{"id":1606,"date":"2026-05-11T09:58:20","date_gmt":"2026-05-11T12:58:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/?p=1606"},"modified":"2026-05-11T10:17:17","modified_gmt":"2026-05-11T13:17:17","slug":"the-homelander-in-judicial-robes-a-symbolic-reflection-on-unrestrained-power-in-constitutional-democracy-murillo-gutier","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/?p=1606","title":{"rendered":"The Homelander in Judicial Robes: a symbolic reflection on unrestrained power in constitutional democracy \u2013 Murillo Gutier"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Homelander in Judicial Robes<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A symbolic reflection on unrestrained power in constitutional democracy<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prof. Murillo Gutier<\/strong>
E-mail: murillo@gutier.adv.br<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This article examines the figure of Homelander<\/strong> from the series The Boys<\/strong> as a critical metaphor for the dynamics of unrestrained institutional power in constitutional democracy. The central thesis holds that the fictional character \u2013 a tyrant disguised as a hero who claims to defend democracy while undermining its foundations \u2013 serves as an illuminating mirror for certain attitudes observed in the contemporary Supremo Tribunal Federal<\/strong> (STF). The analysis draws upon the concepts of institutional salvationism<\/strong>, constitutional hybris<\/strong>, and moral solipsism<\/strong> to shed light on the dangers of a judiciary without effective checks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The study introduces the concept of egoic self-restraint<\/strong> \u2013 a psychic precondition that precedes juridical self-restraint (judicial self-restraint<\/strong>), designating the adjudicator’s capacity to recognize that he is not the measure of the just. When this inner brake fails, moral solipsism<\/strong> ensues, in which the adjudicator treats his own conscience as the exclusive source of juridicity and the Law degenerates into a monologue disguised as jurisdiction. The essay further analyzes selective consequentialism<\/strong> and rhetorical cynicism<\/strong> as instruments for legitimizing arbitrary decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In conclusion, it is argued that the “Homelander in judicial robes<\/strong>” is not an individual figure but a structural position that may be occupied by any actor who succumbs to the temptation of believing himself indispensable. The work advocates for the restoration of epistemic humility<\/strong> as a constitutional virtue, and emphasizes that mature democracies rest upon structures, not upon personalities deemed providential. Judicial self-restraint<\/strong> and collegiality are reaffirmed as indispensable preconditions of the democratic rule of law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Keywords:<\/strong> Homelander; The Boys; STF; Juristocracy; Ministrocracy; Egoic Self-Restraint; Moral Solipsism; Constitutional Hybris; Institutional Salvationism; Judicial Self-Restraint; Epistemic Humility; Rhetorical Cynicism; Silent Erosion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n\tThe Homelander in Judicial Robes - PDF\t(2 downloads\t)\n<\/a>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Homelander in Judicial Robes A symbolic reflection on unrestrained power in constitutional democracy Prof. Murillo GutierE-mail: murillo@gutier.adv.br Abstract This article examines the figure of Homelander from the series The Boys as a critical metaphor for the dynamics of unrestrained institutional power in constitutional democracy. The central thesis holds that the fictional character \u2013 a … <\/p>\n

Continue lendo “The Homelander in Judicial Robes: a symbolic reflection on unrestrained power in constitutional democracy \u2013 Murillo Gutier”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1602,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"saved_in_kubio":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[71],"tags":[571,569,573,561,572,443,128,377,570,574,575,146,562],"class_list":["post-1606","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-direito-constitucional","tag-constitutional-hybris","tag-egoic-self-restraint","tag-epistemic-humility","tag-homelander","tag-institutional-salvationism","tag-judicial-self-restraint","tag-juristocracia","tag-ministrocracia","tag-moral-solipsism","tag-rhetorical-cynicism","tag-silent-erosion","tag-stf","tag-the-boys"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1606","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1606"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1606\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1673,"href":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1606\/revisions\/1673"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/1602"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1606"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1606"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/murillogutier.com.br\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1606"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}