Triangulated domination: how third elements become tools of control

Triangulated systems—those involving three interconnected elements rather than simple binary oppositions—have long been assumed to disrupt hierarchical power structures. We reveal a more troubling reality: these systems often represent the most sophisticated mechanisms of domination, precisely because they appear to offer mediation, balance, and neutrality while actually reinforcing existing hierarchies.

The hidden control function of triangulated power

Triangulated systems maintain domination by creating "attractor states" that pull social dynamics toward predetermined hierarchical outcomes while appearing to offer neutral mediation. Unlike simple oppressor-oppressed binaries, these three-element structures obscure power relations through apparent complexity, making resistance more difficult. The third element—whether mediator, facilitator, or institutional framework—functions not as a disruptor of hierarchy but as its most effective enforcer, channeling opposition into forms that ultimately serve existing power structures.

Critical theorists have identified seven strategic templates of triangulated control:

• threatening to disrupt exchange between parties,
• using third parties for punishment,
• demanding returns for taking sides,
• divide-and-conquer tactics,
• strategic mediation,
• benefiting from uninvolved party presence, and
• gatekeeping access.

These mechanisms create what systems theorists call "strange attractors"—complex patterns that appear chaotic but maintain underlying structural stability. The result is a form of "invisible power" where affected parties may not even recognize the controlling influence, making these systems far more effective at maintaining domination than overt coercion.

When triality masquerades as duality in language and thought

One of the most insidious aspects of triangulated domination is how language itself obscures these three-element power structures by forcing them into binary conceptual frameworks. This "triality masquerading as duality" represents a fundamental epistemological problem: our linguistic structures systematically eliminate the third term, reducing complex triangulated dynamics to simple either/or oppositions that hide the controlling element.

Mathematical triality theory reveals how three-element systems involve non-degenerate trilinear forms that cannot be reduced to simple dualities without losing crucial information. Yet language patterns consistently perform this reduction, presenting "oppressor versus oppressed" narratives that render invisible the mediating institutions, systems, or actors that enable and maintain domination. Terms like "mediation," "facilitation," and "neutrality" function as linguistic camouflage, suggesting impartiality while concealing active participation in maintaining power imbalances.

This linguistic collapse serves power by creating false choices. When we speak of labor "negotiations" between workers and management, we obscure the role of arbitration systems designed to favor employers. When we discuss colonial "indirect rule," we minimize how local intermediaries became essential components of imperial control. The very vocabulary of "stakeholder engagement" and "multi-party dialogue" masks how these supposedly inclusive processes concentrate rather than distribute power.

Historical patterns reveal sophisticated control mechanisms

Our analysis of historical examples demonstrates that triangulated domination is not a new phenomenon but a recurring pattern across different contexts and eras. The British colonial system of indirect rule exemplifies this perfectly: colonial administrators maintained ultimate authority while using traditional chiefs as intermediaries to govern indigenous populations. This created a triangulated structure where chiefs depended on colonial approval for their positions, becoming buffers between rulers and ruled while appearing to preserve traditional authority.

Similarly, the emergence of comprador classes in colonial territories created triangulated economic systems where local intermediaries facilitated foreign exploitation. These compradors profited from maintaining colonial economic structures rather than challenging them, creating vested interests in preserving inequality. The pattern extends to religious hierarchies like the Catholic confessional system, where the priest-penitent-God triangle positioned clerical authorities as essential intermediaries for salvation, reinforcing religious power over lay populations.

The American system of "separate but equal" following Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) demonstrates legal triangulation at its most pernicious. Courts, constitutional interpretation, and "equal protection" rhetoric created a system that legitimized segregation while claiming to uphold equal rights. The apartheid Bantustan system took this further, creating nominally independent homelands whose leaders served as intermediaries legitimizing white control while claiming to represent African interests.

Contemporary manifestations in workplace and digital realms

Modern workplaces reveal how triangulated domination has evolved and adapted. HR departments, ostensibly neutral mediators between employees and management, function as institutional shields protecting corporate power. Research following the #MeToo movement exposed how HR structures "reinforce existing power disparities by protecting powerful actors in organizations rather than advocating for the rights of the most vulnerable workers." The statistics are damning: one estimate is that 99.8% of workers facing sexual harassment do not file complaints¹, recognizing that these supposedly neutral systems actually serve institutional interests.

Digital platforms represent perhaps the most sophisticated contemporary form of triangulated control. Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta claim algorithmic neutrality while their systems "routinely favor people and collectives that are already privileged while discriminating against marginalized people." These platforms position themselves as neutral intermediaries between users and content, between employers and job seekers, between buyers and sellers—yet their algorithms consistently concentrate power and reinforce existing inequalities under what researchers call an "aura of objectivity and truth."

Scapegoating as triangulated deflection

Triangulated systems excel at creating Scapegoats—third elements that become targets deflecting attention from systemic critique. René Girard's analysis reveals how contemporary scapegoating operates through "mimetic desire" and "triangulation of desire," where collective violence is redirected against arbitrary victims to maintain social stability. In workplace settings, lower-level employees are blamed for executive failures. In political contexts, economic anxiety is redirected toward immigrants or other marginalized groups rather than toward the systems creating inequality.

This scapegoating function is crucial to understanding how triangulated domination maintains itself. By providing a release valve for frustration and anger, these systems prevent direct challenges to power structures. The scapegoat absorbs collective resentment while the fundamental triangulated relationships remain intact. Modern political movements have mastered this technique, using sophisticated media triangulation to redirect economic stress toward vulnerable populations rather than systemic transformation.

The master's house as triangulated attractor system

The concept of the "master's house" has evolved to encompass these triangulated attractor systems. Rather than simple architectural metaphors, we must understand how contemporary power creates self-reinforcing dynamics that draw all participants toward predetermined outcomes. Neoliberal governance exemplifies this through public-private partnerships and NGO intermediaries that create "governance through networks based on interdependence, negotiation and trust" while actually concentrating decision-making power among elites.

These systems create what researchers call "path dependence"—historical advantages become self-reinforcing through triangulated structures that appear to offer alternatives while channeling all options toward similar outcomes.

NGOs become "vital aspects of capitalism and for stabilizing the neoliberal order" while appearing to challenge it. International development partnerships create complex webs where "hundreds, even thousands" of actors interact, making accountability nearly impossible while actual decision-making remains concentrated among powerful nations and institutions.

Distinguishing authentic liberation from co-opted triangulation

Not all triangulated systems serve domination. Indigenous knowledge systems demonstrate authentic triangulation through relational epistemologies that recognize three-way relationships between land, community, and spiritual practices without creating hierarchical control. Liberation theology's integration of faith, social analysis, and direct action shows how triangulated approaches can genuinely challenge rather than reinforce power structures.

The key distinctions lie in who maintains control, whether power dynamics are explicitly analyzed, and whether the ultimate goal is transformation or management. Authentic triangulated liberation explicitly names and challenges existing power structures rather than claiming neutrality. It maintains participatory control among those most affected and seeks fundamental alteration rather than management of existing systems. Co-opted triangulation, by contrast, features neutrality claims that obscure facilitator interests, managerial frameworks that treat systemic oppression as technical problems, and false equivalencies between oppressor and oppressed.

Implications for understanding geometric liberation patterns

This analysis fundamentally challenges assumptions about geometric liberation patterns. The apparent complexity of triple systems can mask their function as control mechanisms more effectively than simple binary oppositions. Triangulated domination succeeds precisely because it appears more sophisticated, more balanced, more fair than direct oppression. The presence of a third element suggests mediation and potential resolution while actually ensuring that conflicts remain channeled within system-maintaining boundaries.

Understanding these mechanisms requires developing new analytical tools that can perceive triangulated relationships without reducing them to binaries. It demands linguistic innovations that can name and describe three-element power dynamics accurately. Most importantly, it necessitates strategic approaches to liberation that anticipate and counter triangulated control rather than assuming that adding complexity to binary conflicts automatically serves justice.

Conclusion

Our research reveals that triangulated systems represent domination at its most sophisticated—control mechanisms that maintain hierarchy through apparent mediation, concentrate power through claimed neutrality, and deflect resistance through systematic scapegoating. These are not failures or corruptions of triangulated approaches but their frequent default operation within societies structured by domination. The master's house has indeed evolved to use triangulated structures as attractor systems, creating dynamics that appear to offer alternatives while ensuring that all paths lead back to maintaining existing power relations.

Recognizing these patterns is essential for developing effective strategies for social transformation. We must move beyond assumptions that geometric complexity equals liberation and develop critical frameworks for analyzing when triangulation serves justice and when it serves power. Only by understanding how triality masquerades as duality, how mediators become controllers, and how neutral facilitation can be the most effective form of domination can we begin to imagine and create genuinely liberatory alternatives.

1. https://www.epi.org/unequalpower/publications/strengthening-accountability-for-discrimination-confronting-fundamental-power-imbalances-in-the-employment-relationship/ at footnote 9.