Game of Thrones: Fiction or Reality?

Since the new season of Game of Thrones is coming out on Sunday, I thought this would make an opportune time to organize and present my reflections of the series. No doubt there are thousands of interpretations of the “true meaning” of Game of Thrones, and I do not claim to know with certainty what George R. R. Martin originally intended. Nonetheless I have a few interesting ideas that I would like to share, and welcome the skepticism that anyone expresses towards them.

In my opinion, the world of Westeros is merely a Middle Ages version of the current world order. Think of it this way. Westeros had only recently risen from a terrible age under the tyranny of Aerys Targaryen. I would submit that this represents the Cold War order where the entire world population lived under the threat of MAD (mutually assured destruction) as opposed to the Mad King. Following the death of Targaryen, a brief age of peace and prosperity arises under the leadership of Robert Beratheon, which I believe represents the American hegemonic world order of the 1990s and early 2000s. However, following the death/murder of Beratheon, there comes a violent struggle for power, which we are observing in the series now. I believe this represents the shift from a more stable American unipolar world towards a multipolar world where numerous countries have a similar amount of power, thereby creating environment ripe for a power struggle.  This is very similar to the period before World War 1 when British power began to decline while Germany and the US began to rival Britain as military/industrial powers.  Thus we have our current world order. Now where do the characters stand?

Kings Landing obviously represents the financial and political power centers of the western world, namely New York and Washington DC. In our 21^st century world, the iron throne is capital, financial power, GDP, and technological and military superiority. America and the EU still have the advantage over the rest of the world in this regard, but the future is not so certain.

The same is true for the Lannisters and Tyrells in Kings Landing. While these two houses have a strong hold on the iron throne, any viewer of the series knows there are several threats to their power, the most obvious being the arrogance of King Joffrey. Joffrey represents nationalism, pride, and the national myth that any one nation or empire is permanent. His leadership contains a unique blend of the stupidity and audacity of the Tea Party and the cruelty and pride of neoconservatives. The rest of the Lannisters are more intelligent and competent in wielding power. While Joffrey represents the extremism of the Tea Party, his grandfather Tywin represents John Bohner. He approaches political power far more conservatively, and prefers a patient and incremental approach to change as opposed to Joffrey who wants to take more drastic measures. Tyrian represents an even more moderate part of the Republican Party since he constantly questions his family’s actions yet remains loyal to them when it counts. I believe this is called a RINO (Republican In Name Only) is contemporary society.

The Tyrells represent the Democratic Party. While they also obtain their power through wealth like the Lannisters, they have a more sympathetic view of the poor, and see a positive public image as an egalitarian leader and champion of the poor as the key to power. I see Margaery Tyrell as a Hillary Clinton figure. She appears popular and sympathetic to the public, but is pragmatic and cold on the inside. Nonetheless, despite their differences, the Lannisters and Tyrells (Republicans and Democrats) are part of the same system of wealth and corruption and in most cases are indistinguishable from each other.  

Then there is the rest of Westeros, the most notable being the Stark family. The Stark family represents the political elements that were once powerful in the 20^th century but have fallen short in the 21^st century Gilded Age, labor unions. Once the champions of the worker and the average man, the power of labor unions has diminished in the post Citizens United era. The problem with both the Starks and labor unions is that they refused to adapt to changing political climates. In a world where cheap labor can easily be found overseas, labor unions are more harm to workers in America than help. The same goes for Ned Stark’s obsession with honesty and honor, which leads to his public execution. Like labor unions, the Starks had a brief period of Occupy Wallstreet in the north but were easily crushed due to their inability to lead and manage an army.

However there are two Starks that seem to be competent. Aria and Brandt are the only two Starks whose stories I quite enjoyed. They may not be apart of some large army, but they do play an important part of the story and they seem to know things that others don’t, particularly Brandt who can break into the minds of animals and see the future. These characters also thrive on being independent and antiestablishment. That’s why I see them as pro internet freedom groups like Anonymous, Wikileaks, and the various Pirate Parties trolling European democracies. In the end, these two Starks may prove far more capable of avenging their father than Rob ever could.

Then there are the brothers without banners who are manipulated by a monotheistic cult dedicated to the Lord of Light.  In my opinion this cult is a reference to an Abrahamic religion, and one with a particular violent following that supports murder and terrorism as a means to achieving political objectives. I need go no further in this comparison and will allow you to draw your own conclusions on which of the Abrahamic religions fit this perspective.

Finally we get to the big threats to the system. Daenerys Targaryen is the most fascinating character to look at from a political perspective. She is charismatic, pragmatic, and most importantly populist. Daenerys arguably has the most loyal army in the entire series since she freed them all from slavery. She has the hordes of the masses of Easteros at her back as she slowly makes her way to Kings Landing, not to mention she has dragons. Daenerys and her army represent the greatest challenge to the Washington Consensus, the developing world. I see the people of Easteros as the impoverished people of the former third world who have become frustrated by the inequality in the distribution of the benefits of free trade between the global north and south. This is reflected in mass protests such as the Arab Spring. Global income inequality is one of the greatest threats to global stability, just as Daenerys’s armies are to Westeros.  Daenerys’s dragons represent the other foreign threat to the power of the west, the rise of China as an economic power. It’s no secret that China’s economy will over take the size of the US economy in the coming years. It doesn’t mean that China will become the new unipolar power, but there is a general fear in the US that this may come to pass. China’s economic power and the demands for a more equitable international system by the peoples of the developing world demonstrate a shift in the world order that could possibly overthrow the Washington Consensus. Daenerys represents a shift in her world order. Her image harkens back to the great 20^th century dictators such as Castro, Lenin, Ho Chi Minh, and Mao who rose to power by the support of the masses and ruled over them with an iron fist and a unified struggle towards so called “equality” and “freedom.”

In addition to the human threats to the American world order, there are also natural ones. I think the most obvious comparison that can be made between the 21^st century and Westeros is the winter that is hurdling towards both. The one thing that everyone can agree to fear in Westeros is the arrival of zombified White Walkers from beyond the wall. I see this prolonged winter as the threat of Climate Change. The only thing that separates Westeros from utter chaos is The Wall.  I believe that The Wall is an allegory for humanity’s infrastructure: Roads, bridges, tunnels, temperature control, airports internet, satellite cable, hand held devices and any other modern convenience we have in the 21^st century. These things keep us safe from the harsh elements of mother nature (in most cases). The other side of  The Wall represents primitive human life that lived at the mercy of mother nature, and Westeros’s fear of that represents 21^st century civilization’s fear of once again descending into primitive society due to an apocalyptic scenario. Climate Change of course provides many possible apocalyptic scenarios that threaten major urban centers and the integrity of our infrastructure such as rising sea levels, fires, extinction of insects, tornados, tropical weather, and flooding near rivers and lakes. These possible disasters are represented in the coming of winter in Westeros. Such a winter has the potential to change everything in the story line, just as the environmental impacts of climate change have the potential to produce instability world wide in the 21^st century.

Therefore, perhaps Kings Landing is not so different from Washington DC. As politicians bicker about nonsense, the hordes of Easteros and the winter of the north get closer and closer to destroying the entire order of the kingdom. Either the kingdom will rise above the pettiness of nationalist pride, or a new order will bloom out of the ruins of the old.