(This is a debate thread like others, not "I'm right you're wrong".)

I've been going through the reasons people side with Stormcloaks and not the Empire, and which to me pretty much looks like double standards. Freedom of religion I covered in the other thread ("To those who joined Stormcloaks because of Talos ban"), and here I'd like to go into another major reason: independence of the Nords.


The simple question I have is: how do you justify the "Skyrim is for the Nords" with Stormcloaks at the same time on a killing rampage versus all those Forsworn who happen to have the same motto: "Reach is for the Forsworn"?

And with "Skyrim is for the Nords" life motto, why did Nords invade the Reach in the first place?

You are persistent.

I just compare it to America. As much as I love us and our country, we did the same thing. I guess its just harder to take a bunch of savages (the forsworn) seriously. I just don't feel sorry for those guys

You already made one of these topics.

Didn't we just have a thread about the morality of killing dragons, 'cause "they were here first"? 'Cause this is, y'know, kinda similar. At which point does "here first" become a moot point?

You want to know what makes a ruler legitimate? You want to know how someone can claim a territory to be part of their own country?
Easiest answer is Thucydides Melian dialogue, in which it is stated that "might makes right". But do look up, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau and Max Weber. Do that and I am sure you will find a multitude of arguments.

Why the reach was invaded? Do you mean originally? Read the lore or ask in the lore forum.
Do you mean by Ulfric Stormcloak? That was a reconquest in their eyes, not an invasion - nice bit of justification right there.
I hope my answers are sufficient.

The Reach is basically a poo fight. It doesn't matter who wins, you're all covered in poo. I don't think anyone involved in that squabble can claim any sort of moral high ground.

EDIT: Curate post!

This. I was going to bring up the same point. This is essentially what happened in America. And they had the same viewpoint about them being 'savages' even though some respects of their society were far more 'civilised' than the Americans' or Europeans'.

history is written by the victor, empire wins the nord will be depicted as savages who murdered ruthlessly . the nords win, the empire will be spoken of as the invading force of evil that was held back by the brave nords.
this is how it has always been and will always be

I'm not going to read all of the lore, if you have a point to make go ahead. When I have a point to make I don't tell people to go read, I tell them what I've read.


Everyone else did the same thing, just a matter of degree. It's still interesting how some type "might makes right" (which is true), while others try to justify this and that by mentioning some traditions, long lines, ancestors, "our land" and what not.


That's often just the result of demonization and indoctrination (generally speaking). Since you mentioned US as an example - if you look back few decades even the Soviets were portrayed as Klingon-like savages/brutes, and they pretty much matched the West in technology. But in Skyrim terms, the Nords compared to Imperials or old Dwemer are also just that - savages. Imperials are more advanced civilization-wise than Nords, and yet people feel sorry for the Nords but not the Forsworn compared to Nords. I have been in Markath and Forsworn impressed me far more than Nords there. Then I look at wiki and think "hmm it says here I should dislike Forsworn and go kill them", but in reality after talking to most people in Markath you want to kill the Nords.

You don't have to hate the forsworn in Markarth

Then I guess we're wrong? Because we came out pretty good. I'm still walking around feeling safe. But it happened. There are tons of things I don't agree with. I don't agree with being in the middle east, but we are. I agree with Ulfric more than I agree with us.

Did that yesterday and it was probably the most fun quest I did so far. Really nice.




I'd love to reply to some of this but it would go too much into offtopic and stir a part of the forum population since it's a touchy subject.

I wasn't trying to make a point. I was trying to answer/help you answer your questions.
Here is how I saw your question:
And with "Skyrim is for the Nords" life motto, why did Nords invade the Reach in the first place?
"Skyrim belongs to the Nords" is the battle-motto of the Stormcloaks, not the original invading force. So there is two ways to interpret your question:
1.Why the reach was invaded originally? - If you want to find out, the lore forum is the place to go. I'm telling you where you can find your answer.
2.Why the reach was invaded by Ulfric Stormcloak? - That was a reconquest. He took back what was a rebellious region and handed it back over to the Empire.
I'm not trying to be rude. My lack of smileys does not mean that I aim to insult.

I just don't think we need 50 threads on the same topic. And yes, if you change around the words, it's still the same topic.

This. /thread

It's a completely different point. It's like saying that there should be only 1 thread on Argonians in the entire forum.

This isn't about Stormcloaks being right or wrong, it's about how Stormcloaks feel about particular rally cry.

People "generally" base their world views on the society they are most exposed to. Skyrim is the home of the nords. A ton of people's first characters are nords and only the roleplayers are able to separate themselves from nord>all for their playthroughs.

I can tell you that when there were a lot more people still playing morrowind the debate as to whether the imperials or the dunmer should be in control favored the dunmer more than our current debate has favored the nords.

When most of us run into our first forsworn it is a red dot on the radar/compass and as we all know, red = dead.

Why did you assume people siding against the empire will also side against the forsworn?

No, its still a stormcloak debate. You could easily say this on the other thread you made. Like I said, just because you change words around doesnt make it different