Quote Originally Posted by Morty View Post
I'm trying to wrap my head around how you can look at a man who uses subterfuge to manoeuvre around scheming nobles in order to run an effective and prosperous nation and a man who runs a fascist police-state and orchestrates wars, and then call their approaches and motives similar.
The thing is, I'm looking at this from the perspective of a reader who hasn't, say, read the prequels or is aware of Word of God (who should in any case be showing, not just telling.) From that perspective, it's not particularly obvious that Shojo has made Azure City more anarchic or that Tarquin has made the western continent less pleasant. It's possible, but it's not actually demonstrated- the key evidence is either completely off-panel and off-record, or muddies the picture considerably (i.e, the behaviour of azurite nobles hardly being LN, the prior state of the western continent being less organised but also more violent.)

Tarquin, approaches: Subversion of justice, blackmail, manipulation, deceit, arbitrary imprisonment, use of violent force when people won't see it his way.
Tarquin, motives: Unite the continent and reduce long-term conflict and suffering.

Shojo, approaches: Subversion of justice, blackmail, manipulation, deceit, arbitrary imprisonment, use of violent force when people won't see it his way.
Shojo, motives: Unite azure city and reduce long-term conflict and suffering.

Now, Tarquin is, by all appearances, more extreme is his approach, but that's largely a difference of degree, not kind. Going by in-comic evidence, I'd have pegged Tarquin at somewhere between TN and NE, and Shojo at somewhere between TN and NG. These guys could productively swap notes, is what I'm saying.