Who Truly Deserved The Iron Throne?

Hey everyone, let's dive into the ultimate Game of Thrones debate: who really deserved to win? The series finale stirred up a whirlwind of opinions, and years later, fans are still passionately arguing about the rightful ruler of Westeros. We're going to break down the major contenders, examine their journeys, and discuss why some were more deserving than others. This isn't just about who sat on the Iron Throne at the end; it's about who earned it, based on their actions, motivations, and the impact they had on the realm. So, grab your direwolves (figuratively, of course), and let's get started!

Daenerys Targaryen: The Dragon Queen's Ambitions

Daenerys Targaryen's journey is one of the most compelling in Game of Thrones. From a timid girl sold into marriage to a powerful queen commanding dragons and armies, her transformation is nothing short of epic. Her initial goal – to reclaim her family's throne and liberate the oppressed – resonated with many viewers. She vowed to break the wheel of tyranny and bring justice to the realm. Her actions in Essos, particularly in Slaver's Bay, where she freed slaves and established a semblance of order, solidified her as a liberator in the eyes of many. Dany's charisma, her unwavering belief in her cause, and her connection to her dragons made her a force to be reckoned with. Her supporters believed she had the potential to be a just and fair ruler, a breath of fresh air after generations of Targaryen rule. However, her character had a dark side that was not always obvious. Her belief in absolute power and her willingness to use violence to achieve her goals were often on display. The turning point for many was the burning of King's Landing. This act of indiscriminate violence, fueled by years of pent-up anger and a growing paranoia, shattered the image of the liberator and solidified her descent into the Mad Queen. For many, this act proved she was unfit to rule. Even with the best of intentions, her lack of experience in Westeros, combined with a susceptibility to advisors and her own emotional volatility, ultimately led to her downfall. Did the ends justify the means? Was her vision of a better world worth the cost of countless lives? These are some questions that have been asked during the run time of the show.

The dragon queen, in the earlier seasons of the show, was everything that fans could have wanted in a queen. But when she returned to Westeros, she was already set to go mad. Her decisions ultimately led to her downfall, and while she did have some support from fans of the show, she did not deserve to win.

The Pros and Cons of Daenerys' Rule

• Pros: Liberator of slaves, strong leader, charismatic, dragon control.
• Cons: Ruthless, prone to violence, inexperienced in Westeros politics, the burning of King's Landing.

Jon Snow: The Reluctant Hero

Ah, Jon Snow, the brooding, honorable, and perpetually burdened hero. Jon's journey is a classic hero's tale, filled with selflessness, duty, and sacrifice. From his humble beginnings as a bastard of Winterfell to his rise as a leader of the Night's Watch and a key player in the war against the White Walkers, Jon consistently put the needs of others before his own. His commitment to honor and justice, his ability to inspire loyalty, and his willingness to fight for the greater good made him a compelling character and a potential ruler. Unlike Daenerys, Jon was familiar with the politics of Westeros and understood the complexities of ruling. His time at the Wall taught him about leadership, responsibility, and the importance of diplomacy. His relationship with Daenerys, though complicated by their familial ties and conflicting goals, showed his capacity for love and compassion. However, Jon's reluctance to embrace power was also his biggest flaw. He never actively sought the throne, and his lack of ambition made him a less effective leader in the cutthroat world of Westeros. His loyalty often blinded him to the realities of power, and he often struggled to make difficult decisions. His killing of Daenerys, while a necessary act to stop her descent into madness, further complicated his claim to the throne. Ultimately, Jon's heart was in the right place, and he possessed the qualities of a good ruler, but his desire to be free of responsibility meant that he was not the best choice to rule the Seven Kingdoms.

The Case for Jon Snow

• Pros: Honorable, selfless, experienced in leadership, understood Westeros politics, good relationship with the Starks.
• Cons: Reluctant to rule, lacked ambition, struggles with difficult decisions, killing Daenerys.

Tyrion Lannister: The Master of Wit and Wisdom

Tyrion Lannister, the imp, was one of the most beloved characters in Game of Thrones. He was incredibly clever, witty, and had a great sense of understanding what others could not. From his cunning schemes during the War of the Five Kings to his role as Hand of the Queen, Tyrion consistently demonstrated his intelligence, political acumen, and ability to navigate the treacherous world of Westeros. He was the voice of reason in a realm consumed by madness and violence. Tyrion's perspective as an outsider, combined with his deep understanding of history and human nature, allowed him to see solutions others missed. He was also a pragmatist, willing to compromise and negotiate to achieve peace and stability. His flaws, namely his love for wine and women and his occasional self-destructive tendencies, often made him vulnerable. His betrayal of his family and his eventual fall from grace as Hand of the Queen diminished his claim to the throne. While Tyrion possessed many of the qualities of a good ruler, his personal failings and his association with the Targaryens made him an imperfect choice to rule the Seven Kingdoms. It could be argued that he was more suited to be a counselor and advisor than to rule. Tyrion ultimately served as the Hand of the King to Bran, and was one of the most influential people in the realm. His wit and wisdom played a crucial role in bringing peace and stability to the realm. The impact he had on the show was incredible.

Why Tyrion Was a Strong Contender

• Pros: Brilliant strategist, politically savvy, pragmatic, good at diplomacy, voice of reason.
• Cons: Personal flaws, association with Targaryens, prone to self-destructive behavior.

Bran Stark: The Three-Eyed Raven

Bran Stark, the seemingly unassuming cripple, underwent the most transformative journey of all. As the Three-Eyed Raven, Bran possessed the ability to see the past, present, and future. This unique gift gave him a profound understanding of Westeros' history and the forces that shaped it. He had a unique perspective on the motivations of the characters in the show. Bran's detachment from emotions, his ability to see the bigger picture, and his inherent understanding of the flow of time and events made him a somewhat controversial choice. Supporters argued that his ability to see the future made him the perfect ruler to guide Westeros towards a more stable and prosperous future. The fact that he was the only character that knew the true story of Westeros made him worthy to rule. He was not interested in power or ambition. His lack of personal ambition was a major factor in his claim to the throne. He would do whatever it took to keep peace in Westeros. While critics argue that his detachment and lack of empathy made him a cold and distant ruler, and that his ability to see the future could be used for manipulation and control. Some fans also thought it was unfair that he was the ruler, but in the end, it was a decision that was made by the council.

The Advantages of Bran's Rule

• Pros: Sees the past, present, and future; detached from emotion; understands Westeros history; not interested in personal power.
• Cons: Detached, lack of empathy, potential for manipulation.

Who Should Have Won? A Conclusion

So, who should have won the Game of Thrones? Ultimately, there's no single, easy answer. Each character had their strengths and weaknesses, their virtues and flaws. Daenerys had the charisma and vision but lacked the experience and was prone to destructive impulses. Jon was honorable and selfless but lacked ambition and struggled with leadership. Tyrion possessed the intellect and political acumen, but his personal failings and associations undermined his claim. Bran, as the Three-Eyed Raven, offered a unique perspective but lacked the emotional connection needed to rule. The show made it clear that there was no