"there's nobody left of any real influence who would care."
I bet that's how French royalty thought before their heads were chopped off during the French Revolution. Never underestimate an angry mob.
If a dragon burned down your house, worksite and incinerated family members, you'd care and so would the other 1 million civilians in King's Landing. Dany's father was killed and she exiled when they fell out of favor. Stannis lost half his army when he angered them after sacrificing his daughter.
No ruler (president, king, dictator, etc) rules in a vacuum. They must have support. Usually from nobles, public, religious leaders, bankers and other rich people and foreign allies.
Sansa was concerned about losing the support of her nobles when Arya was waving her letter around so they still exist and they have armies. Cousin Robyn, The Tullys, Lady Mormont, Wildlings , Jon Snow, Greyjoys, Dorne etc all have armies and money. Jon has to convince them to support Dany. Her destroying a Westeros city and taking power without support aka:permission isn't going to do that.
BTW, the explosion at the sept was an accident. Or so the people were told.
reply
share
EmperorOfDragons (292)
7 years ago
Saying that the public think the sept explosion is a accident is stretching it a bit. Especially since Cersei's incestuous relationship is basically a public secret now. Like someone said earlier they just want the wars to be over with.
reply
share
Keelai (32123)
7 years ago
That's not my opinion, but what was on the show. The public were buying the "accident" story. Leak in the underground tunnels, perhaps? What poor peasant would believe their beloved queen mother, Cersei would kill her own uncle, daughter in-law, and advisors? And now she's brokenhearted since her only remaining child has taken his own life in grief.
A widowed mother with three dead children would make her more popular since they'd feel sorry for her (sympathy factor) and angered if killed by a foreign invader.
I didn't see anything in the show saying that the masses wanted the wars over with. If anything, Cersei just hired the bank's army to wage more war and her armies have been marching all over the place winning battles. More looting = more pride and money. Give a crumb or two to peasants to keep happy.
reply
share
MadamShogun (233)
7 years ago
The thing is, Cerei keeps the populace controlled through benign neglect, at best. But that doesn't mean they'll care if she's over thrown. Also the nobles doesn't represent the masses. The biggest flaw in the show i think is them not fully representing the hell that the common folk been through.
reply
share
Keelai (32123)
7 years ago
The people won't care if Cersei is overthrown, but they'd care if they themselves are killed, their homes and property destroyed and their livelihoods ruined. People tend to be xenophobic so I don't believe that people would be happy with a foreign invasion no more than if Russian or China invaded the U.S.
The masses are sheep. The few times they showed them, they followed a leader like mindless cattle. The High Sparrow told them Cersei was a sinner and they were there to mock her. And Margaery had them eating out of her hand with a few "acts of kindness".
reply
share
Otter (24464)
7 years ago
Ah, but GoT isn't based on 18th century France, it's based on 15th century England! And when the War of the Roses finally ended and Henry Tudor finally won the last battle and claimed the throne, there was no popular uprising or revolution - he was crowned and he reigned until he died of natural causes. As far as I know, the common people just wanted to get on with their lives and did, although yes - some of the Yorkist nobility kept making trouble through Henry's reign.
But not enough trouble to unseat him, he died a king and was succeeded by his son in due time. And Henry VII didn't have dragons, the prospect of a 20-year winter, or a common enemy that would bring all the humans in Westeros together to keep his aristocrats quiet. And if Danerys had already taken power, she would.
reply
share
Keelai (32123)
7 years ago
Loosely based on England and other historical events. Henry Tudor wasn't a foreigner like Dany's ancestors. Wasn't the argument against invasion that the dragons would destroy parts of King's Landing along with its citizenry creating hostility against Dany? Not sure if Henry Tudor did something similar, but he did have support or he wouldn't have become king: nobles, foreigners, army, public. He also married Elizabeth of York, a political move to unite and solidify his claim to the throne.
John Snow hasn't convinced the nobles to support Danerys yet. Do you think it would play well for Dany (whose family was exiled because they weren't wanted as rulers) to now invade Westeros and claim power over all of them - not just Cersei? Last time Jon did something unpopular, he ended up with a knife through the heart. Nobles made Jon King of the North and they can take that away. Killing Cersei wouldn't stop the civil war, just start it someplace else.
reply
share
eYeDEF (5050)
7 years ago
Yeah but the reasons for the masses revolting in the French Revolution were not just from blaming the monarchy for the ravishes of war, even though there was that element too. Discontent was fueled by the heavy regressive taxation by a government deeply in debt and famine caused by a succession of bad harvests.
In other words, the peasant's standard of living had plummeted to where their level of suffering had reached a breaking point and they directed their resentment at what they saw as unearned privileges of the clergy and aristocracy. Enlightenment ideals developed over the previous century had taken a foothold in their imaginations by offering radical new ideas like the rights and equality of man that offered an alternative way forward from monarchical rule.
For these reasons, I don't think this period of Westeros can be properly compared to late 18th century France.
I agree with Otter that they'd most likely be content to get on with their lives. Of course it would depend on how Daenery's treated them too, but seeing how Cersei set the bar pretty low and Dany and Jon would likely turn out to be far better rulers, I don't see the justifications for a mass revolt.
Plus, any revolt always faces the very real possibility of getting instantly incinerated by dragons, a deterrent that the French monarchy did not enjoy.
reply
share
Otter (24464)
7 years ago
I disagree, I think the people of Westeros accept the right to rule by conquest, at least much more than we do, and they're desperate for the fighting to end before winter sets in. I think a surgical strike with minimal civilian casualties would have been greeted with a chorus of "Fine, you win" from most people.
And if a surgical strike is too much for you, how about hiring a faceless person to take out Cersei? If Cersei dies with no living issue, and her surviving brothers support Danerys's claim, what's to argue about? Whoever makes these decisions knows they can either have the dragons with them or against them.
reply
share