<p>I just read this now and I've had some thoughts on my mind since Book 2 and, though it does not apply exactly, I feel this is a good place to structure it since I can use some nice parallelism here: You know when Korra tried to get Raiko to send the United Forces to support the Southern Water Tribe in defeating Unalaq, aka that guy that turned into the Dark Avatar and almost destroyed the whole world, or when Korra attempted to find other ways of support against Unalaq, only to be stopped by Mako, who was too busy focusing on Varrick aka that guy who turned out to not really do much other than try to cause a war against the NWT lead by Unalaq, (again) that guy who was the real villain of the series. Basically, what I'm saying is not that Varrick is good (Varrick = bad guy, check) but the real villain of the series was undoubtedly Unalaq, whom Korra had been trying to stop without much help other than her father. Mako spent all of his time trying to stop Varrick and, honestly, what is the worst thing Varrick did (not rhetorical)? Now compare that to trying to bring about 10,000 years of darkness. I do not blame Mako for going after Varrick, but when everything is confusing and there is a lot of uncertainty about something, that is when the Avatar has the responsibility to step in and decide what to do. There have been too many claims that Korra was wrong and Mako was right all along because Varrick was actually bad, even though Unalaq was the one who needed to be stopped (to avoid misunderstandings: other reasons for why Mako was right may be accepted, but not being wrong does not mean you are right). Imo there is way too much Korra-hate inside and outside of the show. People continue to treat Korra like a normal person, whose opinion matters just as much as Mako's or any other person's (Mako actually does have some excuse, because she was his girlfriend, which makes her seem like an average person, hence why I loath Raiko and only dislike Mako). Sorry, but that's not true. Everyone seems to forget the original series while watching LoK because of Korra's abrasiveness; when a new character was introduced in ATLA, he/she was seen as evil if he/she was against the Avatar e.g. Chin, Sozin, Azula and seen as good if he/she was in favor of the Avatar, regardless of any other feature (feel free to point out exceptions). Can Aang be wrong? Yes. Can Korra be wrong? Yes. But all things considered the Avatar's word should be taken above that of anyone who has not lived dozens of lifetimes.
</p><p>Sorry it's long and biased (refer to profile picture), but I am prepared for a lot of controversial feedback.
</p>