Oh wait! I'd like to change my vote to the same as Sansa's! I think you'll be a great king, Bran, but I'll just stay independent too.
HEY ME TOO! I'll just keep my power over my own kingdom but you go ahead and be a great king, Bran. Still got my vote but I'll keep my realm independent as well.
Ahem, yeah, me too. I think this is all a great idea but Sansa has shown me a better way.
etc, etc, etc
Being a fully independent kingdom involves much more work and resources. The Dorne prince and Robyn looked bored and uninterested being there at all. Work would mean less fun time for the both of them. Baratheon is clueless, Edmund is useless. I don't see why they would want the headache.
A good question is why did Sansa really want it?
Did you like it in the Star Wars prequels when all the leaders of the myriad space races joyfully abdicated their power to Palpatine? I'm assuming you did since being a leader and having power is so tiresome.
shareApples and oranges. Your example is how a democracy becomes a dictatorship when a democratically elected leader finds excuses (usually related to an emergency like a war) in order to give himself executive powers which he never relinquishes. Lucas was trying to give us a history lesson - and warning.
GOT storyline is more similar to Brexit. There is a consolidation of seven different kingdoms and one is deciding to go it alone. Let's call it Winterfexit! Don't forget the reason for EU was to become more powerful economically and maintain peace. Brits appeared scared to leave the EU.
A better question is what was Sansa's real reason for Winterfexit? Notice how she gets to have her cake and eat it too. Her brother is King and she still gets to be Queen. Is it an ego trip for her? And why didn't anyone else protests? GRRM will let us know in the book.
Realistically, those kingdoms would just invade Kings Landing. They would immediately war with each other over the vacancy and weakened condition of those who are assuming control. A Brexit analogy would have to assume an existing cooperative structure which there never was in GOT politics. Rather there was constant maneuvering for the throne, not peace.
And btw, if that was Lucas's intent then he made a dog's breakfast of it. It is not like a "democratically elected leader" invoking emergency powers. It is more like the leader of one country saying to all the leaders of other countries "lose your sovereignty and give it to me."
>>"And why didn't anyone else protests?"
This is my point. For it to work, it had to unanimous. Once one leader claims exception, the rest would follow and they would descend back into the squabble. For as much as I dislike Sansa, I should have expected exactly this.
There wasn't fighting over the throne for 300 years. It was controlled by the Targaryns until the Mad King, then Robert was chosen because he had a Targaryn ancestor. It would've continued unopposed if Cersei had given birth to one rightful heir.
The Old Republic was a single government. The planets were like states with their reps. Enemies didn't invade from the outside, instead they infiltrated the govenmment by becoming its politicians and changing it from within. That 's what happens historically.
Robert wasn't chosen, he started and led a rebellion and took the throne by force.
shareThe civil war started when Lyanna's brother and father approached the Mad King about her and they were killed. It didn't start as a coup for power by Robert.
The Targaryens were dead after the war and a new king was needed. Robert had support from the other Lords because he had the best familial claim and was instrumental in winning the war.
I see, thanks. I was thrown by it being called "Robert's Rebellion".
shareTeam effort but it's named after Robert. The name is probably part of building him up as larger than life so people support him and see him as a legendary hero. Tyrion touched on stories that people get behind and how Bran had a good one.
shareI had posted on this in another thread, but I think it has to do with not having to be obligated to others for protection like she had for most of her life. Because she was vulnerable to exploitation until she got an army and a lot of territory to surround her.
It really started with Brienne. But when Arya came home, she saw there were people who could beat Brienne.
t. globalist working for Goldman Sachs
shareExactly. There is no chance that arrangement would remain stable.
shareThe South will clamor to invade the North in short order
The Northern Lords had better be recruiting, training and stockpiling meat and grain 5 minutes after that big Boss meeting ended...send the ravens!
The North's best defense is that it's a horror show invading a snow packed wintry land...several bigshots have learned this fatal lesson in real life
Being in a union CAN be advantageous.
For example, Dorne is probably in a weakened state right now. So are the Iron Islands. Does Gendry want to be an independent king? – Can’t imagine that. Robyn of the Vale? Don’t make me laugh. Bronn? Edmure?
God damn right Bronn!
The guy wants the kingdom to start throwing $$ at rebuilding brothels instead of ships for cripes sake.
He'd go independent in a heartbeat if he had better ties to the Iron Bank, or at least the brains to deal with them himself.
> He'd go independent in a heartbeat if he had better ties to the Iron Bank,
> or at least the brains to deal with them himself.
He has neither, so he stays in the "union" and enjoys life in Highgarden and as Master of Coin. Makes sense to me.
During the whole first season, half of Roberts and Ned's conversations was about how hard it was to keep the seven kingdoms together. And that was with an actual army to enforce things.
No way the Greyjoys and Dorne don't take this most opportune time to just go.
The better question is how did not one of the minor lords(there are tons of them) take this golden opportunity to move into a very empty and very seizable highgarden. There was nobody in power to stop them, yet there wasn't one opportunistic house? It's like they just stopped playing the game of Thrones after 70 something episodes.
Queen Cersei would've stopped them.
shareShe didn't have the manpower left, especially with the North and Dany openly threatening KL.
She probably would've just let it happen as long as they didn't formally announce their withdrawal from the Kingdom.
I thought about that too until Tyrion told Dany that Cersei would punish any citizen who refused to shelter in Kings Landing. Enough soldiers to punish citizens.
Also, the property would've reverted or been controlled by the royal family, so it would be like stealing from Cersei. Nobody would want to discover what horrible punishment she would create for the theft. Just think about that nun or Dorne mother who angered Cersei.
While it's true places like the Vale, The Iron Islands, and Dorne would be way to difficult to conquer, but there's another important factor everyone is forgetting. They have just gone thru about an entire decade of non stop war. Every region has been affected and lost men, as well as members of its high family. The last two wars were particularly brutal. At this point everybody is just tired of fighting and wants to peacefully go back to their homes and rebuild their castles and families.
Also for most of its history, The North was an independent nation. Its only been the last 300 years that they've answered to a king from the south. And unless you have a dragon, its way to difficult to conquer, especially during the winter. Even the Targaryens let the Starks run the North with little to know interference.
If it's such a time of peace then why choose a king at all? Sounds like everyone would be fine on their own ... like the North.
shareBecause they probably feel that they are NOT fine on their own. This also explains why nobody else even tried to declare independence.
shareI should become a GOT apologist. Perpetual cake having/eating rights.
shareI guess that was some kind of insult. Fortunately I didn’t understand it. (Probably that cake thing is some English idiom I’m unfamiliar with.)
shareNot insulting, per se. Argumentative. I bare you no ill will and thank you for participating in the discussion.
Iron sharpens iron.
"You can't have your cake and eat it too."
Proverb. If you eat your cake then you can't still have it since it's gone. It basically means you can't have it both ways.
I'm literally eating cake as I type this.
Thanks for the explanation!
Although I still don’t get what that means in reply to my posting above – but don’t bother to explain that, too. Not that important.
Without a monarch, they have no one to gripe to when they need something done.
shareYes, that’s one advantage if you have a King.
I’m just surprised that so many people seem to think that it was bad writing that nobody else declared independency. In eight seasons, I can’t remember a single hint that any of the Seven Kingdoms except the North and the Iron Islands were unhappy with being a part of it, and the Iron Islands are probably very weak at the moment. So why do people expect they all want to get out of it?
There were enough examples of bad writing this season, no need to put something on top of it which actually is consistent with the things we’ve seen before.
You don't?
Dorne- Always had a shaky relationship with the crown(which completely went to hell when Oberyn died).
Vale- conspired against the crown and pretty much told them to fuck off for the entirety of the series.
Riverun - Allied with the north almost immediately and pretty much stayed that way
Highgarden - betrayed the crown as soon as it suited them.
Iron islands - no need to elaborate here.
My point is, each of the seven kingdoms were pretty damned quick to jump ship as soon as it was safe to do so or was more advantageous. There is no good reason why any of those kingdoms should willingly cede power to Kingslanding without any incentive or consequences.
Dorne had trouble with the *Lannisters*, who killed Elia Martell. By now, most if not all of their fleet is destroyed. If the new Lord comes after Doran (which, admittedly, we don’t know) he won’t even think of leaving.
The Vale’s Lord was Hand of the King – until he was killed, supposedly by the Lannisters. Now it’s ruled by Robyn.
Highgarden – Olenna wanted to rule the Seven Kingdoms through Margaery, not at all to leave it. Lord Mace Tyrell … probably was too dumb to want *anything*. ;-) Now it’s Bronn and I’m sure he’s happy being Master of Coin of the Six Kingdoms instead of having to get along alone.
All of them hated the Lannisters, that’s for sure. None of them ever expressed (again, as far as I remember) to be unsatisfied with the state of being a part of the Seven Kingdoms in itself.
Riverrun – okay, right, they sided with the North. But now it’s ruled by Edmure. He doesn’t strike me as a rebel at all. One little attempt at suggesting himself as King and sits down when he’s told. By his niece.
Gendry is completly new to the business.
So MY point is, most of them, while unsatisfied with the Lannisters ruling, didn’t display dissatisfaction with being a part of the Seven Kingdoms in itself. And in the situation NOW I don’t see any candidate who would profit from leaving.
And yes, in the posting above I mentioned only the situation in the seasons before, not the situation in the end. But that’s because I’ve written about that in other threads already.
And now: Good Night! It’s VERY late over here.
Yes, they all had their problems with the Lannisters, but that isn't why I find that "election" laughable, nor why I think it won't last long.
The one thing that eight seasons of GOT has taught us, is that the lords of westeros are mostly power hungry cunts! Almost all the ones we see in the series were cunts, the ones who came before were cunts, and guaranteed, the ones who come after will also be cunts! And that definitely includes the current lords of the vale, Dorne, and the Iron islands.
So the idea that these people would set aside their innate crappiness and not snatch power when it's ripe for the picking is just silly.
This little system that Tyrion set up will almost definitely lead to war.
All right, then we were talking about two different things: I was specifically talking about that very moment at the council when nobody but Sansa declared independence.
When it’s ripe for picking – yes, that’s something different…
After sleeping over it…
> So the idea that these people would set aside their innate crappiness
> and not snatch power when it's ripe for the picking is just silly.
> This little system that Tyrion set up will almost definitely lead to war.
They do have a king now who knows everything. It might be hard to attack a king who already knows what you’re doing when you start planning the attack so he can stop you with a small skirmish before you can start an actual war. And when this has happened once or twice, the others will think twice before trying it, too.
Of course, King’s Landing has no functional army at this point, but the same holds (probably) true for all the other Kingdoms. So they can’t attack NOW, and when they have build up an army, King’s Landing will have one, too.
And since the 3ER gets very, very old, the system even might last.
That is, IF Bran can change future things. We didn’t get to learn how his power works, it’s fully possible that he only sees things that WILL happen. In that case, he only knows: "Oh, I’m gonna get killed soon" but can’t do a thing against it.
"They do have a king now who knows everything. It might be hard to attack a king who already knows what you’re doing when you start planning the attack so he can stop you with a small skirmish before you can start an actual war."
I don't think Bran knows everything, so much as he has access to that information if he goes looking. If he knew everything, he wouldn't have needed Sam to tell him that Rahegar and Lyanna were married.
Also I feel like you are giving Bran way too much war usefulness, seeing as how he did fuck all to help the north.
-He didn't warn Dany not to send her dragon
-He didn't warn anyone at East watch that the wall would be coming down
-He didn't warn the Umbers that the Night King would murder them all
-He, who knows the Night king and his powers better than anyone, didn't warn them that the Crypts were worst place to hide
-He didn't warn Dany that she would lose a 2nd dragon and a good portion of her fleet.
There's lots more, but you get the idea here.
"Of course, King’s Landing has no functional army at this point, but the same holds (probably) true for all the other Kingdoms. So they can’t attack NOW"
Who said they should attack Kings Landing? I said they would be stupid not to declare independence and rule their own kingdoms. You don't need to attack for that. KingsLanding(and by extension the crown) is penniless, in ruins, and as you said has no army, so what incentive would the Vale or Dorne have for continuing to be a Vassal state?
> I don't think Bran knows everything, so much as he has access
> to that information if he goes looking.
You’re absolutely right here (in fact, I pointed out the very same thing in a different thread).
But if I were king, I’d regularly check what the Lords of Westeros are doing because they ARE cunts. If I were Hand of the King, I’d regularly remind him to check (because otherwise, Bran’d just walk around in the past or something).
> seeing as how he did fuck all to help the north.
I’m not sure what to make of the points you list, which are all true. Other people have suggested that he’s a cunt, too, who knowingly held back a lot information to win the Throne for himself. I find it hard to believe that, yet since I have no other idea how you can explain that, I have to admit that they might be right.
Others have suggested that he can’t see the future at all. I *think* (but I’d have to re-watch all episodes to be sure) that he can, but maybe in a more vague way. However to see if somebody plans against him, he doesn’t need to see the future but only what the Lords to presently.
> You don't need to attack for that.
OK, no objection here.
But they might fear an attack from the (then rebuild) army of the crown, and Tyrion might even orchestrate it to hold the Kingdom together. (Not Bran. He just sits there and walks around in the past.)
> so what incentive would the Vale or Dorne have for continuing to be a Vassal state?
For the moment, that they are in a bad state themselves.
For the future: Either because they fear an attack, OR because they see that that actually prosper from being a part of the Six Kingdoms. That’d not be THAT odd.
Although it is interesting, this discussion is a bit pointless because… well, the story’s done.
It won’t continue, and all we can do is continue it in our mind, and a million different will come up with two million different sequels. ;-)
My whole problem with the TV series is that it didn't really lay out the political structure of Westeros with the how's and why's of the 7 Kingdoms. If you watch other TV series about King Edward or the Mary Queen of Scots, for example, you get a good history lesson on how monarchs ruled and how they controlled their people. I only have GRRM's first book and only made it half way through many years ago, but I remember he does include the details about the power structure and history of each kingdom. The TV series just lays it out that these people are highborns (aristocrats) with wealth and respective populations who swear fealty. What was always missing was the glue that binds these different peoples.
Sansa's demand and the council's acquiescence to it made no fucking sense.