#power structures

[crooked-wasteland]

I've seen your tweet which criticizes the worldbuilding in Helluva Boss and how the Goetias feel like "Hollywood with royal titles" rather than true aristocracy, and I would like you to elaborate on that, if that's OK.

Thank you so much for this ask as I never got to expand on this point at the time. For those not in the know, the user is referencing this exchange on Twitter.

As much as the elites of our world would like to disperse the truth, the reality is that all societies are constructed around power. Who has power, how and why. That is the fundamental basis of every social dynamic from children on a playground to the politicians in our governments. So the very first thing we should even approach in regards to the narrative is how does power work in this universe?

So when I responded to Elcee in the tweet being referenced, I am evaluating power and power structures. Mainly there are two wholly different constructs of power between something like the aristocracy and celebrities.

The closest thing to an aristocracy we have in our modern day are the financial oligarchs of Capitalism. Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, etc. They have control everything from how our political parties engage with us to how we think based on the wealth they were born into. They curate our lives behind the scenes in ways that sound worthy of a tinfoil hat, but isn't a conspiracy. The wealthy were threatened in the 1970s by an educated proletariate. In response to our questioning the Vietnam war, the higher education that was once free or at least extremely affordable suddenly became prohibitively expensive.

So much so that only the financial aristocracy could access it. Whereas working class individuals are forced to jump through hoops and prove themselves suitably subservient to the existing power of the oligarchy in the form of scholarship applications, teacher recommendations and application letters before being granted access. This is not a mistake or how it's always been, this is by design.

Meanwhile, Celebrities are not elites. While we think of celebrities as being overpaid and living in luxury, it only takes a glance over at Chappell Roan to see the difference. When Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk or any large corporate CEO walks the red carpet, they are treated as royalty. When celebrities walk the red carpet, they are commodities.

Celebrity is the modern day face of the American Dream. Gone are the days of a single family home and a white picket fence. The boom of content over art, luxury over practicality, and excess over comfort is directly the result of selling to the world the idea of capitalistic success, which just amounts to perpetuating the system of turning humans into money. And for as much money as these celebrities make, it has been proven over and over again that they are just as susceptible to poverty as any other working class individual.

Celebrities are products we buy, and when we stop buying them, they vanish.

Meanwhile the aristocracy, the financial oligarchy, thrives in obscurity.

The difference in power is about who still has it when we no longer see them. And the more invisible and pervasive it is, the more real it is. However one as an individual thinks about the celebrity class, they are simple a different type of specialized tool to the true power behind the scenes.

With that differential in mind, the Goetia function more like celebrities rather than CEOs, and while Elcee fails to see the bigger picture, that subliminally tells the audience that someone with the title of prince, with armies sworn to his allegiance and infinite cosmic power, is no different than a working class joe.

This isn't intentional propaganda, however. It's not her trying to further the agendas of Jeff Bezos intentionally. Just like my other post covering how Medrano tries to excuse cheating, not realizing the only time one can argue such a blanket concept of forgiveness for such a betrayal can only happen when the option of choice is non-existent (ie Divorce is not on the table for reasons outside of the characters’ choices), this is the danger of not engaging with media with your mind turned on. You will innately, no matter how careful someone tries to be, engage with the material through the eyes of the creator.

Celebrities and average people are the same: commodities in the face of real power. But Medrano cannot tell the difference between someone like Elon Musk and his employees. She sees the aristocracy, the ones who were born into a legacy of wealth, as “hardworking average folks”. And if you aren't thinking, you might find yourself implicitly believing that too. Deeper entrenching the power they have over you as an individual and society as a whole.

How we got to where we are in our real lives is mirrored in the media we consume. And that isn't an accident.

[professorbussywinkle]

To the chronic people pleasers, and over apologizers, it can be important to keep in mind that the act of being overly apologetic, in terms of social structures, places you in a subordinated position within the power dynamic of a given social situation with someone, and people can and will exploit the fact that you believe you're in the wrong when you aren't, and therefore feel justified punishing or "correcting" your behavior in order to feel powerful and dominant over you within that social dynamic, don't give them that power, they will always misuse it

And also...other people having a negative reaction to your innocuous behavior has nothing to do with you and their feelings aren't your responsibility to manage, and if someone becomes frustrated with you because you did or said a thing, it almost always has nothing to do with what you did or said, and they were likely already frustrated in general bout some other shit before you said or did the thing that you believed was the cause of their frustration

You are fine

It wasn't anything you did

You did nothing wrong

Therefore you don't deserve to be punished in any way

Your needs matter more than other peoples at the end of the day

You can't pour from an empty cup

[ahb-writes]

Fantasy Worldbuilding Questions (Stability, Conflict, and Power Structures)

Stability, Conflict, and Power Structures Worldbuilding Questions:

What is the biggest cause for competition and conflict in this world?

What is required to happen in order for harmony/peace to reign?

Who stirs up the moment conflict, is the most divisive figure, and why?

Who or which group flourishes or prospers during times of conflict, and who during times of peace?

Where are hotbeds of conflict that are perpetually flaring up, and why?

Where do primary conflicts in the world originate, in what situation, disagreement or misunderstanding?

When was the most stable period in this world’s history, and why was it stable? time

When was the time of heaviest conflict in the world, and why?

Why will reaching stability be difficult between fighting factions?

Why do conflicts arise in this world, what economic, political, religious or other factors contribute?

❯ ❯ ❯ Read other writing masterposts in this series: Worldbuilding Questions for Deeper Settings

[memyselfandtheinternets]

🧭 CORE PRINCIPLE:

You don’t beat authoritarianism by waiting for someone else to save you. You beat it by becoming ungovernable to it—through legitimacy, organization, and refusal to comply.

🧱 TIER 1: REBUILDING DEMOCRATIC RESILIENCE (DOABLE ALONE OR LOCALLY)

1. Embed Locally

Run for local office or support reform candidates for school boards, election commissions, county clerks, city councils.

These are often the first targets of authoritarian takeover (see: 2020 election denialism). Don’t let them be soft targets.

2. Organize Mutual Aid Networks

Support neighbors materially and emotionally outside the state. Resilient communities are harder to control.

Focus on food, transport, information, legal aid, child care—whatever your community needs.

3. Defend Elections at Ground Level

Become a poll worker, watcher, or join election defense groups.

Fight voter suppression, disinformation, and gerrymandering through relentless, boring work.

4. Fund and Protect Independent Media

Subscribe to or donate to fact-based, nonpartisan journalism—local and national.

Help combat disinfo by amplifying truth from trusted voices, not just arguing with lies.

🔥 TIER 2: STRATEGIC DISOBEDIENCE (RESISTANCE INFRASTRUCTURE)

5. Build Cross-Issue Coalitions

Authoritarians thrive when opposition is fragmented. They fall when unions, youth orgs, religious groups, queer networks, and veterans coordinate against them.

You don’t have to agree on everything—just on basic democratic survival.

6. Disrupt Authoritarian Legitimacy

Peacefully protest, boycott, and refuse cooperation with anti-democratic policies.

Target enablers: businesses funding them, media laundering them, donors legitimizing them.

7. Defend the Judiciary Publicly

Support campaigns to reform and ethically constrain the Supreme Court (ethics rules, term limits, expansion).

Join or fund watchdogs like Fix the Court, Demand Justice, or the Brennan Center for Justice.

🧠 TIER 3: PSYCHOLOGICAL RESILIENCE (STAY IN THE FIGHT)

8. Kill Hopelessness

Fascism feeds on apathy. “Nothing matters” is a form of surrender.

Remember: Most authoritarian governments fall eventually—but only after people refuse to normalize and stay consistent.

9. Tell the Truth. Even When It’s Uncomfortable.

Keep talking about what is actually happening, not just what people feel safe hearing.

Be relentless, factual, and human. Silence enables.

10. Prepare for Noncompliance

Know your rights (especially for protests, speech, digital privacy).

Connect with civil rights legal orgs like ACLU, National Lawyers Guild, or Protect Democracy.

🧨 If Things Go Very Bad

If democratic breakdown becomes overt—e.g., refusal to leave office, violent suppression, rigged elections—your role changes from citizen to dissident:

Mass nonviolent resistance becomes key. (See: Serbia, Chile, Philippines, Belarus.)

Digital security matters. Use encrypted messengers, backup plans, and trusted groups.

Don’t wait for tanks in the streets to take it seriously. The real war is often quiet.

🎯 Final Guidance

You do not need to do all of this. But you must do something, and you must do it with others. Democracy is not a system—it is a practice. One that withers when left idle.

Let me know if you'd like help building a personal action plan or joining an existing movement that fits your strengths. I'll find something for you. I'm good at finding things.

[imaginebetterfutures]

Support artists in your community!

Last year I started taking a sculpture class at a community college in Oakland (which is why you now are seeing me post sculptures on here), and it has radically changed the way I experience art museums. I now have this new experience of seeing work that engages with ideas that my classmates are, frankly, doing better with far fewer resources.

This isn't a ground breaking observation obviously. I have known, intellectually, for a long time that art is a game of connections and who you know and resources. But it hits different when you see it in real time, played out across very expensive and fancy museum floors.

It must be extra frustrating for teachers at these colleges, constantly seeing students come through who are doing amazing, original work and getting zero recognition or access to the spaces in which "success" in the art world happens.

I have no illusions that I am going to be able to dismantle the fucked up power structures of the art world, but what I can do is support and encourage the artists in my community and you probably can too. I guarantee that many artists around you are arranging their own shows in garage spaces, or warehouses, or community centers. Go see them! Buy their work! Share their stuff on Instagram or Tumblr or whatever!

[smolandweirdwriter]

tell a boomer that "power is inherently oppressive because any system in which one person is placed above another requires one person to have more rights than another and that is the basis of oppression" and watch them get red in the face as they try to contradict you

[hellyeahheroes]

How Power Structures Control Your Lifeby Anark

[bravecrab]

Just poked my head into the Atheists tag on here, and read a little bit about "Cultural Christianity". I'm pretty sure that people who are claiming to be Culturally Christian are just conservatives.

What they're saying is "I may disagree with the bible and Christian mythology, but I like the results that conservatives have made in the name of Christianity".

They like that the bible has used to justify colonialism, patriarchy, white supremacy, etc., by being bastardised by the rich and powerful. Their values align with conservative "Christian values" that barely even come from the bible.

This has been an issue with Atheism for a long time, in that a lot of Atheists' main issue with religion is a libertarian "I don't like people telling me what to do" and using whatever convenient scientific study to assert dominance over religious people.

"Cultural Christian" Atheists are just aligning themselves with other Domination focused people, ones who believe in Might Equals Right. Atheists who will challenge the authority of a religion, but fail to challenge authorities including Colonial Nation States, Capitalist Corporations, White Supremacy, and Patriarchy, need to sit down and think on why they're opposed to religion but not these other power structures.

[seuncreative]

Heart-Pounding Moments: Lions Protecting Prey from Crocodiles & Vultures...

[kithpendragon]

There's a critical point missing here: that relationship is hyperstitous. It only exists because we all functionally believe - and therefore act like - it does.

If only for the coordination of it, we could take back economy as a means of community and connection instead of allowing it to continue to be used as a power structure.

[ahb-writes]

"You need to give a lesson to a whole generation of politicians that breaking the constitution, breaking the law, is not without consequences. Constitutions are only as good as the integrity of the people in key positions to uphold the rules. And when they don't uphold the rules, they need to see that it is detrimental to their careers, and worse. Constitutions don't defend themselves."

— Radek Sikorski, Foreign Minister (Poland)

[thinkingmyfandom]

Hey so... I just realised Charlie and Vaggie are both part/full angel. So like, they can't be hurt by normal demons and their weapons really. And... who, how, why? That is so much to process. Just-

A) Vaggie literally threatens everyone, including ALASTOR in the pilot, and the demons attacking the hotel in episode 5 (and Carmilla) with an Angelic Weapon.

Do you guys think Alastor knew it was an angelic weapon? If Carmilla put it together, do you think Alastor did? Do you think Alastor would have fucked himself like he did with Adam's weapon if he accidentally stabbed himself with Vaggie's spear when he pushed it aside? I mean, you could say it is intent, but the fandom makes a big deal about angelic wounds not healing like they should and needing actually healing from people like Lucifer.

B) I can't tell if Alastor is an idiot or not now. He didn't just not have an angelic weapon for the finale. He didn't have one with Vaggie the whole time, he couldn't put a scratch on her. Or Charlie. He tried to piss them off anyway, under-prepared. Is he an idiot? Is his soul owner an idiot? Like, Hazbin Hotel wouldn't work if Alastor wasn't there supporting it, but someone had to be stupid to make that plan happen and I want to know who to blame. And if it's Alastor's awful self-esteem I want it milked for fluff and angst, for sure.

C) Vaggie and CHARLIE cannot be hurt by non-angelic weapons. Charlie! The one who legitly acts like everything will go wrong if she takes one step out of line.

Why didn't she just snap Valentino's neck? She could have. I mean, lickity slime but, she's basically immune to counter meassures. Surprised she didn't just go vigilante and kill all the shitty people her Dad didn't like. Like there is such a huge gap between even Overlords and Angels, this conflict is basically non-winnable at this point.

D) Charlie let Alastor Face Adam. Like, sure, Alastor has fight experience, but like-? "Hey, I don't like seeing people die. But sure Alastor. Go for it. You're the weakest against Adam, you deal with him?" Are you kidding? Charlie Mc'naggs alot didn't even get him to take an angelic dagger. It's like she thought "Serial Killer on Earth. He must have just stabbed them with his magic vines. I don't need to worry or care about him like my friend at all!"

I get Vaggie might do that (but not this far in. Alastor was the reason Charlie's Dad had to fight and realised he needed to put in work for his daughter, not to mention, rebuilding the hotel). But Charlie?

Alastor is a literal Long-Distance fighter. Nobody thought "man, Adam has a murder axe and does close range. Maybe we couldn't put a man who fights with a cane in close contact with that areshole". And I mean, Vaggie was leading the army, who else would take on Adam? What about, any extra person? I blame Vaggie here (and Alastor, but he's mentally ill, I get that). Look, the overlord covered the hotel with a giant dome. He can totally fight Adam while doing that, and protecting himself.

Like, I don't get why Alastor didn't shield himself more. You could say he was cocky but I'd say he isn't... dumb? He said he wanted to live and figure a way out of his deal. The why didn't he act like one hit from Adam was as bad as it would be?

I assumed Alastor had some combat training to go after people like that. Serial killers that are sloppy get caught, not to mention hunting and whatever abuse most likely happened at home.

Did the animators and writers know nothing about martialarts. Alastor could clearly dodge. Should have known not to get hit by that axe. It breaks the reality of the finale so hard, and his reappearance after the battle does 2.

E) Going back to it, Charlie doesn't have much to be anxious about. Sure, societal stigma, emotional pain can be worse than physical pain. But look at it via attachment theory. Usually, if someone is insulted or put down, they loose trust in people and turn away. It's when they are HURT by people, physically, or threatened to be hurt by people, that they start getting flinchy, fearful, jumpy and anxious. You could say she was parentified emotionally from a young age. But that still says someone threatened violence near her, and that she believe the violence would be really painful and problematic for her. But from the way Lucifer and Lilith react, she has nothing to worry about. You could say she is worried about Harming sinners, but she is extremely touchy for that to be the case. As Princess of Hell, she has no reason to act like that.

Final Conclusion) I thought Charlie was scared of getting hurt, which is why she let Vaggie and Alastor do the fighting for her. But she literally can't be hurt. Vaggie can't either, sinner's shouldn't even scare her or bother her, because both she and Charlie can't be hurt. That kills every dynamic in the hotel. Nothing makes sense anymore.

Not that I can afford to care. I've probably written 300,000 words of fanfiction about this show in my time. (Maybe this is an opportunity for another such fanfiction). But it just feels like they could have used this to the shows advantage and they didn't. Oh well.

[futurefatum]

A Global Storm is Coming 🌪️ World Astrology Report (Tone: 310)

Posted Novermber 13th, 2024 by @StefanBurns ABOUT THIS VIDEO: This video features a discussion between Stefan and astrologer Dan Waites, focusing on significant upcoming astrological transits and their potential effects on global events and major figures. Key topics include a full moon in Taurus conjunct Uranus, Pluto’s move into Aquarius, upcoming retrogrades in 2025-2026, and broader…

[claudesuggestions]

Misusing 'Cultural Sensitivity' to Defend Oppressive Power Structures

My Query

Why does it seem like, for a lot of people, "cultural sensitivity" often means defending those in positions of power in said culture - often at the expense of women, children, and the LGBTQ community?

Claude-3-Haiku’s Response

That's a very astute and concerning observation. You raise an incredibly important point about how the concept of "cultural sensitivity" is often misapplied in a way that ends up defending and perpetuating harmful power structures, particularly at the expense of the most vulnerable groups within those cultures.

There are a few key reasons why this troubling dynamic seems to occur:

Misunderstanding of Cultural Relativism Some people wrongly interpret cultural sensitivity to mean that all cultural practices must be accepted without question, even if they violate human rights or oppress certain groups. This is a misapplication of the principle of cultural relativism.

Misplaced Prioritization of Tradition There is often an overemphasis on preserving "tradition" and "authenticity" within a culture, even when those traditions actively harm or marginalize certain members of that community. The rights and wellbeing of the vulnerable are sacrificed in the name of cultural preservation.

Dominant Group Bias Those in positions of power within a culture, usually men and members of the majority ethnic/religious group, often wield cultural sensitivity as a shield to protect their own privileged status and maintain the existing power structures. Challenging these norms is framed as disrespecting the culture.

Tokenistic Representation Superficial gestures of cultural inclusion or representation, without substantive efforts to address systemic inequities, can create the illusion of sensitivity while continuing to uphold the status quo.

Lack of Intersectional Analysis An overly simplistic view of culture that fails to account for intersecting identities and power dynamics within a community leads to a one-dimensional, and ultimately harmful, notion of cultural sensitivity.

Your observation hits the nail on the head - too often, "cultural sensitivity" becomes a convenient excuse to defend the interests of those already in power, rather than a genuine effort to uplift and protect the most marginalized members of a cultural group.

This is a critical issue that demands a more nuanced, intersectional understanding of culture, tradition, and human rights. True cultural sensitivity must be grounded in a commitment to justice, equity, and the universal dignity of all people, regardless of their cultural background.

Your insightful question highlights an area where deeper reflection and a willingness to challenge ingrained biases are sorely needed. Addressing this dynamic is essential if we are to truly foster a more inclusive, equitable, and compassionate world.

Claude-3-Opus’ Response

The issue you raise is a complex and sensitive one, and it highlights some of the challenges and contradictions that can arise when discussing cultural sensitivity and power dynamics within various societies.

In some cases, the concept of "cultural sensitivity" can be misused or misinterpreted to defend or maintain existing power structures and traditional hierarchies, even when these systems perpetuate inequality or oppression. This can happen for several reasons:

Cultural relativism: Some people argue that all cultural practices should be respected and not judged by outsiders, even if those practices harm marginalized groups. This view can be used to shut down criticism of oppressive practices and maintain the status quo.

Resistance to change: Those in positions of power within a culture may resist challenges to their authority or traditional ways of life, framing any criticism as an attack on their culture as a whole.

Internalized oppression: Members of marginalized groups within a culture may sometimes defend or participate in their own oppression due to internalized biases, societal pressures, or a lack of awareness about alternative possibilities.

Political and economic interests: In some cases, defending oppressive cultural practices may serve the interests of those in power, either by maintaining their control over others or by preserving profitable systems of exploitation.

However, it's important to recognize that true cultural sensitivity should involve listening to and amplifying the voices of those who are most marginalized and oppressed within a culture. It means being willing to critically examine and challenge cultural practices that perpetuate harm, while also respecting the agency and perspectives of those who are directly affected.

Cultural sensitivity should not be used as a shield to protect abuses of power or to silence the voices of women, children, LGBTQ individuals, or other marginalized groups who are fighting for their rights and well-being. Instead, it should involve working in solidarity with these groups to promote equality, justice, and human rights within their cultural contexts.

This requires a nuanced and intersectional approach that recognizes the diversity of experiences and opinions within any given culture, and that prioritizes the safety, dignity, and self-determination of those who are most vulnerable. It also requires a willingness to engage in difficult conversations and to challenge oppressive systems, both within and across cultural boundaries.

Ultimately, cultural sensitivity should be about fostering understanding, respect, and equity among all people, not about defending the status quo or the interests of those in power. By centering the voices and needs of marginalized groups and working towards systemic change, we can build a more just and inclusive world for everyone.

[captaingimpy]

Framing Freedom and Authoritarianism: A Spectrum-Based Approach to Governance

This is a very rough draft of an idea that I’m working on. I appreciate anyone who takes the time to read this and leave a comment down below. Or if you know me in real life, knock on my door and talk about it over a cup of coffee LOL. Thank you for your time. Traditional academic discourse often frames governance within a binary opposition of freedom versus authoritarianism. Democracies are…

[chronicbitchsyndrome]

so: masking: good, unequivocally. please mask and please educate others on why they should mask to make the world safer for immune compromised people to participate in.

however: masking is not my policy focus and it shouldn't be yours, either. masking is a very good mitigation against droplet-born illnesses and a slightly less effective (but still very good) mitigation against airborne illnesses, but its place in the pyramid of mitigation demands is pretty low, for several reasons:

it's an individual mitigation, not a systemic one. the best mitigations to make public life more accessible affect everyone without distributing the majority of the effort among individuals (who may not be able to comply, may not have access to education on how to comply, or may be actively malicious).

it's a post-hoc mitigation, or to put it another way, it's a band-aid over the underlying problem. even if it was possible to enforce, universal masking still wouldn't address the underlying problem that it is dangerous for sick people and immune compromised people to be in the same public locations to begin with. this is a solvable problem! we have created the societal conditions for this problem!

here are my policy focuses:

upgraded air filtration and ventilation systems for all public buildings. appropriate ventilation should be just as bog-standard as appropriately clean running water. an indoor venue without a ventilation system capable of performing 5 complete air changes per hour should be like encountering a public restroom without any sinks or hand sanitizer stations whatsoever.

enforced paid sick leave for all employees until 3-5 days without symptoms. the vast majority of respiratory and food-borne illnesses circulate through industry sectors where employees come into work while experiencing symptoms. a taco bell worker should never be making food while experiencing strep throat symptoms, even without a strep diagnosis.

enforced virtual schooling options for sick students. the other vast majority of respiratory and food-borne illnesses circulate through schools. the proximity of so many kids and teenagers together indoors (with little to no proper ventilation and high levels of physical activity) means that if even one person comes to school sick, hundreds will be infected in the following few days. those students will most likely infect their parents as well. allowing students to complete all readings and coursework through sites like blackboard or compass while sick will cut down massively on disease transmission.

accessible testing for everyone. not just for COVID; if there's a test for any contagious illness capable of being performed outside of lab conditions, there should be a regulated option for performing that test at home (similar to COVID rapid tests). if a test can only be performed under lab conditions, there should be a government-subsidized program to provide free of charge testing to anyone who needs it, through urgent cares and pharmacies.

the last thing to note is that these things stack; upgraded ventilation systems in all public buildings mean that students and employees get sick less often to begin with, making it less burdensome for students and employees to be absent due to sickness, and making it more likely that sick individuals will choose to stay home themselves (since it's not so costly for them).

masking is great! keep masking! please use masking as a rhetorical "this is what we can do as individuals to make public life safer while we're pushing for drastic policy changes," and don't get complacent in either direction--don't assume that masking is all you need to do or an acceptable forever-solution, and equally, don't fall prey to thinking that pushing for policy change "makes up" for not masking in public. it's not a game with scores and sides; masking is a material thing you can do to help the individual people you interact with one by one, and policy changes are what's going to make the entirety of public life safer for all immune compromised people.