#the legislative aristocracy

[wonder-worker]

Noble girls received confusingly mixed messages about the clothing they should choose. The clearest Biblical guidance came from the author of 1 Timothy who had advised that ‘women should dress themselves modestly and decently in suitable clothing, not with their hair braided, or with gold, pearls or expensive clothes, but with good works’. This provided justification for generations of Christian authors who associated fine clothing with sinfulness. Jean de Meun, whose Roman de la Rose was to be found in many fifteenth-century noble houses, asserted that ‘a woman who wants to be beautiful . . . wants to wage war on Chastity’. Yet devotional books routinely indicated the high status of virgin martyrs and the Virgin Mary herself by depicting them in opulent and elegant garments, like the cloth of gold dress that St Cecilia wore over her hair shirt. The upper classes believed that ‘in a well-ordered society, consumption patterns would reflect the hierarchy of status’. In 1363 parliament had even introduced sumptuary laws outlining the types of clothing permissible to those of various stations. Gentlemen whose lands were worth less than £ 100 annually were forbidden to wear silk, embroidered clothing, gold jewellery ‘or any manner of fur’, and their wives and children likewise. Knights whose land was valued at less than 200 marks annually were forbidden to wear the most expensive wools and furs or cloth of gold, and even those receiving £ 1,000 a year could only wear ermine or cloth embroidered with jewels in their headwear. Although the legislation was repealed just over a year later, as Christopher Dyer has argued, it indicates the legislators’ ‘assumption that the higher aristocracy ought to wear’ opulent apparel that distinguished them from their inferiors.

One author who tried to steer a helpful middle course was Christine de Pisan, the daughter of an Italian physician and widow of one of the secretaries of Charles V of France...In her manual, Le Trésor de la Cité des Dames, Christine advised ‘the wise princess’ to ensure that ‘the clothing and the ornaments of her women, though they be appropriately beautiful and rich, be of a modest fashion, well-fitting and seemly, neat and properly cared for. There should be no deviation from this modesty nor any immodesty in the matter of plunging necklines or other excesses.'

-J.L. Laynesmith, "Cecily Duchess of York"

#gender tag #medieval #my post #15th century #english history #christine de pizan #fashion #sorta #queue

[badgermolebender]

A day in the life of Wu of the Hou-Ting Dynasty, King of all the Earth Lands, and Glorious Defender of Ba Sing Se, 54th Earth Monarch

Morning

* Wake up

* Get out of bed

* Get out of bed

* Come on, you really have to get out of bed now, you have responsibilities

* Get out of bed

* Breakfast - look over the day’s meeting schedule

* Read over reports from yesterday

* Consider writing Mako, he still hasn’t responded to your last letter

* Attend first meeting, with transportation ministers, discuss the new trains constructed by Kuvira and the funding needed to maintain the system

* Try not to freak out at the mention of Kuvira and the war, succeed — mostly

* Wish Mako was there, you could really use some of his straight-talking, no-nonsense comfort, he doesn’t need to put up with you, he doesn’t need your problems

* Attend second meeting, with financial ministers, argue with them over the new tax structure

* The next time one of them implies you are too young or inexperienced to know what you are doing you are going to scream

* NO! that’s what Auntie would do, you are not Auntie, you won’t let yourself be

* Succeed — for now

Midday

* Lunch - breathe, you can get through the rest of the day

* Consider writing to Mako, the worst thing that happens is he doesn’t respond, it’s not like he isn’t already annoyed with you

* Attend last meeting of the day, with cultural ministers, try once again to convince them to use their funds for a memorial for the victims of Lake Laogai rather than finishing The Earth Queen’s Temple, that it would be good to commemorate the history of the people not just the Royals

* Make no progress, argue them to a standstill

* Consider introducing legislation to undo centuries of discrimination against same-sex relationships

* Your ministers/the aristocracy/the remaining Dai Li would know, they would know

* They’d go after you, your reign, your life

* Decide to start small, tomorrow

Evening

* Dinner - try not to cry staring at the empty table

* Wish that your parents were alive

* Wish that any of your family were alive, so you weren’t king, so you didn’t have to do this, so you weren’t alone

* Feel guilty for thinking this, you’re doing good work, you know you are

* Read over reports from the day

* Wish you could run away to The Cave of the Two Lovers and live with the badgermoles

* Make notes for tomorrow’s meetings

* Consider writing to Mako, he hasn’t written back because he hates you

* He’s always hated you

* He’s always going to hate you

Night

* Go to bed

* Wish you weren’t so alone

* Wish he didn’t hate you

* Wish he could love you the way you love him

* Try not to cry yourself to sleep

* Fail

#avatar legend of korra #king wu #prince wu #lok #mako #wuko #wukoweek2024 #angst #not super Wuko #the ship is implied #Wu is mostly just sad #I was trying something

[just-late-roman-republic-things]

Power to the people! How democratic was Rome? And are we really in a position to judge? Today's notes, based on "Popular Power in the Roman Republic" by Alexander Yakobson:

Historians have argued for a long time about how democratic the republic was. Part of this is due to changes in what we know, but part of it also comes from our own expectations, biases, and current events. It is difficult not to project the political issues of our own time onto Rome.

The debate centers on whether Rome was effectively an oligarchy (rule by a small elite class), or if it had significant democratic elements, even if limited and flawed. This debate is as much about subjective interpretation, and what we think defines a "fair and representative government, as it is about Rome itself.

(Dēmokratia is also a Greek concept that doesn't quite correspond to ancient Roman values such as libertas, but Yakobson doesn't go into that.)

Yakobson asks whether we're comparing Rome to an ideal democratic system, and whether this is fair. He points out that both Rome and most modern democracies have similar flaws: wealth inequality; the wealthy holding most government offices; politicians being in bed with corporate interests; devices like gerrymandering and the electoral college to dilute the votes of certain groups; voters being pressured by social and economic connections; entire territories and underclasses without voting rights. Even in the most democratic countries today, how far is government and society actually shaped by the wishes of "the people"?

He also asks if ancient and modern democracies might both exemplify the iron law of oligarchy: the idea that every society, no matter its political system, eventually develops an elite class that controls most political power. Personally, I'm suspicious of that "law," and not just because its author Robert Michels eventually joined the Italian fascists because he thought democracy was obsolete. I think Michels overlooked the varying degree of accountability that different government structures promote, which can check abuses of power. E.g. in a democracy, regular elections can "punish" sufficiently unpopular politicians by voting in their opponents; autocrats have no such limitation.

(I'm surprised Yakobson quotes the iron law seriously, since he appears to be very pro-democracy and anti-war.)

Anyway, he provides a range of examples of Roman politicians behaving, and speaking, as if the popular vote does matter for their legislation and careers:

Contested elections mean that although the aristocracy as a whole controlled government offices, individual politicians were forced to compete for popular approval.

Popular assemblies repeatedly legislated against the Senate's will. (Strongly backed up by Erich Gruen's survey of assembly results in The Last Generation of the Roman Republic.)

I would also add that the Plebeian Assembly could pass legislation without senatorial approval, but the Senate could not pass legislation without the Plebeian Assembly affirming it.

The Conflict of the Orders, even if somewhat mythologized, does point toward a politically active lower class, and an aristocracy that was forced to grant them greater rights over time.

Aspiring politicians created public games, festivals, grain subsidies, and other "attractions" to secure popularity, and thus elections. Populares were generally not trying to subvert the Senate, but relying more strongly on this established electoral strategy.

Yakobson posits two opposing forces acting on Roman politicians: one pulling them to uphold elite interests and connections, the other pulling them to "break ranks" by winning over the common people. (You might say optimates and populares, though there's other definitions for those words too.)

Rome's lack of zoning meant that many politicians lived side-by-side with the middle and lower classes, and the size of one's posse was important to demonstrate influence. Unpopular politicians risked meeting with insults, protests, and even threats in the streets.

Contemporary documents like Cicero's On the Commonwealth show that Roman politicians saw the "popular mandate" as a strong force, and potentially a threat to the aristocracy's hold on government. Cicero in particular saw it as inevitable and needing to be integrated into the government, not suppressed, to ensure political stability.

Yakobson also points out several examples of "radical" tribunes long before Tiberius Gracchus, and a few commoners making it into the Senate. (LGRR is useful again, and Gruen lists a lot of non-senatorial families making it into the tribunate and quaestorship, especially.)

Rome had many plebiscites, contios (political gatherings), and public trials where people voted on legislation, expressed support or rejection, and could even intimidate politicians. E.g. Bibulus' fasces getting broken by a crowd in 59 BCE, which was probably a symbolic rejection of his authority. Or the troops Pompey had to station at Milo's trial to prevent jurors from being threatened by Clodius' supporters.

The plebiscites, especially, are a form of direct democracy that are rarer in many modern democracies!

Although patrons probably influenced clients' votes, the theory that patrons controlled client votes has been discredited, and fails outright after secret ballots were introduced in the 130s BCE.

Sulla's reforms that aimed to defang the tribunate indicate that tribunes could pose credible force against the Senate, and the reinstatement of tribunes' powers a decade later is a prime example of the Senate bending to popular pressure.

The supposed "harmony" of the decades pre-133 BCE may be an illusion caused by our paucity of sources, rather than an actual lack of tension between the Senate and common people.

Also, Yakobson doesn't discuss public rhetoric here, but Robert Morstein-Marx presents a strong argument in Mass Oratory and Political Power in the Late Roman Republic that the legitimacy of Rome's government openly derived from popular support, and that politicians had to argue their case for popular approval, at least in contios and other public arenas.

Overall, Yakobson concludes that although there were big constraints to how "democratic" Rome actually was, there was some real popular influence in government, and that the Roman people were not passive entities under a "sham" democracy. In this he agrees with Gruen and Morstein-Marx.

Yakobson doesn't talk much about the limitations of Roman democracy, because he's mainly responding to arguments that Rome was purely an oligarchy in practice. But I want to list a few:

Only male citizens in Rome could vote. Women, slaves, and anyone unable to travel to Rome were disenfranchised.

The size of the voting areas and temporal constraints limited the number of voters to 20,000 people, max.

The Roman voting system gave a disproportionate weight to the rich, especially in elections for consuls and praetors.

The Senate could co-opt tribunes of the plebs to veto bills, even if the bill was popular. (This formed the crux of several showdowns for Tiberius Gracchus, Julius Caesar, and others.)

Augurs could call off a vote on account of bad omens (obnuntatio).

The Plebeian Assembly could only vote "yes" or "no," not amend bills or propose new ones. A magistrate had to introduce the bill first. From 82 to 70 BCE, the tribunes could not do this, so all legislation came from the Senate first.

Prior to 139-131 BCE, there was no secret ballot.

#jlrrt essays #roman government #roman politics #democracy #popular power in the roman republic #alexander yakobson #a companion to the roman republic #jlrrt reads

[white-bow-tie]

I want you to read these and keep them in mind.

The 14 Characteristics of Fascism

Powerful and Continuing Nationalism Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

Supremacy of the Military Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

Rampant Sexism The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

Controlled Mass Media Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

Obsession with National Security Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

Religion and Government are Intertwined Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

Corporate Power is Protected The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

Labor Power is Suppressed Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .

Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

Obsession with Crime and Punishment Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

Rampant Cronyism and Corruption Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

Fraudulent Elections Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

#my country is almost all of these #yours? #sorry not sorry for bringing that on your timeline #i just think it's important to know how fascism looks

[djuvlipen]

(...) For almost five centuries, their slave labour resulted in huge earnings for their masters: landowers, the feudal aristocracy and the Orthodox Church. Romani people's status was that of subjugated people, the absolute property of their masters: their masters' personality, faith and habits dictated their whole existence.

After 1500, even though the number of slaves decreased dramatically in Catholic and Protestant Europe - as slaves were transferred to overseas colonies to work - slavery flourished in Romanian Principalities. 'In the 16th, 17th, and 18th century we were probably the only country in Europe which had a class of people with this label of slave or bondsman', states Professor doctor Constantin Bălăceanu Stolnici.

Roma bondsmen were subjected to atrocious treatment.

For five centuries, they were denied the status of human being. Among the cruellest punishments was that of wearing a collar fitted with iron spikes on the inside that prevented the wearer from lying down to rest.

Most of the writing we have about this topic comes from foreigners travelers, staggered by this behaviour.

"The squires are their absolute masters. They sell or kill them like cattle, at their sole discretion. Their children are born slaves with no distinction on sex"

- Comte d'Antraigues.

Jean Louis Parrant, who was in Moldavia during the French revolution, asks himself: 'What can be said about this numerous miserable flock of beings (because they can’t be otherwise described) that are called gypsies and are lost for the humanity, placed on the same level with the cattle of burden and often treated even worse by the their barbaric master whose revolting (so-called) property they are?'

Mihail Kogălniceanu, a former Romanian politician who played a significant role in the abolition of slavery, remembers growing up in a provincial Romanian town and seeing people 'being with hands and feet enchained, with iron circles around their forehead or metal collar around their neck. Bloody whips and other punishments such as starvation, hanging over a burning fire, the detention barrack and the forcing to stay naked in snow or in the frozen water of a river - this is the treatment applied to the miserable gypsies.'

Legislative texts, referring to them under a double denomination - gypsies or bondsmen - stated that they were born slaves; that every child born from a slave mother was a slave; that their masters had power of life and death over them; that each owner had the right to sell or offer his slaves; and that every masterless gypsy is propriety of the state. The list goes on... (...)

In 1600, a gypsy fit for work was worth the same as a horse. In 1682, a gypsy woman was worth two mares with foals. In 1760, three gypsies were worth the same as a house, and in 1814, Snagov Monastery was selling a gypsy for the price of four buffalo. There were also cases when gypsies were sold according to their weight, exchanged for honey barrels, pawned off, or offered as presents.

The abolishment of Roma slavery began with young artistocratic Romanians leaving to study in Western Europe. Upon returning home, they gave voice to progressive ideas denouncing slavery.

At the same time, Western Europe, and France especially, exerted considerable pressure on the newly formed Romanian state regarding the abolition of slavery. In the middle of the 19th century, there were half a million slaves on Romanian territory: 7% of the population.

Unfortunately, until now, Roma slavery has not been yet included in most history school books, and there are still very few Romanians who are aware of this historical reality. (...)

#Slavery #Roma #Romania #romani slavery

[zvaigzdelasas]

Latvia in particular was noted for its followers of Bolshevism and the latter were engaged throughout 1919 in a war against the German landed aristocracy and the German Freikorps. [...] In 1918 in Estonia 90% of the large landed estates had been owned by Baltic Barons and Germans and about 58% of all agricultural estates had been in the hands of the big landowners. In Latvia approximately 57% of agricultural land was under Baltic German ownership. The Baltic Germans lost the most land in left-wing and nationalist agrarian reform, as in the new Czechoslovakia. The agrarian legislation introduced in Estonia on 10 October 1919 and in Latvia on 16 September 1920 reflected above all a determination to break the disproportionate political and economic power of the German element. In Estonia 96.6% of all the estates belonging to the Baltic Germans were taken over, together with farms and villas. The question of fair compensation was left open for later. In Latvia, in contrast to the implied promise in Estonia, nominal remainders usually made up of about 50 hectares and in a few cases 100 hectares, were left to the dispossessed estate owners, as well as an appropriate amount of stock and equipment. These concessions were seen by most Baltic Germans as offering little more than the life-style of a peasant farmer. Again, fair compensation was to be considered later. The Baltic Germans thus lost most of their inherited wealth built up over 700 years.[2]

Apart from the landed estate owners, the rural Mittelstand dependent upon the old estates was severely affected. The expropriation of agrarian banks by the State also hit the Baltic Germans, who controlled/owned them. Paul Schiemann's later polemic against the Bank of Latvia came to the conclusion that 90% of Baltic Germans wealth had gone into the coffers of the Latvian State. The USA Commissioner to the Baltic in 1919 wrote of the Estonians: "German Balts are their pet aversion, more so really than the Bolsheviks".

[socialjusticeinamerica]

Trans state representative banned from state house for simply being trans. Nobody even cares. Did the tv press even mention it? Only a few left-leaning print/websites covered it. Red states are the majority now (even though a numerical minority reside there). Soon they will hold a Constitutional Convention to write a new fascist leaning constitution and we will all suffer. The Koch and Walton families have been buying state legislatures for decades while we ignored them.

Their fascist lawyers have been actively planning and drafting copies of a new corporate/Christo/fascist constitution. They will deliver it through a red state stooge like Rafael “Ted” Cruz. They will make a call for a convention where red state lawmakers will rubber stamp it and America the land of the free will be ended. They are only a few red states away from this. They are already speaking openly of returning to the old selection method of choosing the president to the House of Representatives where they will be able to ignore the voices of the people.

Cruz, Gosar, Boebert, Gaetz, Jordan’s, Greene, etc aren’t just kooks spouting nonsense. They are the harbingers of the oligarchs who are floating trial balloons and prepping the base for the oligarch takeover. They may seem comical with their clumsy ham fisted deliveries but they are spewing the talking points and desires of the right-wing oligarchs.

For years I’ve been delivering warnings and all those warnings have either come true or are about to. Many of you follow this as closely as I do and know what’s going on behind the Republikkkan curtain and who’s pulling the strings. The problem is that the general public has little idea of the Republikkkan end game. This isn’t something cyclical that will resolve itself. Never in history has there been such a tidal wave of anti-democratic legislation being passed so broadly and do rapidly. They’re not playing games or biding their time anymore. They are making their move to seize control of American government and make it a tool of the right-wing billionaire oligarchs and their corporations.

Guns, religion, and culture wars, are the tools they are using to radicalize the poor southerners, westerners, and rural folk to vote against their own best interests. It’s the French Revolution in reverse, where the poor have been conditioned to support the tyrannical aristocracy (kleptocracy). It’s about money and control over government to foster a society where businesses can run rampant while the citizens are stripped of all basic rights and forced into favelas like in Brazil. Favelas being the slums for the poor/working class on the edges of cities where there are little to no government services and crime and disease run rampant. Fascist militias (private paramilitary armies) will become death squads exacting revenge on progressives and executing anyone who demands reform. Militarized police will maintain order and protect business at all costs. The actual military will fight wars for oil and invade nations for other resources.

It shouldn’t sound dramatic it has been happening all around us as authoritarianism has been sweeping the globe. Escape from this along with climate change is what is driving so many migrants to our borders. Do something to stand up to the right-wing while you still can, before you have to live through an actual “ Purge” night.

[theoasisspringsroyals]

In a historic move, King Marcus of Oasis Springs has successfully enacted the Women's Rights Act, a pioneering piece of legislation that marks a significant advancement for the kingdom's approach to gender equality. ♥️ This law, a dream of his father, the late King Meaux, allows women to fully participate in the military and hold influential political positions. 💪 King Marcus had to overcome longstanding opposition from the kingdom's political factions, the Courtas and Aristos, who feared the change might destabilize the monarchy and society at large. 🙄

The Act also introduces a revolutionary change in the aristocracy's succession law, allowing the firstborn child, regardless of gender, to inherit titles—However, the monarchy's succession laws remain unchanged, with the crown passing only to male descendants of King Mauricio.🤔 This decision made by the monarch, reflects the current societal sentiment towards the monarchy’s succession. ��‍♂️ With this judgment, King Marcus demonstrated that progress and tradition can indeed coexist harmoniously. 👏

Oasis Springs is a shining example of how an absolute monarchy can work for the people; because, by tradition, the monarch always seeks the opinion of the majority through an official vote before passing laws or policies. ✨ This is possible because the people trust that their king always has their best interest at heart. 🥰

#sims 4 royal family #sims 4 royal legacy #sims 4 royal story #simblr #sims 4 royal simblr #sims 4 royalty #royal news #sims 4 gameplay #royal sims 4 #royal simblr

[communist-manifesto-daily]

The Communist Manifesto - Part 6

At this stage, the labourers still form an incoherent mass scattered over the whole country, and broken up by their mutual competition. If anywhere they unite to form more compact bodies, this is not yet the consequence of their own active union, but of the union of the bourgeoisie, which class, in order to attain its own political ends, is compelled to set the whole proletariat in motion, and is moreover yet, for a time, able to do so. At this stage, therefore, the proletarians do not fight their enemies, but the enemies of their enemies, the remnants of absolute monarchy, the landowners, the non-industrial bourgeois, the petty bourgeois. Thus, the whole historical movement is concentrated in the hands of the bourgeoisie; every victory so obtained is a victory for the bourgeoisie.

But with the development of industry, the proletariat not only increases in number; it becomes concentrated in greater masses, its strength grows, and it feels that strength more. The various interests and conditions of life within the ranks of the proletariat are more and more equalised, in proportion as machinery obliterates all distinctions of labour, and nearly everywhere reduces wages to the same low level. The growing competition among the bourgeois, and the resulting commercial crises, make the wages of the workers ever more fluctuating. The increasing improvement of machinery, ever more rapidly developing, makes their livelihood more and more precarious; the collisions between individual workmen and individual bourgeois take more and more the character of collisions between two classes. Thereupon, the workers begin to form combinations (Trades’ Unions) against the bourgeois; they club together in order to keep up the rate of wages; they found permanent associations in order to make provision beforehand for these occasional revolts. Here and there, the contest breaks out into riots.

Now and then the workers are victorious, but only for a time. The real fruit of their battles lies, not in the immediate result, but in the ever expanding union of the workers. This union is helped on by the improved means of communication that are created by modern industry, and that place the workers of different localities in contact with one another. It was just this contact that was needed to centralise the numerous local struggles, all of the same character, into one national struggle between classes. But every class struggle is a political struggle. And that union, to attain which the burghers of the Middle Ages, with their miserable highways, required centuries, the modern proletarian, thanks to railways, achieve in a few years.

This organisation of the proletarians into a class, and, consequently into a political party, is continually being upset again by the competition between the workers themselves. But it ever rises up again, stronger, firmer, mightier. It compels legislative recognition of particular interests of the workers, by taking advantage of the divisions among the bourgeoisie itself. Thus, the ten-hours’ bill in England was carried.

Altogether collisions between the classes of the old society further, in many ways, the course of development of the proletariat. The bourgeoisie finds itself involved in a constant battle. At first with the aristocracy; later on, with those portions of the bourgeoisie itself, whose interests have become antagonistic to the progress of industry; at all time with the bourgeoisie of foreign countries. In all these battles, it sees itself compelled to appeal to the proletariat, to ask for help, and thus, to drag it into the political arena. The bourgeoisie itself, therefore, supplies the proletariat with its own elements of political and general education, in other words, it furnishes the proletariat with weapons for fighting the bourgeoisie.

Further, as we have already seen, entire sections of the ruling class are, by the advance of industry, precipitated into the proletariat, or are at least threatened in their conditions of existence. These also supply the proletariat with fresh elements of enlightenment and progress.

#the communist manifesto #communist manifesto daily

[cadegund]

Woedica

Aliases and Titles The Exiled Queen , The Strangler, The Burned Queen, Oathbinder, The Queen That Was and Will Be.

Symbols A broken throne, A leather bound book of law partially blackened by fire, or a broken crown.

Spheres of Influence Justice, Oaths, Law, Promises, Rulership, Authority, Hierarchies, Memory, and Vengeance.

Worshipers Aedyrans, Leaden Key, Steel Garrote, Contract-makers, Judges, Lawyers, and Rulers.

Favored Weapon Swordcane or Stiletto.

DND 5E Domains Order and Knowledge.

Pathfinder 1E Domains Glory, Knowledge, Law, Luck, and Nobility.

Pathfinder 1E Subdomains Honor, Memory, Inevitable, Judgement, Legislation, Sovereignty, Tyranny, Curse, Aristocracy, and Hubris.

Pathfinder 1E Mysteries Ancestors and Intrigue.

Variant Channeling Rulership, Justice/Law, Contracts/Oaths, Revenge/Vengeance, or Tyranny/Slavery.

Pathfinder 2E Domains Duty, Tyranny, Pain, Knowledge, and Confidence.

Pathfinder 2E Mysteries Ancestors.

Favored Dispositions Rational and Cruel

Condemned Dispositions Benevolent and Clever.

Decided to stat out some Eoran gods starting with my problematic favorite, Woedica! First crossover post with one of my alts.

My thoughts

I changed her Dispositions because being Diplomatic seems to not be opposed to her sphere so I replaced it with Clever. My interpretation of Woedica is a hardass who doesn't appreciate what she views as immaturity. Generally a serious and stern god. Thus Diplomatic (which is rather good for a ruler) is replaced with Clever. I also changed her favorite weapon to something more elegant (as badass as it is imagining a Woedican beating the shit of their enemies with their bare fists). I'm only including the law-chaos (instead of the typical alignment chart) axis for POE due to its nature.

#woedica #pillars of eternity #eora

[ospreyeamon]

alderaan’s political system from swtor to the prequels

From the point of realism, we really should see more differences between the galaxy of the prequel trilogy and SWTOR given that they occur more than two thousand years apart. In fairness to the writers, sketching out two thousand years’ worth of social-political-economic shifts is a prohibitively enormous task. Still, the differences that do exist are always worth digging into, even though they may not always be intentional.

Alderaan of the Prequels is a constitutional monarchy. Its head of state is its monarch with the title being passed down the line of House of Organa. While the title is hereditary, heirs are required to demonstrate their worthiness to inherit by overcoming their three trials on the Day of Demand; declining to engage in the trials would function as a soft abdication, opening the way for a younger sibling to become heir apparent.

Though the monarch and a couple of other hereditary roles like the Viceroy confer an automatic right to be part of the executive – Queen Breha serves as her own Minister for Education – the legislature is presumably all democratically elected, as are some other members of the executive. Alderaan has a monarch, but they are a democracy.

While the lore entry for the Glarus Valley describes it as the “seat of culture and democracy on Alderaan” what the game actually shows us is an elective monarchy so deep in crisis it has reverted to aristocracy. Alderaan’s elective monarchy is interesting because the throne is regularly passed between its noble houses rather than its aristocratic electors ratifying the previous ruler’s heir or choosing among competing candidates from the royal house. The most likely point these elections would be held is on the death or abdication of the previous monarch, though there would be advantages to a tradition of the reigning monarch signalling their intention to abdicate on a set date to call for the election of their successor to improve the odds of a smooth transition of power.

Electorships tend to be short-lived because reigning electors usually try to use their period of rule to deepen their powerbase and secure the eventual election of their own heir, eroding them into hereditary monarchies. To last for centuries, Alderaan’s electorship must be enshrined in its constitution with many legal and institutional safeguards designed to ensure its perpetuity. One obvious way of doing this is to prohibit the holding of successive electorships by the same house – Queen Silara’s son Gaul Panteer was titled as the Crown Prince, but that may be a poor translation and Gaul was only ever the heir of House Panteer rather than the Alderaani throne.

The position of Alderaan’s Senator is usually held by the reigning monarch’s heir, implying that the Senator is appointed, rather than elected, to the office.

SWTOR makes no mention of an Alderaani House of Commons which sat alongside its House of Lords in the assembly at the Elysium – no body of representatives drawn from the working, or even landowning, classes. I believe this is because Alderaan does not have one in this period, for if they did surely we would hear about them in relation to the civil war. A House of Commons would be quick to grasp the opportunity to play kingmaker and the noble houses – Organa, Thul, Ulgo – would be eager to court the Commons to secure valuable endorsements. It is likely a House of Commons would also aggressively push for peace negotiations; if none of its representatives are members of the noble houses they cannot win the war and the throne, but their constituencies would likely be demanding an end to the conflict. The absence of an Alderaani Commons is one of the major factors in my categorising this political system as definitely not being a type of democracy.

Another reason we can be sure this government isn’t a democracy is because, while the House Ulgo’s lore entry calls the assembly at the Elysium the Alderaani parliament, its House of Lords lacks the legislative and/or executive authority wielded by real-world parliaments with the ruling family instead able to make unilateral decisions on major issues of interplanetary security and trade. Specifically, Gaul Panteer takes Alderaan out of the Galactic Republic without the decision being debated – let alone ratified – by the assemblage of nobles at the Elysium. If the issue had gone to a debate in the Elysium and Bouris Ulgo had been given the opportunity to loudly and publicly explain that the reason the Galactic Senate signed the Treaty of Coruscant was because the Republic lost the Great Galactic War, that if Alderaan ceded from the Republic it would lose the protection of both the Sith Empire’s Treaty commitment and the Republic’s military mutual defence pact, and that under those circumstances the Sith Empire would immediately pounce on the opportunity to launch a second invasion, even if the Panteers has still tried to go through with their dangerously stupid piece of political theatre the other noble houses would have put a stop to it. Instead, because the monarchy’s power was unchecked, Houses Ulgo and Rist assassinated Gaul and Silara Panteer in an attempt to force the election of a new monarch whose first act would be take Alderaan back into the relative safety of the Republic – and the Empire took advantage, using House Thul as a catspaw to justify their military presence on the planet.

From Alderaan’s aristocratic elector-lords to its constitutional monarchy there is a logical trajectory – at some point the guardrails supporting Alderaan’s elective monarchy failed and it slid, as electorships tend to, into hereditary monarchy.

Given how few mentions of Alderaan’s other noble houses there are in the prequels era, it appears House Organa succeeded in completely shutting its rivals out of power and is instead sharing power with other bodies – my guess would be independent courts and the House of Commons style elected legislative body (ie parliament) that Alderaan lacked during the Old Republic. Ironically, between the two Queendoms of Alderaan it is the hereditary rather than elective monarchy whose government is more representative and egalitarian.

That, I believe, is the clue to how House Organa overcame its rivals. The Organas’ hold authority not through the support of the aristocracy but the proletariat. Winning over the ordinary people living in their rivals’ fiefdoms by supporting the expansion of their rights at the expense of noble privilege, promising representation at the Elysium, funding public bodies accessible to all regardless of rank pulled the other Houses’ support bases out from under them. Alderaan has free universal education at every level, Alderaan has all sorts of other free universal bells and whistles, Alderaan’s royalty spends their lives in public service because that is the social contract House Organa made with the Alderaani people in return for sole possession of the throne.

I feel comfortable saying that we are looking at an early transitionary period between relatively stable forms of government. House Ulgo attempting to seize the throne by force and the other Houses wading into the war to fight for the crown rather than uniting to slap Ulgo down and finish the election has set a precedent likely to be repeated in the future.

Whichever House wins the civil war will not have a truly legitimate claim on the throne even if they take care to hold an election to validate the ascension of their head as the monarch because everyone will still know that the House secured victory through battle, not diplomacy. Further problematising the situation is the fact that all three front runners have factors muddying the view of their potential win; Ulgo for being the first to resort to violence, Organa and Thul for requiring backing from foreign governments because they lack sufficient domestic support (this goes triple for Thul because their backer is the Sith Empire).

The throne being won by warfare before being rubber stamped by Alderaan’s Elector-Lords once seeds the idea it could be done again – every crisis coinciding with a future election becomes an opportunity one of the noble houses might try to take advantage of. More immediately, it will undermine the legitimacy of whoever becomes the new monarch and of their rulings – the legitimacy of that government and the system itself. Having gained control through violence the ruling House will likely need to resort to violence again to keep it.

Somewhere between the Old Republic and the new one born in the Ruusan Reformation lies the forging of the Rhindon Sword and the days when the heir to the crown fought their way to the throne room to secure their birth-right. While we know that peace and democracy await in Alderaan’s future, it can only have been a bloody road to reach them.

#Meanwhile in a Galaxy Far Far Away #star wars meta #swtor meta #Alderaan #House Organa #the Great Houses of Alderaan #Alderaani Civil War #star wars the old republic

[so-where-do-we-go-from-here]

“We need a mature democratic meritocracy in our country where rationality is the norm not a tribal winner-takes-all system more reminiscent of the courtly intrigues of a medieval state. We need to divest ourselves of the very notion of inherited privilege that corrupts the entirety of our public life. Where else could you possibly contemplate a legislative second chamber populated by members for life without challenge: automatic inclusion for the old aristocracy, members of the Church of England, Judges and by political appointees through the corruption of patronage? What mature modern state should rely almost exclusively on privately educated individuals, most often from the very same families give or take a parvenu or two, who attend the same universities and take up the same positions in public life as the family have for generations? What mature modern democracy should allow vast landowning and wealth achieved through historical plunder, theft and sequestration concentrated into so few hands in perpetuity?”

#duchy of lancaster #royal family #democracy #monarchy

[collapsedsquid]

The end of colonial empires in the 1960s and the end of Stalinist (“state socialist,” “state capitalist,” “bureaucratic collectivist”) systems in the 1990s has triggered a process never encountered since the Mongolian invasions in the thirteenth century: a comprehensive and apparently irreversible collapse of established statehood as such. While the bien-pensant Western press daily bemoans perceived threats of dictatorship in far-away places, it usually ignores the reality behind the tough talk of powerless leaders, namely that nobody is prepared to obey them. The old, creaking, and unpopular nation-state—the only institution to date that had been able to grant civil rights, a modicum of social assistance, and some protection from the exactions of privateer gangs and rapacious, irresponsible business elites—ceased to exist or never even emerged in the majority of the poorest areas of the world. In most parts of sub-Saharan Africa and of the former Soviet Union not only the refugees, but the whole population could be considered stateless. The way back, after decades of demented industrialization (see the horrific story of the hydroelectric plants everywhere in the Third World and the former Eastern bloc), to a subsistence economy and “natural” barter exchanges in the midst of environmental devastation, where banditry seems to have become the only efficient method of social organization, leads exactly nowhere. People in Africa and ex-Soviet Eurasia are dying not by a surfeit of the state, but by the absence of it.

Traditionally, liberation struggles of any sort have been directed against entrenched privilege. Equality came at the expense of ruling groups: secularism reduced the power of the Princes of the Church, social legislation dented the profits of the “moneyed interest,” universal franchise abolished the traditional political class of landed aristocracy and the noblesse de robe the triumph of commercial pop culture smashed the ideological prerogatives of the progressive intelligentsia, horizontal mobility and suburban sprawl ended the rule of party politics on the local level, contraception and consumerist hedonism dissolved patriarchal rule in the family—something lost, something gained. Every step toward greater freedom curtailed somebody’s privileges (quite apart from the pain of change). It was conceivable to imagine the liberation of outlawed and downtrodden lower classes through economic, political, and moral crusades: there was, crudely speaking, somebody to take ill-gotten gains from. And those gains could be redistributed to more meritorious sections of the population, offering in exchange greater social concord, political tranquility, and safety to unpopular, privileged elites, thereby reducing class animosity. But let us not forget though that the social-democratic bargain has been struck as a result of centuries of conflict and painful renunciations by the traditional ruling strata. Such a liberation struggle, violent or peaceful, is not possible for the new wretched of the earth.

Nobody exploits them. There is no extra profit and surplus value to be appropriated. There is no social power to be monopolized. There is no culture to be dominated. The poor people of the new stateless societies—from the “homogeneous” viewpoint—are totally superfluous. They are not exploited, but neglected. There is no overtaxation, since there are no revenues. Privileges cannot be redistributed toward a greater equality since there are no privileges, except the temporary ones to be had, occasionally, at gunpoint.

Famished populations have no way out from their barely human condition but to leave. The so-called center, far from exploiting this periphery of the periphery, is merely trying to keep out the foreign and usually colored destitutes (the phenomenon is euphemistically called “demographic pressure”) and set up awesome barriers at the frontiers of rich countries, while our international financial bureaucracy counsels further deregulation, liberalization, less state and less government to nations that do not have any, and are perishing in consequence. “Humanitarian wars” are fought in order to prevent masses of refugees from flowing in and cluttering up the Western welfare systems that are in decomposition anyway.

Citizenship in a functional nation-state is the one safe meal ticket in the contemporary world. But such citizenship is now a privilege of the very few. The Enlightenment assimilation of citizenship to the necessary and “natural” political condition of all human beings has been reversed. Citizenship was once upon a time a privilege within nations. It is now a privilege to most persons in some nations. Citizenship is today the very exceptional privilege of the inhabitants of flourishing capitalist nation-states, while the majority of the world’s population cannot even begin to aspire to the civic condition, and has also lost the relative security of pre-state (tribe, kinship) protection.

The scission of citizenship and sub-political humanity is now complete, the work of Enlightenment irretrievably lost. Post-fascism does not need to put non-citizens into freight trains to take them into death; instead, it need only prevent the new non-citizens from boarding any trains that might take them into the happy world of overflowing rubbish bins that could feed them. Post-fascist movements everywhere, but especially in Europe, are anti-immigration movements, grounded in the “homogeneous” world-view of productive usefulness. They are not simply protecting racial and class privileges within the nation-state (although they are doing that, too) but protecting universal citizenship within the rich nation-state against the virtual-universal citizenship of all human beings, regardless of geography, language, race, denomination, and habits. The current notion of “human rights” might defend people from the lawlessness of tyrants, but it is no defense against the lawlessness of no rule.

#posted this before but deserves reposting

[just-late-roman-republic-things]

Gruen really thinks the “optimate vs. populare” view of Roman politics doesn’t work:

The Romans had no organized political parties or consistent platforms like we do.

Although some causes could be described as “populist,” individual politicians moved in and out of supporting those causes depending on how it suited their personal needs and circumstances. There was nothing remarkable about Cato and Clodius both supporting expansion of the grain dole for different reasons.

Virtually all politicians came from the senatorial class, or at least identified with it, and when faced with external threats class unity usually overrode internal rivalries. When Caesar took legislation directly to the People’s Assembly instead of getting a mandate from the Senate, he presented himself not as allying with the common man against the aristocracy, but as upholding traditional government functions, and his enemies as illegally shutting down the legislative process.

This also helps explain why Caesar included depictions of the Pompeians’ gory death scenes in his African triumph: the Pompeians had allied with an African king against other Romans, which Caesar saw as a betrayal of their class and countrymen.

Populare is best thought of as a method politicians used to accrue public support and put pressure on the Senate, not as an ideology or group. 

Optimate just means whoever the speaker thinks of as “right-thinking/respectable people,” and it’s become associated with people Cicero respected, simply because Cicero used the term a lot and many of his writings survived. You could be an optimate and a popularis at the same time if you were good at appealing to the Senate and common people.

Calling any Roman politician liberal, conservative or progressive is misleading. It’s not the way they talked about themselves or appealed to the voters. Rather, they all claimed to support “traditional Roman values” and “freedom of the People,” but presented different interpretations of what tradition and freedom meant, while claiming their opponents were unorthodox.

(Gruen, The Last Generation of the Roman Republic, p.50)

#erich gruen #last generation of the roman republic #optimates vs populares #ancient rome #jlrrt reads #jlrrt essays

[the-empress-7]

“William and Catherine should care, because this is a State event and not a family party.”

On the issue of Camilla‘s grandchildren, holding the canopy imho you can blame Tony Blair. The role of canopy holder in the two Coronations which pre-date our late Majesty’s 1953 Coronation (i.e. 1910, or 11 and 1937 when the Queen crowned as Queen consort) saw NON Royal Duchesses performing that role.

 Remember that this would have been at a time when the peerage sat in the House of Lords and were heavily involved in legislative matters for the king. Members of Parliament, i.e. of the House of Commons, did not take part in the coronation.

Nowadays, most of the members of the House of Lords got there via the House of Commons.

So the inclusion of grandchildren, in the non Royal role doesn’t bother me in the least, and does represent peerage aka aristocracy… somewhat.

I am happy with this minimal role in the coronation service. But, I would be incensed if they went anywhere near balconies or carriages et cetera.

Just saying 🇬🇧





Well it bothers me. Never mind the fact that Camilla is a divorcee and married Charles in a civil ceremony and not a religious one. I am not even Christian (and have nothing against divorces for that matter) and I feel like C&C are crapping all over the Anglican church and its values. Charles is the head of the very same Church.

[rapturezoo]

CORRUPT + whoever you're feeling for this >:)

Send me One Word Vampire the Masquerade Prompts!

Hehehe I decided to go with Elizabeth Inchmouth for this one. A fair warning though, this is set further ahead than the events of the current chapter of "Land of Blood and Corpses", the fic featuring Liz. So this might have spoilers for future chapters of that.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“You should see this as an opportunity”

The Royal Spymaster’s voice echoed throughout the cavernous expanse of the Golden Music Room, the pompous rolling of his Rs and the slithering of his silver tongue as he pronounced the letter S bounced within the confines of the coffered ceiling high above them, as he methodically, carefully positioned his teaspoon parallel to his teacup by the marble-topped side table. 

Lady Elizabeth Inchmouth was no stranger to the comforts of Gristol's Imperial Palace, nor to Lord Burrows’ looming presence. Her high standing amongst the upper circles of the aristocracy had made her presence in state dinners and soirées almost permanent, alongside the many nobles and decorated officials who made up the late Empress' court, such as the Spymaster himself and the regicidal, former Lord Protector.

But today Dunwall Tower had a different feel to it. Ever since the assassination of the Empress, the air around it felt stale and devoid of life, discomfort and stiff discipline had burrowed its way into the heart of the Empire itself. She followed the Captain of the Watch, a middle-aged, well built fellow whose name she had forgot to catch as he escorted her for her appointed audience.

Elizabeth's nerves were on edge owing to the asphyxiating ambience of the many state rooms and galleries they passed on their way to the uppermost floor, while all around her, visibly exhausted servants toiled away in all manners of menial, seemingly minor tasks. Each making sure at least thrice that things were in their right place before moving on to the next item on their lists. Things had changed, Jessamine had never been hard on the service, not like this.

This was only the latest surprise in what had turned out to be a rather eventful morning. She had wrongfully predicted slower days following the announcement of the official mourning after the previous day's events. Naturally she was quite shocked to receive a letter of summons, hand delivered by courier no less, requiring her urgent presence in the Tower. Despite her mind, and that of the entirety of the Empire's loyal subjects, still reeling from the news of the Empress' death at the hands of her very own Lord Protector and the abduction of her daughter; Elizabeth's curiosity and sense of duty persevered over her suspicions as she ordered her railcar to be prepared for the trip downtown.

How wrong she was to have stepped into the wolf's den.

A private audience with Hiram Burrows seemed reasonable. Perhaps he'd like to personally brief her on the gruesome details of the Sovereign's passing so they could be relayed to the House of Lords during the evening's resumption of legislative activities. Maybe he wanted to inquire about the Party's preference for the interim government to be elected during the upcoming vote. Whatever the reason, she was bound to find it out sooner rather than later, as the towering, bald figure clad in black kissed her gloved hand and offered her a seat in front of him.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The Pendletons are already on board." Burrows explained proudly. "Delighted even! At the potential prospects my proposal holds for them and likely for you as well, should you decide to accept."

“You mean Custis and Morgan?” Elizabeth responded absentmindedly, still flabberghasted by the words coming out of the Spymaster's mouth. He spoke so nonchalantly about yesterday's events, almost as if he was completely unfazed by them.

"Tsk!" He scoffed at her response. “Well, they are the ones in control of Parliament’s largest voting block, aren’t they?” He laughed, amused at the formulated question's blatant ridiculousness. “Birthright of the eldest naturally; one you hold as well”

Elizabeth avoided the man's gaze as he uttered that last statement, one she had heard countless times before from the lips of her deceased father. She peered down into her half-empty porcelain teacup, feeling as if a pit formed in her heart as her eyes studied Jessamine Kaldwin's delicate monogram flanked by two elegant swans, she had not felt like this since her breakdown following her son's birth.

She wondered about the now orphaned heir's wellbeing, where could Attano have taken her? A child being stripped of her mother was the most cruel act her mind could imagine. Liz knew this all too well for fate too had taken her progenitor away from her. With all her strength, she wished for Corvo Attano to rot in Coldridge.

Burrows continued to babble on, hardly caring if the noblewoman had his attention. He knew were to sting, the insect. She had known that for a long time, the stories the other nobles told about him where the stuff of nightmares. Brutal interrogatories and late night break-ins; anything could be expected from a man who wields information.

No, Elizabeth did not avoid the vulture's eyes, she was not afraid of this man who openly praised and mocked her at the same time. She avoided those of the swan whose song will never be heard from again, hung right behind the official's gilded epaulettes by the chimney. The cold eyes of a younger Jessamine, forever preserved by Sokolov's fine hand and exotic pigments. They looked back at her expectantly, waiting, as Elizabeth Inchmouth took a big breath. She had made her choice.

"If you allow me, Lord Spymaster. I've already made up my mind and no amount of bootlicking can change that." She replied with a heavy sigh. "It would be dishonourable for someone in my position to just flat out hand my votes to the highest bidder. I was not raised like this."

She straightened her back as she craned her head to face the man, his expression unreadable. "Surely a man of principles like you can relate to that."

He stood up in stoic silence, remaining quietly in place for what felt like hours, studying her like a creature under a microscope.

“Indeed, my dear Lady Inchmouth.”

Lord Burrows said as he paced around, getting closer as he spoke.

“A man of principles like me only seeks what’s best for Dunwall, for the entire Empire.”

His hands intertwined behind his back as he neared her seat.

“This country needs strong leadership during these trying times.”

He circled her, like a ravenous shark in shipwrecked waters.

“The plague and this dreadful, cowardly blockade imposed on our harbours." The Spymaster stated as he stopped right in front of her. "Your interests have been struck particularly hard by these nefarious circumstances, have they not?"

Goosebumps flared on Elizabeth's skin at the mere thought of her family coffers hemorraging since the embargo was imposed. Just last week, nearly a dozen workers had to be laid off from her factories as more and more furnaces were shut down in responce to the dwindling raw materials needed to keep up production.

"And all this bickering in the House of Lords about this so-called succession crisis, a preposterous display of petty politics!" Burrows continued, as he resumed his incessant pacing around the room. "When the State's efforts should be directed toward purging this disease from the streets of our great city."

"Oh, I agree." Elizabeth replied as she lay her teacup by the coffee table in front of her, relieved to see the man starting to move away from her.

"See? We stand in common ground on this." Proclaimed triumphantly the Lord Spymaster, as he marched onwards, deliberately avoiding to step on the gilded stitching on the rug underneath his shiny boots.

“Everything's been set in motion for me to take the burden of the Regency on my shoulders." He gestured in emphasis. "It is a sacrifice I, for one, feel compelled to make. To bring order to our grieving nation."

He stopped in front of the fireplace, placing his hand atop the mantel as if struck by a sudden, inexplicable sadness. Mere theatre. Elizabeth knew better. Hiram Burrows is not a creature subjected to the whims of human emotions.

“That is, until the missing young Lady Emily is found, naturally”

Burrows dug into the confines of his heavy court livery, the high collared black jacket assigned to the position everyone came to know and fear. He produced a cigar out of its inner pockets, lighting it with a heavy, gold lighter as he stared at the Sokolov portrait hung above his bald head, silently assuring himself that he'd have to do something about that painting in the future.

"Our predicament is that we are still missing a few crucial votes for today's vote on who should lead the Regency during the absence of the Heir to the Throne."

He inhaled.

“Yours would be greatly appreciated.”

He exhaled, leaving a noxious cloud of smoke lingering in the space between him and the carved stonework of the fireplace.

“And handsomely rewarded.”

This left Elizabeth quiet for a few seconds, as she fidgeting with her family's signet ring, feeling it strange her little finger.

She remained quiet for a few seconds, fidgeting with her family’s signet ring, feeling it strangle her little finger.

"Your influence is of great value in the Party, an intelligent choice on your part could swing the vote in our favour." Burrows elaborated further, sweeping his index finger across the marble mantle afront him, looking for even the slightest trace of dust. "Say, old Lord Estermont is quite fond of you, isn't he?"

“Sir, I..." She stuttered, dumbstruck by the question. "Look Hiram, I understand you have the best of intentions but this neither the place nor the proper channel to make a compelling argument..." She gulped before continuing, feeling the room grow tense as she continued.

"I'd gladly hear your case in the Chamber later today, but this? It goes against every principle my family has stood for these past few centuries. What would the opposition say if..."

The man cracked his knuckles, loudly, bringing her argument to a halt as he turned to face her with a menacing look in his eyes.

“As you wish, Elizabeth, but I’d be remiss to remind you to see this as an opportunity.” He replied, taking a step forward.

“Times are bound to get harder,” Burrows recited as each of his methodically calculated steps brought him closer once again to her armchair “It would be a shame for someone in your position to have me as an opponent.”

“My position?” She questioned, her voice slightly cracked, caught off-guard by the Spymaster’s response.

“Oh yes!” The man countered as he stopped inches from her, looking down upon the noblewoman. “The sudden death of your husband all those years ago has surely put you in a vulnerable situation, hasn’t it?” He said with a leering smirk.

He knows. After all, Hiram Burrows knows everything.

The implications of his words immediately sunk in as her face contorted into a panicked grimace. Her chest felt suddenly constrained as her heart raced. Elizabeth stood up rapidly, shoving the towering figure away as she scrambled toward one of the windows.

“I think…” She said quivering as she fumbled with the locks. “I just need some fresh air.”

“Good.” The man said, dusting off his uniform's jacket, hoping to rid it of any microscopic trace his guest might have left as she touched him. “I’m glad we’ve managed to come to an understanding.”

“Surely your colleagues will understand as well.” Lord Burrows scoffed, amused by the meeting's results. “Make sure to write to them once you get home. I'd hurry if I were you.”

He sat down, lifting the tails of his coat before doing so, as he grabbed a silver handbell. A smartly dressed servant rapidly entered the room after a single ring, approaching the Spymaster in quick, short steps.

Elizabeth turned to face the unfolding scene as tears streamed down her face like the torrential downpours of the Month of Wind.

“Yes, Your Excellency?” The domestic inquired in a quiet, almost hushed tone.

“Fetch Her Ladyship's railcar at once!” The Spymaster barked back “She’s just leaving.”

#dishonored #dishonored oc #hiram burrows #morgan pendleton #custis pendleton #i guess?? #elizabeth inchmouth #my writing #my ocs #tysm for sending this!! I had been toying with this idea for a while and it inspired me to finally get it done