The NDC’s humiliating defeat has led to an inquest. Whether or not the result will be favourable, John Mahama’s failure, attributed to betrayal and incompetence of some members, shows interesting parallels with the demise of Eddard Stark.
The manner of Mahama’s defeat at the polls has been so shocking that many have referred to the ineptitude of his underlings. The parliamentary candidates are believed to have been negligent or complacent, or both. In the face of such accusations, Mahama has been portrayed as one who has suffered injustice for the good he has done the country. The stories on the streets are varied, but they all crystallise into this: Mahama has been betrayed.
Whether or not his interventions in infrastructure are enough to cover the allegations of corruption against his person (CHRAJ ruling notwithstanding), it has been whispered that the actions of babies with sharp teeth undermined his national efforts. The jury is still out on who these culprits of betrayal are, however. Ever since Jerry Rawlings made that reference, the public has pointed blaming fingers at whomever they wish. And the sharp shooting tongues of members of the government have given credence to the founder’s words, some have opined. When people spoke of incompetence, elements of government referred the questioners to similar or worse situations in the previous administration. If you had told one of them, “You are a thief. True or false,” they would have answered, “The others stole gargantually, that is a fact.” Perhaps! But in doing this, they forgot that they had not absolved themselves of blame either.
And president Mahama presided over this. Perhaps he was too busy to see. He was building roads and hospitals. He was making sure press freedom reached Montie. It is not completely right to overlook the infrastructural development he has achieved by saying it is his duty. If that were the case, then his government was doing what it was supposed to do. For his detractors though, it is rightly worrying for a man of his vast political experience to have suffered this amount of betrayal. In a way, it pointed to his own flaws, if not the strange workings of the big-talkers of the NDC…just like Ned Stark.
First time readers would swear Littlefinger owes the Tullys nothing but good intentions. Most importantly, he helped Cat meet with Ned discreetly. In hindsight though, it is clear he has been sabotaging everyone he comes across: LF convinces Lysa to murder her husband; He connives to betray Ned’s effort at removing the Lannisters, and then murders Lysa Arryn. The schemer from Braavos is currently playing a deadly game with Sansa, some dull girl be like that, which could bite him hard in the butt. Amen to that.
Incidentally, both men enjoyed only short tenures in office having succeeded their dead leaders. Ned wanted to move away from the establishment that was the Lannisters and their incestuous ways; betrayal cost him his head. Mahama sought to follow Mills in a way that seemed to lead away from the Rawlingses; he lost at a democratic guillotine sharp with baby teeth.
The charming reflections that both of them cast seem to be disappearing with time. It would seem unfair to their situations. They represented a surreal departure from the politics of their world. Compare a soft-spoken, youthful Mahama to his political opponents, and you would expect something true and beautiful. His ability to convey his message in simple terms has been a defining aspect of his career. Perhaps, what he lacked, in the voter’s mind at least, was the ability to send a Lord Beric Dondarrion to apprehend a few corrupting influences. As for Ned, he failed to apprehend his own enemies by seizing the throne when the chance arose. In a world as unforgiving as that, your head was the last thing you needed.
Ghana’s Game of Thrones (#Ghgot) is an analysis of events and characters in A Song of Ice and Fire and the Ghanaian political scene. Rather than drawing a like-for-like comparison between the characters considered, the features seek to juxtapose events in the characters of the series with similar events on the Ghanaian scene. Thus, it is a typical “4 Game of Thrones Moments on the Ghanaian Political Scene,” or “The 3 times John Mahama was Ned Stark,” kind of analysis. Unless where stated explicitly, the parallels drawn are to be taken at face value. They are in no way an attempt to predict or portray the real political and moral lives of the persons concerned.
This is written without judgement.