Jon & Daenerys’ Flaws as Leaders

[Maegor_the_Cool]

I think we can all agree that Jon & Daenerys are the closest characters we have to the “heroes” of the story. Both are thrust into positions of leadership, and both are good intentioned. But both have major flaws that effect them.

To me, Jon’s major issue is that he doesn’t communicate his thoughts very well with the NW causing brothers to take issues with what he does. I’m not saying all his issues would’ve been solved if he just communicated better, but I think it would’ve helped him immensely.

Dany’s is harder to pin point. It’s obvious that she isn’t doing a very good job at ruling Slaver’s Bay. All 3 cities are in complete disarray since she took power. Ending slavery was the right thing to do, but she really had no plans for what comes after. She got bought off by Yunkai and slavery came back she took hostages to keep the peace and then revealed she had no intention of ever actually harming them, rendering the action meaningless and it weakened her position. To me, that shows that while she wants to do the right thing, but she doesn’t plan for or expect to have to do anything afterwards. Unless she learns a lot, and quickly, she seems like she’ll have to rule using fear of her dragons. As a tyrant.

[Curled Finger]

Well, Jon and Dany are both quite young and novice at what they are doing.  While Jon has had a few mentors they have been short associations so he hasn't really had any intensive er training in commanding, human resources, finance, conflict management, communications, power body language, efficient memo writing, inventory control...you know, stuff you normally get as crew leader at the fast food place.  Dany has had even less training in life as she bounced here to there beneath her brother's decisions and we are well aware how much wisdom he had.  None of this is to say that either hasn't had some extraordinary experience as well as deeply innate talent.  They are essentially good people with good hearts and good intentions.  Virtually no training.  Dany speaks a few languages and Jon's a pretty good fighter, they both have remarkable abilities to garner loyalty among masses even foreign masses of people.

They have many flaws as leaders, 7 hells, they have many flaws as people.  They are still young and learning and completely unprepared for the responsibility that has fallen on them and been pushed on them.  They have heroic dispositions that their close friends exploit, but their close friends are not the best advisors.   They aren't Tywin or Tyrion Lannister or (Rh'llor help me) Catelyn Stark or even Davos Seaworth.  They are a book smart scared boy and a collection of discarded knights, prostitutes and blood riders.  If Jon had Wyman Manderly and Dany had Tyrion Lannister we could really see what these kids could do with all that power and talent and skill they would have.  

Until then it's too early to tell.  

[Corvo the Crow]

 Allowing rape go unpunished with the claims of "your wife was property at the time" is wrong. Allowing people to sell themselves into slavery while claiming you are out to end slavery is also wrong. I am not even talking about harboring criminals and not ordinary criminals but baby murderers like Janos Slynt and thousands of them.

[Craving Peaches]

2 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Allowing rape go unpunished with the claims of "your wife was property at the time"

It's a bit inconsistent. You have to be either with the Slavers or against them. Daenerys spent too long trying to toe the middle line and it didn't work.

[Corvo the Crow]

4 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

It's a bit inconsistent. You have to be either with the Slavers or against them. Daenerys spent too long trying to toe the middle line and it didn't work.

I am not even talking about the massacre at Astapor, which is also inconsitent. She massacred the freeborn there but let Meereenese live. I'm pretty sure if they were given chance many at Astapor would've altered their ways, this is quite evident with the Shavepates of Meereen who are even giving their lives fighting the Sons of Whorepy in defense of the new ways.

[Craving Peaches]

1 minute ago, Corvo the Crow said:

I am not even talking about the massacre at Astapor, which is also inconsitent. She massacred the freeborn there but let Meereenese live. I'm pretty sure if they were given chance many at Astapor would've altered their ways, this is quite evident with the Shavepates of Meereen who are even giving their lives fighting the Sons of Whorepy in defense of the new ways.

I mean her whole policy in Meereen is flawed. She keeps on trying to appease the Slavers which is never going to work unless she just restores the status quo again which she wouldn't do or it would undermine the whole campaign, at the same time giving the Slavers all these things could upset the ex-slaves.

[Maegor_the_Cool]

1 hour ago, Corvo the Crow said:

 Allowing rape go unpunished with the claims of "your wife was property at the time" is wrong. Allowing people to sell themselves into slavery while claiming you are out to end slavery is also wrong. I am not even talking about harboring criminals and not ordinary criminals but baby murderers like Janos Slynt and thousands of them.

Cmon Corvo. You are coming off like all the raving mad Stark haters

[Craving Peaches]

14 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Branding the Unsullied “baby murderers”,

Technically they were committing a crime when they killed the babies though. Obviously there was a big element of coercion when they killed the infants to complete their training but coercion is not a defence to murder. They should use diminished responsibility instead to have it reduced to a manslaughter charge. I wouldn't say they were as bad as Slynt but they chose to kill those infants, even if it was under some duress.

[Craving Peaches]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

They had to kill or be killed.  Very brutally.

Well the position of the law is that you should sacrifice your own life rather than take an innocent's. Now this might not be a reasonable position but it is what it is. Obviously the Masters who created and support the cruel system are the villains, but the unsullied in training were complicit in killing the babies.

[SeanF]

6 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Well the position of the law is that you should sacrifice your own life rather than take an innocent's. Now this might not be a reasonable position but it is what it is. Obviously the Masters who created and support the cruel system are the villains, but the unsullied in training were complicit in killing the babies.

If I, a middle-aged lawyer in a prosperous democracy, kill babies, I’m rightly going to be considered a monster.

If I, a slave who has been castrated, and subject to appalling brutality from boyhood, am told to kill a baby upon pain of death, that is a completely different thing.

[Maegor_the_Cool]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

If I, a middle-aged lawyer in a prosperous democracy, kill babies, I’m rightly going to be considered a monster.

If I, a slave who has been castrated, and subject to appalling brutality from boyhood, am told to kill a baby upon pain of death, that is a completely different thing.

Exactly. They are slaves. Brainwashed from a young age, and threatened with the reality of their station. If they don’t, they die brutally, and it’s complete legal.

[kissdbyfire]

4 minutes ago, SeanF said:

If I, a middle-aged lawyer in a prosperous democracy, kill babies, I’m rightly going to be considered a monster.

If I, a slave who has been castrated, and subject to appalling brutality from boyhood, am told to kill a baby upon pain of death, that is a completely different thing.

I agree. The brutality that they’ve been subjected to since they were children changes everything. The level of psychological damage alone is horrendous. 

[Craving Peaches]

9 minutes ago, SeanF said:

If I, a slave who has been castrated, and subject to appalling brutality from boyhood, am told to kill a baby upon pain of death, that is a completely different thing.

The Unsullied do still have a choice. I am not trying to demonise them, I understand the position they in, but trying to act like they have no complicity in killing those babies whatsoever is silly. Obviously they are not nearly as culpable as someone who choses to kill an infant of their own free will, but there is a degree of liability. Most people instinctively understand there is something wrong will killing/harming animals and small children.

9 minutes ago, SeanF said:

If I, a middle-aged lawyer in a prosperous democracy, kill babies, I’m rightly going to be considered a monster.

Of course. But I fail to see how this is a comparison to what you posted below because there is no element of coercion here. It is someone choosing willingly to kill a child vs someone killing a child under duress.

[Craving Peaches]

3 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I agree. The brutality that they’ve been subjected to since they were children changes everything. The level of psychological damage alone is horrendous. 

If they can kill a child then it must have been very significant brainwashing because as I said above people aside from psychopaths have an innate sense of wrongness when it comes to hurting children and animals (and to be honest other people). I don't think the Unsullied are psychopaths because we have numerous examples to the contrary, but if I were in their position I still don't think I could ever kill a newborn baby...

[SeanF]

3 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

If they can kill a child then it must have been very significant brainwashing because as I said above people aside from psychopaths have an innate sense of wrongness when it comes to hurting children and animals (and to be honest other people).

They’re in a similar position to inmates at Treblinka made to work as Sonderkomnandos.

Astapor is one vast concentration camp.  

[Corvo the Crow]

Can't really recall the argument but some people here have argued a month or two back that people can not be owned, so it is quite confusing that the same people absolve unsullied of their actions because they were slaves or not upset about Dany not punishing a great master for being together with a slave girl because she was at the time a slave, to the point of not even mentioning it. 

 

 

[kissdbyfire]

Just now, Craving Peaches said:

If they can kill a child then it must have been very significant brainwashing because as I said above people aside from psychopaths have an innate sense of wrongness when it comes to hurting children and animals (and to be honest other people).

I agree. I’m no expert, but seems to me they have been very significantly brainwashed and probably suffer some form of Stockholm Syndrome as well. I haven’t read those chapters in a very long time, but isn’t there some clues (maybe it is even spelled out) that they don’t really function like normal adults? That they don’t react like mentally healthy humans are expected to react? I’m not in any way, shape or form condoning the murder of babies, but I can’t just say they’re “baby murderers” b/c I don’t think that is a fair description even though they did kill babies.

[Morte]

1 minute ago, Craving Peaches said:

If they can kill a child then it must have been very significant brainwashing because as I said above people aside from psychopaths have an innate sense of wrongness when it comes to hurting children and animals (and to be honest other people).

It is of course brainwashing. The brainwashing of trauma.

Trauma doesn't make you sensitive toward other people, trauma makes you numb. Read Primo Levi.

Beside: One can have a sense of wrongness as much as one likes, if it comes to the question "kill or be killed", most people will kill - Milgram shows that for most people a command is all what is needed.

Of course not in the hypothetical Hollywood scenario in their heads, in our heads we are all heroes, we are all Spartacus.

[Craving Peaches]

Just now, kissdbyfire said:

I’m not in any way, shape or form condoning the murder of babies, but I can’t just say they’re “baby murderers” b/c I don’t think that is a fair description even though they did kill babies.

I don't think they are baby murderers either, if they are guilty of a crime it would be culpable homicide (murder charge reduced) due to diminished responsibility that we can safely say was induced by the Masters' treatment. Possibly you could also make an argument that they weren't guilty at all due to automatism but I don't think they would pass this test...I don't know, I just think I would kill myself rather than kill an innocent baby...

[SeanF]

3 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Can't really recall the argument but some people here have argued a month or two back that people can not be owned, so it is quite confusing that the same people absolve unsullied of their actions because they were slaves or not upset about Dany not punishing a great master for being together with a slave girl because she was at the time a slave, to the point of not even mentioning it. 

 

 

Try putting yourself in the shoes of people who are grossly brutalised, for years, and then told it’s their life, or the life of another.