What sort of society and why ( was Re: Inaugural address....)

[arrowsmithbt]

No: HPFGUIDX 97907

This thread  seems to be drifting towards theories/analyses
of governance in the WW. Interesting.
I've rearranged the order of (heavily snipped) previous 
comments in an attempt to make my responses more coherent.
Hope it works.

>
Nora:
'Reactionary' does have the traditional meaning as ultra-
conservative, for the maintenance of the status quo.  I'd argue
that many of Voldemort's ideas/would be policies are not 
revolutionary, but rather an intensification of the status quo. 
After all, a lot of rather conservative types thought Voldemort 
had the right ideas.
>

Kneasy:
Hm. It's difficult to come up with illustrations that don't have
glaring  exceptions or a tendency to draw unhelpful parallels 
with the RW. 

The purebloods do tend towards  reactionary in that they 
hanker for a system that they think used to exist. Voldy seems
to be the answer to their prayers in that he's happy to put the
 boot into Muggles, Muggle-borns and Mudbloods. Hooray! 
Our natural place as the true expression of Wizardkind is his
agenda! He's the Man!
Wrong.
Voldy has his own agenda over and above this spasm of 
introverted self-regard. He wants to wield his power as the 
sole authority in the WW. He will be the sole arbiter of who is
acceptable. Anybody who opposes or even fails in their 'duty' 
to achieve this end will be on the receiving end of his wand.

His aim is to institute one-man rule. I'm not sure that the 
purebloods fully appreciate this, though Malfoy Snr. gives 
some evidence of showing caution. But most are probably like
Regulus Black; their own prejudices have blinded them to the
reality until too late. They can fairly be compared to what Lenin
called "useful fools". They too will be subject to Voldy's caprices
and their blood will not save them. 

> >
 Kneasy:
 Yes. But I doubt if he intends to raise any of his supporters
 very high. Power in the WW is predicated on *magical* power;
 that is entirely personal and cannot be delegated or transferred.
>>

>
Nora:
I doubt that power (in the WW at present) is strictly predicated on
magical power; Umbridge didn't exactly overtly impress, and 
neither does Fudge--but I don't know. It seems to be some 
perverse mix of  money, lineage, possibly power...you know, 
all of a sudden I'm  wondering about DD's heritage... Agree again
on how Voldemort treats supporters--he is the top dog and 
everyone else is subordinate.
>

Kneasy:
"In the WW at present" is right, but it won't stay that way if
Voldy  wins. For the moment he's happy to let this  useless 
government bumble along, not least because it so often sees 
Dumbledore as it's nemesis. Fine; let  them. If they waste their 
efforts countering a non-existent threat that's all to Voldy's 
benefit. And of course his supporters are inside the Ministry 
helping to perpetuate this myth.
Once he's safely ensconced there won't be a government. 
Oh, the label may still be used as a comfort to the credulous, 
but in reality it will be no more than Voldy's secretariat; fawning
lickspittles eager to enact his slightest whim.

> 
Nora:
I need a new word, but one was thinking in part of the 
progressive/reactionary debate in terms of liberalism and the right 
to individual freedom; IMHO, individual freedom is the last thing 
that Voldemort wants.  DD strikes me as an almost classical liberal 
(small l, natch) in some ways.
> 

Kneasy:
In a dictatorship concepts of Progressive/Reactionary, Left/Right
become meaningless. Those labels predicate factions fighting for 
supremacy. IMO Voldy is not factional. To their discredit his 
supporters are and they suppose that Voldy is; but so far as he 
is concerned everyone is there to be used, ignored or disposed of.
He is not involved in a reaction/progressive battle, though he'll not
disillusion those who think he is, he's  in the process of executing
a putsch that will install an immortal as perpetual ruler. Factions 
become very small beer in such circumstances.

DD probably is the epitome of liberal thinking and personal 
freedoms and with the return of Voldy he sees the larger danger 
that others may not. He distinguishes between Voldy and his 
supporters - it is *Voldy* that must be destroyed, not his adherents
(unless it's absolutely unavoidable). 
 
>
Nora:
 I'm a big admirer of Pip!Squeak's MDDT revised defense, posted a
 while ago; in it, she speculates that DD stayed at Hogwarts because
 it was the place where he could functionally affect the most change.
Note Fudge's litany of complaints, among which is 'not using Ministry
approved curricula'--DD has been deciding what to teach the students,
in large part.  I think he's been thinking and plotting for some time 
on how to change the WW, but hey, mass societal change is never a
fast process. 
>

Kneasy:
Yep; Pip!Squeak's reasoning has a lot going for it, but DD's premises
 and actions become null and void once Voldy returns.
Evolutionary change in attitudes and behaviour are too slow to 
counter this threat. Influencing school children over generations
supposes that time is not a critical factor, but now it is; time has 
run out, the danger is banging on the door.


>
Nora:
Merit is a slippery issue; again, I was thinking a little more small
scale.  We've had hints and inclinations that advancement in
government (and the bureaucracy, which *needs* to be 
independent--that's a major political problem in the WW system)
is strongly  influenced not only by who you know (I'm in academia
--I know all about that), but by what you *are* (considered in the
essentialist manner that a lot of the WW thinks about blood) and 
your political attitudes towards blood.  Draco hates Hermione in
part because she's smarter than he is and gets better marks--he
thinks that his bloodright priviledge should rule over her merit.
>

Kneasy:
This will have to be addressed eventually but again, it only 
becomes relevant if Voldy gets the chop. 
Draco's attitudes indicate how ineffectual DD's slow, steady
influencing of the student generations has been up to now. I'm
not so sure that Draco thinks that bloodright should over-rule
academic merit, more likely he can't understand why his wizarding
antecedants have not guaranteed his academic superiority. He's 
been bred to it, hasn't he? Must be better, stands to reason - this
is the attitude of Lucius - no Muggle-born is a proper wizard, 
therefore Draco isn't trying hard enough. Draco still thinks he's 
better, though doubts may be creeping in after 5 years of being 
an also-ran. 


>
Nora:
 Of course; I agree about the effects of ambition.  I think the number 
 of times the blood requirement has been reiterated is important, 
 though.  Still don't know what to think about Ol' Salazar--he's a 
 major blank space in my mental map of the Potterverse.
> 

Kneasy:
Oooh!
It's my belief that old Sally is very important indeed, perhaps even 
critical to the tale. It's his ideas that are being perpetuated among 
the (clotted) so-called cream. Even his name may be a pointer - 
IIRC, JKR spent some years in Portugal. Wasn't Salazar a one-time 
dictator there? Ruling over an oligarchy? And guess what - he 
started as a professor.

>
Nora:
 So are we heading to a point where Tom is going to have to make
 the choice?  Harry does something to *enable* Tom to make the 
choice?  
It's got a certain elegance to it, I'll give you that, Kneasy...  :)
> 

Kneasy:
You haven't been reading my rantings, have you? *Sigh* 
Here am I, knocking my pipes out constructing theories tying 
together Voldy,  Salazar, Tom, the concurrence of their obsessions, 
how they can be neatly resolved and providing an explanation of 
why DD doesn't  zap Voldy on sight and you've never even noticed.
'Twas ever thus.