#(​as opposed to having a history with them)

[sky-scribbles]

I'm going to say something controversial. I think there's something Veilguard does better than any other Dragon Age game. Namely: incorporating the companions into the plot.

Look, I love Origins as much as everyone. But to be frank: you could cut every companion except Alistair, Morrigan and Loghain and the plot could still work. Once you've finished the mission where you recruit a companion, there aren't other main quests that involve them in any way.

Oghren and Wynne could have stayed home after their recruitment missions for all the difference it would make to the main plot. Sten, Leliana and Zevran could vanish and nothing would change, because once they're on your team, they don't interact with the main plot at all. (There's the Temple of Sacred Ashes, I suppose - but even then, you'd be going on that quest whether Leliana and Wynne were there or not, and it's very telling that they can both die here and next to nothing in the rest of the game is impacted.)

Again: I love Origins. This doesn't detract from any of these characters being great, or from the story being great. It just means there's a layer of separation between the two. They're involved in the story, but they're not driving it, and you seldom get to see them have strong feelings about it.

DA2 is a huge step up. Your companions' personal stories are integral parts of the main plot. You can't do the Deep Roads expedition without witnessing Karl's death and its impact on Anders. You can't enter Act 2 without seeing Varric's brother betray him, or watching your sibling either die or begin a new path in life. Act 2's climax happens because of choices Isabela and Aveline have made. Act 3's endgame is all about Anders making one enormous decision. Even Fenris and Merrill, who have the fewest ties to the plot, have strong reasons to be invested in the Mage/Templar conflict.

And then Inquisition just... backslides. There are multiple companions you don't need to recruit at all, or can send away with zero alteration to the main plot. Your companions don't like Corypheus because he's bad, but no one - except maybe Varric - has any strong personal feelings about him. They have no personal stake in defeating him, not like Alistair has a personal stake in opposing Loghain, or Anders in opposing Meredith.

We go to the Winter Palace, and Vivienne is not made a part of that story. We have a whole subplot about the Wardens, and Blackwall only gets a couple of extra lines, if you even bring him. Their personal arcs could have been somehow impacted by these missions, and they're just... not. Sera is packed with internalised self-hatred that manifests as trying to distance herself from elven culture, to the point of sometimes lashing out at other elves. And despite all the missions you do where elven history features... Sera's growth past that flaw happens entirely offscreen between the base game and Trespasser?????

IMO, this is one of the biggest reasons why Corypheus is such a bland villain. He doesn't make anyone grow, except by starting a plot for them to be part of. He doesn't challenge them emotionally. No one is invested in him. Because no one interacts with the darn plot.

Veilguard, though? Veilguard keeps your companions interacting with the story the whole way through. The Treviso/Minrathous choice affects both Lucanis and Neve heavily, and impacts who they become for the rest of the game. These cities are personal to you, even if you're not a Crow or Shadow Dragon, because your companions love them.

The Siege of Weisshaupt is beyond personal to Davrin and Lucanis, both of whom are entrusted with major parts of the quest: trying to kill the archdemon and Ghilan'nain. Lucanis is affected by his failure to kill Ghilan'nain for ages afterward. Davrin is haunted by survivor's guilt; he should have died when he struck down the archdemon. He's alive. How can he live with that?

Whenever killing the gods becomes a possibility, Rook hands the lyrium dagger to Lucanis. When the squad go to fight the gods' dragons with the Wardens, Taash is the one to flush the first dragon out. When you infiltrate the Venatori, Neve tricks your way in, and everything that happens is especially weighty to Bellara, whose people have been abducted. On Tearstone Island, because of how Lucanis and Spite have grown, they strikes true.

Did you not hate Elgar'nan before that mission? Because you probably will after you watch him capture Bellara or Neve, and see his fellow god kill Harding or Davrin.

You know what's a great piece of writing? There's no reason Emmrich shouldn't have been an option to deal with the wards on Tearstone Island; he's one of the ideal options to take out more wards with the Veil Jumpers in the final mission. But you can't select him to do it. Because Emmrich has far less personal investment in the Elgar'nan battle than the other two. This is Neve's city. This is the monster who tries to call himself Bellara's god. The game makes sure the characters who take control of the Blight at the end are the ones with the greatest stakes in doing so.

One of your companions, not you, wrests command of the Blight from Elgar'nan. The final mission depends on how well you've come to know each companion's skills. They're just... always involved.

And they're invested, too. The companions all have serious personal reasons to hate the antagonists by the end. Lucanis and Neve have either seen their city burn, or know it happened at the cost of their friend's (and potential partner's) hometown. Davrin has seen his order devastated. These are Bellara's and Davrin's supposed gods, and instead of helping the elves reclaim their history and culture, they're trying to enslave the world. Harding learns that the Evanuris maimed and destroyed her Titan ancestors.

Emmrich and Taash have perhaps the smallest emotional tie - and sadly I do think Emmrich especially gets underutilized in the plot. But heck, Taash is still hella motivated by the way the gods are abusing dragons. And Emmrich is tied thematically to the main conflict. He's facing the question of immortality, while nigh-immortal beings are right in front of him, proving how that gift can be abused. The final choice of his personal arc is whether he's willing to embrace his personal, mortal attachments, at the cost of consequences that terrify him... you know, the same question that Solas faces at the end.

And don't even get me started on how everyone is emotionally tied to Solas. Harding and Neve watched him kill Varric in front of them. Everyone not dead or captured has to watch him drag Rook into the Fade. Just about every companion faces some kind of huge regret or failure at some point, in constant foreshadowing for Solas's prison of regret: both the literal one he sticks Rook in, and the mental one of his own making.

Veilguard has its problems, but it absolutely shines at keeping its characters involved and invested in the main story. It gives them things to do, it gives them reasons to care. For all the flaws this game has, this part is good writing.

[geldatchonfury]

“There's something liberating about fighting an obvious enemy as opposed to one you have to prove exists.”

This quote comes from Trevor Noah who answered an audience member’s question about the difference between racism in the USA versus racism in South Africa. But it’s starting to feel relevant again now that there’s a white South African, billionaire goonicus throwing Nazi salutes on live television.

In Trevor Noah’s answer (which has lived rent free in my head for years) he even says, “I often think the greatest gift the Apartheid government gave us is that it was there. It was happening to you. It wasn't hidden.”

I think it would be too easy and wrong to cave to defeatism when, honestly, I think we should be rejoicing. Our enemies are peeling off the masks declaring themselves. It’s not a question anymore. They’re not hiding, which will make it easier to call them out for what they are.

So, yeah. They can try to scrub this from the internet, but we won’t forget. Those fuckers are on the wrong side of history and always have been.

Do not let them erase this. Do not let them tell you he meant "my heart goes out for you."

This man is the grandson of a Canadian Nazi sympathizer who moved to South Africa BECAUSE he thought the apartheid was just the coolest.

He has a gaggle of kids specifically because he believes his genes are superior and need to be spread to improve humanity.

He has thrown his support behind the neonazi party in Germany and the far right party in the UK, not to mention how far he's wormed up the ass of the Republican party.

He threw two sieg heil salutes back to back at the inauguration of the president of the United States and is trying to scrub the evidence off the internet.

Elon Reeve Musk is a fucking Nazi.

[leviathan-supersystem]

how do you get good at debating? how do you put on a cruel stage show? how do you get practice identifying the buckling points in someone’s argument as it happens?

the first and most important part is to read some currently occurring debates on the topic so you know what current talking points are in circulation. this is the absolute most important part, if you don't do this nothing else matters, even if you're smart and well-read in general if you don't know what people are saying in the discourse about that specific topic Right Now then you're going to be playing catch-up and being caught off guard.

at any given time The Discourse on any given topic is mostly composed of like, 12 talking points just getting churned around and repeated back and forth. learn what the best arguments are for the side you agree with, learn what the rebuttals are to the arguments from the opposing side, and if any arguments from the opposing side don't already have ready-made rebuttals, try to see if you can craft a rebuttal of your own to that point from scratch. that way you'll go into every debate basically already knowing what they're going to say and having a ready-to go rebuttal for every point. you can even just copy-paste your rebuttals if you highlight that you're doing that, i do that with my rebuttal against the ancap "achktually, the REAL definition of capitalism is-" argument, and the fact that i'm copy-pasting the same block of text and it works flawlessly every single time just makes their argument look even worse.

If an opponent makes any given claim, don't just assume it's true. look it up. especially if they don't have a source, but even if they do have a source, look up other sources on that topic and see if their source has already be debunked. so often i see someone just outright lie in a debate, and the other person just continues the debate assuming their lie was true.

i'm not immune to this myself, i was arguing with that guy who said "ahaha well palestinians are majority shia and yemenis are majority sunnis and sunnis HATE shi'ites, so yemenis don't even actually care about palestinians, they just hate jews!" and i wrote a whole rebuttal assuming the claim about sunni/shia demographics in those regions was true and then i looked up the statistics on shia/sunni demographics in palestine and yemen, not even trying to debunk or fact-check him, only to find that palestine and yemen are both majority sunni! palestine has a *larger* sunni majority even! so i had to go back and delete my whole response and replace it with "palestine is majority sunni you cretin." just assuming an opponent's factual claims are true without checking them is one of the most rookie mistakes out there, but no matter how much experience you have you can still fall into it if you don't check yourself.

since no ideology can ever perfectly capture reality, every single ideology has certain facts that they can't address adequately. figure out which facts these are for your opponent's ideology and repeat them as often as possible, demand your opponent address them and don't let them try to change the subject when they can't.

for example, there is no way for the conventional anti-communist narrative of "marxism-leninism was bad for everybody, it's fundamentally a failure as an economic system" to account for the fact that the majority of russians consistently say in polls that socialism was better than capitalism and that the soviet union was the greatest time in the history of russia. if you just keep coming back to this fact they'll just keep getting more stressed out and trying to dodge that topic in more desperate ways.

ideologies will also oftentimes have internal inconsistencies, you can also just keep bringing the conversation back to these and watch your opponent squirm. also, conversely, if there are any inconsistencies in your own views, correct these so your opponent can't do this to you. there are plenty of right-wingers who get a lot of mileage by pointing to the dissonance between gun control and other popular progressive positions ("how are you going to condemn the police and then say only cops should have guns?" etc) and by simply being adamantly pro-gun and against gun-control i can basically become impervious to those arguments. they keep using those arguments and i just say "well i'm against gun control" and it shuts them down completely.

similarly a lot of these arguments that hinge on pointing out hypocrisy/incongruity on the other side are directly mirrored by an inverted hypocrisy/incongruity on their own. while the right-wingers are correct to point to an incongruity in the popular progressive "anti-cop, pro-gun control" position, this incongruity is mirrored by an equal incongruity in the "pro-cop, anti-gun control" position which is popular among right-wingers ("if you think we need guns to overthrow the government, why do you want the agents of that government better armed and equipped? who do you think enforces the gun control laws you decry?" etc)- if you jump into the fray of this discourse with an "anti-cop, anti-gun control" position, you can hammer the right-winger on their inconsistency while remaining invulnerable to attempts to do the same to you. similarly if any more mainstream liberals want to try to start shit with you you can also point to the incongruity/hypocrisy of their position while remaining impervious to retaliation.

i'm using gun control as an example, but you can apply this sort of tactic to basically any discourse where two sides are mutually accusing each other of hypocrisy/incongruity. they're probably both right to a degree, and you can get a lot of mileage by crafting a position more internally consistent than either side of the debate.

also, anyone who tries to convince you you should only argue in a vacuum is dumb as hell, your opponents previously stated opinions are completely relevant to the conversation, especially if they suggest that their currently stated positions in the debate are insincere or hypocritical. if someone is debating israel/palestine with you, and they say "the hamasniks don't represent the interests of the palestinian people- it is israel, ultimately, who does, and the hamas extremists are just disrupting this peace and making things worse for everyone." it's absolutely relevant if a week ago they were posting "all arabs are subhuman dogs who must be exterminated, islam is an inherently violent religion which no society should tolerate" and so on and so forth.

if you're arguing about a topic with someone, search that topic on their blog and see what else they've had to say about it. people will whine about "poisoning the well fallacy" but that's obviously just a fake "fallacy" attempting to ban an entirely legitimate debate tactic. yes, if someone is insincere in making an argument, that absolutely reflects badly on their argument, and their previous track record absolutely can demonstrate if they're insincere, it's stupid for them to go "uh uh uh poisoning the well fallacy, you can't point out that i'm a lying little shit, you have to pretend i'm not" and everyone who sees the debate will know it's stupid for them to do this. if you've effectively revealed someone as a liar, they won't be able to redeem their reputation in anyone's eyes by saying "well you're not allowed to prove i'm a liar" no matter how hard they try.

idk thats the stuff i can think of off the top of my head, i'll try to add more if i can think of anything.

[girlactionfigure]

Eighty years ago, he disappeared.

Unable to find the truth regarding the disappearance of their son, his parents died by suicide, overdosing on pills two days apart in 1979.

To this day, his disappearance is still a mystery.

Raoul Wallenberg — whom the UN called “the greatest humanitarian of the 20th century” — risked his life to save the life of strangers he did not know, yet "he was not himself saved by so many who could have done so," according to Professor Irwin Cotler, the chair of the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights.

Wallenberg, called the Hero of the Holocaust, disappeared on January 17, 1945.

The Peace Page has written about Wallenberg before, how he is believed to have issued more than 10,000 protective passports and saved as many as 100,000 Jews, but like many individuals, he has many stories. The Peace Page will continue to update readers with new or additional information, when relevant, to continue to share awareness so their stories are not forgotten.

"Born a Swede, Raul Wallenberg is remembered as a (honorary) citizen of the world. He is an honorary American, honorary Canadian, and honorary Israeli. He was the first individual to ever receive honorary Australian citizenship," according to the Library of Congress.

He also received a U.S. education as an architect from the University of Michigan. He became an honorary citizen of the United States due to the efforts of House Representative Tom Lantos who was saved by Wallenberg in Hungary in 1944, according to the Library of Congress.

Today, January 17, 2020, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said:

“Today, we honour Raoul Wallenberg, a Swedish diplomat in Budapest in the 1940s who put himself in harm’s way to save tens of thousands of Hungarian Jews from persecution and death during the Holocaust."

“Mr. Wallenberg was a true humanitarian and hero, who led an important rescue effort that saved more Jews from the horrors of the Nazi regime than any other individual, organization, or government," Trudeau said. "A man of incredible bravery and courage, he went to great lengths to provide special protective passports – Schutz-Passes – to thousands of Jews, saving them from deportation to concentration camps. Mr. Wallenberg also created a network of safe havens operating under the protection of the Swedish flag, offering refuge to Jews fleeing persecution."

"Wallenberg, a non-Jewish Swedish diplomat, was a beacon of light during the darkest days of the Holocaust, and his inspiration remains so today. Prior to his arrival in the Swedish legation in Budapest in mid-July 1944, some 440,000 Hungarian Jews had been deported to Auschwitz in 10 weeks — the fastest, cruelest and most efficient mass murder of the Holocaust. Yet Wallenberg rescued some 100,000 Jews in Hungary in the last six months of 1944, demonstrating that one person with the compassion to care, and the courage to act, can confront evil, prevail and transform history," according to Cotler.

"He recruited 350 volunteers, rented 32 safe houses covered by diplomatic immunity, organised vital supplies of food and clothing, and issued thousands of “letters of protection”, official-looking documents that had no legal authority but were widely accepted by Hungarian and German officials, often with the aid of a bribe," according to the Guardian.

Despite the threats on his life, Wallenberg continued to try to help as many people as he could.

He even received a veiled threat from Nazi Adolf Eichmann. According to PBS' American Experience:

"In December 1944, the Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg attended a small dinner party in Budapest; also at the table was the Nazi Adolf Eichmann. The two men were in Hungary on opposing missions: Wallenberg was there to rescue Jews; Eichmann was there to kill them. Their conversation was barbed. The war was almost over, Wallenberg pointed out. Why didn't Eichmann give up his task? Eichmann replied that he would do his job until the very end so that when he walked to the gallows he would know he had successfully carried out his assignment. The Nazi added that Wallenberg wasn't immune from danger, even a neutral diplomat, he warned, could meet with an accident."

Wallenberg did not know then that it wasn't just the Nazis, who were threatened by him.

In 1945, he was invited to the Soviet military HQ.

"He was last seen leaving Budapest by car to meet Soviet military officials in Eastern Hungary," according to American Experience.

That was January 17, 1945.

"He disappeared into the Gulag, with the Soviets first claiming that he died of a heart attack in July 1947, and then subsequently changing their story to claim that he was murdered — also in July 1947," according to Cotler.

"His family have never received an official explanation for his detention, although suspicions he was also spying for the Americans, and his connections with some senior German politicians – he negotiated his humanitarian mission with, among others, Adolf Eichmann – have been suggested," according to the Guardian.

Last year, Marie von Dardel-Dupuy, the niece of Wallenberg, said, “I want specific answers to specific questions . . . He was a great man who wasn’t afraid to do the impossible. He deserves for us to know what happened to him. His story is unfinished – the mystery must be resolved. There are still so many closed doors, and we must have help in opening them.”

"What happened to Wallenberg is not clear, but a Swedish-Russian working group in 2000 concluded that Russia had not proved that Wallenberg died of a heart attack (or through execution) in the Lubyanka Prison in 1947 as had been suggested by Soviet officials during the 1950s," according to the Library of Congress.

Trudeau said, "Tragically, Mr. Wallenberg disappeared after he was arrested by Soviet forces near the end of the war. While his fate remains unknown, his legacy lives on. In honour of his heroic efforts, countless awards, monuments, institutions, and anti-racism campaigns now bear his name."

"We must always stand up to hatred and racism," Trudeau said. "With compassion and courage, we each have the power to make a difference in the lives of those around us.”

[Photo from the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights]

The Jon S. Randal Peace Page 

[therocketeer0501]

Emptiness Machine

Starscream X Reader (mech pilot AU)

Warnings/TW: blood, weapons, mention of torture, robot gore, human experimentation (shockwave is shockwave), language, and peril. (I’ll add more as I post)

(Author note: Before I get started I wanted to get a few things out of the way. This is my own AU and doesn’t really lend itself to much existing media. Gonna mash a few continuities together. This is in no way a professional writing by any means. I am not running it past a beta or anything so it’s going to be rough. I wanted to write this for myself and share it with y’all! This is my silly nonsense. That being said if I don’t clarify something or if something doesn’t make sense please submit an ask and I will promptly explain! Now without further ado. Here is the anticipated first chapter of Emptiness machine! Thank you all for waiting.)

Read first

Data log entry #857

Date: 003029 Time: 0700

Time since first contact: 2 years, 4 months, 7 days

What began as a national defense strategy became one of the most complex military operations in the history of the world. Project Archangel, founded by Dr. Zinovy Antonov, began under the pretense of creating the world’s first mechanized army. He started his research long before we found out we weren’t alone out here among the stars. With the arrival of the Cybertronian visitors came the fear that humanity was not only vastly outgunned, but also grossly unprepared to deal with any threat from deep space. Dr. Antonov pleaded with the government to allow him near the deactivated body of one of the Cybertronians, who was discovered after a battle had broken out between factions.

He studied their biology and created what he dubbed the perfect exoskeleton. Fueled by chemical X, also known as Energon, and operated by none other than the human soul itself. There weren’t many volunteers to undergo the rigorous training and testing that these pilots had to go through. But with the help of Cybertronian Autobot scientists, Project Archangel was finally given the green light to move forward. Only three pilots made it through the initial testing.

Pilot: Seraphim, Pilot: Uriel, and Pilot: Michael.

With their functioning mecha, these pilots were meant to assist the Autobot Cybertronians in keeping earth from being terraformed by the opposing Cybertronian facton, the Decepticons.

Which brings us to the present. We have had zero contact with the other faction known as the Decepticons until two months ago. The Autobots insisted we keep our distance and only deploy Project Archangel as a last resort. Keeping the humans out of the conflict was essential if they wanted to stay neutral in the eyes of the Decepticons. As far as we know, no Decepticon has ventured down to the planet’s surface from their airship Nemesis to interact with the population. Only sending drones to wreak havoc on areas rich in Chemical X.

However, in recent months, there have been sightings of Decepticon officers and scientists (identified by Autobot command) on the planet’s surface. It was decided that we bring Project Archangel out of the shadows and deploy them on a scouting mission alongside several Autobots. We only hope that we haven’t made a grave mistake.

Chapter 1

You let yourself be pulled through the spiral of light emanating from the ground bridge. Traveling via the alien tech was a feeling that no one could describe. The closest thing to it was like having a magnet in your chest be pulled faster than your brain could register before spitting you back out on the other side. It had taken many practice runs for you to not throw off your stabilizers and stick the landing. Though it still made you dizzy and a bit sick.

After landing behind Bee in a heavily wooded area, you quickly scan the trees for energy signatures. Your scanners were only programmed to detect the Decepticon drones and of course the energy signatures of your comrades. Bumblebee signaled for you to fall in behind him and you promptly obeyed. You could feel the way your heart pounded against your ribcage where your body rested snug inside the metal chest of your mech. Your consciousness flawlessly divided between the two bodies. One living metal, and one flesh. Energon flowed steady through your lines as you tried to calm the slight tremor of your hand that came with the rush of adrenaline.

Ahead you could see the energon mine in the waning light. A clearing with a large metal structure in the center. The two huge metal doors at the entrance had been blown wide open to reveal the tunnel that went deep inside the earth to extract the precious ore. The human sentries, once posted outside, were nowhere to be found. Vehicles were overturned and some still smoldered where they had been hit with plasma bolts. You switch to internal comms so you can communicate with Bee without anyone on the outside hearing.

“Second wave in twenty. Nineteen….”

You slowly count down the seconds until the others arrive so you can rush the structure together. Adjusting your grip on your rifle you study entrance trying to imagine just what awaited you inside. Clearly a monster. Looking to your left you see Bumblebee gripping his null ray, an uncharacteristically stoic look on his face. You had some form of friendship with all the autobots, but you were closest to the little yellow scout. Perhaps it was shared interest or the fact that he seemed more your age. Whatever the case, you had shared so many things with each other over the two ish years that you had been a part of Project Archangel. Only once did you ask him about his home.

He looked saddened at the question and at first you thought he wouldn’t answer you. But he did. You spent the better part of a day listening to how he didn’t know Cybertron before it had been nearly obliterated by the war. It had been a planet filled with culture, music, and arts. No factions to speak of. A united Cybertron. But then came the slow divide of the classes. The divide grew until there were only the obscenely wealthy, and those who had nothing. That’s when, from the pits of Kaon, came the leader of the Decepticon faction.

Megatron.

Bumblebee described him as charismatic and well spoken. Someone bots wanted to rally behind. Many of the Autobots started out as Decepticons in the early days of the war. Taking down the government brick by brick until nothing remained. When it came time to build a new government, Megatron wasn’t satisfied. He wanted all the bots and their families who dared oppress him gone. Obliterated until nothing was left. He ended up doing exactly that. This cost him many followers and eventually after many thousands of years, his home. He didn’t stop. Blaming the Autobots for the lack of energon and destruction on Cybertron.

With a dead world and nowhere to go, the Autobots turned to the libraries in what was left of Iacon. There they found records of worlds seeded with energon by the 13 original Primes. A failsafe in case something were to happen to Cybertron. Optimus Prime lead the remaining Autobots off world to look for a suitable new home. Of course Megatron followed. They tore their way through 11 uninhabited worlds while trying to find one that suited them best. Stripping the worlds of their energon before moving on to the next. Earth was the first seeded world to have intelligent life. Optimus made it his sole mission to keep that intelligent life from having to endure the horrors of the war they brought with them.

It was nearly impossible due to the ever present evil that lurked in the sky. The Nemesis, like a dark cloud, hung overhead when you looked up. What kind of monsters would tear apart their home just to make a point? You were about to find out. A ground bridge portal appeared nearly blinding her as she adjusted her optics to its harsh blue light. Four bots landed and immediately began sprinting towards the entrance. Your peds began to automatically move. The yellow scout close on your heels as the two of you followed your comrades inside. Drones swarmed around you the instant you broke the entrance. Inside you could see Cliffjumper, Sideswipe, Sunstreaker, and one of your brothers in arms Michael. His mech was a heavy class. Not very good at maneuvering but excellent at breaking things. Throwing a drone into a wall with the butt of your rifle, you turn to Bee and chuckle over comms.

“I was expecting more of a fight. This is a fairly average number of drones.”

He didn’t reply right away as he tried to pull a drone off of one of the lambo twins. You couldn’t tell which one because of the sheer number of bodies trying to suffocate the bot. Using your jump jets you propel yourself forward and into the pile sending a good number of the drones flying. They broke easily, not filled with much energon either. It made you wonder just how the Decepticons managed to manufacture so many drones while the Autobots controlled the energon. With the last of the drones dispatched, you look around and regroup with the others. Slowly you start moving further into the mine. Eventually it would open up into a huge cavern. It would be beautiful if not for the dread that had settled over the group like a thick fog. Suddenly your comm crackled to life as Sideswipe replied to your earlier comment in Bumblebee’s stead.

“We’ll get a good fight eventually. These tin cans are just the appetizer for the main course. It’s confirmed, Shockwave is here. I’ve been itching to dig my fist into that lone optic of his.”

He emphasized his excitement by sending his fist into the shoulder of his brother. The golden bot gave him a sour look but didn’t retort like he normally would have. The energy of the Autobots had been stoic ever since it was confirmed that the first Decepticon on scene was Shockwave. You had no idea what to expect. You knew Shockwave was a scientist and known for his cruel and unusual experiments during the war on Cybertron. He created the most horrific weapons used in the Great War, so he must be someone to fear at the very least.

As you make your way down, you begin to hear a long drawn out noise. Almost like a squeaky door hinge but amplified, bouncing off the walls of the mine shaft. Then there was the screaming. You had wondered what happened to the sentries who were stationed outside. Now you knew. A deep voice rumbled from up ahead. It was cold, unfeeling, and filled you with dread.

“Test 8 unsuccessful. Most illogical. Send another.”

There was that horrible sound like metal rending and then another shriek cut short. Before a sigh of resignation came from nearby. It wasn’t Shockwave who made the noise of dissatisfaction. Another Decepticon. Your heart pounded as you look over at your fellow bots to see if they heard the same thing you did. If their wide optics were any indication, they had. Two Decepticons. Not just one. You listened closely as the other bot seemed to pace back and forth in front of the opening to the cavern. You and your companions were split on either side of the entrance, listening but not yet entering the space.

The other Decepticon doesn’t speak and suddenly he goes eerily silent. It made your hair stand on end and you almost felt like you were being watched. Could Decepticons see through reinforced steel? You shook your helm at the thought. No way. But after a heartbeat he said something that had your heart in your throat.

“Shockwave wrap it up. We aren’t alone.”

Cliffjumper growled into his comm in recognition of the voice.

“Spinster. He’s going to be trouble.”

[technofeudalism]

if you know just a little bit of history, the "hostile foreign government" thing is so funny. quick and dirty amateur history lesson. please, someone correct any of this if i got it wrong.

if we are talking "hostile foreign government," let's talk about the United States.

the entire modern day trade partnership between the United States and China was formed in the aftermath of the Opium Wars. mind you, this was while China was vulnerable and on it's heels, devastated by the British via two wars waged against the Chinese government's attempts at curbing widespread drug addiction that Britain was responsible for via it's Opium exports from India in the first place.

the West, including the US, backed China into a corner and forced them into incredibly hostile and unfair treaties that resulted in 100 years of Chinese humiliation, colonization, death and destruction. that is a pervasive fact that will never leave the minds of generational Chinese citizens. they will always be weary of Western imperialism.

the only reason the United States wasn't involved directly in the colonization of China is because they were a relative late starter. even though the US underwent rapid expansion, with 4 years of Civil War plus the time it took to rebuild the country, it did not have the resources to invade Asia until it became a world power by the end of the 19th century. by the time it turned its colonial ambitions to China, it was already too late.

instead, they set sights on the Sandu Gulf - a natural deep water port in Fujian Province. the Navy checked the area out and came to the opinion that whoever controls the gulf controls the entire western Pacific. the goal was to turn the Pacific Ocean into "a lake of the United States". but Italy, Germany and Britain had already staked claim. so that was a dead end.

so the United States went for the next best option. to protect its commercial interests in China, it came up with its Open Door policy in 1899, the principles of which were as follows:

No nation shall interfere in the sphere of influence of another in China;

None shall favor their own traders at the expense of those from other nations in transportation levies;

and the territorial status quo shall be maintained, safeguarding equal and free trade throughout China.

not only was the relationship built on aspirations of colonial dominance, but even when the United States or the West showed up to help China, such as in 1900 during the Boxer Rebellion, they took the William Sherman route and completely flattened Beijing. never mind the fact that the rebellions were specifically in response to foreign influence in Chinese society.

in the 50 years that followed the Boxer Rebellion (that are WAY too extensive to cover in a tumblr post), the rise of anti-imperialist sentiment in China gave birth to Nationalism and an opposing Communist opposition. Western betrayal of China in the Treaty of Versailles at the end of World War I regarding captured territories by Japan accelerated both these movements.

this US betrayal is ultimately what launched the May 4th Movement in 1919, ironically carried out in Tienanmen Square in Beijing. 2 years later, the Chinese Communist Party was formed.

the Nationalists established their capital in Nanjing, killing US and other foreign citizens in the process. the US still supported them, as they also began a mass purge of Communists, sending them fleeing to the countrysides.

around 1934, Mao Zedong came to prominence. in 1945, as part of their power struggle with the Soviet Union, Western powers divided Korea in half, creating a boundary that separated the Soviet-backed DPRK (North Korea) from the US-backed South Korea. by 1949, the Communists had driven the Nationalists from the mainland and the PRC was founded. the Truman administration's opinion was that they had "lost" China. the next year, the Korean War began and China sided with the Soviets and the Communists in the North.

for more than twenty years after the Chinese revolution of 1949, there were few contacts, limited trade and no diplomatic ties between the two countries. until the 1970s, the US continued to recognize the Republic of China, located on Taiwan, as China's true government.

it wasn't until China was well into it's first stage of industrialization that the United States sought to normalize ties in 1972 and finally did so January 1, 1979. the end of the Cold War, coinciding as it did with China’s economic rise, began an incremental realignment of the balance of global power and influence that was accelerated by 9/11 and the Global Financial Crisis. China has soared. The US has floundered.

China's entire strategy over the last generation has not been to establish Chinese global hegemony. it is intended to move the world beyond US global hegemony. China wants to be acknowledged for it's place in the world and promote the “reform of global governance” toward a “community of common destiny.” that is why they are suddenly a "hostile foreign power."

"china is a hostile foreign government" to who lol?

the US is a "hostile foreign government" to like every other country on the planet

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Dan Pfeiffer at The Message Box (01.20.2025):

Today is a day so many of us have dreaded for so long. By lunchtime, Donald Trump will be sworn in as the 47th President of the United States of America. By dinner, he will undoubtedly have signed a series of scary executive orders targeting immigrants and others. Trump will then head off to be feted at a series of inaugural balls (including one paid for by Mark Zuckerberg). Eventually (after too many Diet Cokes and watching all the Fox shows on his DVR), Trump will go to bed and wake up to do it all over again. After today, the Trump presidency will last another 1,460 days. Somehow, as a country and as individuals, we must figure out how to survive all of them. It won’t be easy. Everything seems daunting, and the path back looks long and treacherous. I know many of you want to throw your phone into the nearest body of water.

1. Remember, Trump’s Win Was Not as Resounding as it Seems

Everyone is treating Donald Trump as if he just won in a Reagan-esque 49 state landslide. The Republican Party is so fully in his thrall that Senate Republicans appear willing to rubberstamp the nomination of a weekend news anchor with a reported drinking problem to run the Pentagon. CEOs and billionaires, many of whom formerly opposed Trump, are bending over backward to kiss Trump’s ass in the most debasing way possible. Even the media, which is supposed to hold Trump to account, is adopting an accommodationist stance to avoid angering our incoming tinpot dictator. But Trump’s win was not as resounding as he would have you believe. Yes, he made huge gains across the country. Yes, he became the second Republican since 1988 to win the popular vote. Yes, he made huge inroads in core parts of the Democratic coalition. But it’s also true that Trump only won by 100,000 votes across three battleground states. No, I don’t say that to try to convince you that Democrats don’t have a ton of work to do or to suggest that we did everything right during the campaign. Far from it. The Democratic Party needs to reevaluate how we do everything — our message, our strategy, our policy agenda, and our leadership. What we are doing is not working. However, it’s important to keep in mind that victory is closer than everyone wants you to believe. We can win if we do the work — and make the necessary changes. All is not lost. [...]

3. Channel Your Anxiety into Action

Sitting around your house doom-scrolling and fretting about all of the terrible thing that Trump and his MAGA minions are doing to America is a terrible way to spend the next four years. Maybe, it seems exhausting after the campaign we just went through, but when you are ready, I highly recommend channeling your anger and anxiety into action. There is no easy or obvious way to beat back the ascendant MAGA movement. But we also don’t need all the answers right now. We can do it in stages. The most impactful way to stop Trump is to take back the House in 2026. If we do that, Trump will never pass another law without Democratic support again. Speaker Jefferies will control what comes to the floor. We will have enormous leverage in budget negotiations and, as importantly, Democrats will have subpoena power to investigate the rampant corruption and criminality that will almost certainly be pulsating throughout the Trump Administration. Retaking the House is very much within our reach. The GOP currently has one of thee narrowest margins in history. If a mere 7000 votes across three districts had gone the other way, Hakeem Jeffries would be Speaker of the House right now. Because of the nature of our Trump-era coalition, Democrats tend to overperform in midterm elections, which have significantly lower turnout. With the notable exception of 2022, the first midterm for a new President is usually very good for the opposition. If 2026 seems like a long way off, you don’t have to wait that long. There are several important elections in 2025. Virginia and New Jersey has key gubernatorial and legislative elections. These races will be even more closely watched than usual because while these are traditionally Democratic states, Trump significantly improved his performance in both states compared to 2020. These races will be a major test fo whether the MAGA movement is ascendant or a flash in the pan that succeeded because of inflation and an unpopular Democratic incumbent. If Republicans win, they will be emboldened to be even more aggressive in pushing their extreme agenda. If we win, it will give vulnerable Republicans permission structure to be even more terrible. If November seems like a long way off, you don’t have to wait that long. There is a critical State Supreme Court race in Wisconsin taking place in April. [...]

4. Don’t Give Up Hope

The most important piece of advice I can give you is not to give up hope. I know things seem especially dark right now. I was around back in 2004 when Democrats lost a winnable election to a woefully underqualified candidate with little regard for people’s civil rights. Like Trump, George W. Bush made gains with core Democratic constituencies. Like now, pundits were talking about an emerging Republican majority that could dominate politics for decades on end. And just like in this moment, the Democratic Party seemed to enfeebled to mount the necessary comeback. But two years after that devastating election, Democrats retook the House and Senate. Four years afterward, Barack Obama won a huge landslide victory. Such an outcome is not a foregone conclusion. It will take real work and hard decisions. But none it will be possible, if we give up hope.

Dan Pfeiffer has a handy guide for surviving the four years of tumult that has begun today.

[skqramble]

I love Wemmbu's Unstable character so much. He was this reckless, naive, but caring dude who got thrown into things he didn't sign up for and losing so much in the process. He made it look like he doesn't care when he does. He's sentimental, even carries a shulker of sentimental items. He gave up so much that he didn't have enough for himself.

His change in character was very subtle, and most of it showed in the training arc episode and the finale. He trusted people and ended up getting betrayed by them, ofcourse he opposed teaming so much, especially since his history with Parrot and Spoke was rocky. He was belittled and underestimated by many for so long, ofcourse he would want to take on fights above his league to prove himself.

Also its really funny that he only really listened to Eggchan. Egg is like the only constant he has on the server, someone he can fully trust and keeps him grounded. Someone he always cared for. Honestly it was really nice to see that selfishness and arrogance develop then reverted back to being carefree and grounded towards the end of the finale. He was finally assured that he was strong and a good pvper, and also stronger with a team.

[polepositioned]

"prost and senna were so brutus/caesar coded" WRONG.

[wonder-worker]

"As for the government of the kingdom, [Edward V] had complete confidence in the peers of realm and the queen."

"According to the Crowland continuator, [Elizabeth Woodville] seems to have taken the king's place in listening to his council immediately after Edward IV's death. It does appear that she expected to have some role in her son's kingship, and the Crowland continuator’s report of the letters sent to her by [Richard of Gloucester] indicates that she had good reason to expect to be able to work with him and the other councillors: 'the duke of Gloucester wrote the most pleasant letters to console the queen; he promised to come and offer submission, fealty and all that was due from him to his lord and king, Edward V, the first-born son of his brother the dead king and the queen'."

"[However], in what was Gloucester's first coup, Edward V was separated from his household and Woodville advisors. When the young king questioned the move, Buckingham was reported to have told the boy 'It is not in the business of women but men to govern kingdoms'. The blunt remark referred to the authority of Elizabeth Woodville as queen and the power she must have anticipated within the new political climate left by Edward IV's sudden death [...] While the veracity of this scene is questionable*, the words attributed to the duke no doubt seemed plausible to Dominic Mancini who believed they exemplified the popular sentiment held by men [...]."

— Dominic Mancini, The Usurpation of Richard the Third / J.L. Laynesmith, The Last Medieval Queens: English Queenship 1445-1503 / Alexander R. Brondarbit, Power Brokers and the Yorkist State, 1461-1485

*One of Mancini's key sources seems to have been Edward V's own doctor, John Argentine, who attended to him in the Tower. It's very likely that he was the one who recounted this scene to Mancini, which suggests that it should probably be considered more credible than not.

[issilya]

I hate answering this because it's something I really go back and forth on when it comes to Esha.

Like, she's a crow. An alienage elf with a fucking death wish. She probably doesn't see a reality where she doesn't die young.

It's not that she wants to die - fuck no she doesn't! Before death takes her, she will break her fingers clawing out of its grasp.

But. She's a pessimistic realist, if that makes sense. She doesn't allow herself to dream of the future, because the future is unsure and cannot be trusted. She accepts the reality she is in - the reality of being Viago's bloodhound. The reality of having to cheat death on the regular. She's fearless, but part that fearlessness on the job? It's not being resigned to her fate. It comes from the fact that she's afraid of being alive. She's afraid of the future. She's afraid to dream. She's afraid of the good times because the good times always end and hurt so fucking much when they do. So it's easier to not have them. Just resign herself to the here and now.

And then, despite all of that, she actually does enjoy what she is. She enjoys the thrill like the adrenaline junkie she is. And she's aware of it.

So it's not that she's really *opposed* to getting married. But she's also not really that into it. She never thinks it's something that happens to her, period. That's it, move on.

If that ever comes up between her and Lucanis, she goes full panic and full denial mode. Like, what do you mean? She's an alienage elf. He's the goddamned First Talon. Doesn't matter if they killed gods, there is a gap between them that makes this difficult. Uncomfortable.

And then it means actually committing to something long term. It means looking to the future. It means dreaming. And that's not something she ever allows herself to do.

All that not even taking into the account what it would mean politically. She's a de Riva, not a Dellamorte, she will not become a Dellamorte regardless of how devoted she may be. Names are who you are and what shapes you, and she would not change hers. It would be like erasing her identity. And then, what does it mean for the First Talon to marry someone who will not give him children? Because even if she ever wanted to, she can't. Does she want to? Eh, probably not, but it's not like she ever considered it knowing she can't anyway. It doesn't bother her, but it does carry weight once *marriage* is a question. Like, do you think Caterina doesn't care about having her bloodline continue? Because I'm sure she does and family pressure is helluva drug (poor Lucanis).

So I think the answer to that is... I don't know. I think she *would* get married, but it would require a lot of work to break down all the walls and shatter all the fears she has.

But once she's okay with it - oof, then there's issues about Andrastian rites vs elvish rites and all that shit. She's not disconnected from her roots. Even after all that, she still sees is as something that's important. It's not about gods, fuck the gods - it's about the community. The rites that keep the community together, the history that gets carried. She understands that, and she's not willing to just play the part of an Andastrian wife. What does that even mean for these two? How Andrastian is Lucanis, anyway?

Jokingly, maybe they almost break up over this and then decide to elope. Have a ship captain marry them because ship captains can do that. I have no idea. They're a tangled mess of opposites and conflicts and I love them. I'm not even sure they get a happy ending after all.

/edit

Yeah after considerations it's not about whether or not she wants it or how she wants it, if they get married, it would be Lucanis pulling some shit like asking her and then within 10 minutes having the ship's captain marry them, because if she has time to think, her brain will overload on panic - gotta get her while she's still in shock lmao

Hey, hope you all had a good weekend! Unfortunately, it’s Monday =/ Fortunately, it’s time for Rook Intro Hour! 🍀🌺🌼🌸

How it works: I ask you a question about your Rook(s) and you answer it with as much brevity or verbosity as you desire. You can do this whenever you want, and I’ll reblog it + add some comments! There’s no time limit— if you want to do the older ones, they are collected here! (The post is updated on Fridays!)

Today’s Question(s): Does your Rook want to get married to their LI(s)? Do they care about where? Is there a specific tradition/traditions they want to follow, when they do? Who would they invite? What would they wear?

Have fun & thanks for sharing!

[storywestistrash]

i am actually so tired of the way westerners treat eastern europeans

[hanzajesthanza]

i do actually headcanon that angoulême had some friends spread throughout beauclair & throughout the sansretour valley. but they weren’t good friends. just… “i know a guy” type of deals. very golan drosdeck type of random association like. you’re nineteen. how do you know all of these people. idk. it’s a small criminal underworld after all. but like drosdeck she would have debts with all of them and none of them would be willing to help her and some still are looking to scam her. and despite her… ‘worldliness’, she is still quite naïve

[hotsugarbyglassanimals]

i feel like this site leaning heavily into the "pedophilia and incest and rape kinks are good" angle lately can be attributed to the mass expulsion of sex workers and black ppl on here ngl

[book-daenerys]

I'm replying because this post is on Daenerys' tag and you have a reasonable view of her, so there's enough common ground to keep the discussion respectful even if we only end up agreeing to disagree with each other.

1.)

Now, of course a lot of the incestuous characters aren't dragon riders, but it is noticeable that those that are copy the rhetoric of the Valyrians: "Your brother?" Ned said. "Or your lover?" "Both." She [Cersei] did not flinch from the truth. "Since we were children together, and why not? The Targaryens wed brother to sister for three hundred years, to keep the bloodlines pure. And Jaime and I are more than brother and sister. We are one person in two bodies. We shared a womb together. He came into this world holding my foot, our old maester said. When he is in me, I feel... whole." (AGOT, Eddard XII) Elsewhere, we also learn that practicing incest is a cultural sign that the practitioner is "above" other men, not subject to the laws of society. A practitioner of incest, then, is above other men... just like a king or a god is: Why shouldn't I marry Cersei openly and share her bed every night? The dragons always married their sisters. Septons, lords, and smallfolk had turned a blind eye to the Targaryens for hundreds of years, let them do the same for House Lannister. It would play havoc with Joffrey's claim to the crown, to be sure, but in the end it had been the swords that had won the Iron Throne for Robert, and swords could keep Joffrey there as well, regardless of whose seed he was. We could marry him to Myrcella, once we've sent Sansa Stark back to her mother. That would show that the Lannisters are above their laws, like gods and Targaryens. (ASOS, Jaime III) The practice of incest is therefore not just abusive, but is also authoritarian, leans very heavily into the idea of blood superiority, and is ultimately just a little bit fash.

Your argument that the practice of incest among Targaryens/Valyrians is authoritarian, abusive and indicative of blood superiority requires us to accept Cersei and Jaime's views on the Targaryens as definitive. But should we? Both of them are explicitly shown to have limited knowledge of history:

"King Maegor's laws prohibit that, as Your Grace must know. It was by his decree that the Faith laid down its swords." "Tommen is king now, not Maegor." What did she [Cersei] care what Maegor the Cruel had decreed three hundred years ago? (AFFC, Cersei VI)

~

"And speaking of the Seven, why would Cersei permit the Faith to arm again?" Jaime shrugged. "I am certain she had reasons." "Reasons?" Lady Genna made a rude noise. "They had best be good reasons. The Swords and Stars troubled even the Targaryens. The Conqueror himself tread carefully with the Faith, so they would not oppose him. And when Aegon died and the lords rose up against his sons, both orders were in the thick of that rebellion. The more pious lords supported them, and many of the smallfolk. King Maegor finally had to put a bounty on them. He paid a dragon for the head of any unrepentant Warrior's Son, and a silver stag for the scalp of a Poor Fellow, if I recall my history. Thousands were slain, but nigh as many still roamed the realm, defiant, until the Iron Throne slew Maegor and King Jaehaerys agreed to pardon all those who would set aside their swords." "I'd forgotten most of that," Jaime confessed. "You and your sister both." (AFFC, Jaime V)

Cersei's disregard for Maegor's laws and Jaime's admission that he's forgotten important details of Targaryen history align with the fact that both of their statements about the Targaryens (the ones you quoted above) are incorrect.

Cersei's claim that "the Targaryens wed brother to sister for three hundred years, to keep the bloodlines pure" is inaccurate. There are lots of examples of Targaryens marrying non-Targaryens over the centuries: Aenys I/Alyssa Velaryon, Maegor I and his multiple non-Targaryen wives, Viserys I/Aemma Arryn, Rhaenyra I/Laenor Velaryon, Viserys II/Larra Rogare, Daeron II/Myriah Martell, Aerys I/Aelinor Penrose, Maekar I/Dyanna Dayne, Aegon V/Betha Blackwood, Rhaegar/Elia Martell and so on... Examining Dany's direct ancestors shows that her heritage actually combines Valyrian, First Men, Rhoynar and Andal blood.

Jaime says that the Targaryens were "above their laws" and that "septons, lords, and smallfolk had turned a blind eye to the Targaryens for hundreds of years". This, again, is simply wrong. Aegon the Conqueror was careful with the Faith to avoid opposition and assimilated into Westerosi culture to unite the realm. Aegon's sons, Aenys and Maegor, faced resistance from Westerosi lords and the Faith Militant, something Jaime admits to forgetting. Jaehaerys I and Alysanne had to create the Doctrine of Exceptionalism that would allow them to marry without causing backlash from the Faith. The Storming of the Dragonpit happened. There are countless examples of Targaryen monarchs making concessions, following Westerosi laws and customs and/or struggling against opposition from lords, septons and commoners throughout F&B and TWOIAF, so they were never "above their laws". Jaime's quote reveals more about his inaccurate and idealized view of the Targaryens than it does about the Targaryens.

2.)

Unlike the Targaryens, the Stark family tree is full of its members marrying outside the clan. Lord Stark's daughter was stolen by Bael the Bard, a man from another (wildling) clan, and their child continued the Stark line. Lyanna was stolen by Rhaegar, and in doing so joined ice and fire. Ned married Catelyn, uniting North and South. [...] Jon is therefore in the unique position of being a descendant of the anti-incest Starks and the pro-incest Targaryens, with his own parents being the union of two different "ice" (non-incest) and "fire" (incest) clans.

Again, I will repeat: there are lots of examples of Targaryens marrying non-Targaryens over the centuries: Aenys I/Alyssa Velaryon, Maegor I and his multiple non-Targaryen wives, Viserys I/Aemma Arryn, Rhaenyra I/Laenor Velaryon, Viserys II/Larra Rogare, Daeron II/Myriah Martell, Aerys I/Aelinor Penrose, Maekar I/Dyanna Dayne, Aegon V/Betha Blackwood, Rhaegar/Elia Martell and so on... Examining Dany's direct ancestors shows that her heritage actually combines Valyrian, First Men, Rhoynar and Andal blood.

Meanwhile, House Stark has its own history of incestuous marriages: Edric Stark/Serena Stark (uncle/niece), Jonnel Stark/Sansa Stark (uncle/niece) and Rickard Stark/Lyarra Stark (first cousins once removed). Additionally, Ned and Catelyn's marriage was unusual because it happened due to Rickard Stark's southron ambitions. Before that, House Stark had rarely married outside the North and other houses of First Men descent (such as Blackwoods and Royces).

So, since 1) Targaryens have intermarried with multiple noble houses and 2) the Starks have also had incestuous unions, including uncle/niece marriages (which is especially relevant when discussing a potential Dany/Jon relationship), I'd argue that framing the former as "pro-incest" against the latter as "anti-incest" or "fire" as incest to "ice" as non-incest is too reductive.

3.)

The practice of incest is therefore not just abusive, but is also authoritarian, leans very heavily into the idea of blood superiority, and is ultimately just a little bit fash. [...] The later Targaryens used incest and their "pure blood" to justify their right to rule.

First of all, it's not true that "the later Targaryens used incest and their "pure blood" to justify their right to rule". They actually started to marry outside their family more often since they no longer had dragons.

Second, GRRM has made it clear in several interviews that incest was a common practice among Targaryens/Valyrians mainly to help maintain control over the dragons:

Ashaya: Let’s ask about a couple questions about Valyrians that I have here… did Valyrians from non dragon riding families practice incest as well? And did Valyrians other than Targaryens have dragon dreams, if you can answer either of those? George: No, I don’t think they particularly would. I haven’t really thought about that. Ashaya: Okay. Fair enough. George: I reserve my right to change my mind, but no, I don’t think. There was a specific reason for the incest which was to uh, you know, I mean, obviously they don’t have… these are medieval people and ancient people. They don’t know about DNA or genes or any of that stuff, but they have some rough concept of it in which they attribute to the blood. This guy has blue eyes and his children have blue eyes, but if he marries someone with brown eyes, now all the kids have brown eyes, why is that? They have some things, so… we can control dragons, we don’t wanna lose that ability, not everybody can do that. So we better keep it in the family, so to speak, or at least with the other dragon riding families. Now there was, I haven’t gone much into it, but there was another very powerful group in Valyria who were not necessarily the dragon riders. And those were the people who practiced blood magic. And which, you know, there’s some overlap in the Venn diagram with the dragon riders, but not necessarily complete overlap. And then there were just the regular people. There were a lot of slaves cuz it was a slave society. There were a lot of poor people. I think of ancient Rome or something like that. I don’t know that they would have any reason to to practice incest. (source)

~

The Targaryens were interlopers from another culture and they had some unique factors that didn’t necessarily fit into the mainstream of the other Westerosi lords, such as their traditional incest, which was part of keeping the bloodlines pure so that they could better control the dragons… (source)

In the first interview, GRRM goes as far as to say that "there was a specific reason for the incest", which, again, was to preserve their ability to control the dragons. It's also worth noting that GRRM has acknowledged that the Targaryens have magical abilities passed down through their lineage and has stated that it's logical for his characters to factor magic into their decisions:

George R. R. Martin: “The Targaryens have certain gifts and yes, taking the dragons and dragon riding and dragon breeding was one of them,” he says. “But the other gift was an occasional Targaryen had prophetic powers and could see glimpses of the future, which they didn’t always necessarily properly interpret because, you know, they were fragmentary and sometimes symbolic. (source)

~

George R. R. Martin: This is a society where people believe in magic, they believe in sorcery and with good reason because it exists. (source)

So, rather than primarily driven by authoritarianism, blood superiority or serving as a justification for the later Targaryens to rule (in fact, again, later Targaryens often married outside their family), the Targaryens’ incestuous marriages had a more practical purpose: preserving their magical bond with dragons (a fact GRRM has confirmed). If GRRM intended Targaryen/Valyrian incest to be primarily associated with blood superiority (which isn't a problem exclusive to Targaryens/Valyrians, but more on that later) or with the later Targaryens' right to rule, he:

would have had all the Valyrians - even the non-dragon riding families - practice incest... but he didn't.

would have shown the Targaryens still marrying within the family even after the dragons went extinct... but he didn't. Instead, the number of marriages between Targaryens and non-Targaryens increased, which proves that the practice of incest was rather flexible and pragmatic rather than dogmatic.

Speaking of the idea of blood superiority... This isn't restricted to the Targaryens/Valyrians, it's widespread among the Westerosi nobility. Consider House Stark, for instance:

"King Robert has a headsman," he said, uncertainly. "He does," his father [Ned] admitted. "As did the Targaryen kings before him. Yet our way is the older way. The blood of the First Men still flows in the veins of the Starks. (AGOT, Bran I)

~

Catelyn smiled, but the smile was tinged with sadness. The Redforts were an old name in the Vale, she knew, with the blood of the First Men in their veins. His love she might be, but no Redfort would ever wed a bastard. (AGOT, Catelyn VI)

~

The gods of the sept had nothing to do with him [Jon]; the blood of the First Men flowed in the veins of the Starks. (AGOT, Jon VI)

~

Robb bristled at that. "The Westerlings are better blood than the Freys. They're an ancient line, descended from the First Men." (ASOS, Catelyn II)

Both Ned and Jon emphasize the Starks' descent from the First Men, Catelyn believes that Mychel Redfort wouldn't marry a bastard because of his First Men bloodline and Robb believes that houses descended from the First Men “are better blood”. This attitude is no different from the Targaryens or Valyrians taking pride in their heritage or viewing themselves as superior because of it. The idea of blood superiority is a problem across Westerosi nobility, not just with the Targaryens.

Also, using Viserys' belief that "Targaryens did not mingle their blood with that of lesser men" as representative of his entire family's worldview is misleading. King Aegon V, for instance, was against incest and tried to prevent his children from marrying each other. As GRRM puts it:

I think it is a mistake to generalize about "the Westerlings," just as it would be to generalize about "the Lannisters." Members of the same family have very different characters, desires, and ways of looking at the world... and there are secrets within families as well. (source)

4.)

Can a good ruler be one half of an incestuous relationship?

According to GRRM, yes. He has described Jaehaerys I, who married his sister Alysanne, as a good king:

George R. R. Martin: I skipped over Jaehaerys; there's very little about Jaehaerys in The World of Ice and Fire because, you know, he was the Good King. He ruled through 55 years of peace and prosperity. What's duller than peace and prosperity? But when I was doing Fire and Blood, I said, "Well, I can't just have a three-sentence chapter that says Jaehaerys reigned for 55 years of peace and prosperity. I've got to invent some stuff that happened there." So I got into that, and I wound up writing another hundred thousand words just about Jaehaerys. And yeah, there was sort of peace and prosperity, but there was also, you know, a few murders and dragon fights and conspiracies and cool stuff. I had a lot of fun writing about Jaehaerys and his wife Alysanne, who was his queen. (source)

I would argue that there are other good Targaryen rulers who were involved in incestuous relationships, but I haven't found direct comments from GRRM to back this up. Regardless, the main point is that the author has already answered your question.

In conclusion, imo your analysis of the Targaryens is too simplistic because it doesn't take into account that 1) Cersei and Jaime, who both have limited historical knowledge, shouldn’t be seen as the final word on the Targaryens, 2) the Targaryen/Valyrian practice of incest was primarily aimed at preserving their magical ability to control the dragons, 3) the Targaryens married outside their family over time (which refutes the idea that incest was a constant justification for their rule), 4) neither incest nor blood superiority are unique to the Targaryens but instead widespread among Westerosi noble houses, including the Starks.

I don't ship Jon and Daenerys, even though they are among two of my favorite characters. I love them both as characters, but I don't see them as a couple.

A big part of it is that they are aunt and nephew, and we haven't seen a single healthy incestuous relationship in the main series, which is kind of the point.

The first one is the marriage of Dany's parents Aerys and Rhaella. It was already a loveless marriage, as Barristan noted there was no fondness between them from the start, and it turned abusive towards the end as Jaime could attest.

The next one is Jaime and Cersei's relationship which is pretty toxic and has elements of abuse. It was a pretty one-sided, codependent relationship with Cersei's desires always coming first, and using sex to get Jaime to enact violence on her behalf. Jaime also noted how much of her her narcissism went into the relationship as she saw him as her mirror image, and lived through him. When Jaime says tells her "No" for the first time, it's noticeably when Cersei starts turning to verbal abuse. Once Jaime starts individuating from her, and disagreeing with her, she responds with verbal and physical abuse.

Cersei has another one with her cousin Lancel while Jaime was gone, and it was clearly shown to be unhealthy and abusive as along with Lancel being a teen and Cersei being a grown woman, she is Queen while he is a squire as well as her ward at court. She used sex as a way of manipulating the inexperienced Lancel, and he admitted to Jaime he was in love with her. She had all the power in the relationship and abused it as she often does with power in her arc.

Jon's exposure to it as at Craster's keep. Craster is clearly shown to be a detestable person and abuser who rules his domain through violence and intimidation. He sacrifices his sons to get rid of potential rivals, and marries his daughters. Gilly is clearly shown to be a victim as are the other women.

Viserys wanted one with Daenerys as revealed by Illyrio, and or rather he lusted for her. After giving her a steady diet of physical, verbal and emotional abuse, he decided to add sexual abuse when he tried to rape her. Euron raped his younger brothers with Aeron's partying years and his identity as Damphair stemming from Euron's abuse.

All the incestuous relationships in the main series are tied up with abuse. There are elements of power dynamics whether they by patriarchy and/or royalty where the ones often pushing for it are often the ones in power being king, queen, older brother or patriarch.

Daenerys and Jon can find happiness in relationships, and I'm guessing they will, but not with each other. They would be better off as a aunt-nephew, or given Jon being slightly older, a brother-sister kind of relationship (not the Targaryen kind).

[twentyfivemiceinatrenchcoat]

thinking about that One scene in the secret history but w cult leader geto (<- having a normal one)