I think Richard was great as the temporary leader. He wont get emotional like Ben. He has been on the island for a long time. Which means he is loyal.
What I don't get is Richard is the leader for the others in the 50's as seen in Jughead.
Then he hands the leadership to Ben. Was Richard ordered to hand the reigns to Ben? Why is he such a strong leader in the past and so submissive and let Ben lead?

You've probably already put this into consideration (from the last bit of your post I'm almost sure), but I believe that as Ben said WAAAAAY back in season 3 "The Man Behind the Curtain" Jacob gets the final say at all times. Maybe it was just destiny that Richard step down.
As being in a sort of conslierge position, I believe Richard is only meant to be a temporary leader and tries to uphold leadership in the transition between "destined" leaders.
I follow the theory that Richard is an incarnation of the island, similar to smokey and Jacob. He is the connection between the leader of the others and Jacob, and therefore shouldn't lead himself unless in strenuous circumstances, like a nuclear crisis for instance.

:Welcome: yahhoodahh19 to the Fuselage!


My guess is that the leader should be able to communicate with Jacob. But I would think Richard should have met him to believe in his existance and to make sure that his people believes in him and trust him. But in The Man Behind The Curtain when Ben said Jacob was their leader, Locke wanted to go and meet him but Ben didnt want to take him at first then Locke said he will ask someone else like Richard. Ben replied: "Why would Richard take you? He doesn't know where Jacob is. He doesn't talk to Jacob..." Could Ben be lying about this?

]Could Ben be lying about this? I would just assume he is always lying.

I hope he is lying. But then the question remains: if Richard can see Jacob why isnt he the leader?

I hope he is lying. But then the question remains: if Richard can see Jacob why isnt he the leader?

If there is a coup attempt, it is better to be out of the spotlight. I have been re-watching season three so I am going to bring up examples from then. Juliet tells Jack before he operates on Ben that there are "others" who want change. So she plots with Jack to kill Ben on the operating table. She is not looking to kill Richard, unless Richard is one of the "others" that wants change. Ben is the one who needs to die.

Im not sure Richard was "the leader" back in the 50's, it could still have been Widmore back at that time. Richard could simply be a "priest" like in ancient times, somebody who advises the King (Widmore, Ben, Locke)...or a prime minister (like Joseph in Egypt). In this case he could also be a tutor/teacher on top of adviser.

Widmore could have been the leader back in the 50's, but because he was still young and learning how to lead, and because Locke mentioned Richard by name, Richard could have been intrigued by this "sodding old man" who was able to track down the others camp very easily, and knew Richard by name...and of course "Jacob". That implies this stranger had a "communion" with the Island, the high priest (Richard) could not let the young king (Widmore) in this case kill Locke (a prophet from the future no less!).

I think there are rules that certain people on the island have to follow about free will (as well as off island agents related to the island like Abaddon). I get the impression certain people are not allowed to take action themselves. When we see Richard in the time of the crash survivors, he is Christian-like in that he tries to manipulate people to do things, but it has to be their personal choice to do it. The same goes for Abaddon.

Sometimes I wonder if that was why Juliet was ostracized from the society, not for killing somebody. Many key figures we have seen seem bored and not perturbed about death. Maybe they were upset with Juliet for taking action herself contrary to the usual mind games to convince people to do something that they want, not for the actual murder.

There are a few holes in my theory, especially the Juliet speculation, but I think that it boils down to some rule about free will and who is allowed to do things and who is only allowed to influence things.

Edit to add: The Richard of the past seems like more of a leader...maybe something has changed from the 50s Richard to the current Richard (i.e. he's dead and walking now).

The Richard of the past seems like more of a leader...maybe something has changed from the 50s Richard to the current Richard (i.e. he's dead and walking now).

Didnt he seem like the leader in LaFleur? I am so confused about this. He seems like the leader and like he is doing a great job.

I think that he is second in command. If they dont have a potential leader, Richard takes over until he can find someone worthy again.

Didnt he seem like the leader in LaFleur? I am so confused about this. He seems like the leader and like he is doing a great job.

I think that he is second in command. If they dont have a potential leader, Richard takes over until he can find someone worthy again.

Time travel is so confusing...I would say he definitely seemed to be acting as leader in the 50s, although he defers to Jacob and others leadership there, too...but he seems more of a leader in the 50s and 70s than in the future where he is manipulating behind the scenes.

I like your idea of Richard as second in command...kind of a Number One if the ship's captain is unavailable?

maybe the 'leader' of the hostiles can't be a native - it has to be someone from off the island - Widmore, Ben, Locke.

I like your idea of Richard as second in command...kind of a Number One if the ship's captain is unavailable?

First Mate on the Black Rock, for instance? ;)

First Mate on the Black Rock, for instance? ;)

Kind of...:biggrin: