NationStates Jolt Archive

I am addressing this to my fellow Brits, and I am of course refering to King Arthur.

Say someone appeared on the scene claiming to be King Arthur, returned to us as he said he would (whether or not he is or not is unimportant, but let's assume that the majority believe that he is who he claims to be).

Within months of his appearance he has built up a significant (yet still fully legal) following, and has made a vow that he will reform the British state and recreate Camelot, he refuses to specify what exactly that would entail, saying that the people will just have to trust him.

Would you follow Arthur? And, to open this thread up a wider audience, can it ever be justified for a leader to claim authority on a purely mythological mandate? Or does leadership need to stem from law and democratic accountability?

No. I will not blindly follow someone who will not reveal his motives or intentions.

This sums it up nicely:
Arthur: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. THAT is why I am your king!

Dennis: (interrupting) Listen, strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme executive power derives from a
mandate from the masses, not from some farcicial aquatic ceremony!
No, I wouldn't follow him.

This sums it up nicely:

No, I wouldn't follow him.

You beat me to it. :p

While I agree with what has been said, let me add some more conditions:

Let's say that the state of Britain has rapidly decreased, that we are in a state of terminal decline, perhaps a second Great Depression, or maybe we are being run as a puppet state to a malevolent outside power, (note that the present political system is still mostly intact).

And by the way, his motives and intentions are expressed, desire to see Britain return to the supposed glory days of Camelot and to restore Camelot respectively, it is only his methods that are not expressed :P

I am Athur King of the Britons

King of the who?

Yes.....because i love king Arthur:D

While I agree with what has been said, let me add some more conditions:

Let's say that the state of Britain has rapidly decreased, that we are in a state of terminal decline, perhaps a second Great Depression, or maybe we are being run as a puppet state to a malevolent outside power, (note that the present political system is still mostly intact).

And by the way, his motives and intentions are expressed, desire to see Britain return to the supposed glory days of Camelot and to restore Camelot respectively, it is only his methods that are not expressed :P

By glory days you mean 0.01% of the population living in drafty stone castles while the rest live in holes and eat mud?

I'm not quite sure where the glory comes in.;)

By glory days you mean 0.01% of the population living in drafty stone castles while the rest live in holes and eat mud?

I'm not quite sure where the glory comes in.;)

I bet the hole construction and mud catering industries would appreciate his return then.

While I agree with what has been said, let me add some more conditions:

Let's say that the state of Britain has rapidly decreased, that we are in a state of terminal decline, perhaps a second Great Depression, or maybe we are being run as a puppet state to a malevolent outside power, (note that the present political system is still mostly intact).

And by the way, his motives and intentions are expressed, desire to see Britain return to the supposed glory days of Camelot and to restore Camelot respectively, it is only his methods that are not expressed :P

So it's current conditions then.

By glory days you mean 0.01% of the population living in drafty stone castles while the rest live in holes and eat mud?

I'm not quite sure where the glory comes in.;)
The glory comes in scene XII.

i wouldn't follow him cuz he was king of the britons. i have more norman, anglo-saxon, pictish, scottish, norse, german heritage than i do brittonnic. all he'd get is cornwall anyway as that is the last stronghold of the britons. and, no, a mythological mandate is not sufficient to claim legitimate sovereignty over an area of land or state. look at what happened when that was used in israel.

Monarchy > Democracy, so sure. :)

Is he going to the liquor store? Cuz I'll follow him to the liquor store.

Would Scotland have an opt out :) .

I bet the hole construction and mud catering industries would appreciate his return then.

Hole contruction? They didn't construct the holes my friend, they simply inhabited the holes already dug by migrating african moles.

The glory comes in scene XII.

:confused:

Monarchy > Democracy, so sure. :)No.
Monarchy ≡ Democracy. I wouldn't say '=' but '≡' pretty much covers it.

Me, follow? Nah. Me follow someone blindly? :D That's a good one. heh.

edit: You better appreciate my rumaging around character map to find the equivalent sign.

I dunno. Any dude who knows so much about swallows is a dude I'd be willing to put my trust in.

I am addressing this to my fellow Brits, and I am of course refering to King Arthur.

Say someone appeared on the scene claiming to be King Arthur, returned to us as he said he would (whether or not he is or not is unimportant, but let's assume that the majority believe that he is who he claims to be).

Within months of his appearance he has built up a significant (yet still fully legal) following, and has made a vow that he will reform the British state and recreate Camelot, he refuses to specify what exactly that would entail, saying that the people will just have to trust him.

Would you follow Arthur? And, to open this thread up a wider audience, can it ever be justified for a leader to claim authority on a purely mythological mandate? Or does leadership need to stem from law and democratic accountability?


What you're asking is what metaphysical authority makes for leadership.

The Total Dictate of the Majority?
Strange Women lying in ponds distributing scimitars?
The Dictatorship of the Proletariat?

We've got a nice constitutional monarchy here in Britain.
Bugger if we know where the power lies -
But it works fine.... :D

Arthur slept on this rock.
He'll come again, you know?

No.
Monarchy ≡ Democracy. I wouldn't say '=' but '≡' pretty much covers it.

Me, follow? Nah. Me follow someone blindly? :D That's a good one. heh.

edit: You better appreciate my rumaging around character map to find the equivalent sign.

I once met this autistic guy that had memorised the entire unicode system, you could ask him for any symbol and he'd be all like ALT+whatever... but you get second place after that.

No.
Monarchy ≡ Democracy. I wouldn't say '=' but '≡' pretty much covers it.
How so?

Camelot is a silly place, Camelot > Parliament?

:sniper: pew. pew.
:eek: CRACK!!1!

How so?Don't you understand the mathematical sign? It means the systems are equivalent ie. produces the same awful result through different methods.

Don't you understand the mathematical sign? It means the systems are equivalent ie. produces the same awful result through different methods.

Yes, democracy is so horrible, eh?

:confused:
Yeah, I have no idea either. It's just one of those days...

Don't you understand the mathematical sign? It means the systems are equivalent ie. produces the same awful result through different methods.
Should I have understood the sign? I hated Maths. Either way, I'll agree to disagree.

I dunno. Any dude who knows so much about swallows is a dude I'd be willing to put my trust in.

African swallows or European swallows?

African swallows or European swallows?

Did you see him oppressing me?

Yes, democracy is so horrible, eh?

It *is*, yes. Though employing democratic principles in other forms of governments has advantages.

It *is*, yes. Though employing democratic principles in other forms of governments has advantages.
Indeed.

Yeah, I have no idea either. It's just one of those days...

I know the feeling. :)

I once met this autistic guy that had memorised the entire unicode system, you could ask him for any symbol and he'd be all like ALT+whatever... but you get second place after that.Memorised? I didn't memorise anything.

It *is*, yes. Though employing democratic principles in other forms of governments has advantages.

Weird.
I think it's the best ever since King Arthur.

Should I have understood the sign? I hated Maths. Either way, I'll agree to disagree.ah right...

My idea is that most humans are idiots. Whether they're a monarch or a prime minister doesn't effect their ability to lead.

ah right...

My idea is that most humans are idiots. Whether they're a monarch or a prime minister doesn't effect their ability to lead.
Well I can't argue with that. Most are idiots indeed. That said, I'm not a fan of hereditary monarchies.

We need to give England and Wales back to the Romans...only way....I mean, after the Romans were driven out, anarchy/feudalism started...that sucked...but when the Romans were there, everything was peaceful....

We need to give England and Wales back to the Romans...only way....I mean, after the Romans were driven out, anarchy/feudalism started...that sucked...but when the Romans were there, everything was peaceful....
Even though the Roman Empire's fall is what caused this power vacuum?

We need to give England and Wales back to the Romans...only way....I mean, after the Romans were driven out, anarchy/feudalism started...that sucked...but when the Romans were there, everything was peaceful....


Was that before or after Boudica?

Weird.
I think it's the best ever since King Arthur.

As far as I know there have been no large scale democracies on this planet since then..

As far as I know there have been no large scale democracies on this planet since then..

Ah so.
Japan, India, ( not to mention our more European ones ) don't exist at all.

isn't king arthur just a character made up by some guy in prison?

if he does return i hope he takes the form of Graham Chapman

Ah so.
Japan, India, ( not to mention our more European ones ) don't exist at all.

None of these are democracies. Some however do use democratic principles.

None of these are democracies. Some however do use democratic principles.
They are essentially representative democracies. Not democracies in any true sense of the word; like you said, the apply democratic principles. And they do so badly.

Isn't it said that he'd come to the aide of Britain in her greatest time of need? Surely he would've intervened during WWII.

Isn't it said that he'd come to the aide of Britain in her greatest time of need? Surely he would've intervened during WWII.

Doesn't bode well for the future, does it?

Was that before or after Boudica?

After, Boudica lost to the romans, they stayed on.

Doesn't bode well for the future, does it?

I dunno, Britain managed to win without him, so I'm not sure if it mkes any difference.

EDIT: After re-reading what you said, I understand better. Yes, it's true, things could indeed get worse.

I'd go with the flow

We need to give England and Wales back to the Romans...only way....I mean, after the Romans were driven out, anarchy/feudalism started...that sucked...but when the Romans were there, everything was peaceful....

The Romans aren't here to give anything back to. Unless you are implying handing British sovereignty to Silvio Berlusconi, lol.

I would much rather prefer to have the gallant King Arthur in charge. But I suppose the ideal situation would be with an elected parliament remaining, and Arthur serving as a King with considerable executive powers... hypothetically of course.

You know, after a update briefing I think Arthur might just give up...

"Gather my knights!"

"Yeah, about that...it's really more, I mean now a days it really...well, I mean Paul McCartney is a knight."

"Yes?"

"The Beatle."

"An insect?"

"Well, no-"

"Summon Paul the Beetle!"

"No, you're not...The Beatles was a band, you see. He's-"

"A minstral? There's nothing wrong with that."

"Yeah, kinda. I mean...well, not a minstral-I mean...that means something else now, at least to the Yanks..."

"Yanks?"

"Oh yeah, right. They, uh, used to be part of us a long time ago and now they're not. Turns out if you go west on the ocean there are two whole other continents."

"We shall bring them back into the fold!"

"Yeah...that's, uh, really more trouble than it's worth. And...well...you really have to meet them. It's kinda for the best."

"...alright. Do I have any other knights?"

"This is Elton John."

"...you guys are on your own."

EDIT: /\/\/\/\*snip*/\/\/\/\/\ All my hyper-patriotic ranting aside, this is some hilarious shit.





If a dude in well-made Roman-Celtic armour with a following of equally well equipped knights marched from under a mountain/came of a boat under a myterious mist....


Definitely I'd join him. In a heartbeat. It would be the culmination of my life, my beliefs and my growing armoury.


Then my round table brethren and I would KICK your cynical arses and drive you forth from our shores, for you have demonstrated truly that it is not race, creed or culture that creates a Briton - it's loyalty to the once and future king. If you can't believe in glory, honour and duty then you shall never see it, even if it waves a magic sword in your face.

Ladies and gentlemen...

I have some dire news. President Bush EATS BABIES!

That is all...

I have some dire news. President Bush EATS BABIES!


We know. And to bring this back on topic: so did King Arthur.

We know. And to bring this back on topic: so did King Arthur.


I think a statement likes this makes you technically an ogre and therefore subject to the SCHWINNG!!! of a rapidly moving broadsword. No moral ambiguity there, methinks. :p

I think a statement likes this makes you technically an ogre and therefore subject to the SCHWINNG!!! of a rapidly moving broadsword. No moral ambiguity there, methinks. :p

You mean Arthur never ate lamb ?

You know, after a update briefing I think Arthur might just give up...

"Gather my knights!"

"Yeah, about that...it's really more, I mean now a days it really...well, I mean Paul McCartney is a knight."

"Yes?"

"The Beatle."

"An insect?"

"Well, no-"

"Summon Paul the Beetle!"

"No, you're not...The Beatles was a band, you see. He's-"

"A minstral? There's nothing wrong with that."

"Yeah, kinda. I mean...well, not a minstral-I mean...that means something else now, at least to the Yanks..."

"Yanks?"

"Oh yeah, right. They, uh, used to be part of us a long time ago and now they're not. Turns out if you go west on the ocean there are two whole other continents."

"We shall bring them back into the fold!"

"Yeah...that's, uh, really more trouble than it's worth. And...well...you really have to meet them. It's kinda for the best."

"...alright. Do I have any other knights?"

"This is Elton John."

"...you guys are on your own."
You win the internets.

Anyway, what if good ol' Arthur just wanted to run for Prime Minister? What would you say about that?

:confused:

I have too point this out or it will kill me

I do believe he means castle Anthrax out of Holy Grail if you don’t know what I mean I suggest you watch “Monty python and the holy grail”……NOW!

I have too point this out or it will kill me

I do believe he means castle Anthrax out of Holy Grail if you don’t know what I mean I suggest you watch “Monty python and the holy grail”……NOW!

We all should go see that right now.

Would you follow Bea Arthur if she said she'd lead the masses to a new Golden Age?

I am not British, but if I was I would follow him. Democracy is overrated and I say follow the Uncommon Man if he verifiably exists.