Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 LordofHats wrote:
And that's not even mentioning the implications that Ulfric is some kind of Thalmor sleeper agent.

Keep in mind, that's based on the typical arrogant viewpoint of the Thalmor, who believe they are invincible and in control over everything. That viewpoint is the basis for defeatism in the Empire, with some spineless politicos seeing every Thalmor defeat as just another step towards their ultimate goal in some long game (e.g., the defense of Hammerfall). The Thalmor are no more invincible than their Ayleid forbears. They used Ulfric; and then Ulfric used them.

 Manchu wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
And that's not even mentioning the implications that Ulfric is some kind of Thalmor sleeper agent.

Keep in mind, that's based on the typical arrogant viewpoint of the Thalmor, who believe they are invincible and in control over everything. That viewpoint is the basis for defeatism in the Empire, with some spineless politicos seeing every Thalmor defeat as just another step towards their ultimate goal in some long game (e.g., the defense of Hammerfall). The Thalmor are no more invincible than their Ayleid forbears. They used Ulfric; and then Ulfric used them.

Yeah and my point I guess is that this is what makes Ulfric bad ass. He could be a racist douche, but the same set of facts could support him as an idealist trapped in the realities of the world around him. Or maybe he's just a pragmatist doing what he has to do to get his job done, walking the line of light and dark.

That ambiguity is why I love his character. I don't think Skyrim ever really gives us enough to say with absolute certainty what the truth of Ulfric Stormcloak really is.

 Troike wrote:
"Other people were doing it" is not really a justification for the Nordic abuse of the Dark Elves in Windhelm. We know that Tamriel can do better, we've seen the Empire's tolerance towards other races.

Not really. Andel Indarys was a member of House Hlaalu, which traitorously (from more traditional viewpoints) opened the doors of Morrowind to the Empire. His appointment as Count of Cheydinhal likely had a lot to do with that (just as Maven Black-Briar can finagle her way into becoming jarl of Riften). He was also the only non-Nibenese count, at least in that time period. And, as LoH already mentioned, prejudice against Khajit, Argonians, and Orsimer was common in Cyrodiil.

Again, I'm not dealing with legitimization or justification. The point is, the Stormcloaks are not clearly any more racist than any other important political group in Skyrim -- but they are obviously less racist than the Dunmer Houses and the Thalmor.

 LordofHats wrote:
That ambiguity is why I love his character. I don't think Skyrim ever really gives us enough to say with absolute certainty what the truth of Ulfric Stormcloak really is.

Agreed and also agreed on the matter, as you said, of this being a masterful portrayal. In one play through, you can rail against the racist, regicidal would-be tyrant of Windhelm. In the next playthrough you can loyally serve this great man of far-reaching vision who may be Tamriel's only hope against the genocidal Thalmor.

 LordofHats wrote:
The only thing unfair about the fight is that Toryigg never stood a chance at winning (but Ulfric clearly knew this)

Indeed. It would have been easy enough for him to fight honourably and to not use his Shouts, but he didn't. Rather than diplomacy with a ruler who was supposedly sympathetic to his views, he preferred to just go kill and the man.

 LordofHats wrote:
Oh it goes deeper than that. Some of the Thalmor NPC's (the Embassy and the one in Markarth I think) if you ask them about Ulfric kind of play it as though Ulfric is a puppet tied to their strings. It's never overtly stated but there are lines in the game to the effect that Ulfric is unwittingly acting at the behest of the Thalmor to further weaken the Empire. It can be read as Ulfric just being a pawn on the game board who came about by convenience or as something more sinister.

Eh, I'd interpret that as them having been responsible for releasing Ulfric and thus making him an active drain on the Empire. Certainly, Stormcloak troops have no qualms about killing Thalmor Justiciars on sight.

 LordofHats wrote:
Hammerfell is at war with the Thalmor. They signed the treaty but there are overt resistance movements in Hammerfell and while the conflict has lapsed into a sort of Cold War during the events of Skyrim, its obvious that Hammerfell is ready to start a fight. If anything, Skyrim breaking from the Empire could cause mass uprising in Hammerfell and Elsywer and Ulfric could just say he's doing the Empire's job because the Empire won't. Nothing stops the provinces from forming an alliance against the Thalmor. Though undoubtedly the Empire would be more organized but the Empire doesn't inspire much confidence that they're really moving to solve this crisis.

Sure, but they wouldn't be working together. A Stormcloak-led Skyrim would certainly not be happy about working alongside the Empire, whereas an Empire-led Skyrim would mean a united front against the Thalmor. Also, pretty sure that Elsywer is still fairly loyal to the Thalmor, since they think that the Thalmor saved the moons for them. Valenwood on the other hand is known to have a resistance.

Oh no. Elsywer more than Valenwood or the Summerset Isle is pretty pissed (from what we can tell anyway). The Thalmor played some dirty tricks to annex Elsywer without a fight and the Khajit do not appreciate it. They aren't currently engaged in rebellion or even resistance like Valenwood or Hammerfell but the Thalmor wore out their welcome pretty quick.

The Thalmor is fighting and winning an ongoing psychological war with the Empire in Cyrodiil -- but it is losing that war, as surely as it is losing the physical fight on all fronts, in Hammerfell and Skyrim. Toryigg, like Titus Mede II, was beginning to bend under Thalmor propaganda -- and Ulfric saw Toryigg's weakness just as he saw Igmund bow to the Thalmor in the wake of the Markarth Incident.

 Manchu wrote:
Not really. Andel Indarys was a member of House Hlaalu, which traitorously (from more traditional viewpoints) opened the doors of Morrowind to the Empire. His appointment as Count of Cheydinhal likely had a lot to do with that (just as Maven Black-Briar can finagle her way into becoming jarl of Riften). He was also the only non-Nibenese count, at least in that time period. And, as LoH already mentioned, prejudice against Khajit, Argonians, and Orsimer was common in Cyrodiil.

And the Empire is still far better at tolerance than the Stormcloaks. And really, do you think that a Dunmer from any other house would want to be a ruler in Cyrodiil? Of course Count Indarys is a Hlaalu, they've always been reputed for being willing to work with other races. And regarding the racism towards Khajit, Argonians, and Orsimer, isn't that usually from other races? In the Imperial city alone, we see all of those races in ordinary, if not prominent statuses.

You keep pointing to the actions of others to justify Nord/Stormcloak racism, and I just can't accept that as valid. We've seen that it can be better than what happens in Windhelm. Hell, all it takes is a Jarl who gives a crap about non-Nords to improve the situation in Windhelm.

 Troike wrote:
In the Imperial city alone, we see all of those races in ordinary, if not prominent statuses.

We also see a prominent Argonian insulted for being an Argonian cause he must have cheated his way to fame and people calling a Wood Elf shop keep a typical sneaky elf (something that that effect anyway, though they were kind of right). Most high profile citizens are still Imperial with their servants/cronies rather regularly being Argonian or Orc. Being an Argonian might be slightly better in Cyrodill but that's not much of a consolation cause you're still probably on the bottom of the social later.

As a cosmopolitan center, it is typical for the Imperial capital to be more tolerant than the far flung reaches where the population is less diverse and the races have less interaction with one another, but even in the Imperial City we get a healthy does of underlying racism and of course all those off handed comments about other races rather commonly said by NPC's throughout the last three Elder Scrolls games.

You'd be surprised how effectively Elder Scrolls mimics history (for a video game that is).

 Manchu wrote:
The Thalmor is fighting and winning an ongoing psychological war with the Empire in Cyrodiil -- but it is losing that war, as surely as it is losing the physical fight on all fronts, in Hammerfell and Skyrim. Toryigg, like Titus Mede II, was beginning to bend under Thalmor propaganda -- and Ulfric saw Toryigg's weakness just as he saw Igmund bow to the Thalmor in the wake of the Markarth Incident.

Well. whether or not the Empire loses the fight in Skyrim is entirely up to the player...

And Titus Mede II hardly bent under Thalmor propaganda. He signed the White-Gold concordant because he knew that the Empire was badly worn out, and needed to recover before fighting again. It was a practical move, not an example of bending to Thalmor propaganda. I don't doubt that he (or his successor, if certain things happened...) will hesitate to rip up the Concordant once the Empire is ready to fight the Thalmor.

Fact is, you don't know what things are like in Cyrodiil since the Battle of the Red Ring. I doubt Altmer are very welcome after the atrocities committed in the Imperial City by the Aldmeri forces. It's nothing new. Since the beginning of recorded history, the mer have made conflict a matter of race and they continue doing right into the Fourth Era. The Dunmer of Windhelm are reaping what their own history has sewn. Yes, it is unfair for the individuals who had no personal part in the enslavement of other races and development of an arch-xenophobic culture. What you cannot pretend, however, is that the Stormcloaks are uniquely or arbitrarily racist.

 LordofHats wrote:
We also see a prominent Argonian insulted for being an Argonian cause he must have cheated his way to fame and people calling a Wood Elf shop keep a typical sneaky elf (something that that effect anyway, though they were kind of right). Most high profile citizens are still Imperial with their servants/cronies rather regularly being Argonian or Orc. Being an Argonian might be slightly better in Cyrodill but that's not much of a consolation cause you're still probably on the bottom of the social later.

As a cosmopolitan center, it is typical for the Imperial capital to be more tolerant than the far flung reaches where the population is less diverse and the races have less interaction with one another, but even in the Imperial City we get a healthy does of underlying racism and of course all those off handed comments about other races rather commonly said by NPC's throughout the last three Elder Scrolls games.

True, but other races are also perfectly able to climb to prominent positions. While underlying racism does inevitably exist, it's still miles better than what the Stormcloak mindset. Also, don't think that Glarthir is racially abused once he stops being detrimental to the other businesses. Don't remember who the prominent Argonian is, though. It's not Gin-Wulm, is it?

 Troike wrote:
It was a practical move, not an example of bending to Thalmor propaganda.

And yet, as part of his "practical" move, Thalmor agents legally march up and down the Skyrim countryside violently persecuting the worship of Talos. Is that what you call sovereignty? It's hardly practical, considering it caused civil war in Skyrim. The Emperor made a major miscalculation for no apparent reason.

 Manchu wrote:
Fact is, you don't know what things are like in Cyrodiil since the Battle of the Red Ring. I doubt Altmer are very welcome after the atrocities committed in the Imperial City by the Aldmeri forces.

http://uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Legate_Fasendil

 Manchu wrote:
What you cannot pretend, however, is that the Stormcloaks are uniquely or arbitrarily racist.

I never said that they were unique or arbitrary in their racism, just that their treatment of the Dark Elves in Windhelm is wholly wrong. Which is certainly is.

Fasendil has nothing to do with conditions in Cyrodiil.

As to "wholly wrong" -- it seems you're applying real values to this fantasy world.

 Manchu wrote:

 Troike wrote:
It was a practical move, not an example of bending to Thalmor propaganda.

And yet, as part of his "practical" move, Thalmor agents legally march up and down the Skyrim countryside violently persecuting the worship of Talos. Is that what you call sovereignty? It's hardly practical, considering it caused civil war in Skyrim. The Emperor made a major miscalculation for no apparent reason.

Actually, the civil war was a result of the Markarth incident.

http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Markarth_Incident

Before that, the Empire was still, presumably, in good control of Skyrim. It wasn't a "major miscalculation", just a unlikable term that he had to accept, in order to end the war.

Read that article on the Markarth Incident.

 Manchu wrote:
Fasendil has nothing to do with conditions in Cyrodiil.

Sure he does. It shows that the Empire is willing to let its Legion be led by an Altmer. If High Elves were that hated, then they would obviously be very unwilling to do this.

 Manchu wrote:
As to "wholly wrong" -- it seems you're applying real values to this fantasy world.

Doesn't really disprove anything I've said. Why is Nord racism against others partially legitimised because other racism has occurred in Tamriel? We can quite clearly see that Tamriel can do better than overt racism against minorities, and Brunwulf Free-Winter as Jarl shows that Windhelm specifically can do better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
Read that article on the Markarth Incident.

?

Elaborate, this doesn't particularly add anything.

Fasendil was stationed in Hammerfall, not Cyrodiil. His experience tells us nothing about conditions in Cyrodiil.

I wish you would stop using the world "legitimise" as that is nothing to do with any point I've made. The correct word is "contextualize." Brunwulf has time to deal with Windhelm's ethnic anxieties because he has nothing else to do; and apparently little vision when it comes to high level politics.

You say the civil war in Skyrim was started by the Markarth Incident and not the prohibition against worshipping Talos in the White Gold Concordat. That is an oxymoronic position, hence my suggestion that you read the article.

 Manchu wrote:

 Troike wrote:
It was a practical move, not an example of bending to Thalmor propaganda.

And yet, as part of his "practical" move, Thalmor agents legally march up and down the Skyrim countryside violently persecuting the worship of Talos. Is that what you call sovereignty? It's hardly practical, considering it caused civil war in Skyrim. The Emperor made a major miscalculation for no apparent reason.

The other option was to face another war.


Anyways, I like the Thalmor. They're like Umaril the Unfeathered and his Aurorans.
I loved those. Brutal, arrogant, and rather damn evil. I like.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
Fasendil was stationed in Hammerfall, not Cyrodiil. His experience tells us nothing about conditions in Cyrodiil.

I wish you would stop using the world "legitimise" as that is nothing to do with any point I've made. The correct word is "contextualize." Brunwulf has time to deal with Windhelm's ethnic anxieties because he has nothing else to do; and apparently little vision when it comes to high level politics.

You say the civil war in Skyrim was started by the Markarth Incident and not the prohibition against worshipping Talos in the White Gold Concordat. That is an oxymoronic position, hence my suggestion that you read the article.

When Markarth followed laws on Talos worshipping, Ulfric began ti complain about it. Until then, there were no Thalmor anywhere in Skyrim. After his complaining, there were. That's when the enforcement of the Talos ban began.

It's stated in-game by the blacksmith of Riverwood.

The Markarth incident is significant because it explains both how the Thalmor became an Inquisition and how Ulfric developed his ultimate outlook on the Empire.

He went to Markarth to drive out the Reachmen who had taken over the city and was promised by an Imperial official that once this was done he and his men would have free Worship of Talos. They took the city and started their worship anew and the Thalmor stepped in, starting the Thalmor presence in Skyrim. Ulfric looked to the Empire to support him and fulfill the promise they made, but unfortunately the official had neither the authority or intention to keep that promise. So Ulfric decided the Empire was finished not just because they stabbed him in the back but because they completely cowtowed to the Thalmor.

The White-Gold Concordant, and the both legal passing and enforcement of the Talos ban by the Thalmor with de facto approval of the Empire, is inextricably connected to the Markarth Incident and the Stormcloak Rebellion. Ulfric can hardly be blamed on this front for being rather PO'd. The Empire has surrendered its sovereignty as a state to what should effectively be one of its clients. Instead the client has taken over the business and is telling everyone else what to do. That's a rather open weakening of power for the Empire.

 thenoobbomb wrote:
The other option was to face another war.

Which neither side could have afforded. The Emperor's failure was twofold: he underestimated what the Thalmor aimed to accomplish with the ban on Talos worship and he underestimated what Talos worship could mean to Skyrim.

 thenoobbomb wrote:
It's stated in-game by the blacksmith of Riverwood.

Alvor supports the Empire and his nephew is an Imperial soldier -- remember, the one who was a little sad about executing you for no reason at the beginning? I'm not saying Alvor is a liar; I don't have the information to back that up. All I know is, he has an anti-Stormcloak perspective.

The perspectives in the game play a pretty big roll. You'll see NPC's who talk about how Ulfric doesn't protect non-Nord settlements, but no one else ever mentions it. And well, there aren't many non-Nord settlements on the game map making the statement a little bizarre (in the larger game). The major non-Nord settlements are Orc camps and they don't look like they need or want any help from Ulfric.

There's a lot of POV pushing on both sides with little actual evidence for many of the claims in the game as part of the developers to make both sides sympathetic.

 LordofHats wrote:
That's a rather open weakening of power for the Empire.

Exactly. This is why I conclude that the Thalmor is waging a successful psychological campaign against the Empire, whether against Titus Medes II personally or the Elder Council matters little I suppose.

Ulfric's real ambiguity lies not so much in his "racism" but in his killing of Torygg. Did he truly think the High King too weak to claim Skyrim's independence or did he simply crave Torygg's crown? I think the answer has to be a bit of both.

 Manchu wrote:


Ulfric's real ambiguity lies not so much in his "racism" but in his killing of Torygg. Did he truly think the High King too weak to claim Skyrim's independence or did he simply crave Torygg's crown? I think the answer has to be a bit of both.

Personally I get the sense Ulfric didn't know Torygg very well. Torygg himself seems to have been very wary and cautious of the Thalmor and of course couldn't allow himself to be seen as associating with a radical like Ulfric.

I don't think Ulfric knew this but also don't think it matter. Ulfric killed Torygg to achieve two things imo. 1, to show how weak the High King was and by extension how weak Skyrim and the Empire had become. 2, to clear the way for his Rebellion. Killing Torygg was his rallying cry and his declaration of war.

Personally, I never got the sense that Ulfric had anything against Torygg in particular.

Me either. But I get the definite sense that Ulfric believes he alone can bear the crown these days. I think the design and background of Windhelm subtly pushes that angle. He would not be content to follow someone else, even someone with his same political outlook.

My own opinion is that Ulfric did not know Torygg but was pretty sure he'd just grow up into a man like Balgruf or worse. Balgruf is the only jarl in Skyrim who even approaches the cunning of Ulfric. But Balgruf's cunning is a rather craven thing.

I openly admit to being baffled that for a game that achieves a level of political realism uncommon in games, Skyrim has a lot of dense to incompetent guys in charge (but then that isn't that far from the truth either)

In part though my own favor for Ulfric is probably a mirror of my view that Tullius is a rather bland fellow. Ulfric has both mystery and charm that makes following his character exciting. Tullius is... Tullius.

 Manchu wrote:
This is why I conclude that the Thalmor is waging a successful psychological campaign against the Empire, whether against Titus Medes II personally or the Elder Council matters little I suppose.

Eh, not really. Again, that was a tactical move. The Empire was exhausted by that point in the war, and would very likely had broken had they been pushed to fight further. Mede is playing a long game. Sign the treaty now, rebuild power, deal with the Thalmor once the Empire is healthy again.

 Manchu wrote:
Fasendil was stationed in Hammerfall, not Cyrodiil. His experience tells us nothing about conditions in Cyrodiil.

It tells us that the Empire, one of its most prominent generals, and presumably the troops under him, have no problem letting an Altmer be a Legate.

 Manchu wrote:
I wish you would stop using the world "legitimise" as that is nothing to do with any point I've made. The correct word is "contextualize." Brunwulf has time to deal with Windhelm's ethnic anxieties because he has nothing else to do; and apparently little vision when it comes to high level politics.

Basically, I said that what the treatment of the Dark Elves in Windhelm was bad. You replied with your posts about racism in other parts of Tamriel. I acknowledged that racism existed in Tamriel, but said that the racism in Windhelm was still wrong. You replied to that with more posts about the other examples of racism, as if this to some extent justified the treatment of the Dark Elves.

Yes, I understand that there's important historical factors there, but it's still wrong, and could be much better.

 Manchu wrote:
You say the civil war in Skyrim was started by the Markarth Incident and not the prohibition against worshipping Talos in the White Gold Concordat. That is an oxymoronic position, hence my suggestion that you read the article.

The Markarth incident was quite clearly the trigger. Was there a civil war before that? Nah.

It's not justification but context. We can look back at the Roman Empire and see some pretty bad racism but seeing as how everyone in 100 AD was racist, it's not a very useful criticism. Same thing with the Nords. Every culture on Tamriel is racist and nationalist in some way. Pointing out that the Stormcloaks are racist nationalists isn't wrong so much as irrelevant because everyone else is too.

Errr.. Wrong on the Roman Empire at least. They were pretty much one of the least racist out of all the states back then, I'll let this describe it though.

But despite Hollywood's near-complete refusal to acknowledge it, ancient Rome was the original melting pot. See, back then, color and prejudice weren't linked -- unlike racism and stupidity today. Rome even had at least two African emperors, Severus and Macrinus. Rome was unique in the ancient world for its inclusive citizenship. In the past, a city-state like Sparta might have conquered a people and enslaved or slaughtered them all. Rome, on the other hand, blew ancient people's minds by assimilating or even naturalizing the conquered. The ancient Romans didn't even force conquered peoples to give up their own languages or customs.

The important thing for the Romans was that people followed the law, paid taxes, and, oh yeah, fought in the Roman army. The Romans were no dummies: Little old Rome was never going to be able to populate the world it conquered, let alone defend it, so absorbing other peoples like a giant legionary sponge was the only way to keep enough bodies in the military and on its farms. Rome enrolled northwest Africans, Moors, Gauls, Celts, Jews -- pretty much anyone who could swing a sword or throw a spear -- which is how an Ethiopian soldier could find himself fighting in Britain (maybe that's why every film Roman speaks with a British accent).

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/article_20536_5-ridiculous-lies-you-believe-about-ancient-civilizations.html#ixzz2b8bXaD3c

 Troike wrote:

Eh, not really. Again, that was a tactical move. The Empire was exhausted by that point in the war, and would very likely had broken had they been pushed to fight further. Mede is playing a long game. Sign the treaty now, rebuild power, deal with the Thalmor once the Empire is healthy again.

That is the point. The Empire was exhausted because it's become to weak to keep the Thalmor in check. This isn't an attack on the Empire's decision but rather pointing out the reality of why the Empire had to make it.

Basically, I said that what the treatment of the Dark Elves in Windhelm was bad. You replied with your posts about racism in other parts of Tamriel. I acknowledged that racism existed in Tamriel, but said that the racism in Windhelm was still wrong. You replied to that with more posts about the other examples of racism, as if this to some extent justified the treatment of the Dark Elves.

Yes, I understand that there's important historical factors there, but it's still wrong, and could be much better.

Well we took you as saying you chose to support the Empire over the Stormcloaks because the Stormcloaks are racist. Fact is that the Empire is also racist. It's not a justification of the Stormcloaks racism its pointing out that their racism isn't a very good reason to support someone else. Granted within only the context of Skyrim the Legion isn't particularly racist. Not in the same way the Stormcloaks are.

The Markarth incident was quite clearly the trigger. Was there a civil war before that? Nah.

Machu was arguing that the banning of Talos Worship led to the Civil War and it did because the ban is a major part of the Markarth Incident. Wars don't spring from any single trigger but from multiple triggers. The Markarth Incident is but one link in the chain.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
But despite Hollywood's near-complete refusal to acknowledge it, ancient Rome was the original melting pot. See, back then, color and prejudice weren't linked -- unlike racism and stupidity today. Rome even had at least two African emperors, Severus and Macrinus. Rome was unique in the ancient world for its inclusive citizenship. In the past, a city-state like Sparta might have conquered a people and enslaved or slaughtered them all. Rome, on the other hand, blew ancient people's minds by assimilating or even naturalizing the conquered. The ancient Romans didn't even force conquered peoples to give up their own languages or customs.

The important thing for the Romans was that people followed the law, paid taxes, and, oh yeah, fought in the Roman army. The Romans were no dummies: Little old Rome was never going to be able to populate the world it conquered, let alone defend it, so absorbing other peoples like a giant legionary sponge was the only way to keep enough bodies in the military and on its farms. Rome enrolled northwest Africans, Moors, Gauls, Celts, Jews -- pretty much anyone who could swing a sword or throw a spear -- which is how an Ethiopian soldier could find himself fighting in Britain (maybe that's why every film Roman speaks with a British accent).

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/article_20536_5-ridiculous-lies-you-believe-about-ancient-civilizations.html#ixzz2b8bXaD3c

 LordofHats wrote:

That is the point. The Empire was exhausted because it's become to weak to keep the Thalmor in check. This isn't an attack on the Empire's decision but rather pointing out the reality of why the Empire had to make it.

Right, but the whole point in signing it was to rebuild so that they were strong enough to beat the Thalmor. Again, Mede is playing a long game. They won't stay weak forever.

 LordofHats wrote:
Well we took you as saying you chose to support the Empire over the Stormcloaks because the Stormcloaks are racist.

That's one of my reasons, yes.

 LordofHats wrote:
Fact is that the Empire is also racist.

Not really. All that's been posted here is evidence of Imperial citizens being racist, while the Legion and Imperial government are most certainly not. The Stormcloak soldiers meanwhile waltz around quite openly abusing non-Nords.

 LordofHats wrote:
It's not a justification of the Stormcloaks racism its pointing out that their racism isn't a very good reason to support someone else.

Sure it is. Racism? Never seems to work out too well in the end. The alternative choice, meanwhile, has a reputation for tolerating other races. Long-term, the Imperials are a far better cultural influence.

 LordofHats wrote:
Machu was arguing that the banning of Talos Worship led to the Civil War and it did because the ban is a major part of the Markarth Incident. Wars don't spring from any single trigger but from multiple triggers. The Markarth Incident is but one link in the chain.

Before the Markarth incident, things were calm. Civil war was certainly not brewing. After the Markarth incident happened, a charismatic, popular leader began inciting rebellion and succeeded.

To take a historian's view, when examining historical events like this factors leading to an event are classed as long-term causes, short-term causes and triggers. The banning of Talos worship is definetely a short-term cause. On its own, however, it did not cause Ulfric to begin pushing for open rebellion against the Empire. The Markarth incident, the trigger, is what did that.