Talk:Charles Pike/@comment-35.40.66.146-20161206205529/@comment-28398720-20170309204555

I love the discussion about Pike and how it relates to real life. Pike appeared in a midst of RL USA elections and is often colored by it. He is commonly portrayed as someone who is ruled by emotions (fear mongering, extreme hatred, taps into anger/bitterness ) and irrational ( usually EXTREMELY irrational, prejudiced and or ignorant). Now, I don't know or care about your Trump, but I find it ironic that most arguments asserting Pike irrationality seem to come from an emotional place and are nothing but Ad-hominem attacks on his character.

>Kane while was a better leader then Pike wasn't neccessarly a good leader because his sales pitch for getting elected was we should put blind faith in Lexa and the peacekeeping army when there's no guarentee they'll keep their promises.

Why was Kane the better leader? In the few days Kane was in charge, he brought things to the edge. Meanwhile Pike was said to lead his people for four month through the toughest experience on the ground; and we seen on the Ark despite Pike methods, his heart was in the right place, and arguably helped the delinquents survive.

Wouldn't it be more correct to say that Kane is the leader we know and like? That he is saying what we want to hear and see happening on the show, particularly based on our fondness for the grounders and what we the viewer seen in Polis. But that ultimately he is like S1 Abby, whose was as rational as any hack in lab coat selling hope, but seeing what happened on the ground we couldn't but feel hope that she succeed.

>Pike similer to Trump was able to tap into the anger and bitterness of Arkadia where some people were willing to overlook his irrational strategy of going to war where they cannot win due to numbers and resouces.

Wouldn't be just as correct to say that Kane was able to tap into people fear and desperation born of constant struggle to survive and unwillingness to see yet another war? Couldn't it be said that Clark plan to go to war against the might of MW was just as irrational? ( I still don't know why they just didn't threaten to blow Arkadia or Polis with a missile)

To me Pike and Kane are two sides of the same coin, ruled by widely diffident experience since that conversation about the 100 on the Ark. Kane gone through the Culling and is seen to go to extremes and willingness to sacrifice himself before risking any more blood on his hands, while Pike has learned the grounder way, survival, and keep fighting at all cost.

Kane is willing to bet their future on Lexa, trading their liberties and freedoms for a promise of security. While Pike, like Clarke, distrust his adversary and is willing to fight for his people and what he believes is right.

The main difference is that we like (me included) Kane better.

>that doesn,t make him the right leader for there people or even a good person a good leader needs to open minded and idealistic

Clarke idealism led to Murphy's lynch and Charlotte suicide. And while Clarke often talk the talk, like in S2 at MW when she gave an inspiring speech that its a rescue mission, however, from the begining she was treading MW war path with passion that borderlines compulsion, ever escalating, and not once seen to suggest any plan to the contrary. Just like in S4, she SAYS they need other options but its actually Jaha that goes looking for them.

Also the difference between a Tv-show and Real life, is that on a show the more a person explains himself the more he appears to care about that subject, while in RL its often a sign of insecurity. And people we give more slak to people whose heart is in the right place.

Also on shows, right is often becomes might, but history shows that might have often been right.. So the question isn't whether you like what Pike did (NOONE is), but whether under circumstances based on what happened and they (not us) know, is it possible that made the right decision?