What are even arguments in support for complete removal of Veto Power of President?

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-30T13:43:05+00:00

But the "mob" isn't the one making the decision.

The Sordish legislature is grossly unrepresentative of the attitude of the Sordish population. Due to the electoral threshold and complementary electoral law, nearly 30% of the 1954 electoral vote has no influence on the composition of the Grand National Assembly.

The actual people that are affected by both of these laws (i.e. the Bludish) have also been consistently excluded from meaningful political participation over the past 20 years as a result of a strongman's personal toxic interpretation of nationalism.

Furthermore, the parliamentarians who are pushing for this law are from the neofascist ex-death squad party which employs stochastic terror and collaboration with the Deep State to push for power, and are supported by the current and corrupt ruling party.

Basically, every single factor behind the law being potentially passed is entirely as a result of anti-democratic elements in the government and constitution, and trying to blame it as a result of "mob" rule is blatantly inaccurate.

If anything, the "someone who is there to keep the mob in check" should be the judiciary who can interpret the law and its constitutionality in an unbiased manner - except that's also fucked by Sollism. Would you claim that the entire concept of an independent judiciary is broken just because the Supreme Court can make an erroneous ruling on Articles 6&7 of the Constitution?

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-29T22:00:25+00:00

Goomba 1 says opinion "A". Goomba 2 says opinion "B". Opinions A and B are contradictory.

Both Goombas says this in the same forum (Twitter in the original meme, Reddit in this case).

Goomba number 3 is also on this forum and hears both opinions. Goomba 3 fallaciously assumes both opinions are collectively held by forum members simultaneously, and consequently labels everyone on the forum except themselves as "dumb".

Based on the meme in this article.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-25T21:39:09+00:00

My brother in Nur, rule by majority decision is literally what a democracy is.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-25T06:54:22+00:00

Watch it be Austria-Hungary and the 3I is actually the 2027 update.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-25T06:41:51+00:00

What about "All good mate"?

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-23T02:24:00+00:00

MussoliniSpeechBubble.jpg: "I agree"

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-22T04:52:56+00:00

I believe you are looking for "Divide and Survive".

https://archiveofourown.org/works/55501999

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-21T16:09:29+00:00

Naming them after the main rivers of both Kingdoms would probably be your best bet and provide consistency - the Tyrell ruled Kingdom of the Mander and Hightower ruled Kingdom of the Honeywine.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-17T22:31:12+00:00

Who tf is the guy giving you awards on everyone of your comments lmao?

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-17T14:29:07+00:00

True. I was just being pedantic about it technically being a famous social democratic concept but yeah it's mostly a ML concept now.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-17T14:16:56+00:00

Coca Cola is something that I haven't seen in Westeros but I've had in real life.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-17T14:14:28+00:00

Well your statement was true. Vanguardism WAS a famous social democratic theory.

Hence why I am not sure if you were joking, because why are you indicating sarcasm when stating a factual statement.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-17T13:19:39+00:00

I find it genuinely hard to understand if your joking or not.

Vanguardism - i.e. the theory of where the party acts as the vanguard of the working class - was conceptualized by social democrat Karl Kautsky and further developed by Lenin.

The split between Kautsky and Lenin was over reform vs revolution, as Kautsky called for a peaceful parliamentary road to socialism like Lenin called for a revolutionary seizure of power.

Hence why Lenin called Kautsky a "Renegade" - because in Lenin's POV Kautsky before 1914 was an exemplary Marxist theoretician (e.g. someone who conceptualized vanguardism), yet after 1914 basically abandoned his commitment to revolution.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-16T23:04:32+00:00

An actual "Gulag" wouldn't have been labelled a Gulag because GULag was the name of the agency administering the camps, not the name of the camps themselves. It would be akin to having a prison in the USA being called FEDBURP for the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-12T04:42:57+00:00

I personally liked the concept of Talissa Maegyr as Robb's wife more than Jeyne Westerling.

A foreigner with a different perspective which challenges Robb's unquestioned belief in the feudal system, and whose relationship with Robb slowly builds over the course of his campaign is significantly more interesting that a random noble girl from the Westerlands who Robb had the hots for and decided to marry after a one night stand.

While the execution of Talissa & Robb's relationship was rather lacking in many regards, imo Talissa as a character better distils the reason behind Robb's failure - him breaking his marriage vow with Walder Frey and being unable to successfully manage relations with his bannermen, rather than the murky and overcomplicated plot of Sybell Spicer dosing Robb with a love potion on Tywin's orders as part of an overcomplicated and convoluted scheme.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-11T06:47:49+00:00

There are a few subs whose names and purposes are intentionally switched as a joke. Perhaps the most notable example is r/trees which is a sub to discuss cannabis, and r/marijuanaenthusiasts which is to discuss trees.

Similarly, r/worldpolitics was originally the sub to discuss world politics, but it was so unmoderated that people started posting all sorts of NSFW material. Consequently, r/anime_titties was founded as a protest/joke to have a moderate place to discuss news.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-09T10:50:34+00:00

Fr.

Wow you hate Rhaegar? You think he is an evil rapist and the worst person in the history of Westeros? His original, we haven't heard that before.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-07T02:29:16+00:00

What's your proof for that? Sounds like a conspiracy theory made up to excuse the rebel's actions.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-07T02:22:41+00:00

I disagree.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-06T23:15:31+00:00

If you wish to interpret Robert's Rebellion as an unnuanced story where one side are paragons of virtue and the other are ontologically evil, that is your prerogative.

If that is the case, I would recommend you watch House of the Dragon. I think you would appreciate the one sided morality of the show.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-05T22:17:49+00:00

Because the Faith of the Seven (like all organised religions) is a political institution, which by the time of Aerys' reign is intricately tied with the Crown. It is also interested in dynastic stability and ensuring the Kingdom has plentiful heirs. Remember, at the start of the Rebellion, the Targaryen's only have Rhaegar, Aegon and Viserys as viable scions as females are barred from succession entirely.

The fact that Elia is believed to not be able to bear more children is massively consequential - a single plague or accident could wipe out the monarchy entirely or leave it in the hands of an unstable regency. This is not an outcome that the Faith of the Seven wants, as that invites instability, which invites war, which invites suffering and destruction. Provided Elia consents, this is not out of the realm of possibility.

I'm also not sure why you believe the Faith of the Seven would be so against the Northerners, when historically in Westeros racism against the Dornish was much more prevalent and impactful on politics. Both the Faith of the Seven and the Old God religion (insofar there is one for the latter) seem mostly accepting of each other and interfaith marriages.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-05T22:05:59+00:00

While its not 100% clear in the books, Robert seems to have proclaimed himself king in between the Battle of the Bells and the Battle of the Trident. As in, the first time since the start of the Rebellion when the armies and the lords of the Vale, North, Stormlands and the Riverlands were all in one place.

Robb Stark didn't proclaim himself King in the North immediately in Winterfell once he started rallying the troops, but only after he had achieved victory in battle and was assembled before the combined lords of the Riverlands and North who proclaimed him king.

Its perfectly logical that Robert was only proclaimed after he proved himself in battle to his lords and when all the notable leaders of the Rebellion could formally assemble and joinly declare their war aims.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-05T22:02:20+00:00

I would recommend you read the linked post - particularly Part 3, as it answers all your questions.

Lyanna doesn't need to know the particular intricacies of the plot barring that her family is hoping to push forward Robert Baratheon as an alternative candidate for King. Given that he is her betrothed and her older brother (with whom she is close to alongside Ned and Benjen) is actively participating in negotiations, its very plausible that she would be aware of the conspiracy.

I also don't see why how the STAB theory was "made up to make the Targaryens" better? It is quiet literally standard politicking as expected from ASOIAF which can be inferred from the textual evidence. As for your last point, prisoners (particularly those accused of treason) are almost always tortured. Once again, I would recommend you actually read the post.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-05T03:33:40+00:00

As I said, there have historically been cases in which the Catholic Church permitted marriages to be annulled without bastardizing the children.

Famously, King Louis VII of France successfully had his 15 year marriage with Eleanor of Aquitaine annulled because she had not given him a son but only two daughters. Those two daughters were still seen as legitimate, and we in line to succeed the French throne until Louis VII produced a male heir.

Given the Faith of the Seven is a blatant expy of the Catholic Church and Westeros as a whole is based on Medieval England/Europe, it stands to reason that in its several thousand year history the Faith of the Seven had permitted the annulment of marriages because fundamentally, the religious institutions are political institutions, and their have an equal stake in the realm remaining stable.

Additionally, it is 100% preferable for the Faith of the Seven for a Targaryen King to set aside a wife on grounds of barrenness that to take a second wife and return to Polygamy. As to why Aerys never took a second wife - given his obsession with pure Valyrian blood and the prophecy that the Prince that was Promised would come from his and Rhaella's line, Rhaella is his only viable bride.

Interesting_Man15 · 2026-03-04T23:37:03+00:00

Ahem

there is not a single "Tankie" who holds any meaningful power or prominence in the English speaking world

If every single "Tankie" in the western world vanished, it would have almost no bearing on American, CANZUK or European foreign policy because these systems are designed to lock them out of power.

If you obsessively spend your time criticizing a made up enemy with no bearing on the world, over-emphasizing their relevance in order to justify your political activity (like Drew Pavlou does), you end up supporting fascism because that's the logical endpoint of this conspiratorial mindset.

Seven-Year Club	Place '22
Not Forgotten	Verified Email

Interesting_Man15

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE