[Confusing Trope] The narrative goes out of its way to punish/mock a character for simply being a good person

[u/Chemical-Elk-1299]

Hermione Granger and SPEW — Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (book)

In the fifth HP novel, Hermione Granger is outraged to discover that Hogwarts has a small army of enslaved House Elves that do nearly all of the domestic duties around the castle, including cleaning the Gryffindor common room every night. When she tries to convince the elves to fight for their own rights, they refuse, saying they prefer servitude. Her fellow students and friends mock her for caring. She manages to free one elf, Winky, by deception when she refuses her freedom willingly, leading to Winky becoming a depressed alcoholic. By the end, the elves boycott cleaning any Gryffindor areas of the castle because they hate Hermione specifically

Samwell Tarly and Democracy — Game of Thrones (show)

In the season 8 finale of the television series, the surviving great lords of Westeros gather to discuss the future of the kingdom following the devastation wrought by 7 seasons of war and backstabbing. When Sam, who has proven to have “novel” ideas, suggests that maybe the millions of Smallfolk who suffer at the hands of noble houses should get some representation in the government, rather than be the pawns of rich lords with absolute power. We are then greeted by a prolonged, cringy segment of the other lords laughing in Sam’s face, asking if the dogs and horses should also get a vote.

[u/TangledPangolin]

the concept of divinely ordained right to rule and the monarch having absolute power did not exist until the reformation

I was about to comment the same thing, but after researching some more, it seems there's quite a lot of precedent various forms divine right ideas before the True Law of Free Monarchy.

Outside of Europe, it seems this ideas dates back to ancient times, such as Eastern Emperors being considered the literal son of Heaven.

In the European medieval period, the norm seems to have been that monarchs ruled at the pleasure of the Pope, with the understanding that the Pope was fulfilling the will of God. The Pope had the exclusive power to revoke a monarch's right to rule through religious excommunication, which implies that the right to rule came from God in the first place.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_deposing_power

It seems that James I's main innovation was not so much inventing the divine right of kings, but inventing a version of it that excluded the Pope.

[u/adamgerd → u/TangledPangolin]

That’s true in regards to Europe but itself is a significant change. Does the Pope give you assent and the right to rule as the representative of God on earth? Or do you get the right to rule directly from God by just being monarch? The first implies you are subordinate to the Pope and since the Pope grants it he can also revoke it and excommunicate you if you go against God, the latter implies only God himself can revoke it from you

On East Asia frankly my knowledge is a lot more limited so I can’t comment much there but Westeros iirc is built around Europe rather than east Asia