Has Martin ever remarked about Dany?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

It's a state of emergency and requires immediate action. Like serfs and other non-nobles in Westoros have to work without pay.

That's not what bartering is, I'm pretty sure. But OK, let's say it's a state of emergency. So what's Dany's excuse?

[Ser_Patreck]

You are ignoring the context. The belief that it is evil to intervene in the affairs of another nation is a legalist invention developed after the Treaty of Westiphalia in 1644 and linked to the notion of national soveriegnty. It was largely out of a desire to prevent conflict and an external power acting in support of religious elements inside their own borders. This is why the Iraq War is considered illegal and wrong. It violated international law and the prescribed standards of national soveriegnty. One nation imposed its own moral standards of governence upon another. That, is what is objected to. Not the actual removal of Sadam or even the concept of military force for the greater good; something the UN actually allows under its mandate. Had the Iraqis done it themselves; perfectly legitimate. But this is a purely modern invention that was alien to the medieval period and to Westeros. International law is as much about modern morality as is the notion of democracy being an inherent good or that status should be based on ability not birth. For that reason it does not apply to any judgement of Dany that she does not behave to an acceptable standard of modern international law because she does not have to cater to the readers modern expectations of behaviour between sovereign nation-states and the expectation she not intervene in their affairs. We can no more judge her for that than we can for Westeros executing people for crimes and serfdom.

You know I believe, as I'am endlessly told, that Martin is pushing moral greyness so even if Dany does crush her enemies like ants she is still fulfilling a Greater Good.

I am ignoring no context. Morality has no context. If it's right it's right it's right. If it's right to make an militarily intervention to impose your belief, it's right now as it was then. If it's wrong to intervene, if revolution can only come from the inside, Dany's wrong. It's as simple as that.

There's a term for characters that warp morality around themselves.

But now I ask you, my friend, how far can Dany go for the Greater Good? At which point killing and burning and slaughtering ceases to be about the Greater Good? Are you aware how many people died in our history "for the Greater Good"?

The worst tyrant is the one that convinced herself that what's she's doing is for her victims own good.

It's a state of emergency and requires immediate action. Like serfs and other non-nobles in Westoros have to work without pay.

A state of emergency that she caused.

"Oh, hey, I started a fire! Oh, hey, I'm stomping it! I'm a hero!"

And serfs and other non-workers in Westeros are paid. The Crown had to pay for every banquet that Robert threw, for example, and pay for every guard.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

And serfs and other non-workers in Westeros are paid. The Crown had to pay for every banquet that Robert threw, for example, and pay for every guard.

Yeah — if no one was being paid for goods and labor (armor, guarding, food prep, crops, jewels, clothing, whatever), then how did the crown wind up in so much debt?

[Winter's Knight]

That's not what bartering is, I'm pretty sure. But OK, let's say it's a state of emergency. So what's Dany's excuse?

When did I say bartering is a state of emergency?

I said serfs may be compelled to render services without compensation during emergencies.

Food is running out and they need canals for water for the beans. n a city that is beggered because their leaders burnt the surrounding farmland, growing food is a first priority isn't it?

Sidenote: Can someone tell me how the Meereenese expected to eat if Dany had left them alone?

[Sevumar]

It's a state of emergency and requires immediate action. Like serfs and other non-nobles in Westoros have to work without pay.

When they're not at war, most people in Westeros seem to have only sporadic contact with the cash economy. In the towns and cities, we see people who deal with cash on a regular basis, but in many parts of Westeros, there are large numbers of people engaged in subsistence agriculture, fishing, and hunting, while bartering their excess and handicrafts for other goods and services.

[total1402]

I am ignoring no context. Morality has no context. If it's right it's right it's right. If it's right to make an militarily intervention to impose your belief, it's right now as it was then. If it's wrong to intervene, if revolution can only come from the inside, Dany's wrong. It's as simple as that.

There's a term for characters that warp morality around themselves.

But now I ask you, my friend, how far can Dany go for the Greater Good? At which point killing and burning and slaughtering ceases to be about the Greater Good? Are you aware how many people died in our history "for the Greater Good"?

The worst tyrant is the one that convinced herself that what's she's doing is for her victims own good.

Morality does have a context. What is viewed as morally evil in one culture might be totally normalized in another;especially at a different time. For example 400 years ago in this country the idea of a couple having sex outside of wedlock was considered morally evil and meant you were going to hell. Today you're "one of the ladz" for having sex with as many women as you can if you're a man.

The extent of the Greater Good is limitless. How many people died to beat the Axis in WW2? How many innocents? How many lives broken and ruined? The leaders of nations and camps hunted down like animals and hanged. A deal made with the totalitarian Soviet Union that split Europe in two. I could go on. I think Martin is being grey, but that doesn't make Dany the self-centered villain.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

When did I say bartering is a state of emergency?

I replied with an explanation of how bartering actually worked and you're the one who started talking about "states of emergency." So, you tell me what you're talking about.

I said serfs may be compelled to render services without compensation during emergencies.

Food is running out and they need canals for water for the beans. n a city that is beggered because their leaders burnt the surrounding farmland, growing food is a first priority isn't it?

Sidenote: Can someone tell me how the Meereenese expected to eat if Dany had left them alone?

It's an emergency that she's responsible for. She doesn't realize that growing food takes TIME and that in this situation, it might be wiser to figure out a way to import it. Someone like, oh I don't know, a skilled merchant might be able to help her with this, but she has him digging a ditch instead.

If Dany had left Meereen alone, I presume that they would have imported food as I suggested. Given the climate, even with some crops, I suspect that Slaver's Bay cities imported most of their food anyway.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

The extent of the Greater Good is limitless. How many people died to beat the Axis in WW2? How many innocents? How many lives broken and ruined? The leaders of nations and camps hunted down like animals and hanged. A deal made with the totalitarian Soviet Union that split Europe in two. I could go on. I think Martin is being grey, but that doesn't make Dany the self-centered villain.

Are you seriously comparing the vanity mission of a spoiled brat to fighting the Axis powers in WWII?

[Winter's Knight]

I replied with an explanation of how bartering actually worked and you're the one who started talking about "states of emergency." So, you tell me what you're talking about.

It's an emergency that she's responsible for. She doesn't realize that growing food takes TIME and that in this situation, it might be wiser to figure out a way to import it. Someone like, oh I don't know, a skilled merchant might be able to help her with this, but she has him digging a ditch instead.

If Dany had left Meereen alone, I presume that they would have imported food as I suggested. Given the climate, even with some crops, I suspect that Slaver's Bay cities imported most of their food anyway.

I was trying to make two different points:

1. Serfs deal n bartering more than being paid by their lords.
   
2. Serfs, during emergencies, can be compelled to work without compensation.
   

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

I was trying to make two different points:

Serfs deal n bartering more than being paid by their lords.

And there is nothing wrong with bartering, like I said. Bartering is a rudimentary economic system, but still a valid system.

Serfs, during emergencies, can be compelled to work without compensation.

And is this viewed as a desirable system? Is it the norm?

[total1402]

Are you seriously comparing the vanity mission of a spoiled brat to fighting the Axis powers in WWII?

He asked me how far you could push the concept of the greater good, In this case freeing the slaves before the activity becomes monstrous. I pointed out that in modern history, in WW2, the ansawr is clearly that there is no limit if the cause is just; a belief stamped in every monument and celebrated publicly and annually in many Western nations. Dany freeing the slaves is a just cause, ergo her using grey tactics and killing a lot of people to get that goal is fairly justified and if successful certainly looked on favourably after the event. Remember, autocracy is not questioned in a medieval fantasy setting otherwise every character is evil. For example, Robb had no right to take the North to war just because his father was executed and the family honour slighted. That was just as much a personal desire that he imposed upon his realm and made his people suffer because he lost as Dany. You and others are using a double standard and applying extremely high standards of modern morality upon a medieval ruler.

[Sevumar]

I was trying to make two different points:

1. Serfs deal n bartering more than being paid by their lords.
   
2. Serfs, during emergencies, can be compelled to work without compensation.
   

Westerosi peasants don't seem to be serfs based on what we've read in the series. They're not bound to the land and seem to have freedom of movement if they desire to (and have the resources to) leave the area and pursue work or domicile somewhere else. They can be compelled to serve in the armies of their lord, but otherwise, seem to be free from compulsory labor in other regards.

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

He asked me how far you could push the concept of the greater good, In this case freeing the slaves before the activity becomes monstrous. I pointed out that in modern history, in WW2, the ansawr is clearly that there is no limit if the cause is just; a belief stamped in every monument and celebrated publicly and annually in many Western nations. Dany freeing the slaves is a just cause, ergo her using grey tactics and killing a lot of people to get that goal is fairly justified and if successful certainly looked on favourably after the event.

The bolded part says it all, I think. I also think that saying something like, "I believe this cause is just so it doesn't matter how far someone takes it, because I believe in it" is dangerous as hell and quite possibly a sterling excuse for the worst kind of misplaced colonialism.

Remember, autocracy is not questioned in a medieval fantasy setting otherwise every character is evil and for example, Robb had no right to take the North to war because his father was executed. A personal desire that he imposed upon his realm and made his people suffer because he lost.

Can anyone ever respond to a question about Dany without resorting to, "Wah look what Robb/Stannis/whoever did!"?

Robb's bannermen chose to follow him and chose to crown him their king. Deal with it.

[Ser_Patreck]

Yeah — if no one was being paid for goods and labor (armor, guarding, food prep, crops, jewels, clothing, whatever), then how did the crown wind up in so much debt?

Isn't it stated that one of Margaery's ploy for popularity was to order dresses from local seamtresses, helping the economy?

Yeah, money was always being exchanged in Westeros. Or goods. It's the same thing, really.

Morality does have a context. What is viewed as morally evil in one culture might be totally normalized in another;especially at a different time. For example 400 years ago in this country the idea of a couple having sex outside of wedlock was considered morally evil and meant you were going to hell. Today you're "one of the ladz" for having sex with as many women as you can if you're a man.

Morality, by it's very nature, it's absolute. If a person from your country from 400 years ago could look into now, she fould find this place evil. You can't apply different standards for different times. You can be understanding, you can see that the people did not know better and were a product of their culture... But an evil act is an evil act.

The extent of the Greater Good is limitless. How many people died to beat the Axis in WW2? How many innocents? How many lives broken and ruined? The leaders of nations and camps hunted down like animals and hanged. A deal made with the totalitarian Soviet Union that split Europe in two. I could go on. I think Martin is being grey, but that doesn't make Dany the self-centered villain.

Then, the Soviet Union wasn't totalitarian. They were doing that only for the Greater Good, to insure that the proletariat wasn't explored, that socialism was made for all?

And for the record, people that said that the Greater Good is limitless give me shivers. There's a reason the fundamental liberties are individual liberties.

[Ser_Patreck]

He asked me how far you could push the concept of the greater good, In this case freeing the slaves before the activity becomes monstrous. I pointed out that in modern history, in WW2, the ansawr is clearly that there is no limit if the cause is just; a belief stamped in every monument and celebrated publicly and annually in many Western nations. Dany freeing the slaves is a just cause, ergo her using grey tactics and killing a lot of people to get that goal is fairly justified and if successful certainly looked on favourably after the event. Remember, autocracy is not questioned in a medieval fantasy setting otherwise every character is evil. For example, Robb had no right to take the North to war just because his father was executed and the family honour slighted. That was just as much a personal desire that he imposed upon his realm and made his people suffer because he lost as Dany. You and others are using a double standard and applying extremely high standards of modern morality upon a medieval ruler.

1 - If there's no limit to the greater good, I'll restate that question I made about Bush Junior and his Middle-East wars. Answer them.

2 - Tell that Robb was wrong to the Riverlanders he saved from Tywin's wrath.

3 - Robb didn't say he was the Blood of the Wolf. Robb didn't call himself "King of the Andals, the Rhoynar and the First Men, Breaker of Kingslayers and Magnar of the Lands of Always Winter". He was named, by his bannermen, King of the North, and later, of the Riverlands. Robb wasn't as egomaniac as Dany was.

[Garlan Marius]

There is a difference when there are international laws, treaties, and conventions being violated as a just cause for a war, and a girl imposing her own view of morality on a culture "because I know better than them."

[Winter's Knight]

And is this viewed as a desirable system? Is it the norm?

No, it is a state of emergency. During a time when food is scarce, people are being given useful work and are fed and sheltered in exchange. It is not an ideal condition.

We have Tyrion's word for the similarity as well:

The life of most slaves was not all that different from the life of a serving man at Casterly Rock, it seemed to him. True, some slaveowners and their overseers were brutal and cruel, but the same was true of some Westerosi lords and their stewards and bailiffs.

[total1402]

Morality, by it's very nature, it's absolute. If a person from your country from 400 years ago could look into now, she fould find this place evil. You can't apply different standards for different times. You can be understanding, you can see that the people did not know better and were a product of their culture... But an evil act is an evil act.

Then, the Soviet Union wasn't totalitarian. They were doing that only for the Greater Good, to insure that the proletariat wasn't explored, that socialism was made for all?

And for the record, people that said that the Greater Good is limitless give me shivers. There's a reason the fundamental liberties are individual liberties.

But people are of the same intelligence and emotional capacity throughout history. How could we have produced such immensely variable and mutable concepts of what morality is. Including ritual sacrifice, summary executions and total war if there is such a thing as objective moral good?

You might need to edit up that last post. But I distinguish the Brits/USA from the Soviet Union in that post when I talk about the deal they all made.

[Garlan Marius]

But people are of the same intelligence and emotional capacity throughout history. How could we have produced such immensely variable and mutable concepts of what morality is. Including ritual sacrifice, summary executions and total war if there is such a thing as objective moral good?

Without absolute truth, how can Daenerys' cultural imperialism be defended whatsoever?

[assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar]

No, it is a state of emergency. During a time when food is scarce, people are being given useful work and are fed and sheltered in exchange. It is not an ideal condition.

We have Tyrion's word for the similarity as well:

The difference being, from what I can tell, that the serving man at Casterly Rock is free to pack up and leave if he so chooses.