![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I get that most people like Aragorn a lot more than I do (I think he's interesting but ... complicated in ways that are generally overlooked), but the posts about how he's not really creating an imperial state because becoming "overlord" of Mordor's allies is a) right and just or b) impossible are so ?????
And when Tolkien says Fourth Age Gondor became an imperial power he didn't really mean that, and the line about how all of Mordor's allies were slain or subjugated has nothing to do with imperialism—because, see, they were BAD PEOPLE, or, alternately, Gondor is just a small(??) weak country without the power to do what LOTR explicitly says it did, and therefore Aragorn's reign is actually unproblematic.
Like, I get going "that's a dumbass decision and I'm choosing to ignore it," but arguing that it's not there? No.
And when Tolkien says Fourth Age Gondor became an imperial power he didn't really mean that, and the line about how all of Mordor's allies were slain or subjugated has nothing to do with imperialism—because, see, they were BAD PEOPLE, or, alternately, Gondor is just a small(??) weak country without the power to do what LOTR explicitly says it did, and therefore Aragorn's reign is actually unproblematic.
Like, I get going "that's a dumbass decision and I'm choosing to ignore it," but arguing that it's not there? No.