Explain This Passage

[susanmcgee48176]

No: HPFGUIDX 180612

> > Julie:
> >
> > This is how I understand it too. And isn't this how it pretty
much
> worked in Nazi Germany when it came to identifying Jews--if you had
a
> Jewish grandparent, i.e. you were of at least one-quarter Jewish
> descent, then you were a "Jew." (Please correct me if I'm wrong,
and
> I may well be!)
>
> So in the WW you aren't pureblood if your blood is "tainted" by
the
> presence of a Muggle or Muggleborn within two generations. So it
> seems to  me. Though I'm not sure JKR ever specified such, I did
get
> the impression she was in fact alluding to Nazi Germany and Aryan
> supremacy with the whole Pureblood supremacy issue.
>
>


In reading this whole thread, I think we're confusing two things. I
may need some help clarifying my thinking (which is a little fuzzy)
particularly around the scientific stuff.

It sounds as if some fans are trying to figure out their own system
for definitions such as full blood, half blood, squib, etc.

(And a squib of course is a muggle. But a squib differs from some
muggles because a squib would have been born into family where one of
the parents was a witch or a wizard. We KNOW that a squib CAN have
two magical parents, because Neville's family was afraid that he was
a squib, and both his parents were magical. The non-squib muggles
would be muggles who had two non-magical parents).

But the whole categorization in the Rowling-created magical universe
is political. It's not really about parentage (although it uses
parentage and magical ability to divide people) It's an excuse to
demonize, discriminate against and oppress a population.

I'm sure many people have read about how various groups in the U.S.A.
were initially not categorized as "white", and were discriminated
against (even the Chinese were considered "white" by definition in
some places.) Who was considered white was not about skin color, nor
was it really about race. It was about who would be given access to
power and privilege. It was an artificial definition. And there are
some parallels...because if you had an African parent and a European-
American parent, you would be categorized as African-American, black,
and could be sold as a slave. Even though you were a "half blood",
you were still Black. (And as people have pointed out, they made
rules about quarter bloods, eight bloods, sixteenth bloods).

J.K.R. talked about this about three years ago. Isn't it on her
website? She said that it was people like Lucius Malfoy who coined
the terms muggle born, and pure blood and half blood. Harry was
considered a "half blood", she said, because of his mother's
grandparents.

She discovered AFTER the fact (while she was in the Holocaust Museum)
that the Nazis used the same system. The Nazis said that if you had a
single Jewish grandparent, then you were Jewish.

I suggest that the whole idea of muggle borns "stealing magic"
(revealed for the first time in the last book) was the justification
for expelling them from Hogwarts, taking their wands, and treating
them like dirt.

I suggest that JKR was using the way oppression, bigotry and
prejudice work in our world. It doesn't work so well to say for
example that people with brown eyes are inferior, and that people
with blue, green, and hazel eyes will have rights, money, education,
food, etc. and not say more about it. The oppressors have to come up
with myths about the oppressed that JUSTIFY the oppression, and make
those upholding the system comfortable with being prejudiced against
and treating others badly.

The idea that muggle borns stole magic was a lie to justify their
mistreatment.

If you look at the history of slavery in the U.S., there is all kinds
of evidence presented about why African Americans should stay as
slaves. They're not as smart, their brains are smaller (wasn't there
a whole science that measured brains?), they're the descendants of
(who was it?) in the Bible, etc. etc.

There's got to be "reasons" to oppress people, or some people start
thinking it's "wrong" and revolt.

Susan