# Lifestyles & Discussion > Family, Parenting & Education > Books & Literature >  Is Harry Potter to blame?

## Meritocrat

A single welfare mother with socialist leanings writes a series of books promoting magical thinking that go on to be read by most young people throughout the world.  Is it possible that JK Rowlings is the secret puppet master of the world's youth?  Is Harry Potter to blame for millennial snowflakes and SJWs?

----------


## MallsRGood

Hmmm...

Rowling gave us...




And Tolkien gave us...




...you might have a point.

----------


## Ender

> A single welfare mother with socialist leanings writes a series of books promoting magical thinking that go on to be read by most young people throughout the world.  Is it possible that JK Rowlings is the secret puppet master of the world's youth?  Is Harry Potter to blame for millennial snowflakes and SJWs?


NO.

----------


## Lamp

That's just idiotic

----------


## osan

> A single welfare mother with socialist leanings writes a series of books promoting magical thinking that go on to be read by most young people throughout the world.  Is it possible that JK Rowlings is the secret puppet master of the world's youth?  Is Harry Potter to blame for millennial snowflakes and SJWs?


At first blush, many would take your questions as idiotic.  To wit:




> That's just idiotic




However, methinks there is something there worthy of eyes.

Meteoric rises such as those of Rowling should always be viewed with some suspicion in environments such as that in which we currently marinate.

----------


## Meritocrat

I've been reading a lot about hypnosis.  Belief in induction is falling off.   Researchers like Nicholas Spanos now think that all that is needed is focused attention and a story.  Novels and movies are the most prevalent and powerful forms of hypnosis.  And there is a long tradition of literary spells.  I've seen first hand the power these novels hold for children and the affects they have on ideas about magic.   Obviously, the questions were provocative, but it's not a stretch to say that no one has been more influential to millennials than Rowling.

----------


## Jesse James

could be

----------


## Lamp

*7 Things Harry Potter can teach us about libertarianism*By Gina Luttrell on July 18, 2011 in Theory
22
If you had come to my apartment looking for me around midnight this past Friday, I would not have been there. I was, like millions of other fans, sitting in a theater chair, eyes glued to the last new Harry Potter movie I would ever see. It was crazy, it was emotional. It was one hell of a ride.
Though Harry Potter is not something that actively informs my libertarianism, I do see a lot of libertarian themes in the books and movies.
*#1 Government is ineffective*In _Prisoner of Azkaban_, the government takes a crack down on Harry’s life because they think there’s a mass murderer after him. Just how effective is Fudge in keeping this thirteen-year-old boy in the home where he’s safe? If Sirius black had been any sort of real threat, Harry Potter would have been dead. When Voldemort returns, Fudge’s reign is riddled with one crucial mistake after another — and that is even _after_ he admits that Voldemort is alive.
*#2 Government is cruel*And who _replaces_ Fudge as minister? One known as Rufus Scrimgeour, who makes George W. Bush’s policies on torture, _habeas corpus_, and illegal imprisonment look humane. He seizes a will and its contents against the law and threatens violence against a 17-year-old if he doesn’t comply with his wishes. Not to mention all the people sent to a prison (where they also torture you) without trial.
*#3 One person can make a difference*If _Harry Potter_ had been meant as a statist’s wet dream, Harry would have been a government agent, trained and working for the Ministry of Magic. We would have heard the successes of the Ministry, instead of its failures all throughout the book.
Instead, we get the understanding that one person, or a group of highly motivated people, can make all the difference in the world. We see Harry, Ron, Hermione coming to face with horrible decisions that will effect not just them but their whole society. We see them make those decisions, and they do the right thing. They overcome adversity as individuals and as a voluntary group, and they change everything.
*#4 Civil Society can alleviate suffering*No amount of government prodding, sanctions, taxing, or force could have kept the Dursleys from locking Harry in his room, starving him, or abusing him. The only real solution was for Harry to get out of the home. Yet there is no magical orphanage for young witches and wizards.
Harry is taken out of the Dursleys’ every summer by members in his community — the Weasley family. Even though they are dirt poor and have little room for him, these kind souls take this Harry in every summer to get him away from his abusive caretakers. This crucial kind act is a part of civil society — namely, people organizing to help other people. Rowling shows how this is far superior to any option the government could have offered Harry.
*#5 Private School Pwns*We all know that private schools are inherently superior to public ones. But what about the fact that not everyone can afford it? Rowling shows us exactly how private schools compensate for this problem — they have private funds to help children who can’t afford it!
When Tom Riddle (AKA Voldemort) finds out he is a wizard, he is a poor orphan boy without a penny to his name. When Dumbledore visits him and says that he can attend Hogwarts, he also informs Tom that the school will allow him to attend for free, and he can have an allowance to purchase books and the other things he needs. Just one of the _other_ perks of private schooling.
Now, just imagine how a non-private school –potentially lead by Cornelius Fudge — would be.
*#6 Parents generally do what’s best for their kids*In the _Harry Potter_ world, children under the age of 17 are not allowed to do magic outside of school. This makes sense: magic is powerful. Kids are dumb.
To keep them from blowing themselves or anyone else up, they are fitted with a magical “trace” that tells the Ministry when they have performed magic. However, we find out later that the trace is proximity-based. That is, if a child does magic while around legal adults, the Ministry can’t sort it out. Their _parents_ are left with the responsibility of making sure they adhere to this rule. And, according to Rowling, it generally works out.
*#7 Freedom is always the best option*Whether they are fighting the tyranny of Voldemort, restrictions that the school places on them, or the idiotic government, the characters in _Harry Potter_ are always striving against arbitrary harmful rule. They want freedom, and they are willing to die for it. The world is better place when Voldemort is gone, Umbridge is chased out by the centaurs, and when our favorite trio effectively reform the Ministry of Magic (cite: based on Mugglenet interview after the 7th book).
*What does all this have to do with libertarianism?*Freedom of choice, respecting human life, and the pitfalls of government are all central to libertarian thought. The reason why Harry Potter teaches us about libertarianism is because people buy it. People read it. True the book is a work of fiction, but if the society had not been crafted in a realistic way, we would not love it as much. We would not fall into it as much. _Harry Potter_ teaches us that many of the core libertarian ideals do constitute what we would like to see in our world. And that amazing things can happen when government gets out of the way.

----------


## Meritocrat

I've always believed that Jack London's novels championed social Darwinism and was surprised to learn the author was a socialist, so I wouldn't look down on someone who sees HP as a defense of libertarianism.  


My guess is that the author/screenwriters were attacking what they considered right-wing, fascist government, not government in general.


Ironically, I have some sentimental feeling for HP.  I saw it on a first date with someone special.  We bailed on a picnic when the temp hit 100, and headed to the movie theater for some relief.  But I can separate sentimentality and rationality.


For me reason and libertarianism go hand-in-hand.  So I don't believe a book/ novel series that promotes magic is good for liberty.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> That's just idiotic


I take it you're a Harry Potter fan.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> I've always believed that Jack London's novels championed social Darwinism and was surprised to learn the author was a socialist


Don't social darwinism and socialism go together?

----------


## Lamp

> I take it you're a Harry Potter fan.


I was until the last book came out

----------


## Meritocrat

> Don't social darwinism and socialism go together?





Social Darwinism and socialism are basically opposites.  Herbert Spencer writes a lot on social Darwinism.  Also Albert J. Nock!  Check out his book, Memoirs of a Superfluous Man.

----------


## Original_Intent

Did Rowling create the snowflakes, or did the snowflakes create Rowling? /ponder

----------


## Suzanimal

> Is Harry Potter to blame?


Nope.

----------


## jllundqu

> A single welfare mother with socialist leanings writes a series of books promoting magical thinking that go on to be read by most young people throughout the world.  Is it possible that JK Rowlings is the secret puppet master of the world's youth?  Is Harry Potter to blame for millennial snowflakes and SJWs?


Given the absolute stupidity of this question, I am forced to assume you are being sarcastic and not actually seeking a response.

----------


## Meritocrat

> Nope.


waw

https://youtu.be/SzZiizNz2kA

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Social Darwinism and socialism are basically opposites.  Herbert Spencer writes a lot on social Darwinism.  Also Albert J. Nock!  Check out his book, Memoirs of a Superfluous Man.


Yeah, that book is the basis for my handle.

----------


## Meritocrat

> Yeah, that book is the basis for my handle.



Cool.

----------


## undergroundrr

Virtually any work of creative art can be interpreted to advocate any political or moral viewpoint. (I know, not Atlas Shrugged.)

If an author, screenwriter, composer wants their art to have any commercial or cultural relevancy, they're going to keep motivations flexible within the work. And once it's in the public forum, it's fair game for analysis.

How many were shocked to find that the creator of the supposedly ultra-libertarian Firefly launched a SuperPAC for Clinton? 

How many here would never give up their love of Star Trek despite its obvious anti-capitalist, globalist (galaxist!) leanings?

I'm amazed how many times I've watched a big-budget Hollywood blockbuster and said "Hey, that has a libertarian message." At the same time, I know people with opposite inclinations confirmed their own bias with the same material quite handily.

If you try to stay away from the works of liberal artists, you're going to find entertainment in general kind of boring. Self-identifying social liberals (economics doesn't really come into it) are far more gifted in the arts than any other group.

----------


## alivecream

Harry Potter book series has a very huge impact in literature and pop culture as well. This is unavoidable considering its massive success in both platforms.

----------


## Ender

> I was until the last book came out


I like the last book- read it in a day so that no one could blurt out spoilers like: "Dumbledore dies!" 

I think the last book proved that Rowling can tell a good story.

----------


## Lamp

> I like the last book- read it in a day so that no one could blurt out spoilers like: "Dumbledore dies!" 
> 
> I think the last book proved that Rowling can tell a good story.


I mean't the book after the 20 something year timeskip

----------


## Iowa

Just looked like some poorly written pieces to me.

----------


## Ender

> Just looked like some poorly written pieces to me.


They're actually pretty well written- compelling stories.

----------

