vote is Tywin