McG / DD / Re: Why should Harry be expected to listen to anyone at H

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 123026


SSSusan:
> No, Nicky Joe, I don't think it's about "respect for the office," 
> nor is it about whether Harry's RIGHT.  Of *course* he's right!  
> But there is a bigger issue at hand.  Not causing problems with DJU 
> is about safety, about preservation of The Order, about keeping 
> himself from being expelled, about keeping DD from being kicked out 
> of Hogwarts.  It's about NOT MAKING WAVES, you know?  
>  
> There are times to make waves.  If this were *not* a period of war, 
> and Voldy were nowhere in the picture, I'd be cheering Harry on for 
> standing up to that wench.  But this *is* a period of war, Voldy 
> *is* on the rise, and what matters most just now isn't whether 
> Harry is right or wrong but what will happen if he keeps opening 
> his trap and yelling at a high-ranking Ministry official who has 
> the backing of an anti-Harry/DD Minister of Magic.

Alla:
> I am always very hesitant to disagree with you, but I partially do.
> 
> First of all, the issue of "respect of authority" was raised ( not 
> by you, but it was raised), therefore I think Nicky Joe concerns 
> are valid.
> 
> I may have agree with you that for the sake of Voldie resistance, 
> Snape and Harry may have to forgo their fights, but Umbridge IS 
> evil, to me frankly no less than Voldie, albeit she is smaller.
> 
> I don't believe that in order to fight one evil, you have to submit 
> to another.
> 
> I think that text does not encourage "submission" to Umbridge 
> either. We clearly see at the end  that Fred and George resistance 
> is approved by all teachers and they are greeted as heroes.
> 
> I admire that Harry stood up to Umbridge. He did what good person 
> is supposed to do when faced with evil, IMO.


SSSusan:
No need, ever, to apologize for disagreeing with me, Alla.

Let's look at where we were in the thread before I snipped Nicky 
Joe's post.  And I'm going to insert MORE of Dung's argument than NJ 
left in.

Dungrollin interjects:
>>> I am of exactly the same opinion - and I agree with McGonagall, 
too.  If someone is in a position of power and authority and is bent 
on making your life hell, giving them extra incentive to do it is
foolhardy. Nobody is defending Umbridge's actions in those
detentions, nor anywhere else. But Harry clearly wasn't listening to
McGonagall because he went and did the same thing again almost
immediately afterwards.

Evidently he needed two weeks of hellish detentions to make
him take Umbridge seriously, because explaining it to him didn't
work. What's immoral about that?<<<

Then Nicky Joe wrote:
>> And just how many times does Voldemort have to try and kill him
before he picks up the clue phone and runs off to hide? I can't
believe anyone would think it a bad idea that he stand up to
Umbridge. Yeah, maybe it was stupid, but at least he made the
attempt! At least he tried to get through to that little evil
peabrain of hers. He's fought Voldemort, for crying out loud! why
should he be afraid to stand up to a teacher? Especially when she's
dead wrong? Oh wait, is this another one of those "repect for
authority" things? I have issues there...<<


SSSusan again:
So, you see, what I was objecting to was the comment, "Oh, wait, is 
this another one of those 'respect for authority' things?" 

I was attempting to point out that Dung's argument revolved around, 
not the issue of giving DJU respect simply b/c she's a teacher, but 
around doing something STUPID, i.e., giving someone in a position of 
power & authority who already wants to make your life hell 
*additional* reason to make your life hell!

And I am adding the additional point that pissing DJU off during this 
time in the WW is also not wise.  McGonagall tried to warn Harry to 
cool it [which is where this thread was earlier today], and I agreed 
that she was right to warn him.  "For heaven's sake, Potter!  Do you 
really think this is about truth or lies?  It's about keeping your 
head down and your temper under control!" she said.  She would NOT 
say as a matter of course, imo, regarding every teacher just because 
of his/her station; rather, she's issuing this warning because of 
this one teacher in these specific circumstances.

NJ's response was, I thought, an attempt to take it back to the issue 
of respect for authority, when that's not where Dungrollin was coming 
from, imo.

Siriusly Snapey Susan