The Perils of a Reluctant King

[Angel Eyes]

So Varys is saying that Jon would be a better ruler than Daenerys because he doesn't want the throne. Isn't there a problem with that since Robert Baratheon didn't want the throne and because he didn't want it he proceeded to run himself (and the country) into the ground? How is Jon any better than Robert for that? 

[Skills]

1 hour ago, Angel Eyes said:

So Varys is saying that Jon would be a better ruler than Daenerys because he doesn't want the throne. Isn't there a problem with that since Robert Baratheon didn't want the throne and because he didn't want it he proceeded to run himself (and the country) into the ground? How is Jon any better than Robert for that? 

Because Jon at least isn't a glutton, or an alcoholic,  or a whore-monger.

Robert was reluctant because he was lazy and didn't care. 

Jon is reluctant but he would care about trying to do a good job. In addition,  his reluctance would make him a more measured ruler.

[madhikun]

My problem with Jon being King (or the Starks in general) is that Starks are honorable, they are true to their word. Or they're supposed to be. Jon bent the knee to Danerys, and in doing so spoke on behalf of all the North. When Sansa broke her word on Jon Snow's parents she committed treason. If Jon becomes King it's because he submitted to what others told him to do which makes him no better than Ned Stark in terms of naivete but worse than Ned in the fact that he knows it is not honorable. 

[StoneColdJorahMormont]

1 hour ago, Angel Eyes said:

So Varys is saying that Jon would be a better ruler than Daenerys because he doesn't want the throne. Isn't there a problem with that since Robert Baratheon didn't want the throne and because he didn't want it he proceeded to run himself (and the country) into the ground? How is Jon any better than Robert for that? 

I think Jon's reluctance would be similar to Neds in that he doesn't want or feel worthy of the title but once in it would do the job to the best of his abilities and would be more than capable of the task

Where as Robert didn't want it nor did he have what it took to be a good ruler, it should have been Ned that took the throne at the end of the war.. but as it was Roberts rebellion...

[Flightless bird]

2 hours ago, Angel Eyes said:

So Varys is saying that Jon would be a better ruler than Daenerys because he doesn't want the throne. Isn't there a problem with that since Robert Baratheon didn't want the throne and because he didn't want it he proceeded to run himself (and the country) into the ground? How is Jon any better than Robert for that? 

He also said "he's a war hero, people follow him"....

I think he'd be a good king because, he risks all for his people/men... he didn't send anyone else to hardhome, he went himself... He didn't sent an envoy to treat with the dragon queen, he went himself... He would sacrifice himself for his people/country.., he puts his men and people as being above himself and would risk all to protect them. He doesn't see Power as being rich and worshipped and obeyed. He sees it as responsibiliy..

"He who passes the sentence, should wield the sword"... why, did Ned say this, why doesn't Danny and Sansa live up to this expectation... If Jon or Ned executed someone, they take the full responsibility and blame if the accused is innocent, no one else can be implicated or blamed for their actions, they alone carry the guilt of the action.  

[Eltharion21]

Jon did quit being Lord Commander of Night Watch, later he quit role of King in the North, who is to say he wouldn't quit again. He is also rather bad military commander, judge of character and  pet owner though he seems like nice person.

He would be certainly better than show version of Daenerys.

[lakin1013]

"It is a curious thing, Harry, but perhaps those who are best suited for power are those who have never sought it. Those who, like you, have leadership thrust upon them, and take up the mantle because they must, and find to their own surprise that they wear it well."

— Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

 

Socrates claims that the best rulers are reluctant to rule but do so out of necessity: they do not wish to be ruled by someone inferior (The Republic).

****************************************

 

Should Jon refuse to rule now, he would be unethical and a failure, a disappointment.  So, this decent guy has a decision to make: does he want to turn tail and run home, or will he accept the responsibility of his noble birth and step up.  As Sam fixed the vote at Castle Black, someone will suggest his name now.  He will do the same as at Castle Black - he will lead.  

 

Whether he is a success is up to him and what he has learned.  Tormund tells us the people will follow Jon.  Varys tells us that people like Jon and his bloodline would be perfect.  Tyrion tells us that Jon could be a better King than Dany.  Sansa, acting out of self-interest, of course, tells Tyrion that there is a better choice to Dany, meaning Jon.  Maester Aemon tells Jon to kill the boy and let the man be born.  Jon has the tools, the supporters and friends, and the best claim.  As a reader/viewer, I think Jon would be a successful ruler with the right advisors.  

 

 

 

 

[Angel Eyes]

13 hours ago, lakin1013 said:

"It is a curious thing, Harry, but perhaps those who are best suited for power are those who have never sought it. Those who, like you, have leadership thrust upon them, and take up the mantle because they must, and find to their own surprise that they wear it well."

— Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

 

Socrates claims that the best rulers are reluctant to rule but do so out of necessity: they do not wish to be ruled by someone inferior (The Republic).

****************************************

 

Should Jon refuse to rule now, he would be unethical and a failure, a disappointment.  So, this decent guy has a decision to make: does he want to turn tail and run home, or will he accept the responsibility of his noble birth and step up.  As Sam fixed the vote at Castle Black, someone will suggest his name now.  He will do the same as at Castle Black - he will lead.  

 

Whether he is a success is up to him and what he has learned.  Tormund tells us the people will follow Jon.  Varys tells us that people like Jon and his bloodline would be perfect.  Tyrion tells us that Jon could be a better King than Dany.  Sansa, acting out of self-interest, of course, tells Tyrion that there is a better choice to Dany, meaning Jon.  Maester Aemon tells Jon to kill the boy and let the man be born.  Jon has the tools, the supporters and friends, and the best claim.  As a reader/viewer, I think Jon would be a successful ruler with the right advisors.  

 

 

 

 

Which brings me back to my earlier point about Robert Baratheon not seeking power, having the crown thrust upon him, and failing in his duty as a ruler. How would Jon be any different from Robert?

[Ser Loras The Gay]

4 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

Which brings me back to my earlier point about Robert Baratheon not seeking power, having the crown thrust upon him, and failing in his duty as a ruler. How would Jon be any different from Robert?

Robert wanted to rule. But he wasn't fit for it. Why would he start a rebellion against the crown if his intentions weren't getting the throne at the end? He was a fiercy warrior and a natural leader but that doesn't make you a good ruler. That's only it. He didn't born and grown with the mindset of wanting the throne but after Rhaegar ran off with Lyanna and Aerys killed both Rickard and Brandon stark they wanted them out of the throne and consequently the crown.

[Bradam]

10 minutes ago, Ser Loras The Gay said:

Robert wanted to rule. But he wasn't fit for it. Why would he start a rebellion against the crown if his intentions weren't getting the throne at the end? He was a fiercy warrior and a natural leader but that doesn't make you a good ruler. That's only it. He didn't born and grown with the mindset of wanting the throne but after Rhaegar ran off with Lyanna and Aerys killed both Rickard and Brandon stark they wanted them out of the throne and consequently the crown.

Robert went to war because the Mad King called for his head.  He didn't really have much for options here.  Go die, or fight and maybe die.  

[lakin1013]

8 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

Which brings me back to my earlier point about Robert Baratheon not seeking power, having the crown thrust upon him, and failing in his duty as a ruler. How would Jon be any different from Robert?

How are Robert and Jon in any way similar?  Robert is a hard-drinking, hard-partying, loud dude, who cheats on his wife, almost weekly.  Somehow, Jon has remained truthful (Tyrion: couldn't you at least learn to lie?), honest (Dany to Sansa: your brother is true to his word) and a decent man (killing Mance out of mercy, for one example).

Could a reluctant ruler be awful at it?  Sure, and if I was a historian I could probably name several right off the bat.  But we have followed Jon and even at his most foolish, such as bringing the wildings in to Castle Black, we can see he meant well.  In most cases (not all) Jon acts from decent impulses.

Robert and Jon do not have much in common, except for both loving Ned.  I think Jon could be a good ruler.  He may not want it, but his basic character is reasonable enough for a ruler to lead the people, people who 'want' Jon to lead them.

[Ser Loras The Gay]

6 minutes ago, lakin1013 said:

How are Robert and Jon in any way similar?  Robert is a hard-drinking, hard-partying, loud dude, who cheats on his wife, almost weekly

Like ned said, he wasn't like that, he became like that because of his depression (yeah, he was depressed for losing the love of his life).

 

6 minutes ago, lakin1013 said:

Could a reluctant ruler be awful at it?  Sure, and if I was a historian I could probably name several right off the bat.  But we have followed Jon and even at his most foolish, such as bringing the wildings in to Castle Black, we can see he meant well.  In most cases (not all) Jon acts from decent impulses.

It was the writers fault. This line of logic has no basis on reality. Being reluctant has nothing to do with being a good ruler. What Varys should've said is something in these lines "Jon, think about everything you've done. You repeled the widlings as a leader, you have the charisma and leadership that inspires people to follow you despite being lowborn. You make people forget you're a bastard, imagine if people get to know you're actually a Targaryen son of a man who was loved in Westeros, you can be the ruler the Realm needs, you're humble, honored, and have people who deeply love you".

[btfu806]

18 hours ago, Angel Eyes said:

So Varys is saying that Jon would be a better ruler than Daenerys because he doesn't want the throne. Isn't there a problem with that since Robert Baratheon didn't want the throne and because he didn't want it he proceeded to run himself (and the country) into the ground? How is Jon any better than Robert for that? 

Was rule during Robert's reign really that bad though? I mean, yeah, he was a hot mess but the country seemed fine?

[Winter prince]

12 minutes ago, btfu806 said:

Was rule during Robert's reign really that bad though? I mean, yeah, he was a hot mess but the country seemed fine?

He put the kingdom in debt to the lannisters.  Jon Arryn did enough damage control to prevent too many issues though

[btfu806]

Just now, Winter prince said:

He put the kingdom in debt to the lannisters.  Jon Arryn did enough damage control to prevent too many issues though

Was the debt why he ended up marrying Cersei? I really need to reread these books it's been a little while.

[Winter prince]

Just now, btfu806 said:

Was the debt why he ended up marrying Cersei? I really need to reread these books it's been a little while.

No, the debt came later.  In the books it talked about them lowering taxes to appease lords that were still targ loyalists.  Cersei/Robert was a power marriage.  I think they lacked high born noble women since Catelyn and Ned got married. 

[btfu806]

1 minute ago, Winter prince said:

No, the debt came later.  In the books it talked about them lowering taxes to appease lords that were still targ loyalists.  Cersei/Robert was a power marriage.  I think they lacked high born noble women since Catelyn and Ned got married. 

Ahhh ok gotcha!

[David Selig]

The idiotic fantasy cliche that reluctant rulers make the best rulers really needs to die in a fire.

[Daemon of the Blacks]

I don't think Jon's reluctance would be a big problem. Jon's problem is that he just hasn't shown any reason as to why he would be a good king other than because the writers say so. 

Jon displayed no great political skill. Jon never liked making compromises, he generally ignores pragmatic advice and acts like a typical Stark.

So Jon has an easy time winning the trust of people. So did Robert and that didn't work out.

Jon may be a good person but this does not naturally translate into being a good ruler. Jon acts like Ned and Robb Stark and considering how they ended that's not a good thing. If Ned and Robb failed their nations by placing their personal honor and sense of morality above the common good then Jon aping that would not make him suited for kingship, quite the opposite. 

[Bradam]

No ruler is a good ruler, some are just less bad then others.  Jon follows his heart and gets everyone around him including himself killed. The schemers, including his sister, would just tear him apart, he'd prolly end up going mad targ in the end too.