What house would be /our house/?

Braavos is the only realm that does not tolerate slavery, serfdom or a caste system.

Tankies = Targaryens, mad that their version of feudalism was more efficient without realizing feudalism is the problem

Based house Greyjoy.

This. Braavos is the most dialectical choice

Yes be a good andal, 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧Braavos🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 can't do anything wrong.

Obligatory:
youtube.com/watch?v=JRwk4mPzdZ0

Brotherhood Without Banners? I mean, their worship of The Lord of Light is excellent, but they are the only group in Westeros that fights on behalf of the commonfolk and the refugees of The War of the Five Kings.

Replace excellent with an antonym. Word filtered.

Eh R'hllor is pretty proletarian so they are good eggs.

Brotherhood without Banners

The gods are pretty much confirmed real though so r'hllor worship isn't that bad

POLL
You can vote more than once so pick any you approve of. You can add some as well.

poal.me/ij8acl

Kek I thought this was a fucking Harry Potter thread at first

Maesters of course.

get this crap outta here

The unsullied

They're based on the real life Paulican, Bogomil and Cathar heresies.

They were medieval Christian sects who realised that the bible talks a lot about asceticism and helping the poor instead of the obfuscation and the ritual laden doctrines of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

No surprise but they were heavily suppressed, the Cathar genocide gave us the lovely quote "kill them all, for God knows his own".

Game of Thrones (TV show writers) fumbling of these medieval references goes to show how important it is to have a background or at least an interest in history beyond watching liberal shut like Extra Credits on YouTube.

It's not like there's a shortage of writers out there but I guess nobody cares besides a few nerds on an anonymous socialist board.

This is why everyone should have a mandatory, comprehensive history education.
Everyone will have PHD's in history under communism

How do I educate myself on history? I barely paid attention to it at school.

To be fair the showrunners fumble with absolutely everything including the basics of running a show.

...

An education such as history and literature is pure propaganda, that is also completely inefficient in our information age.

If anything, we should abolish literature, maybe force the students to read X number of books of their own choosing from an extremely broad selection, and make history absolutely barebone.

Mao knew what's up in that regard.

Case in point

When will you start nofap again?

You know Braavos is based on Venice, the porkiest city in the medieval and modern world? The fact that it was founded by Valyrian slaves doesn't stop it from being de facto ruled by the Bank and the merchant class.

A communist in a feudal society should be pro-porky - ruthlessly and unapologetically so. That said, Venice - and merchant republics - did shit for real capitalism, so Braavos shouldn't be an option.

Sure is Holla Forums here.

Nah, just a person who knows basic Marxism.

True, Newt Gingrich has a PhD in history from an Ivy League School but Gore Vidal didn't attend any university, yet who has contributed more to better understand our past?

History as taught in its current form in the UK ought to be abolished, it conveniently whitewashes the suffering of the peasantry and gives the impression that hierarchy and nobility are necessary for society to function.

Oh is this the Stalinist reasoning that was used when the NVKD were purging lefties and de-collectivising industry during the Spanish Civil War whilst Franco's troops were encroaching and had nothing to do with political expediency?

We are the targaryen-unsullied-dothraki-dragon popular front, the real movement that abolishes the present state of things

Just like Lenin, amrite?

Russia was a part of capitalist world system and capitalist itself.

If you recall, Mao was going to and was building capitalism. Lenin wasn't going to but was building it nonetheless.

Varys is about as close as you can get but theres no real right answer.

Na, they're clearly the liberal substitute just as the lannisters are the conservative one.

Targaryens are fucking Liberal trash.
Lannisters are bourgie trash.
Starks are basically Jeb Bush to the Lannister's Donald Trump.

What did he mean by this?

House Bolton.

Atreides.

I love theorizing about which medieval-style house would be ideal for bringing about communism. This is definitely a discussion worth having.

lmao coca cola pepsi family guy

No_Fun_Allowed.png

Nah harkonnen

This is badwrongfun. Stop having it immediately.

Bravoos is bad. Sure.
But I challenge you to name a better place to live, be it in Westeros, Essos or else.

The gods are all cocksuckers.
Bakunin was right.

Ordos

None, it's a pre-industry society. So to go from sparks to bonfire we need revolutionary republicanism first (not the mercantile one they have in Braavos) and industrialisation.
Maybe even a renaissance and gunpowder.

No they're not.
Pretty clearly made up for social control
Fire magic is clearly real but there's zero evidence of any sort of personified entity taking a direct interest in the users of fire magic.
Warging and tree magic are real but how the tree network functions is so vague that almost nothing can be said about whether the Old Gods "exist", and we don't know what they're supposed to be according to the religion anyway.
Face magic is real but the connection to Death is dubious even thematically, and the logic involved in magic of life and death contradicts their view. (How the fuck does Thoros perpetually paying for Beric's rebirth with his immediately erstwhile death count as balancing the books for the God of Death?)
We see myths from all over the setting but none of the rest has any particular support for or against except the degree to which the Dothraki beliefs are portrayed as being facile in season 1.

...

reminder that as a feudal society any populist peasant movement like the brotherhood without banners is doomed to fail.
reminder that objectively speaking king Stannis Baratheon is the sole legitimate heir to the iron throne and also the only one contesting it who cares about something other than their own ego.
Reminder that Targaryens are imperialist conquerers and their bloodline should be wiped out completely.

Given that the setting is fantasy, is the feudalism-capitalism-communism progression even necessary? What if bringing back and enormously magnifying the magic of Old Valyria, working around whatever caused its downfall, changes the socioeconomic picture entirely?

Even if the result isn't FALC, it could be what /tg/ calls "noblebright", pics related (WARNING: Absolutely MASSIVE spoilers for Berserk).

No ruler is legitimate, famalam

He's literally salty about being in Robert's shadow all his life, he's the legitimate heir alright, and would probably make a better king than all the other contenders, but you're delusional if you think this is not just him wanting to prove the world that he matters.

I'm sorry, but you were literally asking for it

Not the house itself, but Cersei Lannister is /ourgal/. Why?

Marxist-Leninist-Lannisterism when?

...

...

...

So? Just another tactic to win the throne. That and he wanted to get Jon and legitimize him as lord of Winterfell to ensure the North's loyalty.

And anyone else
Wut? She doesn't give a shit about how well the realm functions so long as it functions with her on top.
Handing money to banking institutions… HMM
Dany > Cersei
No?
Truly /ourgal/

Wut you talking about? I read the books.

has irony gone too far

Kill yourself.

...

Breaking what wheel, though?

Wherever there is plight, there will always be a progression.

Definitely Stark

The Brotherhood without Banners were mostly Stark and Tully loyalists. You need to know that Tywin is a war criminal who allowed his troops to deliberately ravage the Riverlands, among them Gregor Clegane, and they radicalised since Lady Stoneheart is in charge.
Robb Stark never claimed the throne. He declared the North and the Trident as independent from the iron throne.

Stannis won't win the throne. He has tragic hero written all over him.
Shireen on the other hand…

this tbh

no, it just shows how D&D are shit show makers.

D&D's favourite character is Renly and they are buttblasted about Stannis killing their favourite faggot (which they made even faggier than he was in the books). But it shows how bad of a showmaker they are, if despite all their vitriol towards him, it didn't stopped "Stannis the Mannis" memes from popping up.

Yes, it's called post-irony and there is a thread about it.

...

I have bad news for you buddy…

I don't watch fan-fiction, no matter how expensive they are.
In the books Stannis is preparing a trap for Ramsay and no 20 men will save him from that one.

Valyria was pretty much the Roman Republic with dragons and shit. They were rightfully rekt by the based Fourteen Flames volcano.
GoT/ASoIaF conveys ancient history/middle ages pretty realistically so I don't see why shouldn't we use historical materialism to analyse it.

It's been awhile since I read it, but didn't Stannis already #rekt the Boltons in open combat?

You know GRRM is playing a very active part in the production of the show? Stannis gonna dead m8.

The Boltons and the Greyjoys.
But the North is a pretty big place, not al battles are decisive battles lie the show would like to make you believe and Winterfell is still in the hand of the Boltons.
And there is the looming Karstark betrayal as well.

This is definitely not true. He himself begged D&D to include Lady Stoneheart, Young Griff and the Blackfyre rebellions in the show and to keep Baristan Selmy alive.
I don't doubt Stannis dying, but he won't die like a bitch. And he definitely won't sacrifice his daughter. GRRM doesn't hate him so much as D&D did.

No thanks. Kill all the royal shits. I hate GoT.

The High Sparrow did nothing wrong (in the books).

The same way you should go about being a decent lefty. READ BOOKS.

t. never read marx.

High Sparrow did NOTHING wrong. Except getting killed of course.

Why do liberals like this show so much?

One in the middle of our street.

Do the show writers know how feudalism works or are they accurately potraying people in power by writting them to not have any idea how they actually got there?

I'd argue that R'hllor probably does have some sort of existence, or at the very least there is some third-party consciousness that is tied to fire magic. Specifically there is the moment in the latest season where the Hound looks into the flames and sees not something that would be immediately relevant to his life and interests (as it would be expected if the visions were just an extension of magic he was projecting), but instead he sees the oncoming armies beyond the wall. The Old Gods have a similar thing were the nature of the prophesies they show seem to indicate that there is some manner of direction by which they seem to push people, if only vaguely so.

That being said, whatever presences are embodied by these magics, they do not appear to be omniscient as it relates to matters of the future; only that which is underway currently or in the past.

Clues as to what Valyria was like, even of what exactly "The Doom of Valyria" was, are extremely vague. Even the "seasons" are alluded to as a novel phenomenon of comparatively recent history. I think Atlantis is probably a much closer comparison for Valyria.

House Seaworth.

D&D will go to the wall when the people's commune is founded.

Naath. Peaceful utopia.

By "the wall" I don't mean The Wall (like with the Night's Watch). I mean "the wall," where reactionaries are shot.

Baby's first taste of full-length, high-concept fiction adapted to the screen without being quite so completely butchered.

GRRM actually writes about Valyria in The World of Ice and Fire.

...

The thing about magic visions is that they tend to be self-fulfilling prophecy. That and the counterpart magic to Rhllor - that of the Great Other - is established to have time-travel capacity. The bit with the Hound could be attributed to looking into his own future (of course we're talking about the show so it needs to be taken with a pillar of salt).

Well The Wall is basically a gulag.

Technocratic neoliberal radical centrist. She's Macron

I hate this aspect of the show, in reality Jon and Dany are tyrants who in actual life and in how feudalism actually functioned, they did not care one fuck if the people loved them, for them it was divine right like in east Asia it was considered the Mandate of Heaven and in India the caste system ie the rule of the gods that justified their hierarchy.

The only time medieval rulers gave a shit about their people's anger was when trying to prevent peasant rebellions or riots.

It really is immersion breaking to hear Dany go on about her anachronistic liberal values though she is a queen herself and her talk of "breaking the wheel" when her goal is to become the next tyrant, oh for those of you who haven't watched it, it's implied that she invents democracy when she liberates some slaving cities and allows them to "choose their own rulers".

Fucking garbage, don't get me started about that Meesa scene where she liberates all the smelly brown people and they call her mother like the second coming of Christ.

Oh and GoT characterises the Dothraki nomads no surprise, when Dany says they'll tear down the stone homes of the people living in Westeros but in real life, actual nomads lived in awe of settled peoples and were keen to learn about civilisation for their own benefit.

It's still pretty vague. We know they were sheepherders before they learned to tame dragons (and how they did it is still uncertain, some say it was the Shadow Men who taught them, others that they bred wyverns with fire wyrms) then they got a knack for slavery after defeating Old Ghis and that their shit was powered by the 14 flames' magic but that's about it.

Night's Watch already has a democracy.
The Free Cities also have democracies to a varying degree. Volantis elects their 3 rulers directly.

But yeah you are right, instead of the workers who need to break their own shakles, it's the benevolent rulers who have to do it for them.
Also I like how people notice that Daenerys is an excellent conqueror. With three dragons and the ridiculous amount of support she is getting? No shit Sherlock! Even the Moon Boy would be an excellent conqueror, if he had the means Daenerys had.

The Riverlands have the most potential of getting industrialisation, even prematurely.
If they build water wheels on their many rivers, they can forego the steam engine completely.
But for an economic development you need peace and a look at the map shows you why this may not be possible.
It borders on 5 nations, and the Iron Islands are just ahead on their Western shores. The North and the Vale's only border is with the Riverlands, so whenever there is a war, they have to go through the Riverlands to participate. And even if they are allied, it's impossible to keep discipline at 100%, so raids are bound to happen which will hurt the economy. Deliberate raids, like the Lannisters and the defected Karstarks did will sent their economy back into the stone age.

So yeah, being a Riverlands smallfolk is suffering.

That's akin to something like the Templars or the monastic military orders that have existed, not a way of ruling a society.

They're more akin to the Italian City States which are again not implied to be the same as the universal suffrage which Dany Christ is conferring in her liberation.

Oh and isn't it odd that Cersei became queen? Surely it would be some distant Boratheon cousin of Tomim or whatever his name was with Cersei being set aside if this was following actual feudal logic.

I mean we had the Duke of Hanover become King of Britain because of how strict succession laws were.

Not to mention all the other interesting rules in Europe like being "born in the purple" and so on.

No way Cersei in a patriarchal society would have been allowed to ascend the throne under such circumstances, Tomim dying should have been her downfall as her status as king's mother was the only thing protecting her.

But no I guess the writers need a full on antagonist to their liberal messiah Dany (could be Snow yet), it would have made more sense from a writers perspective to have kept Tomim alive as he was legitimate (de jure), would have kept Cersei de facto ruler without breaking feudal logic and created another antagonism in the story ie naive Tomim facing the consequences of his "evil" mother and reluctantly doing her bidding.

there are none
some kind of radical peasant movement would be the closest thing, but welp, author didn't read The Peasant War in Germany, so we have some sparrow populist bullshit

dragon queen is walking deus ex machina magnet
it's obvious that she is "the chosen one"
and it fucking sucks, I was almost skipping all her chapters in the books, it was so unbearable

and also you need enclosure movement
can't kick start capitalism if no one is willing to work in your shit manufactures

She didn't became queen in the books.
As a matter of fact, in the books she may or may not has committed a stupid mistake. May, because it depends on whether or not Margaery Tyrell is a virgin. If she is, then Cersei is demasked as a liar and could further accelerate her downfall.
But as always the situation is King's Landing is in shambles, with Varys' rampaging taking out key players and blaming them on Tyrion, Tommen talking back more and more against his mum, Nymeria Sand being the new kid on the block and joining the game, and the High Sparrow, whoever he is and whatever he is planning.

it's easier when the source material is written by a graphomaniac hack.

...