Was Dumbledore utterly incompetent?

[Simon_Jester]

One thing to remember is that screwing up magic can cause really weird injuries. Like turning you into a cat-person by carelessly using the wrong hair in your potion of 'take on another person's appearance.' By comparison, mending broken bones seems to be pretty easy for wizards.

The only way to become an effective wizard without dying it do do as you are told. Spell directions must be followed exactly, et cetera.

In a modern school, a child falling and breaking their arm after ignoring a teacher's directions is treated as a disaster and (importantly) the school's fault. Because that is just about the worst thing that could plausibly happen, and there's no way it should happen in the normal course of things.

But in a school for wizards, if a child ignores their teacher and falls from a broom and breaks an arm, that practically qualifies as "good luck," because at leas they suffered an injury of a relatively simple, curable kind. And hopefully they learned their lesson (respect the power of all the stuff being thrown around, don't do stuff without your teacher's presence or permission)

That doesn't explain everything happening at Hogwarts, but it does explain some.

[The Romulan Republic]

The house degenerated long ago. I think Hermione (or whoever) pointed out in the first movie that essentially every shit wizard ever pretty much came out of Slytherin.

Hagrid (in the book, anyway), and its not really fair.

Pettigrew was a Gryfindore. Hagrid didn't know he was guilty, but he thought Sirius was, and Sirius was also a Gryfindore. Hagrid knew this, because both men had been friends of his.

But to the point: the fact the ultimate-badass Dumbledore has to get himself killed as part of his long-term goals shows how much it sucks to be operating with zero support from the rest of the Wizard upper-crust. He's got to recruit kids for the Order because everyone else seems to be like "fuck it." He's trying to fight off evil in a society that doesn't seem to have a problem with it. Honestly, even killing Voldy doesn't fix the problems with Wizard society because nearly everyone in a position of power embraced his ideology, if not his "kill/enslave 'em all" message.

The killing and enslavement was a pretty big part of his message.

The political status quo between the two Wizarding Wars was prejudiced and discriminatory, certainly, and their's no excuse for it, but their's still a pretty big distinction.

And I don't think Dumbledore's death was part of the original plan- once he knew he was going anyway, he just decided to work it to his advantage. Just like the DADA post being cursed wasn't part of the plan, but he used it to his advantage.

If anything, his death was the single biggest loss for his side up to that point, because he was the only one who could really check Voldemort's advance or match him one on one. I don't think its a coincidence that the Ministry fell within months of his death, when in the first war it took Voldemort eleven years just to substantially weaken it.

And even then, the Malfoys, who pulled some total fucking horse-shit throughout the movies got to just walk-off into the sunset with their demon spawn in tow. Sure, they may have faced consequences off screen, but considering their track record, I wouldn't bet on it.

The "Cursed Child" play shows that Draco, at least, is a free man post-Deathly Hallows.

I suspect that the Malfoys got off because Harry would have been able to testify that Draco was, at that point, working for Voldemort against his will, and Narcissa switched sides at a critical moment in the final battle. Their is precedent, with Snape and Karkaroff, for "all is forgiven if you defect".

No idea how the hell Lucius could have got off, though. In particular, I often wonder how Ginny felt about the man who subjected her to the events of Chamber of Secrets walking away scot-free again at the end of the war.

It's damning of the entire Wizarding community. They seemed just mostly incompetent at first, but end up devolving into demagoguery as the series goes on. Muggles aren't respected much and considered little more than oddities, so I'm sure the idea that Wizards should own them has always been an undercurrent in Wizard society.

To be fair, most wizards seem to just want to be separate from them. Which is shit, but has historical basis in the witch hunts.

The Statute of Secrecy is a shit show all around though, with no easy solution. Keeping it basically requires a secretive, at least partially segregated society which is largely ignorant of Muggles, plus of course draconian laws and mass mind control to uphold the Statute.

Abandoning it means that the far more numerous Muggles find out they've been being lied to, brainwashed, and manipulated by a secret society of super humans for centuries. That... will probably end very badly.

And honestly, it's because of their magic crutch (duh..?). Sure, they can magic up whatever they want, but the lack of respect they have for muggles is barely surpassed by their hate of mudbloods. Muggles flew to the fucking moon, all without magic to help them. It reminds me of some old book I read where the "old hat" wizard was explaining to an apprentice something to the effect of "don't mock the mundanes. They tackle major problems without the benefit of magic and have shown incredible ingenuity. You might be able to call down the heavens, but piss them off enough and they'll find a way to kill you."

Sidenote: this is why I laugh at "nah man, muggles lose hard if Wizards want to take them down" arguments as if it's a given. Humans are pretty god damn clever about finding mundane ways to kill things.

Potterverse magic is excellent at cloak and dagger shit, not terribly impressive in direct combat for the most part. No more so than Muggle weaponry, anyway.

Anyways, the only Wizards who don't seem to show this bias are Harry and Hermione who lived with Muggles and Ron whose family is the Wizard equivalent of poor-white-trash and whose father studies muggles. They come off as arguing first-world values in a third-world shithole. This is the problem as I can see it. There's wizards who have zero desire to interact with muggles. They can just never leave Slave-owning/Money makes right Libertopia. Then you have another class of wizards who go back to reality for a given period of time. These two types cannot really coexist.

You should watch Fantastic Beasts, if you haven't yet.

Newt and company seem to be the first wizard/witches not raised among Muggles (as far as I know, anyway) who really treat them more or less as equals (Dumbledore seems like he might given his acceptance of others who wizards usually view with contempt, but we never see Dumbledore interact with Muggles much besides telling off the Dursleys in book six- for that matter, their are a lot of wizards and witches we never see interact with Muggles).

But then, Fantastic Beasts is the first Potterverse story to give us a major Muggle character who is neither idiotic nor an asshole.

Probably the best elements of an otherwise mediocre film.

[Elheru Aran]

As far as the Malfoys go... we never really hear anything about what happens to them apart from them apparently not being thrown into Azkaban. I haven't read Cursed Child, so if that says anything to the contrary, I can't say. But I would not be surprised if the Malfoys had to surrender their wands or something like that.

Wizarding society really is a mess. I'll throw more thoughts in on this when I have time, but suffice it to say that if you consider the history, first you have the Grindelwald conflict in the 40s roughly paralleling WWII, a short period of peace, Voldemort wreaking a reign of terror in the 80s, and an awkward period afterwards starting with hunting down/arresting/pardoning Death Eaters and ending with Voldemort's return. Said awkward phase could've resembled an extreme De-Nazification, an attempt by wizarding society to strip all trappings of Voldemort from themselves, deliberately putting their heads into the sand and trying to ignore the nasty stuff that was just under the surface waiting to pop back up and not willing to actually purge it.

The European War or whatever Grindelwald's war was called could have had rather more along the lines of collaborators running around; quite a few British thought Hitler wasn't so bad up until the war, after all. And if they thought that was wrapped up neatly with the arrest and imprisonment of Grindelwald and didn't bother to clean house, there would have been plenty of fertile material for Voldemort's ideology to take root in.

I suspect we're going to get a lot more about this in the Fantastic Beasts movies...

[The Romulan Republic]

As far as the Malfoys go... we never really hear anything about what happens to them apart from them apparently not being thrown into Azkaban. I haven't read Cursed Child, so if that says anything to the contrary, I can't say. But I would not be surprised if the Malfoys had to surrender their wands or something like that.

Draco, at least, seems to be free of any lasting legal consequences as of "Cursed Child", though I suppose its possible he suffered some legal penalties between stories. He is, however, something of a social pariah.

Wizarding society really is a mess. I'll throw more thoughts in on this when I have time, but suffice it to say that if you consider the history, first you have the Grindelwald conflict in the 40s roughly paralleling WWII, a short period of peace, Voldemort wreaking a reign of terror in the 80s, and an awkward period afterwards starting with hunting down/arresting/pardoning Death Eaters and ending with Voldemort's return. Said awkward phase could've resembled an extreme De-Nazification, an attempt by wizarding society to strip all trappings of Voldemort from themselves, deliberately putting their heads into the sand and trying to ignore the nasty stuff that was just under the surface waiting to pop back up and not willing to actually purge it.

Pretty much, yes, though to be fair, we don't know the state of the entire Wizarding World in much detail, beyond the fact that they all follow the Statute of Secrecy (though that bloody Statute seems to be at the root of a lot of these evils). Britain and '20s America are cluster fucks though, yes.

The European War or whatever Grindelwald's war was called could have had rather more along the lines of collaborators running around; quite a few British thought Hitler wasn't so bad up until the war, after all. And if they thought that was wrapped up neatly with the arrest and imprisonment of Grindelwald and didn't bother to clean house, there would have been plenty of fertile material for Voldemort's ideology to take root in.

I suspect we're going to get a lot more about this in the Fantastic Beasts movies...

Yup, it looks like the Fantastic Beasts series is going to basically be "Wizard WWII from the point of view of a zoologist".

[TheFeniX]

Hagrid (in the book, anyway), and its not really fair.

Pettigrew was a Gryfindore. Hagrid didn't know he was guilty, but he thought Sirius was, and Sirius was also a Gryfindore. Hagrid knew this, because both men had been friends of his.

Pettigrew couldn't even give us that since the wiki says he had a "Hatstall" and could have ended up in Slytherin. From here

Even after Pettigrew betrayed the Order of the Phoenix, the Hat continued to insist that it made the right choice, citing the manner in which Pettigrew died as (what some would call dubious) evidence.[1]

Someone help me out here who knows more. The citation is for the website, right? Is Rowling's official stance that "well, it should have put him in Slytherin because he betrayed his friends."? if so, she's way to on the nose about this.

And I don't think Dumbledore's death was part of the original plan- once he knew he was going anyway, he just decided to work it to his advantage. Just like the DADA post being cursed wasn't part of the plan, but he used it to his advantage.

I mispoke: the annoyance is that one guy (as least as far as everyone is concerned) stands between Voldy and them and instead of trying to back him or do anything to prepare, they are instead worried Dumbledore is going to try his OWN take-over. Then, when he's dead: they let... Voldy do his take-over.

IT'S FUCKING MAGIC!

If anything, his death was the single biggest loss for his side up to that point, because he was the only one who could really check Voldemort's advance or match him one on one. I don't think its a coincidence that the Ministry fell within months of his death, when in the first war it took Voldemort eleven years just to substantially weaken it.

They put the guy who murdered Dumbledore in charge of Hogwarts. Which makes me wonder why they even BOTHER with appearances at this point. They whole thing was very schizophrenic.

I suspect that the Malfoys got off because Harry would have been able to testify that Draco was, at that point, working for Voldemort against his will, and Narcissa switched sides at a critical moment in the final battle. Their is precedent, with Snape and Karkaroff, for "all is forgiven if you defect".

He chose to join. And the Malfoys obviously have enough resources to go into hiding to wait the whole thing out. Draco wanted to wear bigboy shoes and couldn't hack it. That's why I really hated the character: he never stopped being a little bitch. Even after all he'd been through, he never had balls.

Yea yea, I know: he's a foil, he's this, whatever. But everyone else, even dumbass "glue my wand back together" Ron grew a pair. Even "fat kid, but oh wait, the actor got hot, chicks love him, give him a bigger role" Neville got balls. God damn, you'd think being forced away from your shitty parents for months at a time for school and hanging out in "dipshit central" AKA House Slytherin would make you into SOME kind of man.

NOTE: personal rant, not directed at your explanation.

No idea how the hell Lucius could have got off, though. In particular, I often wonder how Ginny felt about the man who subjected her to the events of Chamber of Secrets walking away scot-free again at the end of the war.

They need the Wizard equivalent of "The Punisher." Only way anything would get done there.

You should watch Fantastic Beasts, if you haven't yet.

Netflix if it makes it there. I'm getting weak though. I couldn't stop yawning through Civil War.

[Vendetta]

And I don't think Dumbledore's death was part of the original plan- once he knew he was going anyway, he just decided to work it to his advantage. Just like the DADA post being cursed wasn't part of the plan, but he used it to his advantage.

I mispoke: the annoyance is that one guy (as least as far as everyone is concerned) stands between Voldy and them and instead of trying to back him or do anything to prepare, they are instead worried Dumbledore is going to try his OWN take-over. Then, when he's dead: they let... Voldy do his take-over.

IT'S FUCKING MAGIC!

"British government is catastrophically incompetent" is hardly unrealistic though, is it?

I mean when authors have to rewrite their satires because it turned out reality was far sillier than anything they thought they could get away with, "wizards fail to prevent hostile takeover of government" is relatively mild...

[Kingmaker]

The house degenerated long ago. I think Hermione (or whoever) pointed out in the first movie that essentially every shit wizard ever pretty much came out of Slytherin.

Even if most evil wizards come from Slytherin, most Slytherin alumni are not evil.

[The Romulan Republic]

The house degenerated long ago. I think Hermione (or whoever) pointed out in the first movie that essentially every shit wizard ever pretty much came out of Slytherin.

Even if most evil wizards come from Slytherin, most Slytherin alumni are not evil.

We do see a few semi-decent Slytherins in canon: Snape was a dick, but I wouldn't call post-defection Snape evil. Slughorn was mostly okay, and outright heroic in the end. Even the Malfoys seem to have become less malevolent as of Cursed Child (which also makes Albus Potter canonically Slytherin). And according to Rowling, no less a figure than Merlin himself was one.

And most of the ones who are scum would probably be small-fry without someone like Voldemort to lead them. The likes of Crabbe and Goyle are petty thug material, nothing more.

However, while the dominant traits of Slytherin are not inherently evil (aside from the fixation on "pure blood", anyway), they do rather predispose one towards acts of selfishness and underhandedness.

I would say that Lucius Malfoy between the wars is actually the clearest embodiment of Slytherin House's traits-ambition, cunning, and racism. Slughorn is probably our strongest example of a "good" Slytherin.

[TheFeniX]

"British government is catastrophically incompetent" is hardly unrealistic though, is it?

I mean when authors have to rewrite their satires because it turned out reality was far sillier than anything they thought they could get away with, "wizards fail to prevent hostile takeover of government" is relatively mild...

It's not the realism, it's just another point in how incompetent and worthless the Wizard gubment is. And they don't seem to have outside pressures like real-world governments do, only super-wizards kicking up a fuss. I'm under the assumption that after Voldy bit it, they went right back to business as usual. "Sorry bout all the torture. We'd punish the guilty, but Azkaban is only so big."

The house degenerated long ago. I think Hermione (or whoever) pointed out in the first movie that essentially every shit wizard ever pretty much came out of Slytherin.

Even if most evil wizards come from Slytherin, most Slytherin alumni are not evil.

My memory is hazy, but didn't they straight up throw the entire Slytherin class into the dungeons before the big throw-down in the last movie? Not saying it's justified, but it seems like Rowling herself was saying the attributes that make you a good Slytherin Wizard also make you prone to being an asshat.

I recall everyone cheering too, which makes it hilarious how universally reviled House Slytherin is.

[The Romulan Republic]

My impression (from the books- don't know about the film) was that a fairly high percentage of Voldemort's inner circle bought it at the Battle of Hogwarts. Their might not have been that many to jail, besides the Malfoys of course.

And if they wanted to jail every low-level collaborator... well, they'd have had to jail every Ministry employee who wasn't in the Order of the Phoenix, and a good portion of the general populace. Which, yes, is a horrible indictment of Wizarding society.

For what its worth, though, I believe their are statements to the effect that the Dementors were removed from Azkaban and Umbridge was tried and imprisoned for crimes against Muggleborns, so it wasn't just back to business as usual. Also, Spoiler

Hermione is Minister in Cursed Child, and Harry is head of Magical Law Enforcement, and I doubt that they'd stand for the old status quo reg. Muggleborns and magical creatures.

Neither would the immediately post-war Minister, Kingsley Shacklebolt.

As to throwing all the Slytherins in the dungeon, that was film only, and in my opinion a bad misstep.

In the book, McGonnagle tells them to leave, after one of the Slytherin students says they should hand Harry over to Voldemort and the other houses draw wands on the Slytherins. Considering the circumstances, it was protecting them as much as anything.

Slughorn takes them out, and then comes back himself with reinforcements for the final battle.

[FaxModem1]

The house degenerated long ago. I think Hermione (or whoever) pointed out in the first movie that essentially every shit wizard ever pretty much came out of Slytherin.

Even if most evil wizards come from Slytherin, most Slytherin alumni are not evil.

My memory is hazy, but didn't they straight up throw the entire Slytherin class into the dungeons before the big throw-down in the last movie? Not saying it's justified, but it seems like Rowling herself was saying the attributes that make you a good Slytherin Wizard also make you prone to being an asshat.

I recall everyone cheering too, which makes it hilarious how universally reviled House Slytherin is.

In the book, Slughorn and the other Slytherins retreated before the battle started. Everyone thought it was cowardice, when in fact, it was them rallying reinforcements to strike at the Death Eaters from a position of strength.

[The Romulan Republic]

Actually, come to think of it, I think Lucius Malfoy probably bears considerable responsibility for the state of inter-war Britain.

Cornelius Fudge, early on, was portrayed as being incompetent but somewhat well-meaning, and mostly relying on Dumbledore for advice (though its pretty clearly established that he's more concerned with the Ministry's image than justice in Chamber of Secrets, and that he's a racist in Goblet of Fire). But it seems that, over time, Lucius won him over more and more to his side, and he relied on Lucius for advice, not Dumbledore. And Lucius seems to have been among the most wealthy, and certainly the most influential and politically active, of Voldemort's inner circle between the wars.

Another part of the problem, I suspect, is that the Death Eaters never suffered an absolute defeat at the end of the first war. Their boss vanished, and those that weren't caught melted back into society. Whereas in the second war, they were ruling more or less openly by the end, and were pretty much wiped out in the final battle.

Edit: On that note, if for some reason the Malfoys couldn't be imprisoned, here's what I'd have liked to see happen post-Deathly Hallows.

Minister Shacklebolt: "Alright Malfoy, you're free to go, just as soon as you sign this."

Malfoy: "This says I hand over all the contents of my Gringotts vault to the Ministry as reparations for the war. And what's this about repossessing all the valuables in my manor?"

Minister Shacklebolt: "Just sigh on the dotted line, Malfoy."

Malfoy: "God damnit."



Seriously, what made Malfoy more dangerous than some random thug was not extraordinary skill with magic. It was his reputation and money. The former, I think its safe to say, is sunk with both sides by Deathly Hallows. Strip him of the latter, and he's largely impotent.

[Elheru Aran]

Another part of the problem, I suspect, is that the Death Eaters never suffered an absolute defeat at the end of the first war. Their boss vanished, and those that weren't caught melted back into society. Whereas in the second war, they were ruling more or less openly by the end, and were pretty much wiped out in the final battle.

Perhaps 'Denazification' was the wrong term, at least for Wizarding society as a whole. For the Ministry, sure-- a big, public campaign to reassure people that the Voldemort terror was behind them, a big show that everything was now tickety-boo, a few show-trials of accused Death Eaters-- but for the common members of magical society, I suspect there was a very strong vibe of "we don't know what really happened, we need to be careful". Hence the years of paranoia, of not calling Voldemort by his name, and I would not be surprised at all if there was a decent amount of emigration outward from the UK to safer environs.

Fudge being a wishy-washy fool didn't help, either.

[TheFeniX]

Something like Slughorn showing back up with Slytherins in tow in the movie would have gone a long way to show the house not full of self-absorbed pricks.

If not for statements to the contrary, I never would have pegged Slughorn for a Slytherin. In fact, the movies really needed more characters from Syltherin like him. I'm inclined to believe the books did this and the movie just took the easy road out because it portrays nearly the entire House as garbage most likely to give more value to Gryffindor (whatever) victories. Even watching the originals, it seemed a shame the movies lumped a bunch of kids into the role of the (lesser) bad guys.

But taking the movies in a vacuum, the Slytherins come off much more as Wizard/class supremacists and the kids get rail-roaded into brainwashing from whatever House they end up in. I was actually surprised to find Potter Sr. bullying Snape. Once again, the movies really could have afforded to show more of this: your House isn't everything.

Like, Potter using his newly acquired shotgun spell on Draco might have seemed excessive, but Draco attacked Harry just for the "crime" of following him around.

[Elheru Aran]

Something like Slughorn showing back up with Slytherins in tow in the movie would have gone a long way to show the house not full of self-absorbed pricks.

If not for statements to the contrary, I never would have pegged Slughorn for a Slytherin. In fact, the movies really needed more characters from Syltherin like him. I'm inclined to believe the books did this and the movie just took the easy road out because it portrays nearly the entire House as garbage most likely to give more value to Gryffindor (whatever) victories. Even watching the originals, it seemed a shame the movies lumped a bunch of kids into the role of the (lesser) bad guys.

But taking the movies in a vacuum, the Slytherins come off much more as Wizard/class supremacists and the kids get rail-roaded into brainwashing from whatever House they end up in. I was actually surprised to find Potter Sr. bullying Snape. Once again, the movies really could have afforded to show more of this: your House isn't everything.

Like, Potter using his newly acquired shotgun spell on Draco might have seemed excessive, but Draco attacked Harry just for the "crime" of following him around.

The movies are significantly flawed in that they cannot go into as much depth and breadth as the books, and they suffer for it. We see a lot of things on the surface that do appear in the movies, but the books have time and space to expand on those events and give you context-- not always at the time they happen, admittedly, but eventually.

The stereotyping of Slytherin and Gryffindor is probably just the worst example of this.

[The Romulan Republic]

Another part of the problem, I suspect, is that the Death Eaters never suffered an absolute defeat at the end of the first war. Their boss vanished, and those that weren't caught melted back into society. Whereas in the second war, they were ruling more or less openly by the end, and were pretty much wiped out in the final battle.

Perhaps 'Denazification' was the wrong term, at least for Wizarding society as a whole. For the Ministry, sure-- a big, public campaign to reassure people that the Voldemort terror was behind them, a big show that everything was now tickety-boo, a few show-trials of accused Death Eaters-- but for the common members of magical society, I suspect there was a very strong vibe of "we don't know what really happened, we need to be careful". Hence the years of paranoia, of not calling Voldemort by his name, and I would not be surprised at all if there was a decent amount of emigration outward from the UK to safer environs.

Fudge being a wishy-washy fool didn't help, either.

I would say:

Anyone who is wearing a Dark Mark, and cannot prove that they either switched sides before the end, or were coerced into putting it on, should get life in prison. Their funds should if possible (I don't know if the goblins would allow such Ministry interference at Gringotts) be confiscated. If not their accounts, then any valuables in their homes, as well as any unoccupied (because the occupants are dead or in prison) properties. Said funds should be used to pay reparations to the victims of the war and repair damage to Wizarding institutions caused by the war, as well as to pay off the fines from the ICW Britain undoubtably incurred for Statute of Secrecy violations.

Fudge can't be tried for being a Death Eater, but the fucker probably took bribes, and if their's a law penalizing criminal negligence or dereliction of duty in a public official, that might be applicable as well. Not to mention the show trial crap he pulled.

Anyone who willingly participated in the arrest, trial, incarceration, torture, or killing of Muggleborns or other minorities, or other victims of Voldemort, or who willingly fought on Voldemort's side at the Battle of Hogwarts (as opposed to being a conscript or under the Imperius Curse), should be treated the same as a marked Death Eater. Of course, as in the first war, the trick is separating the willing from the unwilling.

Pardons or light penalties (fines or community service at worst) for everyone else.

All laws enacted and all promotions or appointments made under Voldemort's puppet regime should be automatically void. His puppet should not be recognized as a former Minister.

Dementors stripped from Azkaban.

Anything big that I missed?

[Eternal_Freedom]

Something like Slughorn showing back up with Slytherins in tow in the movie would have gone a long way to show the house not full of self-absorbed pricks.

In the film, SLughorn doesn't leave, he's right there in the courtyard helping McGonnagall, Flitwick and (wtf?) Molly Weasley cast the giant dome shield.

[TheFeniX]

The movies are significantly flawed in that they cannot go into as much depth and breadth as the books, and they suffer for it. We see a lot of things on the surface that do appear in the movies, but the books have time and space to expand on those events and give you context-- not always at the time they happen, admittedly, but eventually.

I'll grant that book > movies nearly always. However, we DID get shit like Harry and Grainger dancing in a tent during the way too fucking long Deathly Boring: Part 1.

Even the Star Wars Prequels (which I found more than a few parallels between Jedi and Wizard ideology) managed to show us the action, but also delve into how different Jedi handled the philosophy and give us a pretty good look at why they failed. The Sith are Evil, but the Jedi aren't exactly Good either. More like Lawful Stupid. There was rot there and it lead to their end.

HP had the screen-time to show us these things and chose instead to give us a the kid's gloves. That's fine, the movies always seemed more about the spectacle, message be damned. It just colors my perception of Slytherin and even throwing us the bone of Bully-boy Potter is only one small scene. Compared to say... Anakin being pushed aside (in his opinion) numerous times over the course of 2 movies. So, I think Anakin is an idiot, but at least he's an idiot that makes sense and fits what I've seen. But I ask myself (for one example) why Malfoy is able to consistently dodge repercussions for his actions and there's not even a "he has money" answer. Or why Elves are allowed to be enslaved?

Really, the Elf and Dragon abuse and slavery is what really sells it. Maybe our super-rich have actual slaves, but, if they do, they don't go walking them around in public half-naked and beating them at any given opportunity. These aren't DnD wizards or whatever medieval parallel you're showing. These are 21st century wizards living in the "real" world: So, yea: fuck HP wizards. NOTE: Yea, I get the books talk about Elves enjoy being slaves...... whatever message I'm supposed to take from that, the one I'm taking is pretty negative.

And the books make it even worse judging from the wiki as Hogwarts has them running around doing everything. Nah, it's totally cool to give kids who may go back to the real world the idea that slavery is cool as long as the slaves are content.

Something like Slughorn showing back up with Slytherins in tow in the movie would have gone a long way to show the house not full of self-absorbed pricks.

In the film, SLughorn doesn't leave, he's right there in the courtyard helping McGonnagall, Flitwick and (wtf?) Molly Weasley cast the giant dome shield.

I was talking about WRT to Slytherin kids. Maybe they just break out and start fighting on their own. Shoving them all into the dungeon while everyone else cheered was basically the director saying "fuck those guys, you were right to hate them all along."

That said, Molly Weasley is a sleeper badass. Which also goes to show Wizards care less about skill and more about appearances as she just wrecks Lestrange, yet no "real" wizard would take two glances at Molly.

[Elheru Aran]

The house-elf thing is a bit baffling. It's like wizarding society basically took elves and turned them into their own perpetual slave race. I get that they don't really give a shit about non-human magical creatures, but come on.

[Tribble]

Pretty much anyone who isn't a human wizard is a 2nd class citizen at best, slave at worst. And within the wizarding community, unless you are very highly skilled, if your not a pure-blooded wizard you're a 2nd class citizen at best, treated like shit at worst. While most of the wizarding community make not have directly supported Voldemort IMO they definitely aided and abetted his behaviour. Why else would Dumbledore be considered crazy by most wizards for supporting things like Muggle rights, letting Muggle Wizards into school etc? The "good" characters we see in the books / films are strongly implied to be the exception rather than the norm.

Hell even Harry Potter has to be taught a lesson in this via his treatment towards Kreacher.

[The Romulan Republic]

Is their evidence that most wizards consider Dumbledore crazy for supporting things like Muggle rights? Dumbledore is an odd fellow in a lot of ways, but he's fairly well-respected at the start of the series, and is a major figure in government.

Wizarding Britain is a shit hole, but I think people often exaggerate just how much of a shit hole it is.

As for House Elves, how they came about-weather they were created or altered by wizards to be slaves, or what-is something that never really got explained. I'd say it should be, but I worry that Rowling might botch it.

That said, it could be plain old Stockholm Syndrone/brainwashing (possibly backed up by magical mind-control as well as physical punishments). Their have always, tragically, been slaves and abuse victims who convinced themselves that the master was kind.

Dobby did choose to be free, though, so its not really a universal trait. And we don't actually see that many House Elves to compare him too. One out of three of the House Elf characters of any note want to be free, at least. We have Dobby's word that the other Hogwarts elves were offended by Hermione's attempts to free them, but to be fair, Hogwarts under Dumbledore is probably one of the best places for a House Elf to be in that shit hole of a society.

[The Romulan Republic]

I would say that you can divide Wizarding Britain for much of the 80s and 90s into three main political camps, for the most part.

Reformers- De facto leader Albus Dumbledore (and later Shacklebolt). They support, if not equality, then at least better treatment of non-pure bloods, and reforms to eliminate corruption in the justice system and make it less draconian.

Conservatives- The status quo politicians, who just want to keep things the way they are and protect their own status. De facto leader Cornelius Fudge. Corrupt and prejudiced, but not willing to go to the extremes of mass murder and/or slavery for the most part. I'd also put Barty Crouch and Scrimgeour in this camp, most likely. The difference between them and Fudge was more in methods, focus, and perhaps competency than ideology, I suspect.

Blood Purists- Basically want to kill or enslave everyone who isn't a pure blood or at least a half-blood. De facto leader Voldemort (Lucius Malfoy between the wars).

The Reformer faction appears to have done well in the immediate aftermath of the first war, with Voldemort beaten, Dumbledore offered the post of Minister and serving as Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot and representative to the ICW (which he headed as well), and the Minister heeding his advice.

However, in the last few years before Voldemort's return, the Conservative wing, influenced by Malfoy, appears to have reasserted itself.

With Voldemort's return, the Blood Purist faction briefly gained total power due to the incompetence and corruption of the Conservatives (which it then subsumed). Both were apparently thoroughly crushed when the Reformers staged a successful armed revolt at the Battle of Hogwarts, and appear to have largely retained control for more than twenty years thereafter.

[Swindle1984]

It's damning of the entire Wizarding community. They seemed just mostly incompetent at first, but end up devolving into demagoguery as the series goes on. Muggles aren't respected much and considered little more than oddities, so I'm sure the idea that Wizards should own them has always been an undercurrent in Wizard society.

And honestly, it's because of their magic crutch (duh..?). Sure, they can magic up whatever they want, but the lack of respect they have for muggles is barely surpassed by their hate of mudbloods. Muggles flew to the fucking moon, all without magic to help them. It reminds me of some old book I read where the "old hat" wizard was explaining to an apprentice something to the effect of "don't mock the mundanes. They tackle major problems without the benefit of magic and have shown incredible ingenuity. You might be able to call down the heavens, but piss them off enough and they'll find a way to kill you."

Sidenote: this is why I laugh at "nah man, muggles lose hard if Wizards want to take them down" arguments as if it's a given. Humans are pretty god damn clever about finding mundane ways to kill things.

Anyways, the only Wizards who don't seem to show this bias are Harry and Hermione who lived with Muggles and Ron whose family is the Wizard equivalent of poor-white-trash and whose father studies muggles. They come off as arguing first-world values in a third-world shithole. This is the problem as I can see it. There's wizards who have zero desire to interact with muggles. They can just never leave Slave-owning/Money makes right Libertopia. Then you have another class of wizards who go back to reality for a given period of time. These two types cannot really coexist.

Somehow, I'm pretty certain the relative handful of magic users in the wizarding world would get their asses handed to them when they try to conquer the muggle world and discover they're fighting an army of millions with automatic weapons, artillery, armored vehicles, air support, satellite surveillance, chemical and biological weapons (how quickly can you cast a spell to protect yourself from VX nerve agent that kills in three seconds flat and is colorless, odorless, and tasteless? Particularly when 'instantly lethal and almost undetectable poison gas' isn't something you knew about in advance?), and friggin' nukes.

I'm not how useful turning a bird into a fancy goblet would be when a horde of screaming Chinamen charge at you, with a horde of tanks right behind them.

I'm guessing that at least some wizards are cognizant of this fact, and that's why the wizarding world is off in its own little dimension where muggles can't reach them. But given the superiority complex of the majority of wizards, and the near-complete ignorance of what muggles are capable of that their isolation has caused, I'm guessing the majority will be very surprised when they finally reveal their existence to the world at large and set forth to conquer... only to discover that a JDAM doesn't give a shit if you were nominated Potion Mixer of the Year.

Though clearly with all the mind control magic, date rape potions that are openly sold to school children, and shape-shifting potions, the wizards would have the advantage in infiltration and creating their own Manchurian Candidates.

[The Romulan Republic]

Potterverse magic is way more suited to guerrilla warfare and cloak and dagger shit than to open combat.

Edit: I mean, just the things saboteurs and assassins could do with apparition plus disillusionment charms are horrifying. Add in the possibility of Imperius Curses on enemy officers and politicians, and the fact that they can easily conceal anything from a small city to a mobile encampment...

[Tribble]

To be fair, most wizards were never shown to be that stupid. Even Voldemort refrained from openly declaring war on the normal population and publically revealing himself; everyone in the wizarding community more or less seems to know that if they push things too far they'll get stomped.

So far IIRC only Grindelwald deliberately tried to deliberately start a war between the two.