Jump to content

What do you think of this argument that I found for why Dany isn't a good ruler?


Recommended Posts

But the previous king does have a legitimate heir. Now maybe Stannis doesn't deserve thrown. But if he doesn't, why? Is there some reasonable justification for removing him from power, other than of course "he isn't my favorite character".

Because other Lords in Westeros don't like him? That is the thing about claims they are only as good as the support you can get from them. Renly had one of the weakest claims to the Throne but yet had the largest army during the WOTFK. If not for a shadow baby assassin shanking him he very well could have seized the throne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like someone starting as the new CEO next week and no one sent out a memo.

I think most of the kingdoms exist in obliviousness to her existence, they only send assassins after her on the assumption she'd eventually press her claim, not because she's actively doing anything.

Say what you want about Aegon being fake, but at least the boy's got gumption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how I feel about getting into the whole "legitimacy" argument, but I'd posit that it's not that simple.

Well, it's not really an argument. That's objectively the state of affairs right now.

Yes, the matter is more complex, but the issue for now was simply that Dany is not the queen, but nothing but a claimant.

There's not that much to misinterpret in that regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Westeros recognizes a single authority figure, that figure becomes the "rightful" king. We don't need to overcomplicate this by bringing up some sort of democratic process invested with the authority of consensus in itself, for heaven's sake. What matters in terms of "rightful" is that people see this person as the authority. Whether it's because they are super swell, or because they beat the shit out of the opposition and there is just no fight left.

Which people are we talking about? And how do we know "the people" see so and so as the authority. Do they have polling firms in Westeros now? And what if the people see so and so as the rightful authority simply because that person has the biggest army? I think we do need to complicate this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's not really an argument. That's objectively the state of affairs right now.

Yes, the matter is more complex, but the issue for now was simply that Dany is not the queen, but nothing but a claimant.

There's not that much to misinterpret in that regard.

Well, just to be clear, I'm on your side in the "Dany is not 'queen'" debacle. I'm not in opposition to you on this matter.

The "legitimacy" issue isn't so objective or simple, but that seems irrelevant to the thread anyway.

Which people are we talking about? And how do we know "the people" see so and so as the authority. Do they have polling firms in Westeros now? And what if the people see so and so as the rightful authority simply because that person has the biggest army? I think we do need to complicate this.

Well, for a start, the lords. And from the lords, the people they command to fight for them.

I'm saying you shouldn't overcomplicate this with appeals to quasi-democratic processes. I'm pretty clearly not talking about setting up a Westerosi Gallup Poll. I'm talking about getting Westeros to recognize one king, the way it did with the Targs and then Robert.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think most of the kingdoms exist in obliviousness to her existence, they only send assassins after her on the assumption she'd eventually press her claim.

Say what you want about Aegon being fake, but at least the boy's got gumption.

Agreed. It was actually just the inner circle/consultants of the royal family that knew about her at all IIRC. Most of them are now either dead or disappeared anyway.

Yeah, Aegon knows how to press a claim. By showing up on the lord's fucking lands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He lost whatever claim he had when overthrown.

That's really not how it works. The Lancasters didn't lose their claim because Yorkist Edward IV overthrew Henry VI. Henry Tudor was later able to rally support against the House of York because he still had a claim through blood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think "the people" only care about their local lord, you know; the guy who's authority actually matters in their lives, they don't really give a damn who's King.

In reality yes, that's what the game of thrones (and feudalism really) is about. They follow the lord who has direct authority over them, and the one who can amass most of those lords is actually in charge.

That's probably what Littlefinger is trying to do, without even being king.

Oh you meanie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because other Lords in Westeros don't like him? That is the thing about claims they are only as good as the support you can get from them. Renly had one of the weakest claims to the Throne but yet had the largest army during the WOTFK. If not for a shadow baby assassin shanking him he very well could have seized the throne.

All the lords don't like him? Or just the ones in the Storm Lands and the Reach? And is their dislike reasonable? Also, if it comes down to the consent of local lords, what does that say about Dany's claim? How many does she have now that support her? And of course, if consent of the lords is what makes the claims legitimate, then clearly Dany's birth hardly gives her claim at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. It was actually just the inner circle/consultants of the royal family that knew about her at all IIRC. Most of them are now either dead or disappeared anyway.

Yeah, Aegon knows how to press a claim. By showing up on the lord's fucking lands.

Hell, they'll probably think she's some foreign invader when she arrives on Westeros.

Some of them might at least know who Aegon the baby was, for all they know "Danyarys (fucking Valyarian names) Stormborn" is some Volantine invader pretending to be related to Aerys, which is quite ironic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not going to stop, it'll only end when all parties tire of the conversation after it's been run into the dirt.

Yeah, I have no issue with that their are different views on this, even if I understand them.

It's that once in a while someone still insists that only one possibility is right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hell, they'll probably think she's some foreign invader when she arrives on Westeros.

Some of them might at least know who Aegon the baby was.

Being Rhaegar's son probably also resonates more than being his little sister. Let's be honest here, it's Westeros.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, just to be clear, I'm on your side in the "Dany is not 'queen'" debacle. I'm not in opposition to you on this matter.

The "legitimacy" issue isn't so objective or simple, but that seems irrelevant to the thread anyway.

Well, for a start, the lords. And from the lords, the people they command to fight for them.

I'm saying you shouldn't overcomplicate this with appeals to quasi-democratic processes. I'm pretty clearly not talking about setting up a Westerosi Gallup Poll. I'm talking about getting Westeros to recognize one king, the way it did with the Targs and then Robert.

Ok, I suppose I get on board with the idea that the consent of the lords is what establishes the legitimacy of kings in Westeros, to some of extent, since that would move things in a better direction than mere Divine Right. But, if consent of the lords is what matters, in the end, then what kind of claim does Dany have again, based on her birth?

On side note. Does it matter if its a majority of lords, or just the ones with the biggest armies?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's really not how it works. The Lancasters didn't lose their claim because Yorkist Edward IV overthrew Henry VI. Henry Tudor was later able to rally support against the House of York because he still had a claim through blood.

Well yes in the sense that Dany still has a case that she can make to Westerosi lords sympathetic to the Targaryens (if any exist). She still needs to actually convince people to support her though. A claim on its own doesn't mean much. Especially since I see no evidence of Westeros having any kind of actual codified legal system.

She is only the rightful queen if you think the Targaryens should be in power and if you think Aegon is fake. How many people in Westeros actually think that way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...