Ultimately, it is the player who has to decide which side is right. The Imperials argue that the Concordat was necessary to end a previous war with the Thalmor and protect all of Tamriel, to include Skyrim, from destruction.

The Stormcloaks cite the White-Gold Concordat, a peace treaty that banned their main religion, as an infringement of Nord rights and the casus belli. Some context: Ulfric Stormcloak, claiming to be the true High-King of Skyrim, leads an alliance of Nords (the native race of Skyrim) in a war of independence against the Septim Empire. This includes the Skyrim Civil War, also known as the Stormcloak Rebellion, and the element of choice that players are allowed in this conflict provokes some interesting questions about players and their political preferences. Along the way, however, we find that there are many detailed side quests, almost as detailed as the main plot. In the 2011 Bethesda game The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, we take on the role of the Dovahkiin (the Dragonborn), in order to save the land of Skyrim from an apocalypse at the hands of Alduin, the World-Eater.

Jarl Ulfric led a nativist rebellion against the Empire does that say something about his supporters? ( Source)