Anyone else get the vibe that the Stormcloaks resemble real-life racist isolationists and the imperial sympathizers resemble those who want tolerance and international cooperation (such as anti-EU vs pro-EU, at extreme levels).

When I first started playing the game I immediately took a liking to the Stormcloaks, and my view was that these were "honorable rebels fighting the evil oppressive Empire". After playing the game for many hours though I started realizing that this was not really the case, the Stormcloaks were generally racist, brutish bastards. Ulfric comes across like such a man, while the Jarl of Whiterun seems much more reasonable. Generally most of the Jarls who support Ulfric (or take over if you side with him and conquer the Imperial controlled lands) are unsavory fellows.

- Dengeir is a paranoid loon.
- Korir is biased against mages and incorrectly accuses them of Winterhold's disaster.
- Skald is a hard-liner who comes across as an intolerant bastard towards his ex-legionaire citizens.
- Vignar Gray-Mane, whom I originally thought was a good guy, turned out to be a vindictive and heartless leader who allows his troops to harass non-Nords and mug / steal from his rival family (Battleborns). Some of the battle-borns are unsavory fellows as well, but I expected more honor from Vignar honestly.

Meanwhile many of the Imperial-side Jarls seem like good guys, such as Balgruuf, Brunwolf etc. Their viewpoint is not that the Nords should unconditionally bow their heads to the Empire, but rather that it's better for everyone that the Empire stay intact. The Nords were one of the people who founded the Empire, and breaking it up would just play into the hands of the Aldmeri Dominion. They want for the different people of the realms to work together basically, while Ulfric wants nothing to do with anyone but Nords.

The Stormcloak argument is that the Empire forced them to abandon Talos worship. The problem is, that really isn't the case. The Empire was forced to do this by the Aldmeri Dominion.

Ulfric killed the High-King simply because he could, based on old laws of the land (i.e. survival of the strongest, if you challenge someone to a duel they must accept). This is a rather barbaric tradition that favors brute strength over sensibility. I could overlook this if he really had a case against the Empire, but it seems to me from playing the game so far that he really doesn't. I don't see much evidence of the Empire oppressing Skyrim, in fact it seems to be fairly autonomous, the decisions are mostly made by local Jarls. The only exception being the Talos worship issue, and that was forced upon the Empire by the real bad guys, the High-Elf Empire.


In conclusion, I was a bit disappointed that I was pushed into siding with the Empire later on in the game, thereby stabbing the characters I met in the beginning in the game (which I liked) in the back. But I just couldn't let Ulfric win the war in good conscience, it appears that he and his chosen Jarl underlings would have thrown Skyrim into a dark-age and they would have become much more brutal oppressors of the people than the Empire was to begin with.

Too much reading. Both sides have good points which is another reason why the idea of both sides being idiots is a good idea and stance to have.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/439516/Skyrim/racist.jpg

No, the stormcloaks are not racists. Ulfric doesn't say anythig racist, and the dunmer were isolated from the minute they got there, way before Ulfric's birth. They agreed to this for the free room and board, and they are independent from the Jarl's rule. The argonians are kept out to keep them from fighting with the dnmer due to their recent history, and if he was racist, why are there altmer in the city not isolated? The nords as a whole tend to be xenophobic and nationalistic. Thats not the same thing as racist. They are simply distrusting of outsiders. They're even distrusting of you if you're a nord outsider, asking if you're an imperial spy.

Giant dragon attack? should have paused the war.


again, both sides are idiots pure and simple.

Some of my favorite insights on Ulfric and the Stormcloaks come from Sybil Stentor, Solitude court wizard, and Leila Law-giver's son in Riften. They don't encourage me to side with the Stormcloaks at all. Neither does the fact that Ulfric is considered a Stormcloak asset, or the story of his atrocities when he retook Markarth. Even my politically neutral Khajiit vampire prefers Stormcloaks when he looks for a neck to bite.

On the other hand, racism is not automatic with Stormcloak supporters. Look at Riften: it has its problems, but racism is not one of them. Dunmer and Argonians in that city live, work, and trade side by side with Nords. Of course, that may be because Maven Black-briar runs things, and racism is bad for business.

The problem is that both sides are too stubborn to admit that there are bigger threats than one crazy nord and his "army."

In your opinion. Sorry, not everyone believes both are wrong like you do. I'm not a believer of neutrality.

I never said either side was wrong, but both sides are idiots for focusing on the Civil war WHEN THERE IS A DRAGON FLYING AROUND THAT IS A POTENTIAL THREAT TO ALL OF SKYRIM

They're fighting so they can address the bigger threat in the first place without giving up their freedom. Allowing free reign in their country to the enemy everywhere is very counter productive.

Well if they're blatantly intolerant of other races, as is implied in the game on more than one occasion, I think it's fair to call them what they are. If they were just slightly biased, I wouldn't have a problem with it, generally all people are slightly biasted towards their race. But these guys are oppressors, just look at how they treat the Dark Elves in Windhelm. Ulfric turns a blind eye towards crimes committed against Dark Elves and they are forced to live in squalor. I don't see the Empire treating the Nords like that, and according to the Stormcloaks the Empire are the oppressive ones (kind of ironic coming from them).

I don't see the difference in calling them idiots and saying they're wrong. As for the dragon thing, they barely did anything to make them believe the end of the world was coming. Alduin doesn't even show his face much, so you cant really blame them.

I was talking about the dragon attacking Helgen. Had both sides put efforts to find and kill that dragon, the dragon crisis may not have gotten as bad as it did.