Is Celestia really the right ruler for the job?

[Countess Noodle 607]

 

 

She's not evil, but she isn't very good at keeping Equestria safe. Actually, has she done ANYTHING good ever? Hmm

 

 

She tries thats for damn sure. You don't see Luna getting off her fat flank doing anything for Equestria. That and the fact that Celestia doesn't have an episode for herself we really don't know whats going on.  :okiedokielokie:

[Zoraxe 546]

Shes certainly the least honest of the four princesses by far.

[Sazama Ichida 2,356]

In my opinion she's perfect in every way. She's the most powerful and most beautiful and she also has such a wonderful personality. She's perfect for the job. Anyone who thinks otherwise obviously has been listening to too many of the lies about her on the internet like her being a tyrant or troll etc.

[Castle Bleck 19,214]

Currently:

>she still runs the entirety of Canterlot and most of Equestria, as in the politics are entirely decided by her.

>She figured out that Chrysalis was going to attack, and sent Shining Armor to protect Canterlot

>She found out that the crystal empire has risen, and sent Cadence and Shining Armor to protect it

>She gave Twilight Sparkle the knowledge of dark magic that led her to save the Crystal Empire

>She saved Twilight Sparkle's life by sending her the letters in Return of Harmony, which led to Twilight saving her friends

> She gave Discord a second chance

>She found out that Tirek was loose, and sent Discord to confront him

>She was partially responsible for creating the mirror that led to the entirety of the events of EQG

>She promoted Twilight Sparkle to an alicorn and a princess, and is currently the only pony we know of that can initiate the alicorn ascension process

 

Also:

>She broke Twilight's "Want It, Need It" spell on all of Ponyville in Lesson Zero.

>She was able to ward the Elements so Discord couldn't just teleport them away again in Keep Calm And Flutter On.

Edited November 19, 2014 by A.V.

[Nature's Spell 526]

Celestia is what she needs to be and there is a lot of meaning behind that phrase "you are a princess, you'll play your part". Each princess plays a part and Celestia's role was to hold their world together until the ascention of Cadence, Twilight and the return of Luna. Bottom line she did what she had to do. Also if she wasn't good why would she even have bothered to train Cadence and Twilight or allow Luna's return? If she was so horrible it should have been her saying there can only be one princess in Equestria. The fact that she's willing to share power and forgive Luna says a lot about her I think. 

[Arkane 269]

Luna almost couldn't keep up when she was tasked to rule in Celestia's stead for a day. And that she had a previous issue with power. I can't completely trust her. Cadence is still young and already busy with affairs concerning her Empire. You wouldn't want Discord to rule because things can get bucked up. Twilight still has tons of homework to do. Being the overall co-ruler of equestria, you would expect her to have a crap load of things to do. You'd be lucky if she had sent someone over your way rather than just saying "I'm busy."

[Solid 1,327]

I guess most people pretty much said what I'm gonna say lol.

 

Celestia does have a gentle aura/charisma that gives people/ponies the idea that she's the one in charge.

[Kel_Grym 1,917]

:okiedokielokie: Mere mortals question Celestia....

 

So mainstream, yo.

[VitalSpark 1,830]

 

 

You don't see Luna getting off her fat flank doing anything for Equestria.

 

Luna did offer to sort out King Sombra, but Celestia wanted Twilight to handle the situation to prove herself. (Clearly by this point she's pretty much decided to make Twilight a princess, but just needs evidence that she's ready.)

 

Princess Luna: Are you sure you don't want me to go as well?
Princess Celestia: Yes. Princess Cadance and Shining Armor are already there. The others will be joining them soon.
Princess Luna: The Empire's magic is powerful. It cannot fall again, my sister.
Princess Celestia: She will succeed at her task. And when she does, we'll know that she is that much closer to being ready.
Twilight Sparkle: Ahem.
Princess Celestia: Trust me, little sister.

 

 

Then, in Episode 65, Magical Mystery Cure.  She sent that spell book to T.  Starswirl wrote that spell?  My hoof (& less mentionable parts) he wrote it.  He lived long before the Elements were found (created?), so how could his spell affect them?

 

According to The Journal of the Two Sisters: The Official Chronicles of Princesses Celestia and Luna, it was Star Swirl the Bearded who originally showed the tree to Celestia and Luna when they were blank flanks. The tree had sun and moon symbols on it, which Celestia and Luna would later have as their cutie marks, and a third symbol of a six-pointed star. He foresaw that this would be a third princess' cutie mark.

 

Also, you say "he lived". Nowhere in the canon has it been established that he has died. He certainly seems absent from Equestria in the present day, but I wouldn't rule out an in-pony appearance from him at some point.

[Fricklefrackle 184]

Well, lately she hasn't really shown something good, in my opinion.

And she's kinda bad at keeping Equestria safe.

 

BUT.

 

She's still perfect for the job,

Luna couldn't keep up with here, Cadence has an empire to keep up with,

she already defeated Discord once, King Sombra too (I think?) and that's a huge job.

 

She's just getting older I think.

And she's wise enough, wiser then Luna and Cadence, at least.

[Sunny Fox 5,940]

She and the others trusted Discord they all thought he would stay loyal but he slipped.  Not really her fault she did what was right.  She asked Twilight to hold the magic because even if Discord could sense it Tirek couldn't and it was a last ditch move in order to buy some time till Twilight could figure something out really.  Just how I see it. ^^

It's not so much that she sent Discord out there, as much as she didn't have a backup plan for if he did turn on them. And it doesn't matter that Tirek couldn't sense magic, she already knew Discord had teamed up with him; she had no reason to think he wouldn't have told Tirek as soon as he felt the magic transfer happen. Celestia lucked out in that regard, and trusting to luck is not something a ruler should do.

 

She tries thats for damn sure. You don't see Luna getting off her fat flank doing anything for Equestria. That and the fact that Celestia doesn't have an episode for herself we really don't know whats going on.  :okiedokielokie:

She also helped guard Canterlot at night. She spends time helping her subjects through their dreams. In the comics, she even fights monsters at night. She also offered to go to the Crystal Empire with Twilight and help, but Celestia refused her offer. Not to mention that both Luna and Celestia fought Sombra in the first place.

 

In my opinion she's perfect in every way. She's the most powerful and most beautiful and she also has such a wonderful personality. She's perfect for the job. Anyone who thinks otherwise obviously has been listening to too many of the lies about her on the internet like her being a tyrant or troll etc.

That's rather dismissive of you. You seem to imply that one can't possibly doubt Celestia due to her actions, which I do. Plus beauty and a wonderful personality (except charisma, perhaps) aren't requirements for a good leader.

 

Being overpowered by the Changeling Queen, that's forgivable, everypony (even the Queen herself) was surprised by that. But if you're making bad decisions, that's something pure power isn't going to help you with.

Well, lately she hasn't really shown something good, in my opinion.

And she's kinda bad at keeping Equestria safe.

 

BUT.

 

She's still perfect for the job,

Luna couldn't keep up with here, Cadence has an empire to keep up with,

she already defeated Discord once, King Sombra too (I think?) and that's a huge job.

 

She's just getting older I think.

And she's wise enough, wiser then Luna and Cadence, at least.

Luna and Celestia together defeated Discord, and King Sombra, although for Discord, Celestia deserves most of the credit for finding the original Elements.

[newfrickinshow 100]

Quite frankly, I never liked her character all that much, and the main reason behind that, I believe, is her design. For me, it's hard not to see just how she screams “Illuminati”, since she's always got one eye showing, and that her eye design looks a lot like 'the all-seeing eye' of Horus, which is one of the main symbols used by the Illuminati/ Luciferian government, and even on the back of U.S currency.

 

My answer started at, "Yes, she is the right ruler" and you lost me even further in this paragraph.  Aside from the fact that Illuminati is crap and a waste of everybody's time, you don't even know the symbols you speak of.  The, "all seeing eye of Horus" that you claim is on the money, isn't the origin of that symbol.  That symbol on our money is actually the eye of providence, a Christian symbol.  The three sides of the triangle/pyramid represent the holy trinity while the eye itself represents God always watching and divine providence.  I don't know if you subscribe to it but I prefer to leave it in if for no other reason than trolling those that think it's real.

 

Something about the way Celestia always sits in the back and let's others work yet ALWAYS seems to know how to put the pieces into motion for things to happen makes me think she may be playing on a whole other level to be honest.  That hall of memories from Magical Mystery Cure I think may have something to do with it.

Edited November 19, 2014 by newfrickinshow

[Adachi 772]

Celestia's magic wasn't enough to keep NMM banished to the moon forever, she knew she would need help with her sister, since she couldn't use the elements anymore. As for Discord, same thing. She knew he would eventually be free, so she figured that she might as well put his magic to good use. In the end, he decided to stay 100% good, finding that he preferred friendship over chaos. Another thing, if anything happened to Celestia, there would be major panic, since her people relied on her so much. She was grooming Twi to become a princess, so what better way than to have her train against the upcoming threats? Like someone else said, there are things that only Celestia could do, so she needed to focus on those, and let Twi handle the things that she could do. It's not like she sat in her castle all day eating cake and drinking tea

[Roughshod 719]

Frankly, no I don't think Princess Celestia is the ideal pony to rule Equestria. But this stems not merely from a dislike towards her but rather my disapproval of princesses in general.

 

Fundamentally it comes down to the fact that she's a monarch(or perhaps oligarch) and I simply reject the idea that such a circumstance is the best possible political arrangement. You could call this intolerant or a result of democratic bias but that's how I feel. I fully understand that MLP is a children's show with highly idealized views regarding the world it's characters inhabit and that doesn't change my beliefs or make me feel like I should accommodate them in this scenario. I'm not saying that democratic systems are all flawless but I think real world examples have shown the benefits it has over autocratic and oligarchic governments. As shown in the episode 'Magical Mystery Cure' princesses are evidently not elected or appointed by any public process but chosen by Celestia herself. How and why Celestia and Luna attained their position has not been revealed to me from any canonical source so I think it's safe to assume that it was simply a matter of hereditary succession as is the case with traditional princesses. If anyone has valid evidence that contradicts this I'd very much like to see it.

 

The ponies in MLP are anthropomorphic, meaning they have human like attributes, most obviously in their sentience and social behaviour. Like any beings they are not infallible and neither is Celestia and as such I don't believe there is any credible reason why she should have unchallenged authority over a nation that apparently did not choose her for the role.

 

 

 

While this isn't the best example of what I value, here it is:

 

 

Then again, it's possible Puddinghead's character was deliberately made dumb as a subtle mockery of democracy on top of the negative stereotypes about Earth ponies that the ancient Pegasi seemed to hold. Plus Pinkie Pie is just silly of course.

Edited January 17, 2015 by Roughshod

[Fractured 2,683]

How and why Celestia and Luna attained their position has not been revealed to me from any canonical source so I think it's safe to assume that it was simply a matter of hereditary succession as is the case with traditional princesses. If anyone has valid evidence that contradicts this I'd very much like to see it.

The Journal of the Alicorn sisters mentioned Celestia and Luna were both appointed rulers by Star Swirl and representatives from all three tribes.

[Roughshod 719]

The Journal of the Alicorn sisters mentioned Celestia and Luna were both appointed rulers by Star Swirl and representatives from all three tribes.

Did this journal happen to mention why they were appointed in the first place? Did it state how old they were or why they were given oversight of an entire country for a seemingly indefinite period, despite having no previous experience in governmental matters? Had there been a state of emergency and the princesses were chosen to briefly take over in order to stabilize the nation that would be more reasonable. But as its been mentioned several times, Celestia has reigned over Equestria for over a thousand years and lately she's been doing a pretty lackluster job at handling any crises that emerge.

 

 

Honestly I don't see how it makes any difference whether they were chosen by the citizens of Equestria or not. Many autocrats and dictators have been freely appointed and elected in the past. And unless the subsequent generations of Equestrians have had the right to review and reconsider the role of the princesses in an open manner then my main point still stands.

 

 

I'm also not very suprised by this either. After all, equines are herd animals that establish social hierarchies and usually have an alpha mare as their leader. Perhaps it says something about sociological nature that they would establish two Alicorns as their undisputed rulers. Or maybe it just says something about the people behind the show and their naively romanticized outlook towards monarchy.

 

Edited November 20, 2014 by Roughshod

[Fractured 2,683]

Did this journal happen to mention why they were appointed in the first place? Did it state how old they were or why they were given oversight of an entire country for a seemingly indefinite period, despite having no previous experience in governmental matters? Had there been a state of emergency and the princesses were chosen to briefly take over in order to stabilize the nation that would be more reasonable. But as its been mentioned several times, Celestia has reigned over Equestria for over a thousand years and lately she's been doing a pretty lackluster job at handling any crises that emerge.

 

Honestly I don't see how it makes any difference whether they were chosen by the citizens of Equestria or not. Many autocrats and dictators have been freely appointed and elected in the past. And unless the subsequent generations of Equestrians have had the right to review and reconsider the role of the princesses in an open manner then my main point still stands.

 

I'm also not very suprised by this either. After all, equines are herd animals that establish social hierarchies and usually have an alpha mare as their leader. Perhaps it says something about sociological nature that they would establish two Alicorns as their undisputed rulers. Or maybe it just says something about the people behind the show and their naively romanticized outlook towards monarchy.

 

Actually, they were chosen as representatives of the three tribes because alicorns represent the unity between pegasi, unicorns, and earth ponies. Actually, it's less of rulers and more of "overseers"; the two sisters are more of a governmental figure than they are Queens/princesses.

 

All in all, though i'd say Celestia is doing a pretty good job at ruling. There appears to be no problems with the Equestrian government or their relations, and it's currently a long standing era of peace.(From what we know) Equestria itself has a stupidly low crime rate(in comparison to our own) ,and ponies are generally happy and lead successful lives(All f the main cast, and most of the background cast).The student that she taught everything she knows to, Twilight Sparkle, has managed to save the world on multiple occasions, and still looks to her for guidance. I'd say she's done the best she can in the given situation.

 

And I can safely say Celestia would have no problem stepping down if enough ponies asked it of her. The Journal mentions how she dismissed the idea of being "royalty", and how she instead wanted to be a "protector" because she didn't feel right being placed above them. Comics have an instance of Celestia and Luna going through a period of being worshiped as gods, only for Celestia to step in and create the Chuckle-A-Lot, which is essentially a holiday dedicated to making a fool of herself so that others don't see her as above them. That's not something a pony does if they're in the royalty game for their own sake.

 

I'm still obliged to ask, though; if not Celestia, who? There's no one else for the current position of ruler of all of Equestria. If Celestia were to step down, Equestria would fall apart in a week; and all this talk is pretty much meaningless if she's the best that Equestria has as ruler.

[sweetolebob18 724]

As to the whole monarchy debate.  I am a mean spirited, cynical old ex-hippie.  I've got exactly 2 theories left on governments. 

 

1)The ideal form hasn't been invented yet.  There is no form I know of where the requirements for gaining office have anything to do w the ability to rule wisely.  (Let's see Win a popularity contest, pick the right parents, win enough battles)  All forms have some things they do well & some not so well.  (Democracies tend to be good at "throw the rascals out".  Not so good at "make short term sacrifices for long term gain")

 

2)The personality of the ruler has a lot more to do w "How good a ruler are they?" than the exact form of government.   I'd  point out, the 2 most absolute dictatorships I ever heard of are Heaven -and Hell.

[Roughshod 719]

Actually, they were chosen as representatives of the three tribes because alicorns represent the unity between pegasi, unicorns, and earth ponies. Actually, it's less of rulers and more of "overseers"; the two sisters are more of a governmental figure than they are Queens/princesses.

So are you saying their appointment is based on nothing more than positive racism? The mere FACT that they're alicorns gives them the right to be in charge? This line of thinking makes itself clear given Twilight's ascension and transformation. But you're in support of that? You seem to be since you're obviously defending Celestia's right to preside over Equestria.

 

And if the princesses aren't really 'princesses' then why are they called such? Why are they addressed as 'your highness' and 'your majesty' and treated with the type of reverence you might expect for royalty? Why do they wear crowns and tiaras and conduct elaborate ceremonies for themselves? Their behaviour seems to contradict your assertion. The only thing I might accept is the idea that they're more or less figureheads but that does not justify their position for me, quite the contrary actually.

 

All in all, though i'd say Celestia is doing a pretty good job at ruling. There appears to be no problems with the Equestrian government or their relations, and it's currently a long standing era of peace.(From what we know) Equestria itself has a stupidly low crime rate(in comparison to our own) ,and ponies are generally happy and lead successful lives(All f the main cast, and most of the background cast).The student that she taught everything she knows to, Twilight Sparkle, has managed to save the world on multiple occasions, and still looks to her for guidance. I'd say she's done the best she can in the given situation.

I'm not going to debate over the idealistic nature of the world of a children's television show or the fact that the conflicts that arise are always quickly resolved by the main characters. This isn't even an argument for me because it's so self-evident and doesn't even address my main point. The argument that 'it works' doesn't satisfy me either because the nature of the show basically requires it to.

 

To clarify, my issue is one of political ideology. I don't think eschewing the idea of a non democratic system is justified simply because a nation may have a 'wise and powerful, goddess-like matriarch' to oversee the lesser mortals. For a show that tries to break stereotypes this does not seem to advocate much equality.

 

And I can safely say Celestia would have no problem stepping down if enough ponies asked it of her. The Journal mentions how she dismissed the idea of being "royalty", and how she instead wanted to be a "protector" because she didn't feel right being placed above them. Comics have an instance of Celestia and Luna going through a period of being worshiped as gods, only for Celestia to step in and create the Chuckle-A-Lot, which is essentially a holiday dedicated to making a fool of herself so that others don't see her as above them. That's not something a pony does if they're in the royalty game for their own sake.

No actually you can't safely say that, you're only assuming that based on what you know(which is limited) and how you feel. Celestia is a fictional character produced by writers, directors and producers, she is not some entity that either of us can categorically state the nature or potential choices of with any real credibility. My criticism is based on her position not her character and even the references you made only refer to what she has done and not what she may do in the future. The fact that she possesses humility doesn't change my argument in the slightest as she still retains her title either way. It's already been shown with her sister Luna that princesses' personalities can change quite dramatically given the right reason. I'm not saying that Celestia would or will do that only that it's been shown time and time again that a character need not be static and unchanging.

 

I'm still obliged to ask, though; if not Celestia, who? There's no one else for the current position of ruler of all of Equestria. If Celestia were to step down, Equestria would fall apart in a week; and all this talk is pretty much meaningless if she's the best that Equestria has as ruler.

Wow. A lot of big claims in this paragraph, I'll try to address them as well as I can.

 

First of all I didn't make my criticism with the intention of naming a replacement for Celestia. Placing that absurd responsibility on me does not counter my criticism of the principle of her role. But as you may have gathered I'm an advocate for democracy so I would probably leave it to the citizens of Equestria to decide who they want. Evidently they're satisfied with the status quo but I still think they should be given an option, one that is made clear to them.

 

You say there is no one else for the position but why should there be when thete is a nigh immortal being reigning already? The only candidates I can think of that would substitute for her would be the other princesses and princes and after them who knows. If Celestia is more of a figurehead then perhaps a sort of bureaucracy exists that could replace her but that's merely speculation.

 

You can't possibly know that Equestria would "fall apart in a week" if Celestia stepped down. Keep in mind that I'm not suggesting that she would need to abdicate her role in raising the sun(although the unicorns could theoretically replace her and Luna in that matter) only that she no longer be the head of state. As with any major transition there would surely be some turmoil but I think it's presumptuous to assume that anarchy and chaos would automatically ensue because of that. If anything this would only be more proof of why Celestia is incapable, if she were such a great ruler and did so much for her country then it should be strong enough to carry on without her. I would say she's actually doing them an injustice by making them so dependant on her and thus so vulnerable were she no longer able to rule.

 

Finally, stating she's the best ruler means nothing if there's no source for comparison. You could use Discord as an example of why Celestia is a better candidate but it's not a real argument since he was obviously a tyrant. He was defeated by the elements of harmony that the alicorn sisters possessed but are no longer capable of using. In reality he only serves as proof of the dangers of unlimited power in the hands of a single ruler. The same can be said of most of the other major villains in MLP actually.

 

 

 

In summation I don't accept the idea that Celestia is the best possible ruler of Equestria because I reject the premise of a monarchy, duarchy, oligarchy or any other non-democratic state as ideal, real or fictional.

Edited November 21, 2014 by Roughshod

[Buck Testa 5,503]

Not sure why I was linked this thread but I'll have a go at it. 

 

The question is: Is Celestia a fit ruler; also known as, is she evil_satan_illuminati_omg_Devil_onlyoneeyeshowingHalfLIfe3Confirmed

 

The short answer is: No she is not evil and I would serve under her rule any day of the week

 

The long answer: Look to the results of her rule to see if she is truly a good ruler. You know what I see? I see someone who took down the threats to her followers, unified the races under one banner, and ushered in an age of peace after total chaos had been the way of the land. It is only after a Millennium of her time ruling that things are starting to catch up with her, but that in no way takes away from the fact that she has done what few REAL LIFE rulers ever accomplish; Using her absolute authority not to oppress or control, but to encourage individuality, creativity, and peace without succumbing to powers corrupting influence. She is not a deity and she has made mistakes, but over all the fruits of her labor have shown her to be every bit as benevolent as she appears. 

 

I ask you who think she is evil: What is it in you, in your way of seeing things, that sees fit to twist an otherwise good being into a monster or something corrupt? 

 

I ask those who think Autocratic rule is evil by default: What if the ruler was someone good and just and would not succumb to abusing their authority? Would it be an evil dictatorship if the supreme ruler ushered in peace, creativity, and prosperity instead of oppression and fear? Do you not know that a government is good as long as good people are there to lead it?

 

I would not trust a human with that much power, but Celestia has proven herself in spades that she can handle it. 

Edited November 21, 2014 by Buck Testa

[Andaasonsan 3,205]

In summation I don't accept the idea that Celestia is the best possible ruler of Equestria because I reject the premise of a monarchy, duarchy, oligarchy or any other non-democratic state as ideal, real or fictional.

I don't think you can really have a best possible ruler anyway, you can just have someone who is doing their job well. There are always other alternatives with their own advantages and disadvantages. She seems to be doing her job well.

 

As far as whether the system of government they have in Equestria is a good one? I dunno. We don't know much of anything about their government, so we don't know if there are checks and balances in place.

 

Warning: Lots of Journal of the Two Sisters Spoilers ahead

 

Assuming their form of government hasn't changed radically since Journal of the Two Sisters, this is basically what I know:

 

Celestia and Luna (well Luna when she is not evil anyway) were chosen to be impartial overall leaders over the now united tribes of ponies. The idea being that since as alicorns they are all three types of pony at once, they won't favor a tribe. I don't know if that's the best reasoning, but that's what they went with.

 

Here's the thing interesting thing: It seems that the three tribes kept their systems of government intact, as Chancellor Puddinghead and the others still seem to keep their positions even after Celestia and Luna take charge. There is probably a bit of head-canon coming up here, but it seems as though they had some sort of constitutional monarchy and the tribes mostly kept their autonomy. Celestia and Luna serve as appointees of this council. I guess they're sort of like co-Prime Ministers and they simply have never had a vote of no confidence in a thousand years. So assuming that I'm right, Celestia and Luna do actually hold their positions democratically as indirectly elected leaders by this council.

 

The tricky part is how exactly the tribes choose their representatives to the council in the first place. So going by the titles their leaders had, at the time of the founding of Equestria it would seem that the Earth ponies had a representative democracy, the Unicorns had a monarchy, and the Pegasi had a military dictatorship. So if you were a Unicorn or a Pegasus, you just had to hope your representative was actually representing you. We'll just have to assume that virtual representation worked well enough at the time.

 

Now a thousand years have passed since then, so I don't know how the ponies currently choose their representatives. They could all be democracies now for all we know.

 

But anyhow, the point is that I don't think they're dictators and their sovereignty  is derived from a somewhat indirect form of democracy.

 

[Fractured 2,683]

So are you saying their appointment is based on nothing more than positive racism? The mere FACT that they're alicorns gives them the right to be in charge? This line of thinking makes itself clear given Twilight's ascension and transformation. But you're in support of that? You seem to be since you're obviously defending Celestia's right to preside over Equestria.

 

And if the princesses aren't really 'princesses' then why are they called such? Why are they addressed as 'your highness' and 'your majesty' and treated with the type of reverence you might expect for royalty? Why do they wear crowns and tiaras and conduct elaborate ceremonies for themselves? Their behaviour seems to contradict your assertion. The only thing I might accept is the idea that they're more or less figureheads but that does not justify their position for me, quite the contrary actually.

 

I'm not going to debate over the idealistic nature of the world of a children's television show or the fact that the conflicts that arise are always quickly resolved by the main characters. This isn't even an argument for me because it's so self-evident and doesn't even address my main point. The argument that 'it works' doesn't satisfy me either because the nature of the show basically requires it to.

 

To clarify, my issue is one of political ideology. I don't think eschewing the idea of a non democratic system is justified simply because a nation may have a 'wise and powerful, goddess-like matriarch' to oversee the lesser mortals. For a show that tries to break stereotypes this does not seem to advocate much equality.

 

No actually you can't safely say that, you're only assuming that based on what you know(which is limited) and how you feel. Celestia is a fictional character produced by writers, directors and producers, she is not some entity that either of us can categorically state the nature or potential choices of with any real credibility. My criticism is based on her position not her character and even the references you made only refer to what she has done and not what she may do in the future. The fact that she possesses humility doesn't change my argument in the slightest as she still retains her title either way. It's already been shown with her sister Luna that princesses' personalities can change quite dramatically given the right reason. I'm not saying that Celestia would or will do that only that it's been shown time and time again that a character need not be static and unchanging.

 

Wow. A lot of big claims in this paragraph, I'll try to address them as well as I can.

 

First of all I didn't make my criticism with the intention of naming a replacement for Celestia. Placing that absurd responsibility on me does not counter my criticism of the principle of her role. But as you may have gathered I'm an advocate for democracy so I would probably leave it to the citizens of Equestria to decide who they want. Evidently they're satisfied with the status quo but I still think they should be given an option, one that is made clear to them.

 

You say there is no one else for the position but why should there be when thete is a nigh immortal being reigning already? The only candidates I can think of that would substitute for her would be the other princesses and princes and after them who knows. If Celestia is more of a figurehead then perhaps a sort of bureaucracy exists that could replace her but that's merely speculation.

 

You can't possibly know that Equestria would "fall apart in a week" if Celestia stepped down. Keep in mind that I'm not suggesting that she would need to abdicate her role in raising the sun(although the unicorns could theoretically replace her and Luna in that matter) only that she no longer be the head of state. As with any major transition there would surely be some turmoil but I think it's presumptuous to assume that anarchy and chaos would automatically ensue because of that. If anything this would only be more proof of why Celestia is incapable, if she were such a great ruler and did so much for her country then it should be strong enough to carry on without her. I would say she's actually doing them an injustice by making them so dependant on her and thus so vulnerable were she no longer able to rule.

 

Finally, stating she's the best ruler means nothing if there's no source for comparison. You could use Discord as an example of why Celestia is a better candidate but it's not a real argument since he was obviously a tyrant. He was defeated by the elements of harmony that the alicorn sisters possessed but are no longer capable of using. In reality he only serves as proof of the dangers of unlimited power in the hands of a single ruler. The same can be said of most of the other major villains in MLP actually.

 

 

 

In summation I don't accept the idea that Celestia is the best possible ruler of Equestria because I reject the premise of a monarchy, duarchy, oligarchy or any other non-democratic state as ideal, real or fictional.

1) Well, to be honest, if you cannot accept the idea of "living" characters(i.e the understanding that characters are real within the context of their own world), any conversation we could about her practices becomes a moot point. From that context, she's absolved of anything she might do, both good and bad, since the writers are the ones responsible for all of her actions. You don't blame the puppet when someone pulls the strings, right?

 

2)I really don't have any real opposition to this argument, if democracy is indeed the better practice. At the current time, though, I don't see it having any much more of an impact in Equestria than the current system. Changing political practices seems like a large waste of time to me, unless you believe it would actually change something.

[GreyScholar 1,584]

I believe a monarchy can be the best form of government if two conditions are met:

If the one ruling is benevolent and puts thier subjects before themselves.

If the problem of secession is taken care of where one who is selfish, cruel, or evil is not able to take over.

 

These two conditions have been met, and as such I find the peace and prosperity of Equestria to be quite realistic, given the fact the land has a guide and protector who is willing to step forward when needed and step back when not needed.

 

I really don't have any real opposition to this argument, if democracy is indeed the better practice. At the current time, though, I don't see it having any much more of an impact in Equestria than the current system. Changing political practices seems like a large waste of time to me, unless you believe it would actually change something.

As the saying goes, don't try fixing something that is not broken. Edited November 21, 2014 by EquestrianScholar

[Roughshod 719]

I sense that the following quote is addressed to me so I shall reply in turn.

 

I ask those who think Autocratic rule is evil by default: What if the ruler was someone good and just and would not succumb to abusing their authority? Would it be an evil dictatorship if the supreme ruler ushered in peace, creativity, and prosperity instead of oppression and fear? Do you not know that a government is good as long as good people are there to lead it?

 

Some points to make:

1) I never actually said that I thought autocracy was evil, only that I thought democracy was favorable and more stable in comparison. Nor was I trying to imply that Celestia is evil. Some governments have been shown to have more advantages than others in the world and democracy typically comes out above the rest. That being said you'll never hear me say that our modern democracies are flawless or above criticism, but it's because of democratic values that we can even espouse our opinions.

 

2) What if? That's an enormous hypothetical. What if Celestia decided one day to just terrorize all of Equestria and ravage the landscape because she felt like it? That probably sounds absurd but so is making blanket statements about a fictional character as if they're some kind of incorruptible paragon of righteousness.

 

If we accept that she is a sentient being then that means we must acknowledge her capacity to think and make decisions, including possible decisions that we may not agree with or believe contradict her general nature. The nature we assume based on what we have seen and know of her which is limited and contrived(being in fact a fabricated entity). This doesn't mean we can automatically predict what she would do in any circumstance or establish a precedence of character that does not allow for any alternative interpretation. That is frankly ridiculous.

 

3) Would it be an evil dictatorship? Well that depends on your judgment of good and evil doesn't it? How peaceful, creative and prosperous is Equestria really? What if a person(or pony) does not value these things? And what standard of measurement are you using to evaluate them anyway? What of the treatment of Chrysalis and Tirek? One was cast out and the other imprisoned. Perhaps they might have felt like they were being oppressed and living in fear. I'm not necessarily defending their actions but I think it's worth noting that the narrative of MLP is typically very one sided.

 

4) Again, the criteria for what makes a good government or good leaders is completely up for interpretation and reliant on what one values and believes a government is meant to do. The politics of Equestria have never been disclosed in great detail and likely won't be but your argument could easily be used as a self justification by anyone in power.

 

 

 

Perhaps you would like to live in an autocratic state and that's fine if that's your preference. I however would take an imperfect democracy any day, I guess I just have too much distrust for the nature of governments to willingly abdicate all my political decisions to a higher power.

 

1) Well, to be honest, if you cannot accept the idea of "living" characters(i.e the understanding that characters are real within the context of their own world), any conversation we could about her practices becomes a moot point. From that context, she's absolved of anything she might do, both good and bad, since the writers are the ones responsible for all of her actions. You don't blame the puppet when someone pulls the strings, right?

Well, it's sort of yes and no. If I am watching an episode of MLP or engaging in another form of media then I can suspend my disbelief and allow the presentation to unfold with credulity. If, on the other hand I am speaking of it such as now then I feel I have to step back and put it into realistic context. Otherwise you can run the risk of making unfounded assumptions that have no concrete basis in reality. When I make a judgement of Celestia I am of course judging the representation she is making of those behind her portrayal.

 

But the thing is, and I keep stressing this, Celestia is not really my problem. I don't particularly like or dislike her either way, in fact I find her somewhat boring. It's the concept of her role as the leader of a country.

 

2)I really don't have any real opposition to this argument, if democracy is indeed the better practice. At the current time, though, I don't see it having any much more of an impact in Equestria than the current system. Changing political practices seems like a large waste of time to me, unless you believe it would actually change something.

Of couse I believe that democracy is the better practice, that's the whole reason I've been making these posts. I think that both in theory and in practice democracy has proven itself to be the better system. If anyone fundamentally disagrees with me on this then perhaps we just hold irreconcilable views and that's all there is to it. I can accept that.

 

If you're asking me to make accurate predictions about the effects of political change in a fictional world with any seriousness then I obviously can't do that. I don't think anyone could without a thorough understanding of the Equestrian political system which is unavailable as of yet. I think we've already gone over this but the decision to change, were it to be made, would have to be through a democratic process in order to appeal to what I'm arguing about. For the show to take that direction isn't likely to happen anyway.

 

 

 

So many people are saying "If it ain't broke don't fix it". What a lazy attitude towards politics, my word. It's no wonder the democratic process has deteriorated so badly.

Edited November 21, 2014 by Roughshod

[Buck Testa 5,503]

I sense that the following quote is addressed to me so I shall reply in turn.

 

 

 

Some points to make:

1) I never actually said that I thought autocracy was evil, only that I thought democracy was favorable and more stable in comparison. Nor was I trying to imply that Celestia is evil. Some governments have been shown to have more advantages than others in the world and democracy typically comes out above the rest. That being said you'll never hear me say that our modern democracies are flawless or above criticism, but it's because of democratic values that we can even espouse our opinions.

 

2) What if? That's an enormous hypothetical. What if Celestia decided one day to just terrorize all of Equestria and ravage the landscape because she felt like it? That probably sounds absurd but so is making blanket statements about a fictional character as if they're some kind of incorruptible paragon of righteousness. (It has been said that one can know the future by looking to the past. If it were in Celestia's nature to do such a thing she there would of been precedence at some point. Also as she is a fictional character she can BE an incorruptible paragon of righteousness because she represents that ideal. I define her the way she has been portrayed, not what someone else chooses to impose upon her.)

 

If we accept that she is a sentient being then that means we must acknowledge her capacity to think and make decisions, including possible decisions that we may not agree with or believe contradict her general nature . The nature we assume based on what we have seen and know of her which is limited and contrived(being in fact a fabricated entity). This doesn't mean we can automatically predict what she would do in any circumstance or establish a precedence of character that does not allow for any alternative interpretation. That is frankly ridiculous. (No it's really not. Do you want the writers to spell out her every move over her thousand year rule? No, THAT would be ridiculous. Instead they give scenes and exposition that show the kind of ruler she is without having to bury the viewer in needless heaps of filler that would essentially say the same thing)

 

3) Would it be an evil dictatorship? Well that depends on your judgment of good and evil doesn't it? How peaceful, creative and prosperous is Equestria really? What if a person(or pony) does not value these things? And what standard of measurement are you using to evaluate them anyway? What of the treatment of Chrysalis and Tirek? One was cast out and the other imprisoned. Perhaps they might have felt like they were being oppressed and living in fear. I'm not necessarily defending their actions but I think it's worth noting that the narrative of MLP is typically very one sided.

(it's idealistic, of course its one sided. What would you of done with Tirek or Chrysalis? Would adding your take on their character redeem their monologues and clearly malevolent intents against Equestria? Would you not defend your people against a common enemy because the enemy feels you are the ones who are bad?)

4) Again, the criteria for what makes a good government or good leaders is completely up for interpretation and reliant on what one values and believes a government is meant to do. The politics of Equestria have never been disclosed in great detail and likely won't be but your argument could easily be used as a self justification by anyone in power.

(The idea that a government is good as long as good people are the ones who run it come straight from one Thomas Jefferson, and I think we both can agree that Celestia more than meets the qualification of a good ruler. 

 

 

Perhaps you would like to live in an autocratic state and that's fine if that's your preference. I however would take an imperfect democracy any day, I guess I just have too much distrust for the nature of governments to willingly abdicate all my political decisions to a higher power.(under Celestia, yes I would because she would not abuse her authority. Among humanity though I would go for a republic, because easily corruptible humans need checks and balances).

 

In summary I am saying in real life with corruptible people you need a form of government that limits there power and the time they get to wield it, but in an idealistic setting like Equestria where Celestia has proven herself with no ill intent I would gladly serve under her banner knowing she will not succumb to temptation like people in reality do.