Game of Thrones: In Stops and Starts
Don’t worry, I manage to connect it to the Democratic primary.
…this take is so fun, and so pithy, that I’m honestly loath to poke holes in it. But its structure does kinda hinge on “Daenerys massacring civilians was the real revolutionary praxis,” and I don’t think it can be salvaged from that.
To be clear: in a meta-narrative sense, I think that Dany’s crazy heel-turn was a bad artistic move, for both plot and character reasons. I don’t blame people who want to complain about it (although many of the people complaining have reasons that I think are stupid).
But if you’re going to take the text as an absolute given and work from there – I think that the best analysis is the one that Tyrion provided on the show itself. (Which also, as it happens, is nicely on-brand for you.)
Dany has spent her entire career murdering people who weren’t fighting back. Mirri Maaz Duur, the slavers of Slavers’ Bay, the Sons of the Harpy, on and on and on. And we kept applauding her for it, because the people she murdered were Bad Guys. How did you think this was going to end? Why did we outsource our principles of justice to one woman’s intuitions about who the Bad Guys are?