Why must every planet be a representative government

[therunner he/him]

26 minutes ago, bmcclure7 said:

My point was you’re acting like the revolution introduced a complete new system it didn’t. White males could vote before hand and white males could vote after.

And the rest of my point was that there was historical precedence for successfully introducing a new system, transition from Roman Kingdom to Roman Republic.

One that is so far longer lasting than US.

[Ripheus23]

2 minutes ago, bmcclure7 said:

1. If political science is a pseudoscience that makes Jasnah Decision even more stupid. Why would you introduce such a political, change If you know the results of the change are going to be completely random and arbitrary? Clearly, her and Brandon are working from the assumption at least that it is not a pseudoscience.
 

2. I Have already addressed the example of Japan. And again it does not compare to this circumstance at all Japan had an occupying army that could support the new system. And suppress any remnant of the old system. Jasnah wouldn’t be able to do that unless she cut some sort of deal with retribution that let the fused occupy the tower. I doubt she would do that.
 

 

3. If you know of anything reverent from Jewish or Confucius history on this topic by all means, bring it up.

 

4. I certainly hope it’s not. I would hate for another copycat version of scadrial that would make this even more boring. It would be far more interesting if they had completely different political systems.

1. Jasnah/Renarin think that their system is morally better than the previous one. They don't need any more justification than that, morality is not always, if ever, about "what works."
2. The remains of Alethkar are concentrated in a magical city that still has its magic, in another country not blighted by the Night of Sorrows, and in the Shattered Plains, which is also not under Retribution's direct political control. And for all that, we don't know how long the new order will endure, what challenges it will face, etc. so it seems strange to accuse Sanderson of writing a fairytale of political success when he hasn't written the tale almost at all, yet.
3. I'll look into it more for sure. The dialectic of Confucianism (more hierarchy) vs. Taoism (borderline libertarianism in some ways) and so on, is something I have only a little knowledge of for now, but I could see it as entirely pertinent to analysis of the case.
4. I don't mean that we'll see specific parallels, but I meant Scadrial went from a New Eden scenario, to a city with people biting at each other's ankles in all sorts of ways, to a network of even more fractious cities (incl. an attempt by one to hyper-nuke another!), I don't see why Future Alethkar would have to be portrayed as eternally stable???

[Lord Ruler Sylphrena He/Him]

One of the things that could make a democracy more viable in Urithiru/Shattered Plains Alethkar is demographics. A substantial part of the Tower is made up of Radiants and Nobles who already exercised political authority under the old system. They are more used to participating in governance and there are not that many people in the Tower who don't have some form of education as most of the peasants were left in Alethkar. I could see a House of Lords and House of Radiant overseen by the Tower Bondsmith being a decent form of goverment.

This is me arguing a position I don't agree with though I think despite the real world implications a monarchy is better for a narrative then a democracy. It's easier to care about 1 person then 100 I hope Brandon doesn't go overboard making Urithiru to modern.

[bmcclure7]

31 minutes ago, therunner said:

And the rest of my point was that there was historical precedence for successfully introducing a new system, transition from Roman Kingdom to Roman Republic.

One that is so far longer lasting than US.

1. Historically speaking, 500 years is still not that impressive for system. Not bad, but nothing special. 
 

2. The Roman republic wasn’t introduced top down neither was it a modern democracy.

The Roman king didn’t just wake up one day and decide hey I got this crazy idea guys. It’s called a democracy. He was overthrown in a rebellion the rebels, then introduced the Roman republic.

 

 

22 minutes ago, Ripheus23 said:

1. Jasnah/Renarin think that their system is morally better than the previous one. They don't need any more justification than that, morality is not always, if ever, about "what works."
2. The remains of Alethkar are concentrated in a magical city that still has its magic, in another country not blighted by the Night of Sorrows, and in the Shattered Plains, which is also not under Retribution's direct political control. And for all that, we don't know how long the new order will endure, what challenges it will face, etc. so it seems strange to accuse Sanderson of writing a fairytale of political success when he hasn't written the tale almost at all, yet.
3. I'll look into it more for sure. The dialectic of Confucianism (more hierarchy) vs. Taoism (borderline libertarianism in some ways) and so on, is something I have only a little knowledge of for now, but I could see it as entirely pertinent to analysis of the case.
4. I don't mean that we'll see specific parallels, but I meant Scadrial went from a New Eden scenario, to a city with people biting at each other's ankles in all sorts of ways, to a network of even more fractious cities (incl. an attempt by one to hyper-nuke another!), I don't see why Future Alethkar would have to be portrayed as eternally stable???

1. I don’t recall them ever saying that they believe that their system was more moral? Did I miss that part of the book?I only have it on Audible right now so it’s hard to go back and look.

2.  Fair enough, but still I think it would be very fairly boring as we already have had this plot line in the other series anyway 

3. I like you I’m mostly ignorant on this subject. I do know some, but not enough to speak with any kind of authority, though I don’t see how it’s irrelevant in the least. Neither Taoism nor Confucianism is democratic in a modern sense. I just don’t see why you think this is relevant? 
 

4. I will be quite honest I didn’t pay attention to most of the political conflict in Scadrial I found it boring and had no real preference on who won. Regardless, even if it takes it down that route Istill stand by my first statement that having every government system be a modern democracy would be boring especially since we already saw assisted like that in Scadrial.

Edited January 7, 2025 by bmcclure7

[therunner he/him]

18 minutes ago, bmcclure7 said:

1. Historically speaking, 500 years is still not that impressive for system. Not bad, but nothing special.

...ehm, Roman Republic is quite literally the longest lasting republic in history. That is by definition special.

18 minutes ago, bmcclure7 said:

2. The Roman republic wasn’t introduced top down neither was it a modern democracy.

Indeed it wasn't top down, however there are other situations (aforementioned Reform Act of 1832 ) where it was done successfully top down.

Quote

The Roman king didn’t just wake up one day and decide hey I got this crazy idea guys. It’s called a democracy. He was overthrown in a rebellion the rebels, then introduced the Roman republic.

Didn't you argue that you cannot just give democracy to people who aren't used to it, because they don't have experience? EDIT: Sorry my bad, mistook different persons argument for yours.

Here we have people who had no prior experience, regime change was done in unstable circumstances, and result was the longest lasting republic in history.

So, why would it not work if introduced top down? Lack of experience cannot be it, neither can lack of will or instability of circumstances.

Lack of desire likely not as well, darkeyes are quite keen on having a say and with Radiants now have considerable martial (and political) power behind them. From pure demographics, there are more Darkeyed Radiants than not.

So ruler is for change towards more democratic system, the large majority of society is, including martial powers. The main opponents is the old gentry, however they all lost their powerbase (Alethkar) and the ones most opposed were killed. Seems to me like relatively good situation for introducing the reform (though likely not as expansive as Jasnah would like).

Edited January 7, 2025 by therunner

[bmcclure7]

11 minutes ago, therunner said:

...ehm, Roman Republic is quite literally the longest lasting republic in history. That is by definition special.

Indeed it wasn't top down, however there are other situations (aforementioned Reform Act of 1832 ) where it was done successfully top down.

Didn't you argue that you cannot just give democracy to people who aren't used to it, because they don't have experience?

Here we have people who had no prior experience, regime change was done in unstable circumstances, and result was the longest lasting republic in history.

So, why would it not work if introduced top down? Lack of experience cannot be it, neither can lack of will or instability of circumstances.

Lack of desire likely not as well, darkeyes are quite keen on having a say.

1. That says more about the early republics and it says anything else.
 

2. You completely misunderstand me. I am saying that the ruler cannot impose a modern Democratic system pop down on the people who do not want that system or worse yet don’t even know what that system is. That is not what happened in the Roman republic which I would say again is not a modern democracy.

 

3. Again, I said nothing about experience. It has to do what people know and what people want. It’s about their investment in the new system. People gonna have no experience in a modern democracy and still be invested in that system.  
 

4. Were you asleep in Oathbringer? Moash whole disillusionment with humans was his discovery that the dark eyes still followed the light eyes even when they didn’t have to doesn’t sound like a people earnestly desiring a say in government. 
 

5. Even if they did that doesn’t mean they would want democracy. There are many ways to get a say in government. They could, for example, introduce a dark eyed king or they could have a system where everyone sends in essays or have the spren decide on the ruler they seem to only choose dark eyes anyways at least honor spren do. 
 

Edited January 7, 2025 by bmcclure7

[Knuti]

Sorry,

the historical discussion is quite nice, but it must be applied to present day Urithiru:

1. The ultimate ruler of Urithiru is the sibling and their bondsmith. They are quite convenient both unconscient at the moment
2. There are a plethora of functioning examples of democracy in cites at the time of the European middle ages. They did not last eternally and were strictly restricted to the city - the peasants of villages getting into their control were treated as feudal subjects just like everywhere else.
3. The old Alethy light eyes aristocracy is severely diminished in power and reputation and cannot prevent anything. They would certainly become a faction after the fact.
4. The new power, the Radiants would another faction, but at the moment they lack enough coherence to constitute an oligarchy. Whithout a working tower the situation would be different, because everything would depend on their control of the oathgates. Provided Urithiru could survive.
5. democracy does not mean equality as we all too well know. It does not even electoral rights for everyone. For example, if Rlain has these rights, it will certainly lead to deep resentmens on the human side. And it would not even mean, that non-Radiant Singers have the same the same rights
6. This all applies only to Urithiru. Every  discussion of Alethkar is hypothetical, because Alethkar is gone for good. Every argument brought up against democracy  is certainly valid for Jah Keved

Meaning yes, Jasnah can and will introduce democracy in Urithiru. What is means can be visited in book 6

Edited January 7, 2025 by Knuti
editet to add the conclusion

[therunner he/him]

31 minutes ago, bmcclure7 said:

1. That says more about the early republics and it says anything else.

What??

Again, Roman Republic is the longest lasting republic in history. Not longest lasting early republic, longest lasting in period.
US is more than 2 centuries younger than Roman Republic was at its end.

Even if you look at other systems of governance, lasting ~500 years without change of that system is long. Roman Republic actually is the 8th on the list of longest uninterrupted forms of governance.

31 minutes ago, bmcclure7 said:

2. You completely misunderstand me. I am saying that the ruler cannot impose a modern Democratic system pop down on the people who do not want that system or worse yet don’t even know what that system is. That is not what happened in the Roman republic which I would say again is not a modern democracy.

Why not? You keep saying it, but you don't provide much evidence.
Also, you keep saying people don't want that system, but where is the evidence? So far only high ranking lighteyes complained.

Do you think citizens of Roman Republic knew  what republic was in 5th century BC?

Hell, do you think the people who created the first republic knew what it was? Some nation, somewhere did it first, with no prior knowledge.

31 minutes ago, bmcclure7 said:

4. Were you asleep in Oathbringer? Moash whole disillusionment with humans was his discovery that the dark eyes still followed the light eyes even when they didn’t have to doesn’t sound like a people earnestly desiring a say in government.

Ehm, those people were thrown into camps with no structure provided by Singers. So they fell back on what was familiar.

That is quite different from being provided new structure.

31 minutes ago, bmcclure7 said:

5. Even if they did that doesn’t mean they would want democracy. There are many ways to get a say in government. They could, for example, introduce a dark eyed king or they could have a system where everyone sends in essays or have the spren decide on the ruler they seem to only choose dark eyes anyways at least honor spren do.

Neither does it mean they wouldn't want democracy.

• They likely wouldn't argue for a king, as that system is sort of build on either right of conquest or right of blood.
• They certainly wouldn't argue for essay system, as half the population cannot read or write (unlike Azir).
• Having spren decide is poorly defined. Which spren for starters?

And finally, who would be proposing these systems? It's not like there is some committee of darkeyes.
Any changes in any political system typically come from some form of elites, in this particular case, current ruling class wants to institute changes.

Quote

. People gonna have no experience in a modern democracy and still be invested in that system.  

You keep saying it will be modern democracy, but that is just speculation on your part.

Edited January 7, 2025 by therunner

[Duneye]

I feel like this discussion is predicated on the idea of replacing a kingdom-scale monarchy with a kingdom-scale democracy/republic, with all this talk about French and Russian revolutions. But that's not what is happening. A kingdom-scale monarchy has been reduced to, at best, a single tower-city and some towns out in the boonies, which we'll have to ignore because they're so isolated from Urithiru that they would effectively be self governing. So, in reality we have a kingdom's worth of nobility and military along with a menagerie of merchants from all over the world living in a single tower-city. All of these people would want some form of representation/influence in their government, and they'll take it wherever they can find it. And, it's been mentioned that darkeyes who have been pressed into menial labor that used to be done by parshmen have been unhappy with their labor, so they may jump at the opportunity to have some representation in government (see Urithiru coppermind page, "Problems" section).

Speaking historically, cities within an otherwise feudal society were very commonly governed by an elected official. There are innumerous examples of city-state republics just in Europe, many of which were independent of any monarchy (Venice, for example). These still had their own hierarchies and were by no means perfect democracies, but they show that republican rule, that is rule by a representative as opposed to a monarch, is a perfectly viable system of governance for a city such as Urithiru.

The viability of a republic/democracy here should not be in question. Whether it's instituted top-down or bottom-up doesn't matter either. There's already a whole lot of chaos surrounding the government considering the supreme leader of both the Radiants and Urithiru just died, I don't think beginning a democratization process would make things worse. And we don't even know for certain that they'll attempt to implement a modern democracy; as we've seen in Mistborn Sanderson doesn't seem like the type to write a modern, liberal democracy devoid of any aristocracy anyway. I am kind of afraid that he'll just write another Elendel though. Maybe it'll be some type of consitutional monarchy? I seem to remember Jasnah saying something about being a figure head

Edited January 7, 2025 by Duneye

[bmcclure7]

1 hour ago, therunner said:

What??

Again, Roman Republic is the longest lasting republic in history. Not longest lasting early republic, longest lasting in period.
US is more than 2 centuries younger than Roman Republic was at its end.

Even if you look at other systems of governance, lasting ~500 years without change of that system is long. Roman Republic actually is the 8th on the list of longest uninterrupted forms of governance.

Why not? You keep saying it, but you don't provide much evidence.
Also, you keep saying people don't want that system, but where is the evidence? So far only high ranking lighteyes complained.

Do you think citizens of Roman Republic knew  what republic was in 5th century BC?

Hell, do you think the people who created the first republic knew what it was? Some nation, somewhere did it first, with no prior knowledge.

Ehm, those people were thrown into camps with no structure provided by Singers. So they fell back on what was familiar.

That is quite different from being provided new structure.

Neither does it mean they wouldn't want democracy.

• They likely wouldn't argue for a king, as that system is sort of build on either right of conquest or right of blood.
• They certainly wouldn't argue for essay system, as half the population cannot read or write (unlike Azir).
• Having spren decide is poorly defined. Which spren for starters?

And finally, who would be proposing these systems? It's not like there is some committee of darkeyes.
Any changes in any political system typically come from some form of elites, in this particular case, current ruling class wants to institute changes.

You keep saying it will be modern democracy, but that is just speculation on your part.

1. Again, this is more about the Republics prior to the US then does about anything else whether the US and the more modern democratic Republic or any better remains to be seen. I certainly hope so but time will tell.

2. I’m referring to government system not a particular dynasty or government. One family can overthrow another, and the government can change the system does not.
 

3. It’s not a modern democracy because it had an aristocratic class for one thing. Second there was no separation of church in state for Another. It has some similarities to modern democracy, but modern de more people specifically made to be an improvement of the Roman republic not a copy.

 

4.They have no complaints because the system hasn’t been implemented yet no one not even lighthouses has been complained because they literally only just started talking about it. No one has even been given the chance to hear the news. 
 

5. No one in the tower aside from a few scholars have read her work even knows what democracy is. How could they want it?
 

6. Yes, actually the republic was not a new concept.They were republics before that early democracy they didn’t last long and We’re highly criticized but people understood the concept. 
 

7. No actually that’s not how government’s work governments don’t bring out of nowhere. They are built on previous government changes. No one just create a new government from scratch. 
 

8.no one in the ruling class aside from two people wants this either.

9. If she does create a democracy send the dark eyes opinion on democracy matters because they will be part of the ruling coalition at the very least

 

 

1 hour ago, therunner said:

What??

Again, Roman Republic is the longest lasting republic in history. Not longest lasting early republic, longest lasting in period.
US is more than 2 centuries younger than Roman Republic was at its end.

Even if you look at other systems of governance, lasting ~500 years without change of that system is long. Roman Republic actually is the 8th on the list of longest uninterrupted forms of governance.

Why not? You keep saying it, but you don't provide much evidence.
Also, you keep saying people don't want that system, but where is the evidence? So far only high ranking lighteyes complained.

Do you think citizens of Roman Republic knew  what republic was in 5th century BC?

Hell, do you think the people who created the first republic knew what it was? Some nation, somewhere did it first, with no prior knowledge.

Ehm, those people were thrown into camps with no structure provided by Singers. So they fell back on what was familiar.

That is quite different from being provided new structure.

Neither does it mean they wouldn't want democracy.

• They likely wouldn't argue for a king, as that system is sort of build on either right of conquest or right of blood.
• They certainly wouldn't argue for essay system, as half the population cannot read or write (unlike Azir).
• Having spren decide is poorly defined. Which spren for starters?

And finally, who would be proposing these systems? It's not like there is some committee of darkeyes.
Any changes in any political system typically come from some form of elites, in this particular case, current ruling class wants to institute changes.

You keep saying it will be modern democracy, but that is just speculation on your part.

History demonstrated provide a new structure does not fix the problem. , read my earlier comments.

I could think of several reasons why dark eyes would prefer a different structure than a democracy.

1. It’s new and unfamiliar. People automatically have a purchase against things that are unfamiliar. especially in times of uncertainty.

2. It favors the elite and the wealthy, which are mainly light eyes. 

Without any investment in the system in the dark guys will turn against the system as soon as they think they can get a more favorable system or they feel like the system isn’t working.

 

Kings are also based on the right of divine election and right of oath not just blood and conquest

 

Why would any dark eyes object to the right of blood and conquest? 
 

They can still speak to their wives and have them write down their words like all men do. 
 

Do you want more definition very well. the tower or decide in her absence, the highest ranking spren in the tower

 

can you imagine Jasnah creating any system other than a modern democracy?

Edited January 7, 2025 by bmcclure7

[bmcclure7]

37 minutes ago, Duneye said:

I feel like this discussion is predicated on the idea of replacing a kingdom-scale monarchy with a kingdom-scale democracy/republic, with all this talk about French and Russian revolutions. But that's not what is happening. A kingdom-scale monarchy has been reduced to, at best, a single tower-city and some towns out in the boonies, which we'll have to ignore because they're so isolated from Urithiru that they would effectively be self governing. So, in reality we have a kingdom's worth of nobility and military along with a menagerie of merchants from all over the world living in a single tower-city. All of these people would want some form of representation/influence in their government, and they'll take it wherever they can find it. And, it's been mentioned that darkeyes who have been pressed into menial labor that used to be done by parshmen have been unhappy with their labor, so they may jump at the opportunity to have some representation in government (see Urithiru coppermind page, "Problems" section).

Speaking historically, cities within an otherwise feudal society were very commonly governed by an elected official. There are innumerous examples of city-state republics just in Europe, many of which were independent of any monarchy (Venice, for example). These still had their own hierarchies and were by no means perfect democracies, but they show that republican rule, that is rule by a representative as opposed to a monarch, is a perfectly viable system of governance for a city such as Urithiru.

The viability of a republic/democracy here should not be in question. Whether it's instituted top-down or bottom-up doesn't matter either. There's already a whole lot of chaos surrounding the government considering the supreme leader of both the Radiants and Urithiru just died, I don't think beginning a democratization process would make things worse. And we don't even know for certain that they'll attempt to implement a modern democracy; as we've seen in Mistborn Sanderson doesn't seem like the type to write a modern, liberal democracy devoid of any aristocracy anyway. I am kind of afraid that he'll just write another Elendel though. Maybe it'll be some type of consitutional monarchy? I seem to remember Jasnah saying something about being a figure head

I’m hoping for a constitutional monarchy at least that would create a difference between them and Scadrial 

[Nitpicking]

6 hours ago, therunner said:

Again, Roman Republic is the longest lasting republic in history. Not longest lasting early republic, longest lasting in period.
US is more than 2 centuries younger than Roman Republic was at its end.

Is it worth mentioning that the Althing, the parliament of Iceland, is over 700 years old and counting?

 

 

[therunner he/him]

4 hours ago, Nitpicking said:

Is it worth mentioning that the Althing, the parliament of Iceland, is over 700 years old and counting?

Yes and no, in my opinion.

While yes, it is that old, it also wasn't a legislative body with any power between circa 1300s and 1900s...so Roman Republic was still functional and actually doing legislation for longer stretch of time.

10 hours ago, bmcclure7 said:

1. Again, this is more about the Republics prior to the US then does about anything else whether the US and the more modern democratic Republic or any better remains to be seen. I certainly hope so but time will tell.

And again, Roman Republic is so far more of a success than US, at least on durability.
In 2 centuries we can adjust that statement, but as of now, US is not yet proven to be better.

Quote

4.They have no complaints because the system hasn’t been implemented yet no one not even lighthouses has been complained because they literally only just started talking about it. No one has even been given the chance to hear the news. 

Yes, and that works both ways. You have no evidence they would mind, just as I have no evidence they wouldn't.

Quote

5. No one in the tower aside from a few scholars have read her work even knows what democracy is. How could they want it?

They might not want 'democracy' (because they never heard of it), but they might want to have more say in what happens to them.

If someone goes and tells them, "Hey, now you have some say in laws and what happens with Alethkar!" I think most would be supportive.

Quote

6. Yes, actually the republic was not a new concept.They were republics before that early democracy they didn’t last long and We’re highly criticized but people understood the concept. 

Could you provide any evidence as to this?

From what I can find, Roman Republic is roughly contemporaneous with e.g. direct democracy of city states like Athens, so from that, Roman Republic was in fact among the very first republics in history.

Quote

7. No actually that’s not how government’s work governments don’t bring out of nowhere. They are built on previous government changes. No one just create a new government from scratch. 

And neither does Jasnah, she is clearly working from pre-existing body of work, and wants to reform Alethkar state, not start from scratch.

Quote

8.no one in the ruling class aside from two people wants this either.

Its absolute monarchy, ruling class is in effect the monarch.
And those two people have superpowers.

10 hours ago, bmcclure7 said:

I could think of several reasons why dark eyes would prefer a different structure than a democracy.

1. It’s new and unfamiliar. People automatically have a purchase against things that are unfamiliar. especially in times of uncertainty.

New and familiar I grant you, so you would want to introduce it gradually, not all at once.

Quote

2. It favors the elite and the wealthy, which are mainly light eyes. 

Why would they think that?
Per you, they are not familiar with democracy at all, why would they think it inherently favor elite and wealthy more than current system? Current system which literally made them to be second class.

In this way, democracy would be an upgrade, and there is no discussion.

Quote

Without any investment in the system in the dark guys will turn against the system as soon as they think they can get a more favorable system or they feel like the system isn’t working.

Like they could turn against existing system of caste and rulership which was proven to be based on a lie/misunderstanding?

Current system is already not working for darkeyes, and they know it. That makes them more receptive to change, as you yourself say.

Quote

Kings are also based on the right of divine election and right of oath not just blood and conquest

Not in Alethkar, Gavilar conquered it in living memory, there is no divine election.

Quote

Why would any dark eyes object to the right of blood and conquest? 

Because that is representative of the system which repressed them.

Quote

They can still speak to their wives and have them write down their words like all men do. 

And they have no guarantee they will write down what they say.

As knowledge of the undertext start spreading, it will erode some trust.

Quote

Do you want more definition very well. the tower or decide in her absence, the highest ranking spren in the tower

Who is the highest ranking spren? How is rank of the spren decided?

• Is it age?
• Lineage ? (this would be just monarch with extra steps)
• Military rank? (this would be just military rule with extra steps)
• Spren elections?

Saying spren makes the choice just shifts the problem of the government system to spren.

Quote

can you imagine Jasnah creating any system other than a modern democracy?

Yes, constitutional monarchy for example.

I am certain ideologically she would want to try for semi-modern democracy, but I am also certain that the circumstances won't permit that (barring some unforeseen cirmustances).


What evidence do you have it will be modern democracy? Because I am still not seeing any.

Edited January 8, 2025 by therunner

[Ripheus23]

12 hours ago, bmcclure7 said:

1. I don’t recall them ever saying that they believe that their system was more moral? Did I miss that part of the book?I only have it on Audible right now so it’s hard to go back and look... Neither Taoism nor Confucianism is democratic in a modern sense. I just don’t see why you think this is relevant?

Regarding the second part first: Azish society is modeled in part off Confucianism, and the Alethi, who wrought a genocide upon that land not that long ago (all things considered), are much housed up there now, so... Or, imagine if alien-demons from both another planet and another plane of existence invaded 1800s Europe, and the leading power in Europe became a government-in-exile situated in part in India and Saudi Arabia (and among the remnants of Native American tribes, apparently). If for nothing else than historical flavoring, I think we would do well to factor in cultures/societies/histories that Sanderson has said informed his representation of Azir (and other places on Roshar, incl. Alethkar, which is not supposed to be all that much like 1800s Europe AFAIK).

I mean, forget how "unrealistic" it is for Alethkar-in-exile to accept democratization at the whims of a heretic and a man bonded to a corrupted spren, who is now romantically involved with the "enemy" (who with that enemy man helped set free Mishram!). How unrealistic was/is it for Azir to take in Alethkar as it has? You could be like, "There's no way, if a country murdered 10% of my fellow citizens, that I'd be willing to accept people from that country as refugees unless it was civilians or soldiers who didn't know any better. But to take in a general who massacred tens of thousands of people, including his own wife? What the hell!"

Now, as for Jasnah and Renarin's moral attitudes: w.r.t. Jasnah, it's based on the outcome of her debate with Taravangian, her need to reflect on, and better personify, her ideals. The decisions she's making after that scene are informed/motivated by her experience of that debate. As for Renarin, in the interests of diversity and inclusion, which are real values for him after all, he is going to gravitate towards political systems whose themes resonate more with openness to more and more perspectives and possibilities. Dictatorship isn't that, and hierarchy leads to dictatorship fairly easily (also note that no real human dictator has the kind of physical power that Radiants and Heralds have, so cannot function as singularly as they might, but a real dictator must depend on the agreement of the seething oligarchy below them); Renarin's culture already has a history of opposing the Hierocracy, we should not forget; and in Sanderson's hands, the word "democracy" here might have a very general significance. The LDS interpretation of reality involves a very sharp commitment to the importance of agency, as a strong concept of free will even, and this plays into the idealization of democracy on various levels.

In a sense, greater personal diversity is symptomatic of a more open system, a system of more "freedom" in some appropriate sense. Too much rigid order is totalitarian, which is more than just authoritarian. Too much random chaos is not stable. So a balance of political order and political randomness is variously closer to optimal, ethically, and democracy at least overlaps this balanced range to a moderately greater extent than an overbearing hierarchy based on e.g. eye color. We also shouldn't forget that one of the most prolific fantasy authors ever lives in southern Utah, among the landscapes that inspired the Shattered Plains, and since I would be surprised if Sanderson had no knowledge of this man, I would instead expect that Sanderson is at least passingly familiar with his (the other author's) dialectic of order and chaos. At any rate, though, Renarin internal to the Archive's storyline and externally, outside the fourth wall, is meant to symbolize the potential social dynamics that are reflected in his representation of, and drive towards, democracy as a medium of political and personal autonomy.

[bmcclure7]

39 minutes ago, therunner said:

Yes and no, in my opinion.

While yes, it is that old, it also wasn't a legislative body with any power between circa 1300s and 1900s...so Roman Republic was still functional and actually doing legislation for longer stretch of time.

And again, Roman Republic is so far more of a success than US, at least on durability.
In 2 centuries we can adjust that statement, but as of now, US is not yet proven to be better.

Yes, and that works both ways. You have no evidence they would mind, just as I have no evidence they wouldn't.

They might not want 'democracy' (because they never heard of it), but they might want to have more say in what happens to them.

If someone goes and tells them, "Hey, now you have some say in laws and what happens with Alethkar!" I think most would be supportive.

Could you provide any evidence as to this?

From what I can find, Roman Republic is roughly contemporaneous with e.g. direct democracy of city states like Athens, so from that, Roman Republic was in fact among the very first republics in history.

And neither does Jasnah, she is clearly working from pre-existing body of work, and wants to reform Alethkar state, not start from scratch.

Its absolute monarchy, ruling class is in effect the monarch.
And those two people have superpowers.

New and familiar I grant you, so you would want to introduce it gradually, not all at once.

Why would they think that?
Per you, they are not familiar with democracy at all, why would they think it inherently favor elite and wealthy more than current system? Current system which literally made them to be second class.

In this way, democracy would be an upgrade, and there is no discussion.

Like they could turn against existing system of caste and rulership which was proven to be based on a lie/misunderstanding?

Current system is already not working for darkeyes, and they know it. That makes them more receptive to change, as you yourself say.

Not in Alethkar, Gavilar conquered it in living memory, there is no divine election.

Because that is representative of the system which repressed them.

And they have no guarantee they will write down what they say.

As knowledge of the undertext start spreading, it will erode some trust.

Who is the highest ranking spren? How is rank of the spren decided?

• Is it age?
• Lineage ? (this would be just monarch with extra steps)
• Military rank? (this would be just military rule with extra steps)
• Spren elections?

Saying spren makes the choice just shifts the problem of the government system to spren.

Yes, constitutional monarchy for example.

I am certain ideologically she would want to try for semi-modern democracy, but I am also certain that the circumstances won't permit that (barring some unforeseen cirmustances).


What evidence do you have it will be modern democracy? Because I am still not seeing any.

She already said that she would not have a constitutional monarchy (though I believe that if her mother ever wakes that is what she will have in reality if not in name) 

Because that is the system that she wants to make.

[Nitpicking]

3 hours ago, Ripheus23 said:

I mean, forget how "unrealistic" it is for Alethkar-in-exile to accept democratization at the whims of a heretic and a man bonded to a corrupted spren, who is now romantically involved with the "enemy" (who with that enemy man helped set free Mishram!). How unrealistic was/is it for Azir to take in Alethkar as it has? You could be like, "There's no way, if a country murdered 10% of my fellow citizens, that I'd be willing to accept people from that country as refugees unless it was civilians or soldiers who didn't know any better. But to take in a general who massacred tens of thousands of people, including his own wife? What the hell!"

Did I miss something? The only significant Alethi presence in Azir that I know of is the army sent to successfully defend the empire against the Singer attackers under the command of Odium.

If you look at, say, the history of the Korean peninsula, they have a historic habit of taking invaders (China, the Mongols) and turning them into semi-allies. Right now, South Korea is holding its metaphoric nose to work with Japan to contain North Korea.

[bmcclure7]

4 hours ago, Ripheus23 said:

Regarding the second part first: Azish society is modeled in part off Confucianism, and the Alethi, who wrought a genocide upon that land not that long ago (all things considered), are much housed up there now, so... Or, imagine if alien-demons from both another planet and another plane of existence invaded 1800s Europe, and the leading power in Europe became a government-in-exile situated in part in India and Saudi Arabia (and among the remnants of Native American tribes, apparently). If for nothing else than historical flavoring, I think we would do well to factor in cultures/societies/histories that Sanderson has said informed his representation of Azir (and other places on Roshar, incl. Alethkar, which is not supposed to be all that much like 1800s Europe AFAIK).

I mean, forget how "unrealistic" it is for Alethkar-in-exile to accept democratization at the whims of a heretic and a man bonded to a corrupted spren, who is now romantically involved with the "enemy" (who with that enemy man helped set free Mishram!). How unrealistic was/is it for Azir to take in Alethkar as it has? You could be like, "There's no way, if a country murdered 10% of my fellow citizens, that I'd be willing to accept people from that country as refugees unless it was civilians or soldiers who didn't know any better. But to take in a general who massacred tens of thousands of people, including his own wife? What the hell!"

Now, as for Jasnah and Renarin's moral attitudes: w.r.t. Jasnah, it's based on the outcome of her debate with Taravangian, her need to reflect on, and better personify, her ideals. The decisions she's making after that scene are informed/motivated by her experience of that debate. As for Renarin, in the interests of diversity and inclusion, which are real values for him after all, he is going to gravitate towards political systems whose themes resonate more with openness to more and more perspectives and possibilities. Dictatorship isn't that, and hierarchy leads to dictatorship fairly easily (also note that no real human dictator has the kind of physical power that Radiants and Heralds have, so cannot function as singularly as they might, but a real dictator must depend on the agreement of the seething oligarchy below them); Renarin's culture already has a history of opposing the Hierocracy, we should not forget; and in Sanderson's hands, the word "democracy" here might have a very general significance. The LDS interpretation of reality involves a very sharp commitment to the importance of agency, as a strong concept of free will even, and this plays into the idealization of democracy on various levels.

In a sense, greater personal diversity is symptomatic of a more open system, a system of more "freedom" in some appropriate sense. Too much rigid order is totalitarian, which is more than just authoritarian. Too much random chaos is not stable. So a balance of political order and political randomness is variously closer to optimal, ethically, and democracy at least overlaps this balanced range to a moderately greater extent than an overbearing hierarchy based on e.g. eye color. We also shouldn't forget that one of the most prolific fantasy authors ever lives in southern Utah, among the landscapes that inspired the Shattered Plains, and since I would be surprised if Sanderson had no knowledge of this man, I would instead expect that Sanderson is at least passingly familiar with his (the other author's) dialectic of order and chaos. At any rate, though, Renarin internal to the Archive's storyline and externally, outside the fourth wall, is meant to symbolize the potential social dynamics that are reflected in his representation of, and drive towards, democracy as a medium of political and personal autonomy.

1. Yes I know their culture is based on Confucianism. I just don’t see how is that relevant to them deciding on making a democracy? It’s not even the right country and even if it were, I still didn’t see how it’s relevant.
 

2. When did it ever say that her moral confrontation with retribution had anything to do with her decision to form of democracy? She had already made that decision and talked about it a book ago so it’s not like it came afterwards and even if it did that doesn’t mean the two are related?

3. You’re only speculating about. Renarins motives he never once says any of the things you said in the book.

3 you do realize that democracy are hierarchical? If hierarchy led to dictators, then all governments would be rulled by dictators 

[Ripheus23]

1 hour ago, Nitpicking said:

Did I miss something? The only significant Alethi presence in Azir that I know of is the army sent to successfully defend the empire against the Singer attackers under the command of Odium.

If you look at, say, the history of the Korean peninsula, they have a historic habit of taking invaders (China, the Mongols) and turning them into semi-allies. Right now, South Korea is holding its metaphoric nose to work with Japan to contain North Korea.

I'm referring to the history of the Sunmaker, not sure how long ago that was (many centuries AFAIK).

Now that Korea thing is interesting as the Alethi culture draws inspiration from there, and one might compare Japan to Alethkar and North Korea to Retribution's system. Moreover, though, I don't think that the Azish decision to take in the Alethi was "unrealistic" or "wrong" or what, I just meant that people might think that it was unrealistic/wrong, depending on their theories of psychology and sociology, etc.

[Ripheus23]

1 hour ago, bmcclure7 said:

1. Yes I know their culture is based on Confucianism. I just don’t see how is that relevant to them deciding on making a democracy? It’s not even the right country and even if it were, I still didn’t see how it’s relevant.
 

2. When did it ever say that her moral confrontation with retribution had anything to do with her decision to form of democracy? She had already made that decision and talked about it a book ago so it’s not like it came afterwards and even if it did that doesn’t mean the two are related?

3. You’re only speculating about. Renarins motives he never once says any of the things you said in the book.

3 you do realize that democracy are hierarchical? If hierarchy led to dictators, then all governments would be rulled by dictators 

1. I'd want to look into various political transitions in Chinese history, for example to/from Confucianism in various ways. I'm not focused so much on transitions to/from democracy in Chinese history but just major political changes of whatever kind; I'd be looking for an example where China's political system underwent a "large" change that resulted in a new system of administration which was at least temporarily stable. Or where something like this happened in India, or Persia, or wherever. If it's generally possible for such changes to take place, and we've seen this IRL, then I would apply that information as a "rule," not of necessity but possibility, and say, "So Sanderson is not being that unrealistic about this after all," at least no more unrealistic than when he has magic and the like in his stories.
2. This is in terms of character building. We don't need everything directly stated in the text, I mean people figured out a huge chunk of the Metallic Arts by deduction, people figured out that Chana was Shallan's mother likewise, I deduced that Taravangian would pick up Odium and then that Dalinar would give him Honor and that Honor's power was involved in Shards being bound by certain conventions well before those things were stated "out loud." So we've been given repeated character-building information about Jasnah's ethical philosophy going back to WoK, I don't see why we can't deduce things from all that. Even if that wasn't plausible reasoning, though, we could invoke Sanderson's religious background to explain a preference for democracy in his representation of "the good side" in this conflict.
3. Same argument as for (2), then.
4. I'm sure there are systems, most of them even, which have been called "democracies" and which include varying degrees of hierarchy. However, I didn't mean that all hierarchies inevitably become dictatorships, only that they can more easily become this, depending on their rigidity, and it's an issue in political philosophy, whether democracies themselves tend to mutate into dictatorships eventually (a particular case being the mystery of Gödel's loophole), but so for a more authoritarianism-adjacent system (a non-democratic hierarchy) to slip towards this state does seem easier in some general respects. OTOH maybe all democracies and hierarchies are so generally unstable, along with dictatorships, that really it's just a matter of perturbation theory adapted to the social level.

[coolsnow7]

On 1/6/2025 at 6:16 PM, bmcclure7 said:

Interesting sentiment, but one hardly unique throughout many areas in history People have made similar arguments for there ideology or system All were eventually proven wrong with time. I like living in a democracy and appreciate the benefits and it brings me im Skeptical of the belief that it will last forever

I’m not about to argue with you about Fukuyama - your best bet is to read the actual book and find out his arguments for yourself. I’m here to point out that this is a respectable view that’s, I’d say, pretty widely held - and therefore serves as a reasonable basis for the Cosmere. And, I’d bet that if you ask Brandon, he holds these views as well.

[rabidhexley]

It doesn't seem so much that Representative Government specifically is inevitable, but some sort of self-repairing distribution of power, whether that be a democracy, republic, oligarchy, meritocratic bureaucracy (like Azir), etc. will eventually come into place. Systems where power can naturally transition between hands rather than being reliant on the grasp of specific individuals/families.

 

Absolute monarchy or a static noble ruling-class requires there to be harsh limits on social mobility. But as the underclass begins to gain some means of social mobility and autonomy from the ruling-class, the system will naturally want to change into a form that allows for it. That isn't necessarily a democracy or representative government, though.

 

It isn't so much that these systems are absolutely more stable or resilient to collapse, so much as they're a natural result of certain underlying conditions.

 

In the case of Jasnah, she wants to begin moving in that direction because she knows that in giving the underclass (darkeyes and slaves) agency, the current system will begin crack under the pressure and likely eventually fall to a rebellion that institutes a distributed system of power anyways.

 

And Jasnah has the benefit of living in a world/universe that already has representations of non-nobility based systems, and lives in a time where outside events are causing sweeping changes in the status-quo to be the norm.

Edited January 8, 2025 by rabidhexley

[bmcclure7]

5 hours ago, coolsnow7 said:

I’m not about to argue with you about Fukuyama - your best bet is to read the actual book and find out his arguments for yourself. I’m here to point out that this is a respectable view that’s, I’d say, pretty widely held - and therefore serves as a reasonable basis for the Cosmere. And, I’d bet that if you ask Brandon, he holds these views as well.

I’m not really looking to start an argument. I don’t necessarily disagree as it could be true to time will tell. I’m usually skeptical of such things, but it’s possible.  I mean it’s been wrong at the other time. People have said that, but there’s always a first. But regardless I hope at least if there’s a different feel to each democracy. Something to make them feel different and not all the same. 

Edited January 8, 2025 by bmcclure7

[Isilel]

 

On 12/31/2024 at 2:31 AM, bmcclure7 said:

 Well it would make sense for the edge dancer become advocate for the people that doesn’t mean that they would support representative government,

 

Let me point out the elephant in the room - clashes between the Radiants and the old hierarchy would have been inevitable once the war calmed down. In fact, it is a wonder that nothing has happened yet. I have expected much more friction after OB, once the number of Radiants began to grow and the fact that most of them had been drawn from the lower levels of society became evident. Oaths of a number of Orders, particularly of the Windrunners and the Edgedancers would have pretty much required them to interfere at some point. Something needed to be done to preempt this easily foreseeble conflict from erupting.

 

On 1/7/2025 at 7:44 PM, bmcclure7 said:

Why would you introduce such a political, change If you know the results of the change are going to be completely random and arbitrary?

 

Consequences of political changes are difficult to predict, but the old societal order has become untenable between the re-appearance of the Radiants and of Odium. Radiants introduce a massive disruption to the eye-color based hierarchy, since everyone, even a slave, can become one and their eyes would lighten. They would also eventually get a shardblade and plate. So, why would darkeyes continue to be as willing to accept the privileges of the old nobility? For that matter, it puts the whole nahn - dahn system in question, since it provides tangible evidence that it in no way reflects worthiness or divine right to lead. At the same time, slaves would be ripe for recruitment as a Fifth column by Odium. Because they have plenty of reasons to hate and little to lose.

Honestly, the idea that it is bad to enslave your own people is something that even ancient Romans understood, which is why they made it illegal to enslave a Roman citizens for any reason around 4th century BCE.

Slavery was abolished in most European countries by the 14th century, though of course it re-appeared again later in the colonies. But it doesn't necessarily require modern sensibilities to do away with it. I am sure it wasn't all due to high-mindedness, there must have been practical considerations. As there are in SA, as I pointed out above.

As there are practical reasons to give non-Radiants some kind of voice in the governance of Urithiru. First of all, most new Radiants don't have relevant skills, training and experience. And they'd have more than enough to do fulfilling their Radiant duties, doing things that only they can do. And second, they are more dependent on the support of the Urithiru population than they have been in the past, with the rest of Roshar bar Azir in Retribution's hands.

 

On 1/5/2025 at 7:52 PM, Fractalfire said:

Ask some of the real life brilliant philosopher kings and queens how well their enlightened rationalist reforms worked out for them sometime... As Holy Roman Emperor Joseph the II would reply ""Here lies a ruler who, despite his best intentions, was unsuccessful in all of his endeavors."

 

Funnily enough, Joseph II successfully abolished serfdom in the parts of the Habsburg monarchy where it  still existed and his religious tolerance edict had far-reaching positive results. While anti-nobility legislation was repealed, it still never fully regained it's former privileges, since societal tolerance for them had diminished.  Etc. Also, due to his own botched education, he had a life-long aversion towards  scholarship, so hardly a philosopher. History had been kinder to him than this bitter self-epitaph on  his deathbed implies, too.

But anyway, he had good ideas, which were both neccessary and timely, but went about executing them somewhat incompetently. Aggressive and expensive foreign policy at the same time didn't help.

It is also worth pointing out that Joseph II by no means tried to establish constitutional monarchy. On the contrary, he pursued enlightened absolutism. And his own autoritarianism and extreme micro-management were in big part responsible for his failures and probably hastened his death due to constant exhaustion from  massive overwork. So, in this his personality was more similar to Dalinar than to Jasnah.

 

[bmcclure7]

1 hour ago, Isilel said:

 

 

Let me point out the elephant in the room - clashes between the Radiants and the old hierarchy would have been inevitable once the war calmed down. In fact, it is a wonder that nothing has happened yet. I have expected much more friction after OB, once the number of Radiants began to grow and the fact that most of them had been drawn from the lower levels of society became evident. Oaths of a number of Orders, particularly of the Windrunners and the Edgedancers would have pretty much required them to interfere at some point. Something needed to be done to preempt this easily foreseeble conflict from erupting.

 

 

Consequences of political changes are difficult to predict, but the old societal order has become untenable between the re-appearance of the Radiants and of Odium. Radiants introduce a massive disruption to the eye-color based hierarchy, since everyone, even a slave, can become one and their eyes would lighten. They would also eventually get a shardblade and plate. So, why would darkeyes continue to be as willing to accept the privileges of the old nobility? For that matter, it puts the whole nahn - dahn system in question, since it provides tangible evidence that it in no way reflects worthiness or divine right to lead. At the same time, slaves would be ripe for recruitment as a Fifth column by Odium. Because they have plenty of reasons to hate and little to lose.

Honestly, the idea that it is bad to enslave your own people is something that even ancient Romans understood, which is why they made it illegal to enslave a Roman citizens for any reason around 4th century BCE.

Slavery was abolished in most European countries by the 14th century, though of course it re-appeared again later in the colonies. But it doesn't necessarily require modern sensibilities to do away with it. I am sure it wasn't all due to high-mindedness, there must have been practical considerations. As there are in SA, as I pointed out above.

As there are practical reasons to give non-Radiants some kind of voice in the governance of Urithiru. First of all, most new Radiants don't have relevant skills, training and experience. And they'd have more than enough to do fulfilling their Radiant duties, doing things that only they can do. And second, they are more dependent on the support of the Urithiru population than they have been in the past, with the rest of Roshar bar Azir in Retribution's hands.

 

 

Funnily enough, Joseph II successfully abolished serfdom in the parts of the Habsburg monarchy where it  still existed and his religious tolerance edict had far-reaching positive results. While anti-nobility legislation was repealed, it still never fully regained it's former privileges, since societal tolerance for them had diminished.  Etc. Also, due to his own botched education, he had a life-long aversion towards  scholarship, so hardly a philosopher. History had been kinder to him than this bitter self-epitaph on  his deathbed implies, too.

But anyway, he had good ideas, which were both neccessary and timely, but went about executing them somewhat incompetently. Aggressive and expensive foreign policy at the same time didn't help.

It is also worth pointing out that Joseph II by no means tried to establish constitutional monarchy. On the contrary, he pursued enlightened absolutism. And his own autoritarianism and extreme micro-management were in big part responsible for his failures and probably hastened his death due to constant exhaustion from  massive overwork. So, in this his personality was more similar to Dalinar than to Jasnah.

 

1. I agree and personally, I think making a democracy would only make conflict between the orders worse 

2. Radiance do not up and the social order just the opposite they reinforce it. Any dark eyes who becomes Radiant will have his eyes change color to be lighter reinforcing the idea of light eyes being holy and set above Other man.

2.5. It makes sense that many of the radiance will support the current social system as that system gives them the most power and privileges 

3.Just because dark eyes desire or places in society (a questionable idea best) doesn’t mean that they want a democracy I doubt that even know what that is half of them can’t even read (more than half as many dark eyed females do not have the education to read) and even if they didn’t know how to weed the only scholar who’s written on democracy is Jasnah so it’s not a very common idea. 
 

4.There are many other ways, more familiar for them to push for more control of the government that they do not involve the modern democracy. 
 

5.The abolition of slavery has already happened and it’s not relevant to a modern democracy.

6. Even if you introduced a modern democracy, there’s no getting around the fact that you have an aristocratic class in the form of the knight radiant.

There’s a reason why democracy did not become so popular till after the invention of gun powder before that even democracy had some form of oligarchy class of a lead warriors or a wealthy merchants who could higher elite mercenaries.
 

There’s no getting around that a radiant powers make give them social and political power even if this fact is not acknowledge.
 

It would make more sense to acknowledge this obvious fact and incorporate the orders into the system so that they can be regulated by laws  traditions, and customs. Instead of treating them extraordinary citizens, and allowing them to use their power, completely unhindered and separate from official channels

Edited January 9, 2025 by bmcclure7

[rabidhexley]

34 minutes ago, bmcclure7 said:

1. I agree and personally, I think making a democracy would only make conflict between the orders worse 

2. Radiance do not up and the social order just the opposite they reinforce it. Any dark eyes who becomes Radiant will have his eyes change color to be lighter reinforcing the idea of light eyes being holy and set above Other man.

 

...

 

There’s no getting around that a radiant powers make give them social and political power even if this fact is not acknowledge.
 

It would make more sense to acknowledge this obvious fact and incorporate the orders into the system so that they can be regulated by laws  traditions, and customs. Instead of treating them extraordinary citizens, and allowing them to use their power, completely unhindered and separate from official channels

The problem with this is that the Radiants evidently never took over the world in the past. They were leaders and ran things during the desolations. But even up to the Recreance when the Radiants had internal strife, the fact of the Oaths seemed to create a degree of self-selection against the types of folks who would create a superpowered ruling class. You have to "join the club"  to get your powers. And anyone can potentially join the club because spren can bond by choice, so there's downward pressure on Radiant powers becoming exclusive (in the sense of societal/hierarchical stratification).

 

And it's not even that all Radiants were good guys, it's just that for them to create organized oppression, the spren and other Radiants would have to be okay with it. A Radiant ruling-class is tough because the spren may very well just start bonding the underclass instead and you end up with a stalemate of power or some kind of civil war/rebellion.

 

So there's a lot of natural pressure to prevent Radiant powers from becoming a dominating force in politics due to the requirements of the Oaths and how the distribution of powers can't be controlled, you can't prevent the underclass or your political opponents from getting Radiant powers, so you might as well ignore them for the purpose of political organization outside of the Radiant Orders themselves. Doing otherwise is just asking for instability.

 

And the rise fabrials and other technology, as well as things like the Unoathed harkens on the democratization of Might.

 

What you're talking about more accurately happened on Scadrial with allomancy being concentrated in the ruling class until the elimination of full mistborn and ferruchemists as well as modern weaponry and a broader distribution of allomantic abilities pushing this down, and now there's the technological democratization of metalborn abilities on the way.

 

On Roshar it did happen with Shardbearers being completely contained in the ruling class. Shareblades and plate are essentially magic powers selected by might is right, and gave so much of a power advantage only those who ruled tended to have them. And it was fine if a member of the underclass occasionally got shards because it was rare and could be contained. That isn't the case for Radiant bonds.

Edited January 9, 2025 by rabidhexley