The Alethi are actually TERRIBLE Politicians

[+Oltux72]

1 hour ago, Elend Venture said:

I get the distinct feeling that Torol may not have been interested in the positioning for the extended future,

That I highly doubt. His actions and explanations after the betrayal of Dalinar are extremely hard to explain under that premise. He tried to make a martyr out of Dalinar and at the same time to show that Dalinar's methods were too reluctant and scrupulous. He tried to set the Alethi onto a course of ruthless conquest beginning with wiping out the Parshendi. He had started that course with not accepting surrenders. The man had a vision of repeating and outdoing the Sunmaker. An empire to be built in many decades and to last for centuries.

[+robardin]

On 7/17/2020 at 8:38 PM, Kuram said:

The alethi are warlords playing at what they think politics is.  Fighting, shows of force, backstabbing and appearance over substance.

This. I mean, they wouldn't even take the term as an insult. Their names for ranks, aside from theconventional, what one might call "translation to our world for reader impact" terms like General or Captain, include "companylord" and "battalionlord". Calling a highprince a "warlord" would probably get a positive response.

[Elend Venture]

7 hours ago, Oltux72 said:

That I highly doubt. His actions and explanations after the betrayal of Dalinar are extremely hard to explain under that premise. He tried to make a martyr out of Dalinar and at the same time to show that Dalinar's methods were too reluctant and scrupulous. He tried to set the Alethi onto a course of ruthless conquest beginning with wiping out the Parshendi. He had started that course with not accepting surrenders. The man had a vision of repeating and outdoing the Sunmaker. An empire to be built in many decades and to last for centuries.

Fair, enough, in which case the OP's premise, that highprinces excluding Dalinar (Sadeas included) are bad politicians is false. That is the plotting of an alright to good politician. He still could probably have had more backup plans and alterntive routes to be truly effective, but he was a decent politician.

Edited July 20, 2020 by Elend Venture

[GriffinMaze]

Your definition of 'politics'/'politicians' is overly simplistic and limited.  The Alethi in question are better than Dalinar at being a certain type of politician 

Edited July 21, 2020 by GriffinMaze

[Karger]

17 minutes ago, GriffinMaze said:

Your definition of 'politics'/'politicians' is overly simplistic and limited.  The Alethi in question are better than Dalinar at being a certain type of politician 

20 hours ago, Oltux72 said:

That I highly doubt. His actions and explanations after the betrayal of Dalinar are extremely hard to explain under that premise. He tried to make a martyr out of Dalinar and at the same time to show that Dalinar's methods were too reluctant and scrupulous. He tried to set the Alethi onto a course of ruthless conquest beginning with wiping out the Parshendi. He had started that course with not accepting surrenders. The man had a vision of repeating and outdoing the Sunmaker. An empire to be built in many decades and to last for centuries.

13 hours ago, Elend Venture said:

Fair, enough, in which case the OP's premise, that highprinces excluding Dalinar (Sadeas included) are bad politicians is false. That is the plotting of an alright to good politician. He still could probably have had more backup plans and alterntive routes to be truly effective, but he was a decent politician.

If you move the goal posts you can get almost any group of people to fit any description.  The point that a US politician for example would not last 10 seconds in alethkar is true.  However I do stand by my argument.  In simplistic terms the Alethi are bad at deciding what they want and generally pretty bad at getting it.  Sadeas is unique in that he new what he wanted but he was also pretty bad at getting it.  Given his methods I would be kind of surprised if his death had occurred in any other manner.

[+Oltux72]

2 hours ago, Karger said:

If you move the goal posts you can get almost any group of people to fit any description.  The point that a US politician for example would not last 10 seconds in alethkar is true.  However I do stand by my argument.  In simplistic terms the Alethi are bad at deciding what they want

That is literally true. The problem is that they do not decide what they want in a political sense. Very few among the Alethi do have politics in the modern sense. Jasnah has, Moash has, Sadeas and Gavilar had. That is about it, as far as we know people. They do not subscribe to the idea that institutions should be shaped by political will. Their political actions are about tactical approaches and power, but not goals. How life should be can be taken from the religious books and priests will tell you what is in them if you ask.

So what does it tell you if somebody is bad at what he does not do?

2 hours ago, Karger said:

and generally pretty bad at getting it.  Sadeas is unique in that he new what he wanted but he was also pretty bad at getting it.  Given his methods I would be kind of surprised if his death had occurred in any other manner.

If your main political goal is power, you are playing a zero-sum game. You either are boring and keep together what you have, or you bet your head.

[Karger]

8 hours ago, Oltux72 said:

If your main political goal is power, you are playing a zero-sum game. You either are boring and keep together what you have, or you bet your head.

That is a common misconception.  Political power can be created.  That is what Gavilar did.  In doing so he actually made the highprinces more powerful.  Same for many high ranking nobbles.

[Hoid the Former Drifter]

If your politics involve assassinating other people, then your politics are worse than American politics. I mean, come on. Isn't it bad enough that we have to hear people carry on like babies? What if presidential debates consisted of fighting to the death?

[Pathfinder]

Maybe if i frame it this way it will carry the point i was attempting to make better. Is the governing system the alethi employ faulty? Yes. Are there other systems of government that are theoretically more beneficial to the populace? Yes. Does that make the highprinces poor politicians? I dont think that is necessarily the case. Operating within the system that was in place at that time the highprinces were successful in securing their power, maintaining said power, controlling their lands, and keeping their personal economies profitable. This was so effective that the alethi were seen as a world power for a very long time prior to gavilar and that legacy kept the other nations intimidated long after gavilar was gone. 

I liken it to comparing a crow using tools and a human using tools. A crow can learn to take a stick and shove it in a tube to fish out a seed to eat. It can learn to drop a rock in a tube of water to raise the water level so the item floats up to the edge to reach it. A human can learn using tools to build a house, or a tv, or a computer. Does that make the crow a poor tool user? It used the system it had to the best of its ability and advantage. 

Democracy isnt inherently good just as other systems of governance are not inherently evil. It is just as plausible to have a benevolent dictator as a nefarious congressperson. 

That is why if the question is if the alethi are terrible politicians, then my answer is no. They are wonderful politicians, with the system they chose to employ. In this case, as it is said repeatedly in the books, Dalinar is the terrible politician. He is continually out maneuvered and on multiple occasions almost got his entire people killed. In a different system of governance he might be a wonderful politician, or he might get out maneuvered again with a whole other set of laws and rules. Just like the other high princes might be terrible politicians in another system, or learn the nuances to take advantage of that system of laws.

So that leads what i think is the issue that has plagued this thread. What is the definition of a successful politician?

A "good" person? An individual chosen by his or her people and maintains that status?(in other words does not get overthrown or voted out) An individual that provides for his or her people? An individual that wins against his or her political opponents?

Because it looks to me like the highprinces hits 3 of the 4.

[Karger]

2 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

Is the governing system the alethi employ faulty?

The thing is I don't really care what system they use.  The crudest, most simplistic, or even downright silliest political systems invented by human kind can still involve amazing political minds.  An example is the US senate.  It is designed to prevent congress from doing basically anything(it is over preforming these days).  Does that make senators bad politicians?  Of course not.  The senate may contain archaic, hard to understand rules that prevent most people from doing anything but the likes of LBJ still managed to get legislation passed despite the opposition.  A demonstration of his political skill.  Gavilar did not really alter the system of politics too much.  It was still basically a hierarchical military dictatorship.  He just added another level and put himself on the top.  What made him so effective was that he managed to convince everyone else that it was better to serve in his heaven then rule in the hell he could make for you.  To this he employed Dalinar and Sadeas to make hell while he personally made heaven.  He was dedicated, insightful, and fully aware of both his own goals and how they aligned with or against his opponents and allies.  This makes him a good politician.  Can you honestly say that Sadeas has a real goal?  The way he operates makes it easy for Dalinar.  A man with no real political instincts to easily get the better of him with a shardblade offer.  This zero sum goal orientated planing is actually the mark of business or laypeople.  Not experienced political minds.  If Jasnah had become queen I doubt any of the highprinces would have given her any trouble.  Jasnah knows what she wants.  She knows what the others want.  She knows what she is prepared to do and what her enemies are prepared to do.  These are the marks of a good politician.  I am focused on the individuals not the system.

[Pathfinder]

8 hours ago, Karger said:

The thing is I don't really care what system they use.  The crudest, most simplistic, or even downright silliest political systems invented by human kind can still involve amazing political minds.  An example is the US senate.  It is designed to prevent congress from doing basically anything(it is over preforming these days).  Does that make senators bad politicians?  Of course not.  The senate may contain archaic, hard to understand rules that prevent most people from doing anything but the likes of LBJ still managed to get legislation passed despite the opposition.  A demonstration of his political skill.  Gavilar did not really alter the system of politics too much.  It was still basically a hierarchical military dictatorship.  He just added another level and put himself on the top.  What made him so effective was that he managed to convince everyone else that it was better to serve in his heaven then rule in the hell he could make for you.  To this he employed Dalinar and Sadeas to make hell while he personally made heaven.  He was dedicated, insightful, and fully aware of both his own goals and how they aligned with or against his opponents and allies.  This makes him a good politician.  Can you honestly say that Sadeas has a real goal?  The way he operates makes it easy for Dalinar.  A man with no real political instincts to easily get the better of him with a shardblade offer.  This zero sum goal orientated planing is actually the mark of business or laypeople.  Not experienced political minds.  If Jasnah had become queen I doubt any of the highprinces would have given her any trouble.  Jasnah knows what she wants.  She knows what the others want.  She knows what she is prepared to do and what her enemies are prepared to do.  These are the marks of a good politician.  I am focused on the individuals not the system.

Personally that comes off as far to vague. Taking the shardblade for instance. In the alethi system military might equates political clout. For all of way of kings and words of radiance Dalinar could not move against sadeas because of the size, and effectiveness of his army coupled with his booming economy (gemhearts) and numerous allies among the other highprinces. Shardplate and blade are military assets. Without the blade, when the parshendi shard wielder showed up, sadeas had to frequently retreat because he could not face her with a mundane weapon. That means losses numerically in his soldiers, economically in gemhearts, and mentally in his constituency. Getting a shardblade for sadeas drastically changes all of that for the better for him. Compared to losing a group of slaves that he can easily replace is nothing. Neither sadeas nor dalinar knew kaladin was a radiant and what that would mean. Was what dalinar did a good thing to do as a person? Totally. Was it a sound political move? Not at all. And that is stated as much in the novel. That it is practically considered madness on dalinars part. 

Taking your example of LBJ, sadeas would fit while dalinar would be woefully inadequate. Dalinar for all intents and purposes was the acting king. He had the ear and access of the actual king that no one else did (and is mentioned grated on the other highprinces who had to wait). He could enact policy in the kings name and has done so. He has even commanded the king to make decisions and the king has done so. Yet sadeas and the other highprinces (like your LBJ example) still found ways to circumvent those limitations and still operate. Time and again sadeas accomplished his goals leaving dalinar floundering. The man ultimately had to be killed by adolin to be fully taken out of it. Adolin truly believed (and based on everything we have seen i agree with him) that sadeas, even with dalinar being proven right about everything, would still manage to out maneuver dalinar and take it from him. At that point, even with literally everything confirming and supporting dalinar (like the congress in your example), we are lead to believe that sadeas (like LBJ in your example) would be able to accomplish his goals and win out against dalinar. 

So again, i find myself repeating myself so i guess my thoughts are not adequately coming across. I feel i have done my best to convey them. So i will leave it at that. Sadeas and co within the system they are in successfully govern their states, remain in their position at the behest of their people, and keep their constituents happy, fed, and economically viable. All classic hallmarks of a successful politician.

[Karger]

1 hour ago, Pathfinder said:

For all of way of kings and words of radiance Dalinar could not move against sadeas because of the size, and effectiveness of his army coupled with his booming economy (gemhearts) and numerous allies among the other highprinces

They were technically allied for the entirety of WoKs(until the end).  During WoR he did not even really consider Sadeas a personal enemy.  He was more of a representative of the opposition.  The other highprinces knew that how Dalinar dealt with Sadeas would determine how rebellious highprinces in general would be treated.

1 hour ago, Pathfinder said:

Getting a shardblade for sadeas drastically changes all of that for the better for him. Compared to losing a group of slaves that he can easily replace is nothing. Neither sadeas nor dalinar knew kaladin was a radiant and what that would mean. Was what dalinar did a good thing to do as a person? Totally. Was it a sound political move? Not at all. And that is stated as much in the novel. That it is practically considered madness on dalinars part. 

Yes but it completely dislodges him from his political position revealing just how selfish and greedy he is.  With Amaram on the scene all of those problems go away.  He now outshards the enemy if they are both there and he does not require taking any deal with Dalinar.  Having a shardblade personally does not change his tactical considerations too much.  As to Dalinar.  It is a sound political move because it is a demonstration of honor that can't be faked.  If you are willing to give up a shardblade to do the keep up appearances then what is the difference between that and real Honor?  I would hazard that doing this is ultimately what gives Dalinar Aledar's support when seeking the center and the rest of the highprinces latter.  Also in practical terms a thousand well trained well led men are probably worth a shardblade in open combat.

2 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

Yet sadeas and the other highprinces (like your LBJ example) still found ways to circumvent those limitations and still operate

Meaning flagrantly ignore the King's edicts knowing he did not have the power to enforce them.  I do not think that really counts as "finding ways to circumvent limitations."  Elhokar and Dalinar should have known better then to make rules they could not enforce or at least found clever ways of enforcing them. 

2 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

At that point, even with literally everything confirming and supporting dalinar (like the congress in your example), we are lead to believe that sadeas (like LBJ in your example) would be able to accomplish his goals and win out against dalinar. 

In the end he did not.  Even if Adonlin had not killed him he would have failed politically(and probably been killed or ended up serving Odium).

[Pathfinder]

19 minutes ago, Karger said:

They were technically allied for the entirety of WoKs(until the end).  During WoR he did not even really consider Sadeas a personal enemy.  He was more of a representative of the opposition.  The other highprinces knew that how Dalinar dealt with Sadeas would determine how rebellious highprinces in general would be treated.

They were allied in protecting Elhokar, but not otherwise. Sadeas frequently used his success on bridge runs to politically out maneuver Dalinar. If your definition of a politician is successfully accomplishing your goals, then Dalinar is horrendous, while Sadeas is amazing, because time and again Sadeas either outright prevented Dalinar's goals, or twisted them to serve his own.  

Quote

Yes but it completely dislodges him from his political position revealing just how selfish and greedy he is.  With Amaram on the scene all of those problems go away.  He now outshards the enemy if they are both there and he does not require taking any deal with Dalinar.  Having a shardblade personally does not change his tactical considerations too much.  As to Dalinar.  It is a sound political move because it is a demonstration of honor that can't be faked.  If you are willing to give up a shardblade to do the keep up appearances then what is the difference between that and real Honor?  I would hazard that doing this is ultimately what gives Dalinar Aledar's support when seeking the center and the rest of the highprinces latter.  Also in practical terms a thousand well trained well led men are probably worth a shardblade in open combat.

Huh? That is not how the alethi system works at all. No one thought less of Sadeas regarding the shardblade except the bridgemen. Who are individuals who had absolutely no say on Sadeas's position, or ability to govern. In fact it certainly helped Sadeas because remember it is after that moment, that the highprinces began to chose sides. Either for Sadeas or Dalinar. And Sadeas had the majority with even the ones on the fence favoring him to a degree. Again, if you want to say who is "the good person", then yes we can clearly state it is Dalinar. But good politician does not equate a good person. In a perfect world it would. But in reality unfortunately it does not. 

Quote

Meaning flagrantly ignore the King's edicts knowing he did not have the power to enforce them.  I do not think that really counts as "finding ways to circumvent limitations."  Elhokar and Dalinar should have known better then to make rules they could not enforce or at least found clever ways of enforcing them. 

Having the king name Sadeas as Highprince of Information to investigate Dalinar does not count as finding ways to circumvent limitations? He literally found a way to get the king to distrust Dainar, his own uncle, prevent Dalinar from attaining additional power via oversight rank, and attain the oversight rank to pretty much walk through Dalinar's camp and army carte blanche. Sadeas very much could have done what Dalinar feared and fabricate evidence against Dalinar. It just benefited Sadeas more to gain Dalinar's trust to set him up at the Tower. 

Quote

In the end he did not.  Even if Adonlin had not killed him he would have failed politically(and probably been killed or ended up serving Odium).

So if Sadeas would have failed regardless, and not been a threat to the Kholins, then Adolin murdered Sadeas pointlessly and all the arguing people have made that Sadeas's killing was justified because of the clear and present danger he exuded was false?

Basically based on what you are saying, then if Sadeas was not actually a threat capable of following through on all the statements he made in that moment, then Adolin killing Sadeas was murder without cause. 

 

Honestly I keep coming back to I really feel you haven't provided a definition on what constitutes a "good" politician. I feel like you have changed it repeatedly over the course of the thread, and each time it has been rather vague. If you would like to say that the highprinces are not good and honorable people, then I completely agree. If you want to say the alethi system of governing is not sustainable, again I totally agree. Just I keep getting lost in your statement regarding a "good" politician. 

So having said that, I don't want to beat a dead horse. I have made my views pretty clear. So I will leave this thread, and wish you luck.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Pathfinder

[Karger]

34 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

They were allied in protecting Elhokar, but not otherwise. Sadeas frequently used his success on bridge runs to politically out maneuver Dalinar. If your definition of a politician is successfully accomplishing your goals, then Dalinar is horrendous, while Sadeas is amazing, because time and again Sadeas either outright prevented Dalinar's goals, or twisted them to serve his own.  

I actually consider them both fairly terrible just in different ways.  As such Sadeas defeating Dalinar easily is just an example of how terrible Dalinar is at playing people.  Sadeas's inability to devote himself to a cause meanwhile makes him terrible in the sense that nothing out ways short term interests.  This is similar to the children in the famous cookie experiment who can't wait.

34 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

Having the king name Sadeas as Highprince of Information to investigate Dalinar does not count as finding ways to circumvent limitations?

I thought you were talking about his later actions ignoring Elhokar's edicts.  Sadeas later points out correctly that fabricating evidence would not have worked.  No one would really believe it.

34 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

So if Sadeas would have failed regardless, and not been a threat to the Kholins, then Adolin murdered Sadeas pointlessly and all the arguing people have made that Sadeas's killing was justified because of the clear and present danger he exuded was false?

Basically based on what you are saying, then if Sadeas was not actually a threat capable of following through on all the statements he made in that moment, then Adolin killing Sadeas was murder without cause. 

He still would have caused trouble but Ialia is doing that on her own.  He might have been more aggressive about it then she is which would have been problematic in the short term but I personally doubt he would find much support and ultimately I don't see him going in any other direction then Amaram.  Dalinar was clearly right, trustworthy, and has a game plan.  Sadeas is just looking after Sadeas and is an eel.  During a desolation who would you follow?  I am not personally qualified to tell people what is or is not justified.  Do the waves Sadeas is going to cause before he dies political or physical death matter?  In the long run maybe not but in the short run I have not the slightest idea.  Adolin made his call.  I might have made a different one.

34 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

Just I keep getting lost in your statement regarding a "good" politician. 

In my view a good politician(in terms of skill not morality) has a clear understanding of what they want as well as a clear understanding of what they are willing to do to get what they want.  They are also aware of how these pertain to their allies and enemies.  They cannot be sidetracked from this goal by smaller concerns but are aware of how small concerns effect their overall goals and positions.  For example:

How to manage Sadeas.  Sadeas is one of the wealthiest highprinces.  He is also one of the most ambitious.  This could be a problem.  However he has a weakness.  He will do pretty much anything to get a shardblade.  Secretly offer him one of the kings blades in return for loyal and obedient service during the war. 

How to manage Dalinar.  Dalinar's loyalties have always been strong.  If he wants to overthrow the kingdom he could do it and could have done it years ago.  As such you have no choice but to trust him.  At least to an extent.  You have two options.  One is to employ him to secure Alethkar.  Keep moving him around and keep him busy.  That way he won't have time to think of treason.  I personally like this as it also deals with the problems Alethkar has with being constantly at war both internally and externally.  Just be careful to always give him enough support so that he won't become angry.  Your other option is to keep him around and keep an eye on him.  He lacks the subtly to manage treason so if he is in the area I don't think he can get up to much.

How to manage Sebarial.  Make him highrpince of commerce.  In doing so you give him a plausible excuse to get out of fighting on the plains and devote his troops to fighting bandits instead.  Also give him the authority to expand his business investments under the king's name and authority.  Unlike most deals with highprinces this is not zero sum.  Both the king and Sebarial gain by this arrangement.  This is why I actually consider Sebarial a good politician.  He can win without making enemies and is effectively in a position where no one actually considers him an enemy even if they dislike him personally.

and so on.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Karger

[Pathfinder]

16 minutes ago, Karger said:

In my view a good politician(in terms of skill not morality) has a clear understanding of what they want as well as a clear understanding of what they are willing to do to get what they want.  They are also aware of how these pertain to their allies and enemies.  They cannot be sidetracked from this goal by smaller concerns but are aware of how small concerns effect their overall goals and positions.

See I have no problem with this definition except for two things:

1. From my understanding of the books, all the highprinces except Dalinar fit. They all knew what they wanted and what they wanted to accomplish. They all worked within the system and with other countries to accomplish it so that pertains to allies and enemies. And of the instances we see closely (namely Sadeas and Dalinar), Sadeas isn't side tracked by smaller concerns but at the same time accounts for them, meanwhile Dalinar loses focus to police the surrounding area of the shattered plains, care for Elhokar's feelings, and believe in his visions. Now again, ultimately all of that makes Dalinar a good person, but as pointed out by Sadeas, Elhokar, Adolin, and Dalinar's own officiers, they are politically damaging. Policing the surrounding area of the shattered plains makes them safe for the general populace, but severely weakens his ability to protect his constituents. Caring for Elhokar's feelings makes him a good uncle, but a horrible politician because using kid's gloves with him resulted in Dalinar being outmaneuvered and almost killed including almost wiping out most of his constituents. Believing in the visions turned out to be best for the whole world, but politically, as Adolin pointed out, it was leading to the fall of his house. Meanwhile every step Sadeas took enriched his princedom, fortified his influence, and protected his people. 

2. The next response is as you have mentioned before, will be the goals. But what are "acceptable" goals as presented are very subjective. Which is why I believe this will then result in rehashing previous statements. You will say Sadeas does not have the proper goals. I will say what constitutes proper goals. That then lead to the discussion of what is proper or not. Which then leads to a moral/ethical sense, which I believe (and you seem to agree based on your prior post) is not intrinsically related to a "good" politician. Which then leads to defining what a politician is, which then brings us back here again. 

 

So once again, I am saying I am good. Not going to reply further. Good luck!

[Karger]

56 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

1. From my understanding of the books, all the highprinces except Dalinar fit. They all knew what they wanted and what they wanted to accomplish

Did they?  It all really boils down to immediate advantage.  That is pretty vague.

57 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

And of the instances we see closely (namely Sadeas and Dalinar), Sadeas isn't side tracked by smaller concerns but at the same time accounts for them

Shardblade, six years hunting gemhearts

58 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

meanwhile Dalinar loses focus to police the surrounding area of the shattered plains, care for Elhokar's feelings, and believe in his visions

Dalinar is devoted to Alethkar.  All of those steps make sense in that context.  Policing the area is good for the army as a whole.  An unstable king is bad for the nation.  His visions if they are real mean that the world could end.

1 hour ago, Pathfinder said:

Dalinar a good person, but as pointed out by Sadeas, Elhokar, Adolin, and Dalinar's own officiers, they are politically damaging

Are they?  Policing the area shows his devotion to the crown and is good for the war effort.  The war going poorly undermines alethkar as a nation.  It also is hard for the other highprinces to understand.  It may make people think he is a bit weird but that is not really very damaging.  It will also evaporate if people come to depend on him for it.  He might loose some political capital to lack of respect in the short term but at the same time it is called capital.  It is not worth anything if you don't spend it.  Far too many of the highprinces are more worried about looking good then doing good.  It means they don't take necessary actions related to their own survival.  As Dalinar says "the coward is the man who delays a necessary retreat for fear of looking foolish."

1 hour ago, Pathfinder said:

You will say Sadeas does not have the proper goals. I will say what constitutes proper goals. That then lead to the discussion of what is proper or not. Which then leads to a moral/ethical sense, which I believe (and you seem to agree based on your prior post) is not intrinsically related to a "good" politician. Which then leads to defining what a politician is, which then brings us back here again. 

If Sadeas wanted world domination, a goal that I would say is not ethically justified, I would say that 1 it is a stupid goal because the odds of achieving it are near zero and two plunging Alethkar into a civil war first is not the way to go about it.  Taravangain's method is much smarter.  Secretly cause chaos in a neighboring nation state and then move in as a benevolent overlord.  Pay lip service to Alethkar to maintain your title as highprince and work from there.  Just attacking people one at a time is silly.  Eventually you will loose.  Assuming the Tower betrayal works you still have to deal with the king not to mention the eight other highprinces and Renarin none of who trust you now.

[agrabes]

On 7/22/2020 at 10:39 PM, Karger said:

The thing is I don't really care what system they use.  The crudest, most simplistic, or even downright silliest political systems invented by human kind can still involve amazing political minds.  An example is the US senate.  It is designed to prevent congress from doing basically anything(it is over preforming these days).  Does that make senators bad politicians?  Of course not.  The senate may contain archaic, hard to understand rules that prevent most people from doing anything but the likes of LBJ still managed to get legislation passed despite the opposition.  A demonstration of his political skill.  Gavilar did not really alter the system of politics too much.  It was still basically a hierarchical military dictatorship.  He just added another level and put himself on the top.  What made him so effective was that he managed to convince everyone else that it was better to serve in his heaven then rule in the hell he could make for you.  To this he employed Dalinar and Sadeas to make hell while he personally made heaven.  He was dedicated, insightful, and fully aware of both his own goals and how they aligned with or against his opponents and allies.  This makes him a good politician.  Can you honestly say that Sadeas has a real goal?  The way he operates makes it easy for Dalinar.  A man with no real political instincts to easily get the better of him with a shardblade offer.  This zero sum goal orientated planing is actually the mark of business or laypeople.  Not experienced political minds.  If Jasnah had become queen I doubt any of the highprinces would have given her any trouble.  Jasnah knows what she wants.  She knows what the others want.  She knows what she is prepared to do and what her enemies are prepared to do.  These are the marks of a good politician.  I am focused on the individuals not the system.

What is it that makes you think Sadeas has no goal, or is bad at politics?  He is one of the best, if not the best politician in Alethkar.

Sadeas basically has two goals: 1 - Establish and secure the Alethi monarchy.  He wants Alethkar to be a united country with one ruler.  He may not respect Elhokar (nobody does) but probably holds out hope for future children.  2 - Maintain the political and ethical environment that he personally advocates: Might makes right.  All his actions are based on establishing the idea that Alethkar should keep its warlike nature and the values that Sadeas, Gavilar, and Dalinar used to unify the High Princes.  He wants to keep Alethkar on the offensive, and prepare for their next war of conquest, ruthlessly eliminating all competitors.  He believes the more honorable values that Dalinar promotes are a weakness.  If Dalinar is allowed to make the Alethi more like him, then they could allow themselves to be killed by treachery.  For Sadeas, it's better to kill the enemy and protect yourself and worry about your conscience after you've survived.

Dalinar didn't get the better of Sadeas with the shardblade offer.  He just got one thing out of Sadeas at huge cost to himself.  Sadeas still got the better end of that deal by a long shot.  A shardblade for a few thousand slaves that could be easily replaced was an easy trade for him.  The bridge crews were worth much more to Dalinar than they were to Sadeas.  Politically speaking, Sadeas won that conflict.  

The pattern of WoK and WoR was that Sadeas beat Dalinar every time in the political arena.  It was in battle that Sadeas lost - usually because of Kaladin's unexpected intervention and use of Radiant powers that Sadeas didn't know about and therefore couldn't plan to accommodate.  Sadeas was never going for a civil war, he was looking to eliminate Dalinar's influence on Elhokar and the High Princes and make himself the main influence on Elhokar.  He wanted to do that without sparking a civil war, which you can see based on how his plans involved things like making Dalinar a martyr or assassinating him in enemy territory so it could be claimed as an act of war by the enemy.  

[Karger]

44 minutes ago, agrabes said:

Maintain the political and ethical environment that he personally advocates: Might makes right.  All his actions are based on establishing the idea that Alethkar should keep its warlike nature and the values that Sadeas, Gavilar, and Dalinar used to unify the High Princes.  He wants to keep Alethkar on the offensive, and prepare for their next war of conquest, ruthlessly eliminating all competitors.  He believes the more honorable values that Dalinar promotes are a weakness.  If Dalinar is allowed to make the Alethi more like him, then they could allow themselves to be killed by treachery.  For Sadeas, it's better to kill the enemy and protect yourself and worry about your conscience after you've survived

Those two ideas are incompatible.  If might makes right then no one is going to support or manage an ineffective king.  A single authority is only possible if people value the system more then their short term interests.  Eventually you are going to have one or more stupid people in power.  Sadeas's way of thinking indicates that you should have some kind of free for all that eradicates opposition but this will weaken Alethkar as a whole.

48 minutes ago, agrabes said:

Dalinar didn't get the better of Sadeas with the shardblade offer.  He just got one thing out of Sadeas at huge cost to himself.  Sadeas still got the better end of that deal by a long shot.  A shardblade for a few thousand slaves that could be easily replaced was an easy trade for him.  The bridge crews were worth much more to Dalinar than they were to Sadeas.  Politically speaking, Sadeas won that conflict.  

I was simplistic in stating that Sadeas "lost" and "Dalinar" won.  In politics things are rarely that clean cut.  I will say that Dalinar maintained position at the cost of a short term advantage.  Sadeas won a short term advantage but also clearly revealed the transactional nature of his own alliances.  Dalinar demonstrated that he was trustworthy at the cost of a shardblade.  Considering the backstabbing nature of the Alethi court that is huge.  Sadeas demonstrated that he will forgo anything to get what he wants.

52 minutes ago, agrabes said:

The pattern of WoK and WoR was that Sadeas beat Dalinar every time in the political arena.  It was in battle that Sadeas lost - usually because of Kaladin's unexpected intervention and use of Radiant powers that Sadeas didn't know about and therefore couldn't plan to accommodate.  Sadeas was never going for a civil war, he was looking to eliminate Dalinar's influence on Elhokar and the High Princes and make himself the main influence on Elhokar

He strait up told Adolin that he was looking to a civil war in chapter 50 of WoR.

[agrabes]

On 7/24/2020 at 0:29 PM, Karger said:

Those two ideas are incompatible.  If might makes right then no one is going to support or manage an ineffective king.  A single authority is only possible if people value the system more then their short term interests.  Eventually you are going to have one or more stupid people in power.  Sadeas's way of thinking indicates that you should have some kind of free for all that eradicates opposition but this will weaken Alethkar as a whole.

I was simplistic in stating that Sadeas "lost" and "Dalinar" won.  In politics things are rarely that clean cut.  I will say that Dalinar maintained position at the cost of a short term advantage.  Sadeas won a short term advantage but also clearly revealed the transactional nature of his own alliances.  Dalinar demonstrated that he was trustworthy at the cost of a shardblade.  Considering the backstabbing nature of the Alethi court that is huge.  Sadeas demonstrated that he will forgo anything to get what he wants.

He strait up told Adolin that he was looking to a civil war in chapter 50 of WoR.

I don't think Sadeas' idea is a straight up free for all.  It's a free for all with certain rules and limits.  I think he wants cut throat competition between people of equivalent level.  For example, High Prince vs. High Prince, competition of nobles with each other within each High Prince's lands, etc.  What he does not want is for the order of the king or high princes to be challenged.  So, he wants to put in place a system of values where whatever else happens the High Princes enforce the king's authority and therefore Alethkar stays one united kingdom.  I'm not sure that this is a realistic system, but it seems like what he wants.  Eradicating opposition could be good for Alethkar so long as you don't care about human rights concerns.  For example, it was good for the Mongols to eliminate all possible challengers.  It secured them a lengthy period of time ruling most of the content of Asia.  Not good for anybody else, but good for them.

I agree it's not so simple as one or the other total winning or losing.  But Sadeas definitely came out ahead both long term and short term if you think about it in any terms other than the moral high ground.  Most high princes were still on Sadeas' side in WoR.  Sadeas' attitudes and values were much more in common with the other High Princes than Dalinar's.  They didn't like Dalinar because of his weird honor values and they distrusted him because of his past as the Blackthorn.  The only advantage that Dalinar got out of it was that he got Elhokar on his side.  But even Elhokar couldn't act against the High Princes if 9/10 were on Sadeas' side.  Dalinar beat Sadeas best political scheme of making him a martyr because of Kaladin's intervention on the battlefield.  It forced Sadeas into backup plans which relied less on politics and more on assassination.  I don't have my copy of WoR with me at the moment, but going off the Coppermind summary of Ch. 50 it seems like this was more of Sadeas trying to play games with Adolin and get him to make a mistake.  There is a WoB that says Sadeas was loyal to the throne.  I don't think he genuinely wanted a civil war.

[Karger]

5 minutes ago, agrabes said:

Not good for anybody else, but good for them.

Actually being a member of the mongol empire was not half bad.  No slavery, religious toleration, good bureaucracy and reasonable trading routes.

5 minutes ago, agrabes said:

There is a WoB that says Sadeas was loyal to the throne.  I don't think he genuinely wanted a civil war.

That was during Gavilar's reign.  He told Adolin that he expected a lengthy civil war between the two of them.

5 minutes ago, agrabes said:

.  Most high princes were still on Sadeas' side in WoR

Two of them is not a majority.

Edited July 28, 2020 by Karger

[agrabes]

7 minutes ago, Karger said:

Actually being a member of the mongol empire was not half bad.  No slavery, religious toleration, good bureaucracy and reasonable trading routes.

That was during Gavilar's reign.  He told Adolin that he expected a lengthy civil war between the two of them.

Two of them is not a majority.

Well, yes and no.  Those are the good parts of the Mongol Empire.  The parts where they literally slaughtered the entire populations of cities, demanded tributes and killed all citizens of cities who refused to provide them were the bad parts.  They would kill everyone who offered any resistance.  They were strongly considering leveling all cities and killing all city dwelling people in the first areas of China they conquered to return them to the Steppe which they saw as the natural state.  So, I guess if you ignore the mass murders they committed, then they were good.  Even by the standards of their times, they were war criminals on a massive scale.  They did good things too.  But you have to keep them in context.

You could be right on the civil war thing.  I don't have WoR with me so I'll just leave it there.  It doesn't seem right in my head canon but doesn't mean my head canon is right.

There were only one or two on Dalinar's side.  One or two might have been active allies for Sadeas, but the rest were passive.  The rest probably didn't particularly like Sadeas, but they supported his style of government and cultural values which were the status quo.

[Karger]

2 minutes ago, agrabes said:

You could be right on the civil war thing.  I don't have WoR with me so I'll just leave it there.  It doesn't seem right in my head canon but doesn't mean my head canon is right.

It is in chapter 37 right before Shallan show up.  Adolin almost looses his cool and punches Sadeas but Amaram stops him.

2 minutes ago, agrabes said:

There were only one or two on Dalinar's side.  One or two might have been active allies for Sadeas, but the rest were passive.  The rest probably didn't particularly like Sadeas, but they supported his style of government and cultural values which were the status quo.

I think it was more they were waiting to see who was winning and hopping a civil war could be avoided. 

Edited July 28, 2020 by Karger