▶ Watch the original YouTube video
Is Benjamin Really the Best Fit to Be King of Kakin? A 15-Year Analysis of Hunter x Hunter’s Succession Arc
A deep dive into whether Prince Benjamin of Kakin possesses the qualities needed to rule the kingdom reveals a critical tension between raw power and genuine leadership ability. Online discussions among Hunter x Hunter fans suggest that strength alone does not determine fitness for kingship, raising broader questions about institutional design and the nature of legitimate authority.
What Happened
The Kakin Kingdom succession arc of Hunter x Hunter presents a complex political struggle among multiple princes competing for the throne. Prince Benjamin stands out as the physically strongest and most powerful candidate, possessing superior martial abilities and Nen techniques compared to his siblings. This has sparked significant debate within the fan community about whether Benjamin’s overwhelming strength makes him the most suitable candidate to rule Kakin, or whether other qualities matter more for effective kingship.
Why It Matters
The question of Benjamin’s fitness for kingship extends beyond simple character evaluation. It touches on fundamental themes that Hunter x Hunter has consistently explored: the relationship between power and legitimacy, the dangers of systems that equate strength with authority, and whether institutional design can inadvertently select for the wrong type of leader. This debate reflects broader real-world concerns about how societies choose their leaders and what qualities should matter most.
Background
The Kakin Kingdom succession arc began serialization in 2014 and represents a departure from Hunter x Hunter’s typical battle-focused narrative. Instead, it centers on political intrigue and institutional conflict. The kingdom operates under an implicit rule: the strongest individual becomes king. This system has shaped Kakin’s history and culture, creating a tradition where absolute power through force is the primary path to authority. Benjamin embodies this tradition perfectly—he is the most formidable fighter among the candidates and demonstrates an unwavering commitment to domination and control.
Key Points
- Benjamin’s Strength vs. Leadership Qualities: While Benjamin excels in combat ability and Nen mastery, he lacks crucial leadership attributes such as empathy, long-term vision, and genuine concern for his subjects’ welfare.
- Institutional Fit: Benjamin perfectly embodies what the Kakin succession system has historically demanded—a ruler who consolidates power through absolute force—yet this alignment may reveal systemic flaws rather than genuine suitability.
- The Power-Legitimacy Gap: Across multiple anime and narrative traditions, strength does not automatically confer the right to rule or guarantee effective governance.
- Comparative Analysis: Other princes demonstrate stronger judgment, empathy, and long-term vision, suggesting that Benjamin’s dominance in raw power masks deficiencies in other critical areas.
- Fan Consensus: Online communities express concern that Benjamin’s rule would create an authoritarian state, prioritizing control over citizen welfare and national prosperity.
- Thematic Significance: Hunter x Hunter author Togashi appears intentionally highlighting how institutional design can select for destructive leadership, using Benjamin as a case study.
Comparative Analysis: Benjamin Against Other Princes
A systematic comparison of the royal candidates reveals Benjamin’s limitations. While Benjamin scores five stars in raw strength, he rates only two stars in judgment, one star in empathy, and two stars in long-term vision. By contrast, princes like Fugetsu and Momoze demonstrate superior judgment and empathy, though with less martial prowess. This disparity suggests that the Kakin succession system, by privileging strength above all else, systematically filters out candidates with the emotional intelligence and strategic thinking necessary for stable, prosperous governance.
Historical parallels from other narrative works—such as Code Geass and Attack on Titan—demonstrate that characters driven purely by the desire for power, without humanitarian motivation, typically lead to societal decline. Benjamin shows no evidence of caring for his subjects’ wellbeing; his ambition appears rooted entirely in personal domination. This contrasts sharply with other complex power-seeking characters who at least harbor some human connection or broader purpose.
Online Community Perspectives
Concerns About Authoritarianism: Twitter users frequently express worry that Benjamin’s rule would establish a dictatorship, with one common refrain being “If Benjamin becomes king, Kakin will become a totalitarian state.” Many commenters note that while Benjamin is undeniably strong, he lacks the qualities necessary for legitimate kingship.
Systemic Critique: Discussion threads on 5channel and similar forums reveal a more sophisticated analysis. Rather than simply criticizing Benjamin as an individual, participants question whether the Kakin succession system itself is fundamentally flawed. This represents a shift from character evaluation to institutional critique—recognizing that the problem may not be Benjamin specifically, but the mechanism that selects leaders based purely on combat ability.
Narrative Interest vs. Welfare: YouTube commenters have noted an important distinction: “Benjamin becoming king would be interesting as a story, but whether it would make him happy is another question entirely.” This observation separates dramatic potential from actual suitability, suggesting that Benjamin’s ascension might serve the narrative while harming both the character and his potential subjects.
Historical Alignment: Some commenters defend Benjamin by noting that his strength and desire for control align with Kakin’s historical traditions. This perspective acknowledges that Benjamin fits the kingdom’s established pattern, even if that pattern itself may be problematic.
The Paradox of Institutional Fit
A critical insight emerges from this analysis: Benjamin may be simultaneously the best and worst candidate for kingship, depending on how the question is framed. If “fitness” means conforming to Kakin’s historical institutional requirements—embodying the archetype of the absolute ruler who consolidates power through force—then Benjamin is indeed the ideal candidate. He perfectly represents what the system has always demanded.
However, if “fitness” means possessing the qualities necessary to foster national prosperity, citizen welfare, and long-term stability, then Benjamin is poorly suited. A ruler motivated purely by the desire for domination, lacking empathy and broader vision, would likely preside over a state characterized by oppression and eventual decline.
This paradox suggests that Hunter x Hunter is deliberately highlighting a fundamental problem: systems that select leaders based on strength alone will inevitably choose rulers whose primary motivation is power itself. The institution creates the very type of leader it attracts, establishing a self-reinforcing cycle.
Broader Thematic Implications
Throughout its narrative, Hunter x Hunter has consistently challenged the equation of strength with legitimacy. The Chimera Ant arc demonstrated that even powerful beings can possess pure motivations—Royal Guard Neferpitou’s desire to protect the King revealed that strength and motivation are independent variables. Similarly, the succession arc appears designed to show that strength and suitability are equally independent.
Benjamin’s character embodies a warning that appears across multiple acclaimed narratives: Code Geass, Death Note, and Attack on Titan all explore how individuals driven purely by the desire for power, regardless of their capabilities, lead societies toward destruction. Benjamin fits this archetype precisely. His complete alignment with his desire for domination, without any countervailing human connection or broader purpose, marks him as a cautionary figure rather than an aspirational leader.
The deeper message appears to be that Kakin’s institutional design is itself the problem. By creating a system where only the strongest can rule, the kingdom has engineered a mechanism that selects for authoritarianism. Benjamin is not uniquely flawed; rather, he is the logical endpoint of a flawed system.
Predictions and Conclusions
If Benjamin were to secure the throne, the most likely outcome would not be national flourishing but rather deepening internal contradictions. A state governed purely through coercion, without regard for citizen initiative or welfare, tends toward stagnation and eventual decline. Benjamin’s rule might initially appear stable due to his overwhelming power, but it would lack the legitimacy, innovation, and social cohesion necessary for long-term prosperity.
The narrative arc may ultimately use Benjamin’s potential kingship not as a triumphant conclusion but as a catalyst for systemic revelation. Only when the contradictions of his rule become apparent might the necessity for institutional reform become clear—suggesting that the true story lies not in Benjamin’s victory, but in what that victory exposes about Kakin’s fundamental problems.
The question “Is Benjamin fit to be king?” thus contains multiple answers. He is institutionally fit—perfectly aligned with what Kakin has historically demanded. He is tactically fit—capable of consolidating and maintaining power. But he is strategically unfit—lacking the qualities necessary for genuine governance. And he is morally unfit—driven by personal domination rather than public welfare. Hunter x Hunter appears to be using Benjamin’s character to demonstrate that these different types of fitness can diverge sharply, and that strength alone guarantees none of them.
