Aegon as a king

[Aldarion]

17 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Of course it matters. You say she engages in black-and-white thinking and that this will continue in Westeros, which implies this is some sort of immutable personality flaw of hers. But I've shown several instances where she very quickly forgives - and even grows fond of - people coming to her from enemy camps and people who've betrayed her. Clearly, it very much depends on context. That's why I keep asking you to explain what it is about Westerosi lords that will make Dany think this way.

 

And I have already explained you that Daenerys as she is in Mereen would not expand that treatment to Westerosi lords - but that is why her hallucinations in desert matter. Especially the fact that she hallucinates Jorah Mormont of all people.

17 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Several things wrong with this:

1. The Great Masters are the rulers of Meereen. I'm not sure why so many readers insist on imagining a group of them ardently protesting the crucifixion of slave children given what we've seen of the Good/Wise/Great Masters. Did you not read how the Unsullied are created? These are the people who okay'd that... but some of them didn't want to nail up kids? #NotAllSlavers

2. Dany hates the Great Masters; she gets along fine with the freedmen. The majority of Meereen are the former slaves - why does "Meereenese" refer to the people of the slaver class to you, and not the freedmen? Why does "help the people" mean help the slavers?

3. After Dany outlaws slavery in Meereen, the only changes to occur are: the slavers get a king, the fighting pits get re-opened, people are allowed to sell themselves into slavery. There's progress to be sure, but it's not towards abolition.

You are far from the first person to be making these arguments. What I find problematic about them is that they're always centred the slavers, and how Dany can improve conditions for them.

1) I am not protesting crucifixion of Great Masters as such. What I am protesting is the fact that Daenerys' measure are half-measures in truth. She crucifies some Masters, but not all of them - thus leaving remainder to form, organize and finance Sons of the Harpy. She frees slaves, but apparently does not strip Great Masters of any of their wealth. This fact, alone, makes her achievments useless. It is the economy of democracy. He who holds wealth, holds the power. True rule of the people was always based on existence of powerful middle class: be it citizens of Athens, warrior class in tribal societies, or else Byzantine stratiotes. But she neglected to create that middle class in Mereen - which means that freedom she brought is a jape.

2) Again, see point 1). She may have destroyed slave owners, but she did not help anybody. In fact, some of the freedmen in Mereen were asking her to be allowed to be sold back into slavery, if memory serves me.

3) And that is my point. She made formal changes, but did not create foundation for these changes to stand on. Therefore everything she has done will fall apart - and already is falling apart, in fact.

18 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Again, why? You acknowledged her suspicions are perfectly normal given the environment. Why would this develop into something unhealthy in Westeros?

 

Because there is a danger she might continue to apply the same patterns of thought in Westeros. That is why there is always a friction when person from one culture comes to live - let alone rule - in a different culture.

18 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Several things wrong with this:

1. The Great Masters are the rulers of Meereen. I'm not sure why so many readers insist on imagining a group of them ardently protesting the crucifixion of slave children given what we've seen of the Good/Wise/Great Masters. Did you not read how the Unsullied are created? These are the people who okay'd that... but some of them didn't want to nail up kids? #NotAllSlavers

2. Dany hates the Great Masters; she gets along fine with the freedmen. The majority of Meereen are the former slaves - why does "Meereenese" refer to the people of the slaver class to you, and not the freedmen? Why does "help the people" mean help the slavers?

3. After Dany outlaws slavery in Meereen, the only changes to occur are: the slavers get a king, the fighting pits get re-opened, people are allowed to sell themselves into slavery. There's progress to be sure, but it's not towards abolition.

You are far from the first person to be making these arguments. What I find problematic about them is that they're always centred the slavers, and how Dany can improve conditions for them.

I have shown you her thoughts (though maybe not in this thread). Most important is "dragons plant no trees" part, but it is not the only one. Also notice how her thoughts gradually change:

Quote

And no matter how far the dragon flew each day, come nightfall
some instinct drew him home to Dragonstone. His home, not mine.
Her home was back in Meereen, with her husband and her lover.
That was where she belonged, surely.
Keep walking. If I look back I am lost.

Quote

“Quaithe?” Dany called. “Where are you, Quaithe?”
Then she saw. Her mask is made of starlight. “Remember who you are, Daenerys,” the stars
whispered in a woman’s voice. “The
dragons know. Do you?”

Quote

She dreamt of her dead brother.
Viserys looked just as he had the last time she’d seen him. His
mouth was twisted in anguish, his hair was burnt, and his face was
black and smoking where the molten gold had run down across his
brow and cheeks and into his eyes.
“You are dead,” Dany said.
Murdered. Though his lips never moved, somehow she could hear his voice, whispering in her
ear. You never mourned me, sister. It is hard to die unmourned.
“I loved you once.”
Once, he said, so bitterly it made her shudder. You were supposed to be my wife, to bear me
children with silver hair and purple eyes, to keep the blood of the dragon pure. I took care of
you. I taught you who you were. I fed you. I sold our mother’s crown to keep you fed.
“You hurt me. You frightened me.”
Only when you woke the dragon. I loved you. “You sold me. You betrayed me.”
No. You were the betrayer. You turned against me, against your own blood. They cheated me.
Your horsey husband and his stinking savages. They were cheats and liars. They promised me
a golden crown and gave me this. He touched the molten gold that was creeping down his face,
and smoke rose from his finger.
“You could have had your crown,” Dany told him. “My sun-and-
stars would have won it for you if only you had waited.”
I waited long enough. I waited my whole life. I was their king, their rightful king. They
laughed at me.
“You should have stayed in Pentos with Magister Illyrio. Khal
Drogo had to present me to the dosh khaleen, but you did not have to ride with us. That was your
choice. Your mistake.”
Do you want to wake the dragon, you stupid little whore? Drogo’s khalasar was mine. I bought
them from him, a hundred thousand screamers. I paid for them with your maidenhead.
“You never understood. Dothraki do not buy and sell. They give
gifts and receive them. If you had waited …”
I did wait. For my crown, for my throne, for you. All those years, and all I ever got was a pot
of molten gold. Why did they give the dragon’s eggs to you? They should have been mine. If
I’d had a dragon, I would have taught the world the meaning of our words.
Viserys began to laugh, until his jaw fell away from his face,
smoking, and blood and molten gold ran from his mouth.

Quote

If she had not been so sick and scared, that might have come as a relief. Instead she began to
shiver violently. She rubbed her fingers through the dirt, and grabbed a handful of grass to wipe
between her
legs. The dragon does not weep. She was bleeding, but it was only woman’s blood. The moon is
still a crescent, though. How can that be? She tried to remember the last time she had bled. The
last full moon? The one before? The one before that? No, it cannot have been so long as that. “I
am the blood of the dragon,” she told the grass, aloud.
Once, the grass whispered back, until you chained your dragons in the dark.
“Drogon killed a little girl. Her name was … her name …” Dany
could not recall the child’s name. That made her so sad that she
would have cried if all her tears had not been burned away. “I will
never have a little girl. I was the Mother of Dragons.”
Aye, the grass said, but you turned against your children.

Quote

The soft brown mud felt good between her toes and
helped to soothe her blisters. In the stream or out of it, I must keep walking. Water flows
downhill. The stream will take me to the river, and the river will take me home.
Except it wouldn’t, not truly.
Meereen was not her home, and never would be. It was a city of
strange men with strange gods and stranger hair, of slavers wrapped
in fringed tokar s, where grace was earned through whoring, butchery was art, and dog was a
delicacy. Meereen would always be
the Harpy’s city, and Daenerys could not be a harpy.
Never, said the grass, in the gruff tones of Jorah Mormont. You were warned, Your Grace. Let
this city be, I said. Your war is in Westeros, I told you.

Quote

Lost, because you lingered, in a place that you were never meant to be, murmured Ser Jorah, as
softly as the wind. Alone, because you sent me from your side.
“You betrayed me. You informed on me, for gold.”
For home. Home was all I ever wanted. “And me. You wanted me.” Dany had seen it in his eyes.
I did, the grass whispered, sadly. “You kissed me. I never said you could, but you did. You sold
me to my enemies, but you meant it when you kissed me.”
I gave you good counsel. Save your spears and swords for the Seven Kingdoms, I told you.
Leave Meereen to the Meereenese and go west, I said. You would not listen.
“I had to take Meereen or see my children starve along the march.” Dany could still see the trail
of corpses she had left behind her crossing the Red Waste. It was not a sight she wished to see
again. “I had to take Meereen to feed my people.”
You took Meereen, he told her, yet still you lingered. “To be a queen.”
You are a queen, her bear said. In Westeros. “It is such a long way,” she complained. “I was
tired, Jorah. I was weary of war. I wanted to rest, to laugh, to plant trees and see them grow. I am
only a young girl.”
No. You are the blood of the dragon. The whispering was growing fainter, as if Ser Jorah were
falling farther behind. Dragons plant no trees. Remember that. Remember who you are, what
you were made to be. Remember your words.
“Fire and Blood,” Daenerys told the swaying grass.

She dreams of Quaithe, she dreams of Viserys... she thinks of her dragons and forgets the name of the child said dragons - or rather, Drogon - murdered. Then she states that Mereen is "harpy's city" and dreams Jorah who tells her that "her war is in Westeros", and that she has to "remember her words" - fire and blood.

It is also important to note that when she is trying to maintain peace, she chains dragons in the dark. Dragons clearly represent her destructive impulses - yet by the end, Drogon willingly comes to her. This is symbolic of her accepting path of "fire and blood".

18 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

What Robert and Ned believe is the whole point, as they serve as our only representatives for what Westerosi lords think about Targs returning with Dothraki.

Whole Europe thought that first Huns were scary, and then Mongols were scary too, yet both were in the end comprehensively beaten.

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Aldarion said:

 

And I have already explained you that Daenerys as she is in Mereen would not expand that treatment to Westerosi lords - but that is why her hallucinations in desert matter. Especially the fact that she hallucinates Jorah Mormont of all people.

1) I am not protesting crucifixion of Great Masters as such. What I am protesting is the fact that Daenerys' measure are half-measures in truth. She crucifies some Masters, but not all of them - thus leaving remainder to form, organize and finance Sons of the Harpy. She frees slaves, but apparently does not strip Great Masters of any of their wealth. This fact, alone, makes her achievments useless. It is the economy of democracy. He who holds wealth, holds the power. True rule of the people was always based on existence of powerful middle class: be it citizens of Athens, warrior class in tribal societies, or else Byzantine stratiotes. But she neglected to create that middle class in Mereen - which means that freedom she brought is a jape.

2) Again, see point 1). She may have destroyed slave owners, but she did not help anybody. In fact, some of the freedmen in Mereen were asking her to be allowed to be sold back into slavery, if memory serves me.

3) And that is my point. She made formal changes, but did not create foundation for these changes to stand on. Therefore everything she has done will fall apart - and already is falling apart, in fact.

 

Because there is a danger she might continue to apply the same patterns of thought in Westeros. That is why there is always a friction when person from one culture comes to live - let alone rule - in a different culture.

 

I have shown you her thoughts (though maybe not in this thread). Most important is "dragons plant no trees" part, but it is not the only one. Also notice how her thoughts gradually change:

She dreams of Quaithe, she dreams of Viserys... she thinks of her dragons and forgets the name of the child said dragons - or rather, Drogon - murdered. Then she states that Mereen is "harpy's city" and dreams Jorah who tells her that "her war is in Westeros", and that she has to "remember her words" - fire and blood.

It is also important to note that when she is trying to maintain peace, she chains dragons in the dark. Dragons clearly represent her destructive impulses - yet by the end, Drogon willingly comes to her. This is symbolic of her accepting path of "fire and blood".

Whole Europe thought that first Huns were scary, and then Mongols were scary too, yet both were in the end comprehensively beaten.

That was show-only.  Nobody who has been a slave ever wants to return to that condition, whatever D & D might believe.

In ASOS, some "gently-born" Meereenese asked a Qartheen trader to buy them as slaves. Those were not ex-slaves.

The implication of the latter is that she must finish her revolution, not continue with the half-measures that you rightly criticise.  The path to Westeros is still via Meereen (and probably Volantis and Pentos).

[SeanF]

2 hours ago, Aldarion said:

 

 

Whole Europe thought that first Huns were scary, and then Mongols were scary too, yet both were in the end comprehensively beaten.

Europe got very lucky.  Batu Khan and Subedei went through the Poles, Silesians, Russians,Teutonic Knights, and Hungarians like a knife through butter, during their great raids.  Fortunately, Ogedei Khan died in 1241, and they returned Eastwards.

[Big P]

2 hours ago, Aldarion said:

Again, see point 1). She may have destroyed slave owners, but she did not help anybody. In fact, some of the freedmen in Mereen were asking her to be allowed to be sold back into slavery, if memory serves me.

This is mostly false.  Even the pit fighters were willing to fight against the Yunkai outside Meereen.  Sure some of the freedmen were complaining but they are better off and would rather remain free.  There will always be a few who are in a different situation.  I am sure it was the same way in the southern states of America before their Civil War.  But those are the rare, extreme cases.  So it is quite ignorant to say Dany did not help anybody.  She helped the majority of the freedmen and gave them a chance at a better future.  Dany is the wind of change needed to reform Slaver's Bay.  It will not be easy but she is doing the right thing.  You should be blaming the slaves' former owners and masters for the problems.  The Ghiscari slavers are the ones hindering peace and blocking the way towards a more prosperous future for the majority. 

[Hodor the Articulate]

2 hours ago, Aldarion said:

And I have already explained you that Daenerys as she is in Mereen would not expand that treatment to Westerosi lords - but that is why her hallucinations in desert matter. Especially the fact that she hallucinates Jorah Mormont of all people.

But you haven't demonstrated how her hallucinations have changed her so that she is now inflexible in her judgement of people. In fact, in the hallucination, she expresses regret for dismissing Jorah and says she misses him.

2 hours ago, Aldarion said:

1) I am not protesting crucifixion of Great Masters as such. What I am protesting is the fact that Daenerys' measure are half-measures in truth. She crucifies some Masters, but not all of them - thus leaving remainder to form, organize and finance Sons of the Harpy. She frees slaves, but apparently does not strip Great Masters of any of their wealth. This fact, alone, makes her achievments useless. It is the economy of democracy. He who holds wealth, holds the power. True rule of the people was always based on existence of powerful middle class: be it citizens of Athens, warrior class in tribal societies, or else Byzantine stratiotes. But she neglected to create that middle class in Mereen - which means that freedom she brought is a jape.

2) Again, see point 1). She may have destroyed slave owners, but she did not help anybody. In fact, some of the freedmen in Mereen were asking her to be allowed to be sold back into slavery, if memory serves me.

3) And that is my point. She made formal changes, but did not create foundation for these changes to stand on. Therefore everything she has done will fall apart - and already is falling apart, in fact.

I believe your orignal point was that she takes the easy path. I just don't see how that applies to any of this. One of her biggest mistakes was not removing wealth and political power from the Masters - that we agree on - but I would attribute that to lack of experience and self-doubt, not an unwillingness to take the hard road.

As to 2) see @SeanF's post. The freedmen remain loyal to Dany even after she disappears, which suggests they do consider their lives improved by her.

3 hours ago, Aldarion said:

Because there is a danger she might continue to apply the same patterns of thought in Westeros. That is why there is always a friction when person from one culture comes to live - let alone rule - in a different culture.

She might have a reasonable amount of suspicion towards suspicious people in Westeros? I'm not seeing the problem here.

3 hours ago, Aldarion said:

I have shown you her thoughts (though maybe not in this thread). Most important is "dragons plant no trees" part, but it is not the only one. Also notice how her thoughts gradually change:

She dreams of Quaithe, she dreams of Viserys... she thinks of her dragons and forgets the name of the child said dragons - or rather, Drogon - murdered. Then she states that Mereen is "harpy's city" and dreams Jorah who tells her that "her war is in Westeros", and that she has to "remember her words" - fire and blood.

It is also important to note that when she is trying to maintain peace, she chains dragons in the dark. Dragons clearly represent her destructive impulses - yet by the end, Drogon willingly comes to her. This is symbolic of her accepting path of "fire and blood"

To the bolded: I wouldn't say that's clear at all. Symbolically, it's more that she's losing her identity and not listening to her intuition. At best, you could argue dragons=necessary war. They're juxtaposed with her "floppy ears" i.e. the garment of the Great Masters, after all, which symbolises slavery, not true peace. So when Dany regains her Mother of Dragon persona, it is a final rejection of Slaver's Bay and the slavers' ways. It does not point to Dany arbitrarily dracarys-ing people.

4 hours ago, Aldarion said:

Whole Europe thought that first Huns were scary, and then Mongols were scary too, yet both were in the end comprehensively beaten.

Well Robert and Ned are not Europe, and the Dothraki are a fictional inspired by various nomadic people. We weren't talking about the actual strength of the Dothraki, anyway. You may have to follow the conversation thread back a bit, but the topic was whether Westeros lords cared that Dany had Dothraki in her army. So far, I have as evidence that they don't care: Robert's opinion and the (lack of) reaction towards Stannis using pirates, and towards Tywin using the Brave Companions + the Mountain Clans.

[Rose of Red Lake]

18 hours ago, SeanF said:

Bolivar wore no crown, but he was a Prince (using that word in its old sense, to mean Head of State/Government) who came to power by force of arms.

Her destiny is to fight the Others - and probably perish doing so.  I doubt if she'll sit the Iron Throne for very long.

It's surface. You've fallen for Dany's surface rhetoric, superficial gestures toward freedom and revolution that she's wrapped herself in.

Like most politicians she has ulterior motives. That motive is to rule Westeros and seek vengeance for her family. She is very intense about this.

If she believes its her destiny to be ruling in Westeros - this is incompatible with being a revolutionary fighting for people in Essos. 

Again, she didn't once care about abolitionism or slavery in that chapter - the chapter that is her true thoughts. You can't trust what she says to others because it runs the risk of being political rhetoric. 

Pay attention to what isn't said. 

In that chapter with her internal thoughts, she doesn't say she had to stay in Meereen "to end slavery for good!" It was because she didn't want to leave a trail of corpses after her conquests. That was her guilt talking - not actually any intrinsic desire to stay and make abolitionism her life's work. She stumbled onto being a "revolutionary" on the way to the Iron Throne. She was trying to make her march to the Iron Throne less destructive, just like when she was trying to minimize the damage done during Drogo's raid. That shows that she still hasn't learned Mirri's lessons which exposes her contradictory behaviors; she can't make war and conquest for her own power while trying to save people at the same time. Because eventually, she will reach a point where she has to choose one or the other and COMMIT. 

She would stay fighting for people's freedom until the very end if she was remotely like Bolivar (which she's not).

She wouldn't be taking her armies to conquer additional territory so she can be queen of it, either.

You took someone who was anti-imperialist and compared him to a character who wants to restore an empire. 

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

It's surface. You've fallen for Dany's surface rhetoric, superficial gestures toward freedom and revolution that she's wrapped herself in.

Like most politicians she has ulterior motives. That motive is to rule Westeros and seek vengeance for her family. She is very intense about this.

If she believes its her destiny to be ruling in Westeros - this is incompatible with being a revolutionary fighting for people in Essos. 

Again, she didn't once care about abolitionism or slavery in that chapter - the chapter that is her true thoughts. You can't trust what she says to others because it runs the risk of being political rhetoric. 

Pay attention to what isn't said. 

In that chapter with her internal thoughts, she doesn't say she had to stay in Meereen "to end slavery for good!" It was because she didn't want to leave a trail of corpses after her conquests. That was her guilt talking - not actually any intrinsic desire to stay and make abolitionism her life's work. She stumbled onto being a "revolutionary" on the way to the Iron Throne. She was trying to make her march to the Iron Throne less destructive, just like when she was trying to minimize the damage done during Drogo's raid. That shows that she still hasn't learned Mirri's lessons which exposes her contradictory behaviors; she can't make war and conquest while trying to save people at the same time. She has to choose one or the other and COMMIT. 

She would stay fighting for people's freedom until the very end, if she was remotely like Bolivar (which she's not).

She wouldn't be taking her armies to conquer additional territory so she can be queen of it, either.

You took someone who was anti-imperialist and compared him to a character who wants to restore an empire. 

Well, of course Bolivar, in his lifetime, was accused of precisely the same faults that you accuse Daenerys of - that he was a self-serving tyrant, who made a pretence of freedom, and left a trail of destruction behind him.  He could be quite brutal. For several years, he ruled a huge empire as autocrat.  Like most great leaders he combined both self-interest, and altruism.  It's far more often a case of both/and, rather than either/or.

IMHO, war is actually essential, in this case, in order to save people, in Essos.  And it's just not true that she doesn't care about the slaves in her internal thoughts.  As @Hodor the Articulatequoted:-

"I am not your mother, she might have shouted, back, I am the mother of your slaves, of every boy who ever died upon
these sands whilst you gorged on honeyed locusts."

"you turned against your children."

"I was tired, Jorah. I was weary of war. I wanted to rest, to laugh, to plant trees and see them grow. I am only a young girl.”

Time and again, in her last chapter, she tries to return to Meereen.  Walking to Meereen is scarcely feasible, but that's the effect of not thinking straight, due to delirium and heatstroke.

And if the world does truly face an existential threat from the Others - as she will no doubt hear from Bennero and Marwyn - that threat, too, will only be ended by war.

As to her guilt well, yes, she has spent pages blaming herself for the people she failed to save, while overlooking the people she did save.  She blames herself for the atrocities which her enemies commit against her supporters. 

[Rose of Red Lake]

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

Well, of course Bolivar, in his lifetime, was accused of precisely the same faults that you accuse Daenerys of - that he was a self-serving tyrant, who made a pretence of freedom, and left a trail of destruction behind him.  He could be quite brutal. 

It's one thing to do brutal things to fight oppression - it's another to fight oppression while using it to gain followers on a quest to seek power for yourself to replace the oppressors. It's a distinction that matters. 

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

MHO, war is actually essential, in this case, in order to save people, in Essos.  And it's just not true that she doesn't care about the slaves in her internal thoughts.

She really doesn't.

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

"I am not your mother, she might have shouted, back, I am the mother of your slaves, of every boy who ever died upon these sands whilst you gorged on honeyed locusts."

That's about her hatred of the fighting pits, which isn't quite the same as being committed to abolitionism. Her hatred of the fighting pits is yet another contradiction because it's not all slave labor; there are voluntary fighters like a Westerosi tourney. The contradiction is, she doesn't like violence when other people do it but she's fine with it, when she commits it herself.

But even if this did indicate that she is a dedicated, serious abolitionist, she doesn't continue this anger through to the last chapter - the one where all pretense of trying to be a good Queen of Meereen is slowly melting away.  If she really cared about slavery it would come up in the last chapter, where the arc is being decided.

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

"you turned against your children."

"I was tired, Jorah. I was weary of war. I wanted to rest, to laugh, to plant trees and see them grow. I am only a young girl.”

Umm...

Quote

“Drogon killed a little girl. Her name was … her name …” Dany could not recall the child’s name. That made her so sad that she would have cried if all her tears had not been burned away. “I will never have a little girl. I was the Mother of Dragons.”
Aye, the grass said, but you turned against your children.”

Children=her dragons in that quote, you are misreading it.

Quote

"I was tired, Jorah. I was weary of war. I wanted to rest, to laugh, to plant trees and see them grow. I am only a young girl.”

That's not her thinking of abolitionism - that's just her saying she tried to rebuild. 

Planting trees=rebuilding. But also notice, in these thoughts, she's only thinking about HERSELF. What "I" want. What "I" want to do.

It's not the same as abolitionism or being anti-slavery.

1 hour ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Dany even after she disappears, which suggests they do consider their lives improved by her.

The slave who spit on her might beg to differ?

But even then, the jury is still out on "lives improved" especially if she bails.

Stalin fought Hitler; Stalin had devoted followers who called him "father" who thought he improved their lives; Stalin might have even believed it himself; but still Stalin was terrible tyrant who had ulterior motives and used revolution as a front to gain power for himself.

[Rose of Red Lake]

On 6/24/2020 at 10:22 PM, Hodor the Articulate said:

I asked you what you'd abolish slavery in Meereen. You seem to be always criticising Dany for using violence, but here you accept military force in necessary to achieve that goal, at least to begin with.

Sorry, I missed this earlier reply, this thread is moving too fast.

There's a reason why I criticize Dany for using violence. It's because she's the only person in the book who can destroy entire cities very fast without having to think about it. I criticize her for using violence excessively and carelessly, and for falling back on it when it might not be necessary. 

As I said upthread, she has to strike a balance between being a fighter and not losing her humanity by becoming just as brutal as the slavers. A platform of eye-for-an-eye justice isn't necessary, ever. But it's especially dangerous when she has 3 nukes.

On 6/24/2020 at 10:22 PM, Hodor the Articulate said:

The fighting pits are re-opened. They paraded slaves in front of Dany for the event. Slave markets are opened right outside the city walls. What's next? The only thing I see being rebuilt is the slave trade.

The slave trade in Meereen though? No. She abandoned Astapor and Yunkai, those aren't her cities anymore. And, she didn't want to abolish the slave trade anyway:

Quote

“The Yunkai’i resumed their slaving before I was two leagues from their city. Did I turn back? King Cleon begged me to join with him against them, and I turned a deaf ear to his pleas. I want no war with Yunkai. How many times must I say it? What promises do they require?”

It's odd to say she didn't meet a goal, when she didn't even want that goal to begin with?

She wanted the Harpy to stop killing freedmen in Meereen (which she achieved). She didn't want to end slavery everywhere.

The reason why slaves were at that event, was because the Yunkish were invited for a celebration of the peace that she signed. It's fragile but it's also an achievement that you see as failure. And now you see Dany using excessive violence as justified, when the text is asking "was it really?"

On 6/24/2020 at 10:22 PM, Hodor the Articulate said:

And here you are again, being vague. What political pressures?

Similar to the ones that are made all over the world when problems are resolved through political means and not genocide. What FDR, LBJ, and JFK did for civil rights and social security involved (not excessive or brutal) enforcement, legal frameworks, and economic incentives. You can't use bombs every time a social group is discriminated against or someone needs medical care.

Quote

What are you doing about the other slaver cities bringing war to you?

Recognize, first, that the story is more complicated than what she believes. Not everyone wanted war with her - they were a diverse camp of people. They also fought against her because they thought she was going to enslave them like Cleon. She did little to convince them otherwise--that was why the marriage was so important. Second, if they are bringing war, realize that it's because of mistakes on both sides, that she also broke the guest right by slaughtering innocent people in the fighting pits during a peace celebration. And third, defend Meereen if she has to, but once the war is over she has to transition to rebuilding mode, she has to stay there for life. Aegon I did it; why can't she?

On 6/24/2020 at 10:22 PM, Hodor the Articulate said:

We've already seen that violence and military action (and the threat of) is effective. It's how Dany managed to free slaves in the first place, how Westerosi houses gained and held onto their lands, how Aegon united the kingdoms... it's also how the Masters got Dany to bend. "Be politically astute" is far more vague and needs a whole lot more explanation.

Well you're kind of proving my point - look at how much Dany achieved without DRAGONS. That's the main issue. How unnecessary they are.

Also, you have to be both a fighter and a peacemaker. It goes hand in hand. I hate to bring Sansa and Arya into this but really, you have to be two sides of the same coin and them working together is what is needed. After the conquest of Meereen, Dany had to rebuild it and not go to constant war. And you want to criticize her for it and think that's weakness? Why?

Dany achieved something important with her marriage to Hizdahr. She didn't bend when it came to keeping Meereen free but she was flexible enough to know how to solve a problem without using dragons--that's commendable. We shouldn't be cheering her path to use dragons to solve her problems now, because its excessive and doubtful if she can even solve this problem and bring "freedom" to Essos, with dragons anyway.

If GRRM were to illustrate how nukes were effective for long-term change, it goes against his own statements in interviews.

GRRM's criticisms and praise for Jimmy Carter are lurking in the background here. While he didn't like how Jimmy Carter lacked the stomach for a fight, he also praised him for being a peacemaker at the Camp David accords. He says "Blessed are the Peacemakers" (x). And I think Adam Feldman had it right, that Dany achieved peace but decided war felt better. That's a bad turn.

On 6/24/2020 at 10:22 PM, Hodor the Articulate said:

That is the #1 question.

It's a waste of time to focus so much about the slavers as the big bad. It's a distraction. Look at Dany...she's developing into that.

Quote

In fact, in the hallucination, she expresses regret for dismissing Jorah and says she misses him.

Missing unrepentant slave trader Jorah? He's a human trash can.

[Rose of Red Lake]

6 hours ago, SeanF said:

Nobody who has been a slave ever wants to return to that condition, whatever D & D might believe.

Um, Penny did.

And Tyrion wrestles with that when she wants to return to Yezzen. He acknowledges that most slaves ate better than most peasants in Westeros.

It's just another layer of contradiction that the author would like us to discuss and debate. Why are you trying to make him a less complex a writer than he is?

Quote

 

In ASOS, some "gently-born" Meereenese asked a Qartheen trader to buy them as slaves. Those were not ex-slaves.

 

Gently-born doesn't mean they are the masters. There were various levels of slave class in Athens; it wasn't all chattle slavery. Slaves could even own businesses. If GRRM is basing this on Greek city states, he would have to confront how slaves achieved a level of status that they might want to keep, if the other option is worse. Seems like it's a complexity that you'd prefer to simplify so Dany can look good. 

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

Um, Penny did.

And Tyrion wrestles with that when she wants to return to Yezzen. He acknowledges that most slaves ate better than most peasants in Westeros.

It's just another layer of contradiction that the author would like us to discuss and debate. Why are you trying to make him a less complex a writer than he is?

Gently-born doesn't mean they are the masters. There were various levels of slave class in Athens; it wasn't all chattle slavery. Slaves could even own businesses. If GRRM is basing this on Greek city states, he would have to confront how slaves achieved a level of status that they might want to keep, if the other option is worse. Seems like it's a complexity that you'd prefer to simplify so Dany can look good. 

Slaves and freedmen are not "gently born".  Gently born would be the class immediately below that of the Great Masters. Slave revolts were frequent, in the ancient world, pointing to real unhappiness with their status.  As to Penny, you'll recall that on an earlier thread, you argued that it was fine for Hizdahr to feed her and Tyrion to lions as a form of public entertainment.  That's the problem with being a slave.  Your life can be ended on a whim.

We see slaves revolting, in order to be free, in this tale.  We don't see freedmen revolting in order to be made slaves. You dislike Daenerys so much,  that you  try to find the good in anybody who fights her, however terrible such people might be.  You spend a lot of time justifying, mitigating, excusing, slavery because if Daenerys and her supporters don't like it - well, there must be something good to it. Don't be surprised if other posters call you out on it.

The author does nothing in this story to suggest that slavery isn't so bad, or that slaves would rather be slaves than free.  Martin is not an apologist for slavery. In fact, he lays it on pretty thick, about just how awful Slavers Bay and Volantis are.  Tyrion's arc shows just how precarious the life of a slave is.  In Astapor, three children die for every Unsullied.  In Meereen, they are made to fight as a form of entertainment. In Selhorys, they are raped till the point that they want to die.  Slaves are sold into brothels, raped, tortured, murdered, and are, very much, depicted as chattels.  In Volantis, they are on the point of revolt, and desperate for Daenerys to arrive.   There is not a lot of moral complexity about that yet still, you try to argue for a sort of moral equivalence between slave owner, slave, and freedman.  Not everything comes in shades of grey in this tale.  There's nothing good about Roose and Ramsay Bolton, or Walder Frey, or the Bloody Mummers.  Nor is there about the slave drivers of Slavers Bay.

You  present a false choice between "nukes"/genocide and appeasement, concluding that because nukes destroy, appeasement must be the better course of action.  You overlook that there are many other military choices.  JFK and LBJ used force, as well as negotiation, to bring about change. The problem in ADWD is that change has been going in one direction - from emancipation to unfreedom, not the other way around.   The original treaty she made with Yunkai prohibited them from practising slavery and slave trading.  The fact that the new peace treaty entitles them to do so is a move in the wrong direction.  The fact that they can bring slaves into Meereen, or set up a slave market on Meereenese territory is even more of a move in the wrong direction.

Yunkai, Qarth, New Ghis, and Volantis did not bring war because they foresaw that  Drogon would fly into Daznak's Pit and cause a stampede at some point in the future (an event that you wilfully misrepresent as a massacre that was planned by Daenerys).  They brought war because they know very well that a free Meereen is an existential threat to them. 

Your view that Daenerys doesn't actually care about slaves requires one to disregard pages of text.  She never had to free slaves before entering the pyre.  She never had to risk her life at Astapor.  She could have purchased a couple of thousand Unsullied, or got the lot in return for a small dragon.  She could have done as the Good Masters suggested;  sack a few cities and send them boys to be made into fresh Unsullied.  She could have driven away the 40,000 non-combatants that accompanied her, as Ser Jorah suggested.  She could have accepted a bribe from Yunkai to leave with the Unsullied.  She could have just looted Meereen, and the rest of Slavers Bay, and made out like a bandit.  That's what she would do, if her anti-slavery campaign was just a cynical ploy to recruit an army.  The plunder of Slavers Bay would enable her to hire thousands of mercenaries, over and above the Unsullied.  That she did not do this is evidence that she feels empathy towards, and responsibility for, these people.  

Now, if in TWOW, she does decide to leave the people to be re-enslaved, in pursuit of her claim to the Iron Throne, she'll deserve immense criticism.  All I can say at this stage is that that would be massively out of character, given the textual evidence so far. 

[Lord Varys]

Guys, this isn't another Dany-slavery thread.

This is about Aegon as king, and one can compare him to Dany or anyone in this regard here, but it is not about Dany and slavery.

[Aldarion]

20 hours ago, SeanF said:

Europe got very lucky.  Batu Khan and Subedei went through the Poles, Silesians, Russians,Teutonic Knights, and Hungarians like a knife through butter, during their great raids.  Fortunately, Ogedei Khan died in 1241, and they returned Eastwards.

That was the first invasion. But the forces which Mongols beat in their first invasion have absolutely no resemblance to what Westeros fields - no crossbowmen, no pikemen, very limited heavy cavalry. And when Mongols did encounter forces which had resemblance to Westerosi forces - specifically, Austrian army - they got crushed even in their first invasion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe#Invasion_of_Austria

When Mongols returned for their second invasion, Hungary too fielded Westerosi-style armies - with the result that it defeated Mongol invasion force without too much difficulty.

So you are wrong. Central Europe got very lucky, yes. But Western Europe would have been death for any invading Mongol army - be it in First or in Second invasion. It never happened only because Ogedai Khan died in 1241. (so yes, it was a stroke of good luck - for Mongols) and because in 1285.-1286. nearly entire Mongol force got wiped out in Hungary, so there was nothing left to send westwards.

Dothraki are poor, incompetent version of Mongols (no armour, no proper organization, no siege equipment, no combat engineers - imagine Dothraki building a bridge during night!). Westerosi are better-equipped Hungarians from second Mongol invasion (plate armour as opposed to mail, better crossbows, more knights, better infantry, better castles). Realistically, the only way for Dothraki to have major military impact in Westeros - not win, just have major impact - is for their enemies to start literally dying of laughter. Otherwise, Dothraki will be swatted like an annoying fly.

18 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Europe got very lucky.  Batu Khan and Subedei went through the Poles, Silesians, Russians,Teutonic Knights, and Hungarians like a knife through butter, during their great raids.  Fortunately, Ogedei Khan died in 1241, and they returned Eastwards.

If these hallucinations are irrelevant for her future development, as you appear to think, what is the point of them?

18 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

I believe your orignal point was that she takes the easy path. I just don't see how that applies to any of this. One of her biggest mistakes was not removing wealth and political power from the Masters - that we agree on - but I would attribute that to lack of experience and self-doubt, not an unwillingness to take the hard road.

As to 2) see @SeanF's post. The freedmen remain loyal to Dany even after she disappears, which suggests they do consider their lives improved by her.

Maybe. But she made a lot of mistakes.

As for freedmen, yes, their lives may be improved right now. I will have to reread those parts when I get time. But I am not certain it is a sustainable solution - as we have agreed, she made a mistake in not removing wealth and political power from the Masters. This means that Masters will come back to power and reinstitute the old system the moment she leaves (and yes, such things do happen - we did not have lustration in Croatia, and as a consequence of that, now we have Communists in power. Basically, we fought a war for nothing).

19 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

I believe your orignal point was that she takes the easy path. I just don't see how that applies to any of this. One of her biggest mistakes was not removing wealth and political power from the Masters - that we agree on - but I would attribute that to lack of experience and self-doubt, not an unwillingness to take the hard road.

As to 2) see @SeanF's post. The freedmen remain loyal to Dany even after she disappears, which suggests they do consider their lives improved by her.

Because "reasonable amount" differs from situation to situation. What is reasonable in Mereen is not necessarily reasonable in Westeros.

19 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

To the bolded: I wouldn't say that's clear at all. Symbolically, it's more that she's losing her identity and not listening to her intuition. At best, you could argue dragons=necessary war. They're juxtaposed with her "floppy ears" i.e. the garment of the Great Masters, after all, which symbolises slavery, not true peace. So when Dany regains her Mother of Dragon persona, it is a final rejection of Slaver's Bay and the slavers' ways. It does not point to Dany arbitrarily dracarys-ing people.

On its own, I would agree. But then there is the entire process I have pointed out, which does show her turning towards more volatile policies.

19 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Well Robert and Ned are not Europe, and the Dothraki are a fictional inspired by various nomadic people. We weren't talking about the actual strength of the Dothraki, anyway. You may have to follow the conversation thread back a bit, but the topic was whether Westeros lords cared that Dany had Dothraki in her army. So far, I have as evidence that they don't care: Robert's opinion and the (lack of) reaction towards Stannis using pirates, and towards Tywin using the Brave Companions + the Mountain Clans.

They did care that Stannis brought Red Priestes IIRC. Also, pirates and sellswords (which Brave Companions and Mountain Clans essentially were) are nothing unusual. Daenerys bringing Dothraki to Westeros is IMO much more akin to Jon Snow letting Wildlings through the Wall. And he got murdered for it (well, not just for it, it was merely a trigger).

11 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Guys, this isn't another Dany-slavery thread.

This is about Aegon as king, and one can compare him to Dany or anyone in this regard here, but it is not about Dany and slavery.

I would have copied a response into a new thread but forum software is rather problematic in that regard.

[SeanF]

16 minutes ago, Aldarion said:

That was the first invasion. But the forces which Mongols beat in their first invasion have absolutely no resemblance to what Westeros fields - no crossbowmen, no pikemen, very limited heavy cavalry. And when Mongols did encounter forces which had resemblance to Westerosi forces - specifically, Austrian army - they got crushed even in their first invasion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe#Invasion_of_Austria

When Mongols returned for their second invasion, Hungary too fielded Westerosi-style armies - with the result that it defeated Mongol invasion force without too much difficulty.

So you are wrong. Central Europe got very lucky, yes. But Western Europe would have been death for any invading Mongol army - be it in First or in Second invasion. It never happened only because Ogedai Khan died in 1241. (so yes, it was a stroke of good luck - for Mongols) and because in 1285.-1286. nearly entire Mongol force got wiped out in Hungary, so there was nothing left to send westwards.

Dothraki are poor, incompetent version of Mongols (no armour, no proper organization, no siege equipment, no combat engineers - imagine Dothraki building a bridge during night!). Westerosi are better-equipped Hungarians from second Mongol invasion (plate armour as opposed to mail, better crossbows, more knights, better infantry, better castles). Realistically, the only way for Dothraki to have major military impact in Westeros - not win, just have major impact - is for their enemies to start literally dying of laughter. Otherwise, Dothraki will be swatted like an annoying fly.

 

Though we are straying off-topic, I think that the kind of army that Edward III fielded, in the 1340's, would have been up to defeating the Mongols.

The kind of army that was led by Frederick II or St. Louis, in 1241, well, that would have been more iffy.  

I think the Dothraki ought to be defeated by an army of heavy cavalry, archers, and pikemen, but the author writes them as being very formidable.

[Aldarion]

3 hours ago, SeanF said:

The kind of army that was led by Frederick II or St. Louis, in 1241, well, that would have been more iffy.  

 

Army led by Ladislaus IV in 1285. proved completely adequate to task of defeating Mongols, so no need to go to 1340s. But yeah, we might be better off moving that discussion.

[Hodor the Articulate]

@Aldarion I decided to reply to you here because the below relates back to an earlier discussion about Aegon. You posited the realm would rally behind Aegon against Dany because she has Dothraki, and because her personality flaws. I think we can keep going with our current discussion, but we should try to tie our arguments back to those things to avoid too going off-topic. Otherwise, if you want to talk just about Dany, there's this thread.

btw to bring over quotes from other threads, highlight what you want to reply to and click "quote selection". Then copy-paste the reply to the new thread.

5 hours ago, Aldarion said:

If these hallucinations are irrelevant for her future development, as you appear to think, what is the point of them?

I'm sure I've already mentioned this, but Dany's ADWD story was about identity. The resolution to this arc was her becoming the Mother of Dragons, Mhysa, and the Queen of Westeros again, helped by the hallucinations. What I think it means for the future is she'll continue her war, both against the slavers and to reclaim her family's seat.

I've never said Dany's final chapter was irrelevant to her future development. I just disagree that it points to her changing into someone who can't change her opinion of Westerosi lords.

5 hours ago, Aldarion said:

Because "reasonable amount" differs from situation to situation. What is reasonable in Mereen is not necessarily reasonable in Westeros.

When a person has heightened suspicions, induced by a particular situation, they aren't in that state forever. That's not how people work.

5 hours ago, Aldarion said:

On its own, I would agree. But then there is the entire process I have pointed out, which does show her turning towards more volatile policies.

It doesn't, though. I can't see a single hint that she's going to arbitrarily enact violence unless you strip quotes like "dragons plant no trees" of context.

5 hours ago, Aldarion said:

They did care that Stannis brought Red Priestes IIRC. Also, pirates and sellswords (which Brave Companions and Mountain Clans essentially were) are nothing unusual. Daenerys bringing Dothraki to Westeros is IMO much more akin to Jon Snow letting Wildlings through the Wall. And he got murdered for it (well, not just for it, it was merely a trigger).

The Brave Companions has Dothraki members, so if people are okay with them, they should be okay with Dany's retinue.

People were wary of Mel because of her religion but it didn't stop anyone allying with Stannis - it was his personality that drove people away.

Jon got stabbed because he was taking part in KL politics and letting the NW's enemies settle in the south. People have no reason to assume Dany is bringing over the Dothraki to settle in Westeros.

[Aldarion]

12 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

btw to bring over quotes from other threads, highlight what you want to reply to and click "quote selection". Then copy-paste the reply to the new thread.

 

I have tried that and it only copies the text within.

12 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

I'm sure I've already mentioned this, but Dany's ADWD story was about identity. The resolution to this arc was her becoming the Mother of Dragons, Mhysa, and the Queen of Westeros again, helped by the hallucinations. What I think it means for the future is she'll continue her war, both against the slavers and to reclaim her family's seat.

I've never said Dany's final chapter was irrelevant to her future development. I just disagree that it points to her changing into someone who can't change her opinion of Westerosi lords.

There is more than just that in there however. I personally also see a person who is giving in to her violent impulses, who is tired of compromise and will henceforth solve problems with fire and blood.

13 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

When a person has heightened suspicions, induced by a particular situation, they aren't in that state forever. That's not how people work.

 

It is not just about suspicions, it is about patterns. Patterns of thought, patterns of behaviour... once you fall into a pattern, it can be difficult to leave.

13 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

It doesn't, though. I can't see a single hint that she's going to arbitrarily enact violence unless you strip quotes like "dragons plant no trees" of context.

 

Look at her thoughts in general. By the end of it, she has essentially concluded that peace was a failure - and what does that leave but war? And I should note that she was dissatisfied with peace from the beginning:

Quote

Yunkai’i had come at King Hizdahr’s invitation, to sign the peace and witness the rebirth of
Meereen’s far-famed fighting pits. Her noble husband had opened the Great Pyramid to fete them.
I hate this, thought Daenerys Targaryen. How did this happen, that I am drinking and smiling
with men I’d sooner flay?

Quote

Dany scarce touched a bite. This is peace, she told herself. This is what I wanted, what I worked
for, this is why I married Hizdahr. So why does it taste so much like defeat?

And the entire time, her impatience shows. As I have said, she is making a good progress, but she does not see it because she has not achieved what she wants. She has made compromises, but she doesn't see them as a success; rather, she sees compromises as a defeat:

Quote

“They are permitting that, yes,” she had replied, “but their warships remain. They can close their
fingers around our throat
again whenever they wish. They have opened a slave market within sight of my walls! ”
“Outside our walls, sweet queen. That was a condition of the peace, that Yunkai would be free to
trade in slaves as before, unmolested.”
“In their own city. Not where I have to see it.” The Wise Masters
had established their slave pens and auction block just south of the
Skahazadhan, where the wide brown river flowed into Slaver’s Bay.
“They are mocking me to my face, making a show of how
powerless I am to stop them.”
“Posing and posturing,” said her noble husband. “A show, as you
have said. Let them have their mummery. When they are gone, we
will make a fruit market of what they leave behind.”
“When they are gone,” Dany repeated. “And when will they be gone? Riders have been seen
beyond the Skahazadhan. Dothraki scouts, Rakharo says, with a khalasar behind them. They will
have captives. Men, women, and children, gifts for the slavers.” Dothraki
did not buy or sell, but they gave gifts and received them. “That is
why the Yunkai’i have thrown up this market. They will leave here
with thousands of new slaves.”
Hizdahr zo Loraq shrugged. “But they will leave. That is the
important part, my love. Yunkai will trade in slaves, Meereen will not, this is what we have
agreed. Endure this for a little while longer, and it shall pass.”
So Daenerys sat silent through the meal, wrapped in a vermilion tokar and black thoughts,
speaking only when spoken to, brooding on the men and women being bought and sold outside
her walls,
even as they feasted here within the city. Let her noble husband make the speeches and laugh at
the feeble Yunkish japes. That was
a king’s right and a king’s duty.

Quote

All of the entertainers were slaves. That had been part of the peace, that slaveowners be allowed
the right to bring their chattels into Meereen without fear of having them freed. In return the
Yunkai’i had promised to respect the rights and liberties of the former slaves that Dany had freed.
A fair bargain, Hizdahr said, but
the taste it left in the queen’s mouth was foul. She drank another cup of wine to wash it out.

What all this indicates is that Daenerys is fundamentally opposed to compromise. Yes, Mereen is not the same as Westeros, and slavers are indeed detestable. But compromises still need to be made. As I have stated earlier, Aegon has a small army and no dragons. Thus, whether he likes it or not, he will be forced to compromise in order to succeed in Westeros (and he has to succeed if he and Daenerys are to meet). Daenerys, with her dragons and potentially much larger army, may not see such a need, especially after her experiences in Mereen.

13 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

The Brave Companions has Dothraki members, so if people are okay with them, they should be okay with Dany's retinue.

 

Dothraki members, but how many, and how do they act? There is a difference between few Dothraki in a sellsword company, and an entire khalassar.

13 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

People were wary of Mel because of her religion but it didn't stop anyone allying with Stannis - it was his personality that drove people away.

 

Considering how Stannis had no allies beyond his sworn vassals and family, it is hard to say either way.

13 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Jon got stabbed because he was taking part in KL politics and letting the NW's enemies settle in the south. People have no reason to assume Dany is bringing over the Dothraki to settle in Westeros.

What else will they assume? She is bringing whole khalassar, not just a few sellswords. This means that Aegon is at advantage precisely because he is bringing only the Golden Company.

 

[Hodor the Articulate]

3 hours ago, Aldarion said:

There is more than just that in there however. I personally also see a person who is giving in to her violent impulses, who is tired of compromise and will henceforth solve problems with fire and blood.

*compromise with slavers. If Westerosi lords start slaving, I'm sure she'll fire and blood them, and good riddance I say. What other situations are you envisioning, where she could compromise but just executes people instead? And how/why would Aegon at differently?

3 hours ago, Aldarion said:

It is not just about suspicions, it is about patterns. Patterns of thought, patterns of behaviour... once you fall into a pattern, it can be difficult to leave.

Which Dany hasn't exhibited. She's suspicious of people who are suspicious (sellswords, Hizdahr, XXD) and trusting of people of are trustworthy (Barristan, Grey Worm). This doesn't change in her last chapter that I can see.

Also, one of first things a psychiatrist will tell you to do to break a pattern of behavior is to change settings.

3 hours ago, Aldarion said:

What all this indicates is that Daenerys is fundamentally opposed to compromise. Yes, Mereen is not the same as Westeros, and slavers are indeed detestable. But compromises still need to be made. As I have stated earlier, Aegon has a small army and no dragons. Thus, whether he likes it or not, he will be forced to compromise in order to succeed in Westeros (and he has to succeed if he and Daenerys are to meet). Daenerys, with her dragons and potentially much larger army, may not see such a need, especially after her experiences in Mereen.

* compromise with slavers.

Again, I'm a bit unclear as to what compromises you're thinking of.

4 hours ago, Aldarion said:

Dothraki members, but how many, and how do they act? There is a difference between few Dothraki in a sellsword company, and an entire khalassar.

The Brave Companions are a pretty gruesome lot and imo worse than the Dothraki. The latter enslave, pillage, and rape, but at least they're not purposely mutilating their victims.

We're not told of how many Dothraki members are in the BC but they sound to be as diverse as any other sellsword group. Dany will have a khalasar but she'll also have Unsullied, freedmen, sellswords from all over, and whatever Houses she'll pick up in Westeros. Altogether, a pretty diverse group. So if people are okay with other lords using "foreign savages", Dany should be okay with hers too.

4 hours ago, Aldarion said:

Considering how Stannis had no allies beyond his sworn vassals and family, it is hard to say either way.

His vassals didn't have to follow him either. Lord Sunglass withdraws his support after Mel burns a sept. Celtigar, after Stannis loses at Blackwater. No one has left because of the foreign pirates, and we hear nothing about anyone refusing to join him because pirates, either.

4 hours ago, Aldarion said:

What else will they assume? She is bringing whole khalassar, not just a few sellswords. This means that Aegon is at advantage precisely because he is bringing only the Golden Company.

They'll assume she's using the Dothraki to fight. It's pretty well known their home is the Dothraki Sea. The GC on the other hand, is full of Westerosi exiles and children of exiles, all wanting to go back to Westeros. JonCon has already taken over his nephew's seat. Westerosi lords are more likely to fear being displaced by the CG than they are the Dothraki.

[SeanF]

In all this discussion, the irony is that the Flower of Chivalry of Westeros can be just as savage as any Dothraki.  The only difference is that they have coats of arms.  

[Aldarion]

4 hours ago, SeanF said:

In all this discussion, the irony is that the Flower of Chivalry of Westeros can be just as savage as any Dothraki.  The only difference is that they have coats of arms.  

Can be. Doesn't mean that they usually are. And besides, how often have we seen them in war? Reach hasn't sent forces to campaign proper, North doesn't have concept of chivalry, Westerlands have... Tywin, Dragonstone doesn't have many knights, and everybody else is either on defensive, out of focus, or both.

4 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

In all this discussion, the irony is that the Flower of Chivalry of Westeros can be just as savage as any Dothraki.  The only difference is that they have coats of arms.  

Aegon would act differently because he doesn't have experience with slavers to colour his judgement. And how can you be sure that Daenerys will not go "anybody questioning my right to my throne" = "no better than slaver?". She has those experiences for a reason, just as Aegon's episode with Stone Man is there for a reason too.

4 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Which Dany hasn't exhibited. She's suspicious of people who are suspicious (sellswords, Hizdahr, XXD) and trusting of people of are trustworthy (Barristan, Grey Worm). This doesn't change in her last chapter that I can see.

It is also a question of quantity. I do agree that being suspicious of Hizdahr e.g. is not stupid, but she hardly gives him a chance - IIRC, she basically started screwing Daario behind his back almost straight away.

4 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

* compromise with slavers.

Again, I'm a bit unclear as to what compromises you're thinking of.

She is ruling a (formerly) slaver city, whose ruling class she didn't slaughter. And she is surrounded by slaver cities. Therefore, if she wants to ensure peace, compromise with slavers is a must.

4 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

The Brave Companions are a pretty gruesome lot and imo worse than the Dothraki. The latter enslave, pillage, and rape, but at least they're not purposely mutilating their victims.

We're not told of how many Dothraki members are in the BC but they sound to be as diverse as any other sellsword group. Dany will have a khalasar but she'll also have Unsullied, freedmen, sellswords from all over, and whatever Houses she'll pick up in Westeros. Altogether, a pretty diverse group. So if people are okay with other lords using "foreign savages", Dany should be okay with hers too.

Brave Companions aren't exactly a recommendation in Westeros. And they are being used by an established lord.

4 hours ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

They'll assume she's using the Dothraki to fight. It's pretty well known their home is the Dothraki Sea. The GC on the other hand, is full of Westerosi exiles and children of exiles, all wanting to go back to Westeros. JonCon has already taken over his nephew's seat. Westerosi lords are more likely to fear being displaced by the CG than they are the Dothraki.

It is also pretty well known that Dothraki do not cross the sea easily. Yet now they are coming to Westeros.