Wizard supremacy (was:Re: Nel Question #4: Class and Elitism)

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 125871


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03"
<horridporrid03 at y...> wrote:
> 
<SNIP>
> Betsy:
> It's implausible only if you think that when it comes down to it, 
> wizards are more powerful than Muggles.  Everything JKR has written 
> points to the opposite being true.  Even the isolated acts of 
> violence speak of a weaker group attacking a stronger.  Honestly, if 
> you put a Navy Seal up against an Auror, I think the Navy Seal would 
> win.  Once a wizard loses his wand, he's pretty helpless, and I 
> don't think it would take much for the Navy Seal to disarm the 
> wizard.
> 
> I think the Wizarding world was in danger of going the way of the 
> Neaderthals and that's why they went through the formidable task of 
> completely hiding their existence from Muggles.  All the talk of 
> Muggles being weaker or in danger of becoming dependent on wizards 
> are so much propaganda.  In fact, I think the propaganda has been 
> going on for so long, most wizards firmly believe it to be true.  
> But their own history tells a different story.
> 
> Betsy

I tend to agree.  And we haven't even gone into the Achilles Heels of
the WW, the muggleborns, half-bloods, and squibs.  In any conflict
between the two worlds, one would expect a certain percentage of the
muggleborns and half-bloods to side actively with their muggle kin. 
Many more would side with them passively by dragging their feet in
helping the Wizarding World.

And the squibs, my God the squibs!  If ever there was a ready made
fifth column its them.  Knowledgable of the WW, and at least generally
informed of magic and how it works, but bitter and at least partially
outcast.  In your example above, Betsy, of the Auror and the SEAL, the
SEAL is almost certain to be victorious if he is informed by an
embittered squib "His power is in his wand.  Break the wand and he is
helpless."

Finally, the wizards are drastically outnumbered.  JKR is notoriously
bad at math, so we don't have any idea how many wizards vis-a-vis
muggles there are, but the wizards can't account for, at most, more
than 0.015% of the population, and probably much less (Hogwarts is the
only school and wizarding Britain and has, even allowing for JKR's
generous and unseen number of pupils, only 1000 students covering
seven year-groups).  True, not all wizards attend Hogwarts but that is
probably offset by the extended wizarding life-span and the fact that
wizards can probably have children at ages that would be very old for
a muggle.  Some friends and I once did some calculations and figured
that, given those ratios, in the U.S. with a population of roughly 300
million their could be only about 500 thousand wizards even allowing
for ridiculously generous ratios.  A more realistic figure would be
anywhere from fifteen to thirty thousand, including the old, infirm,
and children.  Say then about ten thousand wizards of "combat
capability."  That against a population of 300 million.  Worldwide
that would mean about 200,000 war capable wizards against six billion
muggles.  Not a pretty picture.  Once the muggles realized the wizards
are helpless without their wands, the wizards would be done for, even
without the full advantages of muggle science coming into play.


Lupinlore