The thing I think Sanderson has taken the most liberty with

[Kahlika]

As far as the "slapstick" goes: yeah, that was a bit overdone with the backstories, but it wasn't slapstick, which is almost completely based in physical (and physically violent) comedy. "Farce" is a more accurate label for that scene.

 

The scene with the rabbit was slapstick.

 

Uh, no. Not that either. An implied pun, yes (think "blind luck"). Slapstick, no. The clowns in Valan Luca's show beating each other with pig-bladders? That's slapstick. So was Nynaeve and Siuan going at each other in tFoh, after Nynaeve's very trying day in Salidar.

 

So I went and looked it up. Quiet day at work etc.

 

slap•stick

 

–noun

1. broad comedy characterized by boisterous action, as the throwing of pies in actors' faces, mugging, and obvious farcical situations and jokes.

 

–adjective

3. using, or marked by the use of, broad farce and horseplay: a slapstick motion picture.

 

Taken from dictionary.com since I'm blocked from virtually everything else at work.

 

Slapstick could, under that definition be used as an adjective to describe the rabbit scene. I think it would fall under the noun as well, it was a physical scene (the boisterous action, the throwing the knife) with a farcical result (hitting the rabbit) exaggerated for comic effect.

 

You're trying to narrow the term down to only referring to the original actions that the term evolved out of (Commedia clowns hitting each other with sticks). While that's one aspect of slapstick comedy as it's still practiced it's not the only kind, and it's not accurate to suggest that only physical humour can be present for something to be slapstick. Slapstick can play with/on other types of humour in a physical way and still be slapstick, even though the other type of humour is clearly a component. Farce is even mentioned as having a role in the definition.

 

It's not a terrible way to describe how new!Mat's humour is written really. RJ relied heavily on irony with Mat's humour, most of it coming from the contrasts between his internal monologues and his actions, and while he was a physical character his actions themselves weren't ridiculously exaggerated for comedic effect, there was a bit of sarcasm in there as well. BS writes him more 'goofy' to borrow a term someone else on this thread used. His humour is more physical, his actions and circumstances are exaggerated for effect, the irony is gone, the sarcasm isn't really there (the one instance I can think of in which it was there in this book is also the one instance we've had it confirmed that RJ wrote).

 

Although to be fair Mat changed a lot when RJ wrote him too. Mat in books 1-3 was closer to the Mat we have today. His humour was very juvenile, pranks, bad ideas ('lets go into Shadar Logoth and touch stuff!'), general childish misbehaviour etc. It was moving away from that by book 3, and by the time he made it to Rhuidean he'd developed into the Mat everyone thinks of as Mat. Maybe that's why BS's Mat is so irritating. He's regressed as a character, gone from one of the characters who really changed and grew (and not just grew, but grew into a character people liked more) as the series went on to being uncomfortably similar to how he was at the start of the books, when a lot of people were basically irritated by him.

[EvilSocrates]

I disagree that the Whitecloaks are better. Being made a well cared for pet is better than getting killed. Also, empirically speaking, when faced with the decision of either rape or slavery (which are not commensurate in the first place, by the way) or death, almost nobody chooses death. American racial slavery was far worse than what the Seanchan have going on, and enslaved blacks were not killing themselves in droves. Also, prisoners--who are likely to be less adverse to risk and more concerned with being seen as manly and who tend toward homophobia on the outside--get raped all the time. Faced with a choice of getting raped by a dude and getting a severe beating (let alone death) guess which one they pick? Just sayin'!

 

See? This kind of talk is why I think people just aren't clear-headed about the Seanchan. I get the damane thing, but not every culture has an Oath Rod handy to keep the Channelers from seizing power. Both Randland and Seanchan use Ter'angreal to control Channelers, one device is just more restrictive (and still ends up with them in charge, just less brutally so, unlike Shara or old Seanchan) I think they are preferable to Tariens which is debatable certainly. What isn't debatable is calling them worse than Whitecloak rape-Nazi's. Folks need to chill.

[capuga]

I disagree that the Whitecloaks are better. Being made a well cared for pet is better than getting killed. Also, empirically speaking, when faced with the decision of either rape or slavery (which are not commensurate in the first place, by the way) or death, almost nobody chooses death. American racial slavery was far worse than what the Seanchan have going on, and enslaved blacks were not killing themselves in droves. Also, prisoners--who are likely to be less adverse to risk and more concerned with being seen as manly and who tend toward homophobia on the outside--get raped all the time. Faced with a choice of getting raped by a dude and getting a severe beating (let alone death) guess which one they pick? Just sayin'!

 

See? This kind of talk is why I think people just aren't clear-headed about the Seanchan. I get the damane thing, but not every culture has an Oath Rod handy to keep the Channelers from seizing power. Both Randland and Seanchan use Ter'angreal to control Channelers, one device is just more restrictive (and still ends up with them in charge, just less brutally so, unlike Shara or old Seanchan) I think they are preferable to Tariens which is debatable certainly. What isn't debatable is calling them worse than Whitecloak rape-Nazi's. Folks need to chill.

 

Neither an a'dam or Oath Rod is necessary. The Wise Ones use neither but they are a respected and respectable faction of their culture. As are the Windfinders. Having the ability to channel does not make you evil. It does not make you someone who needs to be controlled. A person should be judged on their decisions and actions, not their potential. No one should be punished before they have even done anything wrong. Blademasters are dangerous and can easy kill normal people. Should we cut off their hands because they might use their abilities to hurt someone? Or should we only punish the ones that actually commit murder? Look at the wonders of the AoL. These channelers were neither chained nor bound but from all indications did not enslave the world. Instead they were largely responsible for un-paralelled prosperity. The Seanchan way would deprive the world of reaching this potential.

 

The White Tower and various Randland governments could use a lot of improvement. But I don't care how much order the Seanchan bring a lot of their people, I will never think it is OK to treat fairly large classes of people as sub-human. The fact that they have slaves (and, even worse, hereditary slaves) and that they treat channelers as animals is so egregrious to me that any positives they have pale in comparison.

[Bob T Dwarf]

I disagree that the Whitecloaks are better. Being made a well cared for pet is better than getting killed. Also, empirically speaking, when faced with the decision of either rape or slavery (which are not commensurate in the first place, by the way) or death, almost nobody chooses death. American racial slavery was far worse than what the Seanchan have going on, and enslaved blacks were not killing themselves in droves. Also, prisoners--who are likely to be less adverse to risk and more concerned with being seen as manly and who tend toward homophobia on the outside--get raped all the time. Faced with a choice of getting raped by a dude and getting a severe beating (let alone death) guess which one they pick? Just sayin'!

 

See? This kind of talk is why I think people just aren't clear-headed about the Seanchan. I get the damane thing, but not every culture has an Oath Rod handy to keep the Channelers from seizing power. Both Randland and Seanchan use Ter'angreal to control Channelers, one device is just more restrictive (and still ends up with them in charge, just less brutally so, unlike Shara or old Seanchan) I think they are preferable to Tariens which is debatable certainly. What isn't debatable is calling them worse than Whitecloak rape-Nazi's. Folks need to chill.

 

So, your argument is that there is nothing wrong with rape because most people would choose it over being killed or severely injured? Does that mean that women who get raped deserve it because they did not choose the alternative?

 

The question was which is better the Whitecloaks who kill channelers or the Seanchan who enslave them?

 

Slavery and all the kinds of depravity that descend from it is worse than simple murder. A murder victim dies but once. A slave dies inside every day. Look at how the damane are described; they no longer think of themselves as people. They, even in their own eyes, are things, tools to be used, abused, or thrown away at their master's pleasure. They have been brainwashed into believing that is all they deserve.

 

That's just sick and wrong on every level.

[EvilSocrates]

I disagree that the Whitecloaks are better. Being made a well cared for pet is better than getting killed. Also, empirically speaking, when faced with the decision of either rape or slavery (which are not commensurate in the first place, by the way) or death, almost nobody chooses death. American racial slavery was far worse than what the Seanchan have going on, and enslaved blacks were not killing themselves in droves. Also, prisoners--who are likely to be less adverse to risk and more concerned with being seen as manly and who tend toward homophobia on the outside--get raped all the time. Faced with a choice of getting raped by a dude and getting a severe beating (let alone death) guess which one they pick? Just sayin'!

 

See? This kind of talk is why I think people just aren't clear-headed about the Seanchan. I get the damane thing, but not every culture has an Oath Rod handy to keep the Channelers from seizing power. Both Randland and Seanchan use Ter'angreal to control Channelers, one device is just more restrictive (and still ends up with them in charge, just less brutally so, unlike Shara or old Seanchan) I think they are preferable to Tariens which is debatable certainly. What isn't debatable is calling them worse than Whitecloak rape-Nazi's. Folks need to chill.

 

So, your argument is that there is nothing wrong with rape because most people would choose it over being killed or severely injured? Does that mean that women who get raped deserve it because they did not choose the alternative?

 

The question was which is better the Whitecloaks who kill channelers or the Seanchan who enslave them?

 

Slavery and all the kinds of depravity that descend from it is worse than simple murder. A murder victim dies but once. A slave dies inside every day. Look at how the damane are described; they no longer think of themselves as people. They, even in their own eyes, are things, tools to be used, abused, or thrown away at their master's pleasure. They have been brainwashed into believing that is all they deserve.

 

That's just sick and wrong on every level.

 

No my argument is that if you ask the potential victim, murder is worse. Obviously rape is reprehensible. Slavery is also wrong, but not all slavery is the same, and it is obviously not worse than death to the slaves, or they would kill themselves. Being a slave in Ancient Greece was not the same as being a slave in the American South. I never said anyone deserved rape or anything of the sort. I can't tell if you are simply an idiot, or are being deliberately obtuse, but either way I'm done speaking with you.

 

Mark: I'm not sure you are correct that the Aiel and Seafolk aren't ruled by Channelers. Aren't the Windfinders pretty much in charge for the Seafolk? The Aiel might be a fairer example, but they are still PARTLY ruled by channelers. Being a channeler is not a requirement for a wise one, but it does get you into the ruling class for free. And the Aiel and Seafolk are kind of special anyway, they do not have traditional social structures: they are a loose (and in the case of the Aiel, often hostile) collection of tribes and clans (or ships), not an agrarian kingdom. Still I take you point, I don't think that it is LOGICALLY necessary to restrict channelers in some way to prevent them from taking over, just that you run HUGE risk of them doing so if you don't. I understand the decision to not run the risk of becoming old Seanchan or Shara. Much as I find the Seanchan solution distasteful, I don't think it makes them a nation of monsters.

 

Also, not really fair to compare to the Age of Legends, where guys with guns (shock lances) probably ran the show more than the actual channelers, but we don't know really anything about that Age anyhow. Besides, I never said that Channelers couldn't be GOOD rulers, just that they would end up in charge if left unchecked.

[Loophole]

Slavery and all the kinds of depravity that descend from it is worse than simple murder. A murder victim dies but once. A slave dies inside every day. Look at how the damane are described; they no longer think of themselves as people. They, even in their own eyes, are things, tools to be used, abused, or thrown away at their master's pleasure. They have been brainwashed into believing that is all they deserve.

 

That's just sick and wrong on every level.

 

That's crazy, i would rather be a slave then be dead, at least then you have a chance to live and change your circumstances, no matter how slim.

[RUSH]

In the case of the damane, remember that they can't deliberately kill themselves, so even that option had been removed.

 

Faced with hundreds of years of slavery where even if I have retained enough of my humanity to be able to wish for death (if that was what I wanted), but to be prevented from even attempting it, I would rather be dead, especially in a world with cyclical rebirth. Surely the afterlife is better, and better luck next time.

 

Man this thread has derailed.

[Bob T Dwarf]

 

That's crazy, i would rather be a slave then be dead, at least then you have a chance to live and change your circumstances, no matter how slim.

 

OK, you're a slave ( da'covale actually ). Go kneel in the corner with your head pressed to the floor. Don't move until I tell you you can. If I should die, kill yourself.

[NetSlider]

That's crazy, i would rather be a slave then be dead, at least then you have a chance to live and change your circumstances, no matter how slim.

 

OK, you're a slave ( da'covale actually ). Go kneel in the corner with your head pressed to the floor. Don't move until I tell you you can. If I should die, kill yourself.

 

I think that you don't value your life as much as others, man. Or you have a very weird sense of hope. The saying says that hope dies last for a good reason. When faced with crazy situation you'd go to extreme cases just to stay alive - trust me on that one, the world view changes really fast.

[dwn]

That's crazy, i would rather be a slave then be dead, at least then you have a chance to live and change your circumstances, no matter how slim.

 

OK, you're a slave ( da'covale actually ). Go kneel in the corner with your head pressed to the floor. Don't move until I tell you you can. If I should die, kill yourself.

 

I think that you don't value your life as much as others, man. Or you have a very weird sense of hope. The saying says that hope dies last for a good reason. When faced with crazy situation you'd go to extreme cases just to stay alive - trust me on that one, the world view changes really fast.

 

Many people place dignity, honour, etc. above life. Personally, I find the tendancy to place a moral/ethical/spiritual value on preserving life at any cost a bit weird, perhaps even a bit selfish.

 

-- dwn

[Bob T Dwarf]

That's crazy, i would rather be a slave then be dead, at least then you have a chance to live and change your circumstances, no matter how slim.

 

OK, you're a slave ( da'covale actually ). Go kneel in the corner with your head pressed to the floor. Don't move until I tell you you can. If I should die, kill yourself.

 

I think that you don't value your life as much as others, man. Or you have a very weird sense of hope. The saying says that hope dies last for a good reason. When faced with crazy situation you'd go to extreme cases just to stay alive - trust me on that one, the world view changes really fast.

 

One more time -

 

The issue is not about what a person on the receiving end might choose if given an option, the issue is which is morally or ethically worse, murder or slavery.

 

Now granted, both are reprehensible, but of the two, slavery is worse, precisely because it kills hope before it kills the body.

[NetSlider]

That's crazy, i would rather be a slave then be dead, at least then you have a chance to live and change your circumstances, no matter how slim.

 

OK, you're a slave ( da'covale actually ). Go kneel in the corner with your head pressed to the floor. Don't move until I tell you you can. If I should die, kill yourself.

 

I think that you don't value your life as much as others, man. Or you have a very weird sense of hope. The saying says that hope dies last for a good reason. When faced with crazy situation you'd go to extreme cases just to stay alive - trust me on that one, the world view changes really fast.

 

One more time -

 

The issue is not about what a person on the receiving end might choose if given an option, the issue is which is morally or ethically worse, murder or slavery.

 

Now granted, both are reprehensible, but of the two, slavery is worse, precisely because it kills hope before it kills the body.

 

 

I see where you coming from and to be honest I agree the slavery probably would be worse. But it all comes down to specific situation - how much does the person has to loose and how much responsibility and obligations the person has left in the world. After all, death lighter than a feather, duty heavier than a mountain.

 

As far as what's worse killing someone or enslaving someone - the second is worse in my opinion, so again we're on the same page.

 

 

[Talmanes]

Ok well I've skimmed some of the replies, but I don't have time to look through 11 pages so here is my opinion.

First off I did enjoy the book and thought it was quite good. That being said I noticed that the feel of the story is turning more towards Brandons usually style. The whole thing ahs just a lighter feel than it did before.

 

One particular point that I've already seen discussed was the fact that Mat had some pretty crazy scenes. In this one his letter and badger incident showed this a lot. Honestly I thought those parts came out pretty funny, but it was extremely obvious that RJ didn't write those parts. The thing I wasn't a fan of was when Mat used the 'Mother's milk in a cup' that no one besides Elayne IIRC ever said.

 

The other Sandersonism I wasn't a fan of was the fact that on two occasions, Min called Rand a 'looby'. That just seemed an odd thing and didn't fit too well in my opinion.

 

The only thing that I really have a problem with in the book is this:

Just after reading the part where Nynaeve heals the madness of Naeff, I happened to come across a quote from RJ saying that while the True Power could heal madness, the One Power could not. As soon as I'm home I'll post the quote. Although the healing of madness in the way Nynaeve did seems possible with what the WoT has showed us so far, the fact that it happened, when RJ said it couldn't doesn't sit right with me. Also I would think that Semi would probably be the one to discover it if it could be done based on her familiararity with the mind and using the Power on it.

[RembrandtQ.Einstein]

The Seanchan can't represent fascism or Nazism to any degree because this is already covered. The Black Tower is highly representable of the Waffen SS in it's structure, philosophy and mindset. The rank names and the uniforms tend to give that away easily enough, although there are more than enough other comparison points if you choose to look.

 

The Seanchan are merely a meritocracy based partially on the Chinese Empire. Andor is based on England. Etc.. etc.. But to be frank the Seanchan are morally superior to the people of Andor. How simplistic is it to have an absolutist monarchy where only a single sex may become the regent? Please. Compared to that the Seanchan are downright enlightened.

[David Selig]

I'd say slavery and leashing channellers are far worse things from a moral point of view than having a monarch from only one gender.

 

Besides, Seanchan has only have Empresses on the throne for the last 900 years, so it seems that in practice it's next to impossible for a man to become ruler there too.

[Bob T Dwarf]

The Seanchan can't represent fascism or Nazism to any degree because this is already covered. The Black Tower is highly representable of the Waffen SS in it's structure, philosophy and mindset. The rank names and the uniforms tend to give that away easily enough, although there are more than enough other comparison points if you choose to look.

 

The Seanchan are merely a meritocracy based partially on the Chinese Empire. Andor is based on England. Etc.. etc.. But to be frank the Seanchan are morally superior to the people of Andor. How simplistic is it to have an absolutist monarchy where only a single sex may become the regent? Please. Compared to that the Seanchan are downright enlightened.

 

You do understand that Seanchan is an absolutist monarchy where only a single sex may become regent, don't you? There hasn't been an Emperor since Luthair Paendrag.

 

From the BWB: ( emphasis added )

Since Luthair's conquest, Seanchan has evolved into a nation that is stratified and has very little movement between the ranks. That is not to say that there are no power struggles, only that almost all of them are between members of the same class. The society is based on the concept that everyone has a place in which to serve, and everyone should be in their place.

 

That is the essence of fascism. Everyone lives to serve the state and the leader is the state.

 

As for it being a meritocracy, the only way for those of low caste to advance is to become high level slaves. Also according to the BWB,

"It is a rare honor for a commoner of free birth to be chosen as a high-level servant, but one that is eagerly sought for it is one of the few ways to advance beyond one's station of birth. The loss of freedom, even for future generations, is believed to be a very small price to pay for such advancement.

 

Apparently the kind of insanity that leads to the tortured logic that slavery is both an honor and an advancement is one of the side-effects of their brand of fascism.

 

The Seanchan are very nasty pieces of work.

[Jack Shaftoe]

That is the essence of fascism. Everyone lives to serve the state and the leader is the state.

 

Everyone lives to serve the state in any kind of despotic regime. Following your reasoning communism is fascism, absolute monarchy is fascism, theocracies are fascist, etc. Fascism is merely a type of oppressive government. Was Nero a fascist too? How about the Chinese emperors or the Arab caliphs?

 

As for it being a meritocracy, the only way for those of low caste to advance is to become high level slaves.

 

It says "one of the few ways", not "the only way".

 

The thing I wasn't a fan of was when Mat used the 'Mother's milk in a cup' that no one besides Elayne IIRC ever said.

 

Well, If Elyane can learn new curses from Mat, I don't see why Mat can't do the same with phrases she uses.

[Bob T Dwarf]

That is the essence of fascism. Everyone lives to serve the state and the leader is the state.

 

Everyone lives to serve the state in any kind of despotic regime. Following your reasoning communism is fascism, absolute monarchy is fascism, theocracies are fascist, etc. Fascism is merely a type of oppressive government. Was Nero a fascist too? How about the Chinese emperors or the Arab caliphs?

 

No, the essence of communism is the opposite of fascism, the State exists to serve the people. In a theocracy, the people and the state both exist to serve God. ( in theory. In practice that equates to everything exists to serve the Church. )

 

Nero, many emperors, caliphs, etal are examples of despots. Despotism is a case where everything and everyone exists to serve the despot. This is what the Forsaken want. Each of them plotting to become the only despot.

 

As for it being a meritocracy, the only way for those of low caste to advance is to become high level slaves.

 

It says "one of the few ways", not "the only way".

 

You are correct, it does say one of the few ways. In practical terms, for 99.999999% of the population, that equates to "the only way." That changes nothing though. The Seanchan are still Evil. Very orderly, so in a Ragnarok, Order v Chaos scenario, they have to be classed as White Hats, but Evil White Hats. In D&D terms you'd class them as Lawful Evil, with Machin Shin, Mashadar, and Mordeth/Fain as Neutral Evil, and the DO and his merry band of psychos as Chaotic Evil.

 

FWIW you'd also class the Whitecloaks as Lawful Evil.

 

I wouldn't want any of 'em for neighbors.

[NetSlider]

That is the essence of fascism. Everyone lives to serve the state and the leader is the state.

 

Everyone lives to serve the state in any kind of despotic regime. Following your reasoning communism is fascism, absolute monarchy is fascism, theocracies are fascist, etc. Fascism is merely a type of oppressive government. Was Nero a fascist too? How about the Chinese emperors or the Arab caliphs?

 

No, the essence of communism is the opposite of fascism, the State exists to serve the people. In a theocracy, the people and the state both exist to serve God. ( in theory. In practice that equates to everything exists to serve the Church. )

 

Nero, many emperors, caliphs, etal are examples of despots. Despotism is a case where everything and everyone exists to serve the despot. This is what the Forsaken want. Each of them plotting to become the only despot.

 

As for it being a meritocracy, the only way for those of low caste to advance is to become high level slaves.

 

It says "one of the few ways", not "the only way".

 

You are correct, it does say one of the few ways. In practical terms, for 99.999999% of the population, that equates to "the only way." That changes nothing though. The Seanchan are still Evil. Very orderly, so in a Ragnarok, Order v Chaos scenario, they have to be classed as White Hats, but Evil White Hats. In D&D terms you'd class them as Lawful Evil, with Machin Shin, Mashadar, and Mordeth/Fain as Neutral Evil, and the DO and his merry band of psychos as Chaotic Evil.

 

I wouldn't want any of 'em for neighbors.

 

I agree with you for the most part, but I think there is hope for them. The problem with Seanchen is that their system is very dangerous for the rest of the world - it will take only one crazy (like Surof sp?) and now you have an empire under a crazy dictator with completely worshiping population (reminds you of anything?). My point is, Seanchen not really "evil" but extremely good potential environment for the real evil to be born in. They justify a lot of thing for the sake of empire and those justifications can only increase.

 

So Bob, I agree with you 99% but I don't think they are really evil....yet! (Look at that, we actually agree on something . Just kidding, we actually agree on many things)

[Jack Shaftoe]

You are correct, it does say one of the few ways. In practical terms, for 99.999999% of the population, that equates to "the only way."

 

And you know this how exactly? You lived in Seanchan or what? And even if it's true, the situation in many parts of Randland seems precisely the same - peasants remain peasants, lords remain lords.

 

No, the essence of communism is the opposite of fascism, the State exists to serve the people. In a theocracy, the people and the state both exist to serve God. ( in theory. In practice that equates to everything exists to serve the Church. )

 

Well, in theory no state presents itself as a force of oppression, so this is a bit irrelevant, don't you think? The Seanchan claim to bring peace, order and happiness, not a totalitarian nightmare.

[Bob T Dwarf]

NetSlider -

 

Of course I believe we agree on most things, because we do. Even so, we're not going to both be correct all the time. Just the nature of life.

 

 

 

You are correct, it does say one of the few ways. In practical terms, for 99.999999% of the population, that equates to "the only way."

 

And you know this how exactly? You lived in Seanchan or what? And even if it's true, the situation in many parts of Randland seems precisely the same - peasants remain peasants, lords remain lords.

 

No, the essence of communism is the opposite of fascism, the State exists to serve the people. In a theocracy, the people and the state both exist to serve God. ( in theory. In practice that equates to everything exists to serve the Church. )

 

Well, in theory no state presents itself as a force of oppression, so this is a bit irrelevant, don't you think? The Seanchan claim to bring peace, order and happiness, not a totalitarian nightmare.

 

I'm talking about what a given system is, not what it claims to be. They all claim to be sweetness and light. The Seanchan system is a fascist nightmare.

[NetSlider]

NetSlider -

 

Of course I believe we agree on most things, because we do. Even so, we're not going to both be correct all the time. Just the nature of life.

 

 

 

You are correct, it does say one of the few ways. In practical terms, for 99.999999% of the population, that equates to "the only way."

 

And you know this how exactly? You lived in Seanchan or what? And even if it's true, the situation in many parts of Randland seems precisely the same - peasants remain peasants, lords remain lords.

 

No, the essence of communism is the opposite of fascism, the State exists to serve the people. In a theocracy, the people and the state both exist to serve God. ( in theory. In practice that equates to everything exists to serve the Church. )

 

Well, in theory no state presents itself as a force of oppression, so this is a bit irrelevant, don't you think? The Seanchan claim to bring peace, order and happiness, not a totalitarian nightmare.

 

I'm talking about what a given system is, not what it claims to be. They all claim to be sweetness and light. The Seanchan system is a fascist nightmare.

 

Agreed, but yet ironically it works the best out of all of them (on the bones of others to some degree). Here the thought, would it still work as well if domane were not present and their slaves gone as well (after all, it's not like their whole industry depends on slavery. From what we saw only royalty have slaves and not many). I kind of have a feeling, as much as I hate to admit it, it would still work as well and people still would have the security and prosperity. But the problem, of course, arises when a crazy person is in charge. So, it's a ticking bomb.

[capuga]

You are correct, it does say one of the few ways. In practical terms, for 99.999999% of the population, that equates to "the only way."

 

And you know this how exactly? You lived in Seanchan or what? And even if it's true, the situation in many parts of Randland seems precisely the same - peasants remain peasants, lords remain lords.

 

No, the essence of communism is the opposite of fascism, the State exists to serve the people. In a theocracy, the people and the state both exist to serve God. ( in theory. In practice that equates to everything exists to serve the Church. )

 

Well, in theory no state presents itself as a force of oppression, so this is a bit irrelevant, don't you think? The Seanchan claim to bring peace, order and happiness, not a totalitarian nightmare.

 

I don't understand why this continues to be part of the argument. The failings of the other Randland governments does not excuse the absolute heinousness of the Seanchan. It is not OK to engage in slavery. Period. It is not OK to treat a group of people as sub-human animals when they have not done anything wrong. Period. If they abuse their power and commit a crime, then fine throw on an a'dam and punish them. Until then they should be treated the way all other innocent people are.

 

I can understand pointing out the positives of the Seanchan. I can understand pointing out areas the Randland governments could improve. I cannot ever understand trying to justify slavery and damane as being OK. It is never OK.

[Jack Shaftoe]

I don't understand why this continues to be part of the argument. The failings of the other Randland governments does not excuse the absolute heinousness of the Seanchan

 

Of course they don't but that's not exactly the argument, is it? The idea seems to be that the Seanchan conquering the world would make life in Randland so much worse than it was before they showed up. Not that living under the Seanchan is better/worse than living in a random real life country in the 21st century. So the comparisons with other forms of government in Randland are quite inevitable.

 

I'm talking about what a given system is, not what it claims to be. They all claim to be sweetness and light. The Seanchan system is a fascist nightmare.

 

No, it's not because it's not fascist any more than Stalin or Nero were fascists.

[NetSlider]

Completely off topic

 

Hot Soup - you like Ender? I just saw your name and was like AHA!!! I KNOW WHAT HE MEANS!