Dragaera

Idle Speculation (SPOILERS)

Fri Oct 1 12:19:07 PDT 2004

--- S SHafer <shafedog205555-brustfan at yahoo.com> wrote:

> They've changed in many ways, but to move from
> feudalism to socialism, I feel, isn't possible without
> the consent of the Cycle, if not the Noble Houses
> themselves. And can you see Dragons, Dzur, Athyra, or
> Phoenix allowing their aristocracy to be pushed aside
> in favor of a total Teckla revolt, destroying the
> Cycle itself? I don't think so. The
> Houses allow the Teckla to have their little Republic
> every Cycle because they know it'll last, at most,
> 17^3 years before the Cycle pushes them aside for the
> next House in line. The brand of feudalism may change,
> but it's still feudalism.
> 
> What Kelly wanted was the destruction of the Cycle...

What he wanted is the dictatorship of the proletariat,
by any means necessary.  I expect he was convinced that this
was inevitable.  Either the Cycle would permit it or it
would be destroyed--both fine with him.

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Kelly an Easterner
> and not a Teckla.  The revolt in Adril...

ankha...

> , involving
> Vlad's wife (also an Easterner, no?), was not a move
> towards the Teckla Republic, but a move by Easterners
> who, being outside the cycle, want a bigger role in
> governing the empire.  Kelly and his followers would
> not even be involved in the Teckla Republic and
> Verra's comments about Kelly's ideas do not really apply.

At least one of Kelly's people, Paresh, is a Teckla, and
if I remember Phoenix correctly, he effectively rouses
the Teckla rabble.

There can certainly be a Teckla Republic without Kelly's
movement.  But he intends to make sure that, if the Cycle
gets to that point again, his movement will be involved.

I'm not sure what you mean Verra's comments don't apply to.

Jerry Friedman


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com