I'm saying that your focus is almost exclusively political, which accounts for only a small portion of a person's ideas and moral compass.
Question... as a conservative, would you ever expect me to buy a home I do not live in or a car that I do not drive to help someone else?
Political views and personal moral or ethical goals are not necessarily the same. What I believe is a good governmental structure is not necessarily an indicator as to how I will choose to behave, personally. In many cases, it is almost the opposite - as the things I see the government needing to be deprived the power to do, I see as being the responsibility of the individuals. The government isn't supposed to be charitable with money it can legally steal from people. I am supposed to be charitable with money, time, skills, etc that I have earned and can spend accordingly.
That wasn't exactly what I meant.
One of the girls I had a very deep connection with when I was younger, and may even still have (we will see), had rather passionate differences in opinion with me. She and I were both fairly politically-minded, and held very strong views on such things. Yet, she was always very committed to the idea of truth. What we really enjoyed seeing was both each other's passion for something, and how we could interpret the meaning of the same or similar truths very differently. And I thought it was adorable how she could get worked up over me still not agreeing with her.
Even though this was back during the days of dial-up, we raved about each other to our families. My mom knew who she was, her mom knew who I was (actually posited that I was a god - though within a wiccan context). Her sister teased her about our sort of e-romance thing that we had going on. Good times. We lost touch with each other after she had to move over some family issues and fell into hard economic times. It's kind of crazy to think that it was literally about half my life ago. She called, once - right before they were going to move. She was so nervous that she had her sister call. Because of the time difference, though, I was already asleep and my mom answered the phone.
After that, it was really only glancing contact over the years. An e-mail here, an instant message there. Even though we often came out on different sides of a subject - we almost always valued and treasured the same things, it seemed. Bringing up those memories evokes a sort of child-like awe and giddy-ness that I largely walled off. A sort of true self that I rarely allow to be seen, since. The deafening silence between us over the years is rather simple to explain - "that's childish." We are adults, now, and expected to do adult things. Fawning over a person on the other side of the world, tracking down a young love with the hope that the feelings you hold are reflected in them... nonsense. Aint nobody got time for that. They moved on and so should you.
... What were we talking about, again?
The Hidden Hand of the Signature. Watch to the end. This message will self-destruct in 3 days.
I jest. Kind of.
Anyway ... it's rather difficult to translate Naruto politics to historical politics. Stalinism largely rose up out of Leninism, which arose from the Bolshevik revolution and the ideals of Marxism on the impact of industrialization on society/economics. A lot of Stalin's views simply don't make sense within the Naruto universe as the economic and political structure of Naruto is so abstract, as are many of the character views within Naruto.
It's difficult to say there are historical figures similar to Madara. One could argue Oda Nobunaga, in some ways, but that is actually a little closer to Pain or Sasuke's final stance before VOTE2 - simply being a terror to terror. Fight darkness by making the darkness fear itself. Which... wasn't really what Madara settled on, or how he thought when he was younger. If anything, Madara was simply defined by his family lineage and overall strength in combat. He was effectively defined by creating a foil for Hashirama as a sort of distant echo of Sasuke. His motivations and aspirations were to see the fighting end, and his frustration with the fighting not ending as well as it should have, and his belief that the Uchiha were being sidelined.
Beyond that, he really has very little political definition... even in simple ideology of whether he was more of a collectivist or an individualist. For example, if he was the Hokage, would he expect the other families to set aside their own personal views of their family and unite under his directives? Or would he be more in favor of councils and the ability for clans to manage their own affairs? I get the sense that he would actually have a bit of a double-standard by nature, favoring the Uchiha being able to do their own thing when he is not the Hokage, and then expecting every other clan to step in line with his guidance after he becomes Hokage.
Since Madara is largely defined by his conflicts with Hashirama and Tobirama, a person who potentially intervenes in those disputes and helps Madara resolve to any other action than his canon ones greatly alters how his character develops within the story and how we see Madara in general. A scenario where Madara does not fight Hashirama to the death means that Tobidara either never becomes Hokage, or does so much later ... if at all. A scenario where the Uchiha are never made to feel as sidelined as they were has the potential to avoid the fight between him and Hashirama in the first place.
So... how would Madara interact with someone who held a Stalinist and Suffraggette view? Tobirama seemed to hold views and patterns of behavior very similar to Stalin. Stalin espoused the State/Nation over the individual or the family.... hard core, at that, too. To a younger Madara who was being made subject to that view of a State that was anything other than Uchiha... he would probably be rather hostile to it. It would take some rather delicate positioning on her part to get Madara to agree to the notion she was expressing a fair view. If anything - he really wouldn't want much to do with the politics, and would probably 'let that be her thing'... right up until he was unhappy with things.
Perhaps my 'old' self would agree... but who I really am disagrees with that quite passionately.
My parents loved each other. A lot. They would talk to each other for hours every night on the phone when my dad had to live apart from us for a job, for a while. My father
never spoke ill of my mother, even in jest. There were few things that got an immediate, aggressive reaction from my father than a slight against our mother. When it came to us kids, we were always given a very judicious process that sentenced us to spanking, grounding, or whatever. While they had their disagreements, they were never in front of us kids, and I never heard him raise his voice at her, ever. This is a man who had a temper as bad as mine and could utterly destroy things in a single stroke of rage (including a few people who found out that he could punch them through plate glass). When it came to our mother and us, he held nothing but compassion (well... frustration at times).
When I grew up and saw how other people's parents behaved, it blew my mind. Certainly, the way couples behave in TV dramas and books is absolutely disgusting to me. "Family Guy" - while I can see some of the humor in it, is nothing more than an insult to the concept propagated to poison the minds of entire generations.
While it's true that there can be many functional relationships that aren't violent, abusive, or toxic - this is the "I am a 50 year old man or 35 year old woman and have run out of time" solution to the problem of having no heirs. It's... sad and tragic that we would reduce our families and our homes to such a utilitarian degree. True - at least it isn't the vile sewer propagated by media... but it's still a massive step backward in my estimation.
I mean... it just sounds like you're creating a Fem-Inner-Madara. Anything Madara bites his tongue over, she stands up and gives voice to, like Inner Sakura. You're saying that she's her own person... but everything is through the frame of Madara's views of a political system that he really didn't want much to do with in the first place. She's more or less a sort of Greek Chorus.
Which is about all she can be if she can't actually change events. I can see the scenario, quite easily, where she starts going off on Tobirama while he is around, and he acts to squelch her simply because he doesn't want to see the argument. He doesn't want the fight - but she does. I've seen similar in other couples, or even platonic relationships. When the "fireballs" of the group start going off and striking up an argument the ones uncomfortable with conflict wish to avoid... they either end up attacking the fireballs, themselves - or flat-out abandoning the conversation and getting angry at the hot-heads for 'creating an argument.'
This girl lights up Tobirama only to have Madara storm away from the group, then tell her that she's not helping issues; that he doesn't need her to fight his battles, and that he doesn't need or want someone to create more conflict. Or... he tries to tell her to be quiet on the spot - and then she torches him, too.
She has to be a very combative personality where he has to be a very sympathetic personality... and the two are just not on the same wavelength. While Madara's fighting style may be very aggressive and overpowering, his actual presence works out to be more insular and reserved. He prefers to bite his tongue until a problem gets to a point where he's willing to blow up the planet to put an end to it, and he is very hard-headed about that way of living.
This really depends upon exactly how the scenario unfolds and how effective she is at talk-no-jutsu. Typically, attacking your partner's friend(s) in front of them is an invitation to fight your partner, as well. If I were to get a wife and then tell her that one of her friends is a scum-guzzling, tailpipe huffing, chalkboard screecher - right or wrong, then I am probably going to end up having two women trying to slap at me, even if my hypothetical wife would agree with me in private. It doesn't mean I can't do it... or that I wouldn't... but it's "cruising for a bruising" as they used to say.
If she were truly the more diplomatic type, then I would say that she would wait for a moment when the two men were apart from each other and then try to explain why one feels the way they do to the other, or to give a condemnation of their opinion/behavior. Unless Madara is the type who seeks validation from his partner if a dispute is unfolding between him and another. Some people are like that - they get irritated when their partner isn't acting as a proverbial Greek Chorus, but I don't really see that in Madara.
