What's the political philosophy of Harry Potter?

It is. It is sexiest and exploitative.

It makes men feel inferior because they are not James Bond.

To destroy white culture and make sure I don't have sex.

I want to believe she's pure ideology but I actually think she's a dense moron.

She will simply never be as smart as us. It's sad that us intellectuals are neglected while talentless whores like her are heralded despite producing utter shit

Watered-down, secularized Christianity, to the point it doesn't resemble anymore what a 1st century Jewish apocalyptic preacher would teach.

I should also point out how the Harry Potter corpus is the closest thing to a political treatise ever read by liberals on Twitter, they have no other written works to interpret things old and new with.

Here's a pretty interesting analysis of the franchise Nick Land linked to the other day:
spottedtoad.wordpress.com/2017/02/06/getting-your-owl/

>do you expect me to read all this bullshit.jpg
At least give two sentence summary about the hypothesis/argument.

It's like 12 paragraphs I ain't summarizing shit

On Veeky Forums

hates reading
hates writing

Everything seems to be in order.

If it were an interesting subject, sure, twelve ain't a thing. But twelve about a subject I dread and the hypothesis might be the only thing that saves it, I think a summary would be alright.
Also, for papers/essays, even low academia shit, a summary is always required and provided.
The blog has a shit style, so I'm even less willing to give it a try.

>reading shit when you could be shitposting or reading better things

Because you confuse "the left" with tumblr and buzzfeed, allowing you to caricature the actual tenets of leftism into outlandishly stupid shit like

>Harry Potter, especially as realized in the films, is a fantasy of institutional legitimacy, that loyalty to the idealized form of the School is equivalent to an individual moral sense.

Why the fuck are you in a thread the about political philosophy of Harry Potter if you dread the subject? It's a fairly niche topic, seems odd to go out of your way to read about it.

>Hogwarts is different to the '80s idea of school in that it puts the institution on a pedestal instead of the rebels. Students in real life seek out to do this too.

>tumblr and buzzfeed

They and their ilk (particularly the hyperindividualist, belligerent, and proudly anti-solidaric mutations of identity politics) are, without a doubt, the worst thing that has happened to the left in the 21st century.

It's hardly out of your way to scan the threads on the front page. Or is reading in general a chore for you?

Which is exactly what seemed to happen during the last election and with Brexit.

I don't know much about Nick Land but he seems firmly right when considering the allegory of Harry Potter within mainstream media.

Topkek, 8.5/10

>tfw was a much happier person when I didn't know about the authors of the books I read

It's a slow board, it popped at the top in the catalog, and I expected harold bloom copypasta to appear, which it did.

>I have absolutely no interest in the topic at hand
>but I will nonetheless enter the discussion and demand that those who do cater to my whims

It's just bizarre bro

Why does everything these days have to be so politically charged ? I feel like I can't go anywhere without somebody talking about their political beliefs.

It's just another way to attention whore.

Join the revolution, cuckhold

GET ASS FUCKED OR DIE

I doubt anyone who read harry potter thinks of it like that. If anything, the system is voldemort and hogwarts represents the liberal establishment of all the nice folks and voldemort and his buddies are the evil republican conservatives who want to come in and ruin everybody's fun times by instituting standards.
It's a 'racism bad' message, that's literally all the voldemort wizards are cited as being evil for besides them killing all the decent wizards who are too busy casting goddamn disarm spells while the other side is using mind control, torture, and death curses.
I bet if Hogwarts were real they wouldn't be complaining about the migrants in europe because they live in their own closed off world and can give a big fuck you to human governments whenever they want.
How many syrian refugees do you think hogwarts would take?

J.K Rowling would have you believe they would pack the building with them and buy them all fucking owls with magical gold fortunes their dead parents left them.

True evil exists and has to be dealt with violence and direct action, helping yourself through conspiracies and compromises.
Since it's so black and white it can't be applied to the real world. It's worthless.

It's because political views are the one thing people will always have in common. Once you create such an open sphere of dialogue (the internet and ergo social media) then it's nigh-on unlikely that people will discuss anything else on such a grand scale. Politics effectively pervades everything.

I think the only way to stop talking about politic is to either be so selfish that you really don't give a shit about anything but your own interests or be very self-disciplined.

racemixing with mudbloods until there is no talent for magic left

an occult brasil

>if only you'd read a book by me, you would know I imagined that people like you would be burned alive, in my fictional world that I imagined, which is not real.

They might not think of it like that, but it still happens. Everybody thinks they're the good guys.

>What's the political philosophy of Harry Potter?

Christian ressentiment.

How the heck did Hogwarts kidnap Harry from his legal guardians? They simply didn't want him to go to an equivalent of an ISIS boot camp.

There is none.

Or rather, there are many.

The content of the books themselves are vague enough that you can easily project whatever political philosophy you want onto it to imagine yourself the brave hero. Harry never espouses any political beliefs other than "decent guy" and Voldemort is a saturday morning cartoon villain with an authoritarian streak who can be whatever boogeyman you want him to be. All of YA fiction is like this. It's part of the appeal, part of why it works to engage people.

But word of god via Rowling implies that HP does in fact have a political philosophy; but said philosophy is always in flux dependent on what Rowling feels like that morning.

Why is it always the irrelevant celebrities who feel the need to spout their political bullshit?

Fame is a mask that eats into the face.

But seriously, EVERYONE seems to spout their own political bullshit opinions all the time. The real question is, why do people elevate a select few morons to the status of celebrity?

JK Rowling deserves to be famous more than most famous people in western culture. If there's anyone who actually deserves to be elevated above the rest, it's writers.

Her books might (though I disagree), but the OP shows that no, she definitely should not.

See

The guy started the tongue-in-cheek referencing to Harry Potter. He got BTFOed whether you agree with her or not

Rather complicated.

>The Harry Potter books are a childish rescue fantasy that feeds into a far more adult escapism: they are, after all, the ultimate fairytale of social mobility through merit. If you’re born with magical ability, you get to go to a special school where they’ll teach you special skills, and that’s okay, because you’ll be part of the good elite, who get to mess around catching pixies and playing wizard chess and protecting the powerless, and not the bad elite, who are like Nazis with better hair. In these stories, liberal meritocracy is set against the simpler evil of aristocracy—those wizards, including the Dark Lord himself, whose main bugbear throughout the series is the corruption of “pure” magical blood by Muggle-born witches and wizards. In a feat of worldbuilding that chimed perfectly with liberal triumphalism of the mid-nineties, it turns out that all magic is really good for—all Rowling’s Wizard government, the Ministry of Magic, exists to do—is to maintain the wizarding world as a secretive parasite universe, invisible to ordinary folk.

thebaffler.com/blog/harry-potter-laurie-penny

>From an outside perspective, Harry Potter is a funny fantasy for liberals to cohere around. Going off to centuries-old boarding school where your mum and dad were Head Boy and Head Girl, where tolerance and broadmindedness consists of admitting that lower-class Muggles can occasionally have the same genetically-mediated gifts as the gentry, where the greatest possible action for a woman is to let herself be slain so her son can grow up to revenge himself on her killer, where ignorance of the supernatural is a form of willful self-delusion,a pathetic blindness to the real forces that move the world, where all the kids eat Merry Olde England foods like Roast Beef and Kidney Pie and Yorkshire Pudding all the time, all sounds more reactionary than progressive. But if contemporary liberalism is the ideology of imperial academia, funneled through media and non-profits and governmental agencies but responsible ultimately only to itself, the obsession with Harry Potter makes a lot more sense.

spottedtoad.wordpress.com/2017/02/06/getting-your-owl/

...

HP represents the neoliberal capitalist status quo, all races are equal and love wins etc except for the fact that the world is literally run by an elite class of all-powerful aristocrats who go to great lengths to trick the stupid muggles/proles and conceal the true extent of their pervasive influence

>Mom! I did it! I said the thing again!

Rowling was completely divorced from reality even before Harry Potter was successful.

this. not to mention its a childrens book. kids read it in their formative years. sure it can pique people to read more complex and differing texts but pop culture has a way of not allowing that.

The warped meritocracy is very true to modern day liberalism in that they both expect that some innate quality that has always existed in them should qualify them to circumvent the capitalist way of supporting one's self and be supported instead by a social class of 'good guys' who fight nazis on behalf of the common man by directly attacking "evil" rather than intervening in any aspect of the common man's quality of life.

They want to be the bloggers, jounalists, whistleblowers, teachers, etc. who are paid to hold important knowledge and correct opinions and fight against a boogeyman who - like them - has nothing at all to do with the quality of life for 95% of the population.

This is brilliant. Well said user. I agree completely.

>teachers have no impact on the quality of life of 95% of the population
Get the fuck off Veeky Forums

there hasn't been a healthy one in a long time. with trump being elected, the majority got their worldview shattered and are now collecting pieces of what happened while they took their bubble for granted. and one of the ways they are coping with it is by painting reality with a young adult novel. what a time indeed

Ah yes, the teachers, true heroes. None greater than them, except real heroes.

Sarcasm is boring. Anti-intellectualism is as tiresome as it is primitive. Perhaps /b/ is more your speed?

Did a teacher tell you that?

>They want to be the paid to hold important knowledge and correct opinions and fight against a boogeyman who - like them - has nothing at all to do with the quality of life for 95% of the population.

Academia is the epitome of this, it fucking destroys them when they learn that literally nobody gives a shit about their research, even in their specialisation.

>anti-elite
>anti-scholarship
>distorted sense of how the world actually works

So did you fail out of school or did you never even go in the first place?

Really makes you think

Every time I see people use words like capitalist and socialism seriously, I realize how hopelessly stupid and mind controlled most of the population is.

I didn't go to school, I went to books.

I love the "Anti-intellectualism" meme, interestingly it only ever seems to be used by social studies undergrads.

That's quite interesting. I kinda like this idea of college safe spaces = manchildren wanting their own Hogwarts.

Actually the wizards are a metaphor for the technologically competent humans, and muggles are a metaphor for the technologically reliant masses. A company like apple or facebook is more likely to be the metaphor for either hogwards or voldemorte and his death eaters. The republican democrat dialogue is for plebs living in a world increasingly becoming dependent on the capabilities of the technological wizards.

Is there any logic behind the "racism" in Harry Potter?
I have never understood why they cared so much about that pure-blood thingy, I don't think they never said why in the books.

Let's be serious user, destruction of white culture isn't what's keeping you from getting laid.

Reading isolated works without context, guidance or external input is not a substitute for an actual education. It seems you have created your very own boogeyman out of academia. How you imagine it is wildly off-base.

I agree entirely user. How can you expect to receive a good education without paying a professor to call you racist for several years?

>Reading isolated works without context, guidance or external input is not a substitute for an actual education
Well to be fair that's exactly how most Philosophy is taught.

Only a product of the government funded apparatus can under the very same government funded apparatus give the Trve context to content.

>It seems you have created your very own boogeyman out of academia. How you imagine it is wildly off-base.
Not really. He's entirely justified in hating a system that helps to stratify society based on the decisions people made as teenagers and is inaccessible to the vast majority of people later in life.

It deserves all of the shit thrown at it even if some of it is completely false.

>The content of the books themselves are vague enough that you can easily project whatever political philosophy you want onto it

As is demonstrated in this thread - everything from liberal to conservative viewpoints can be seen within its lens

Remember when she erected traffic lights to trim her hedge causing massive traffic jams around edinburgh?

Are you being deliberately dense? Have you even ever taken a lit class? Tumblr isn't real life

She also did le virgin shaming a couple weeks back, then backed down over it when her fans (more like concern trolls) criticised her over it, in a halfway form when she said that it was ok to criticise people who had become frustrated by being virgins to the point where they had the wrong ideas. Which seemed to placate her fans, but comes off a bit like someone spitting on the poor because they're too unsophisticated to agree with the noblewoman.

That's just like the time when professor McGonagall told Hagrid to kill the griffin for shitting on the roofs.

She can't open her mouth without embarrassing herself, literally any half-witted media personality can run rings around her, when fucking Piers Morgan can btfo you into silence you know its time to give up.

to be fair Piers Morgan is a fucking idiot, but an expert troll. He's really good at getting under your skin and has made a career out of it.

Pretty much. Trump thinks a lot of wrongthink without apologising and then gets elected after having been memed into literally Hitler by these people. To them, the world has ended and yet they're still here. They're reacting to a deep trauma and it's going to be very amusing.

But those using Tumblr are real people, and they get these ideas from somewhere. I imagine that it's typically sociology 101.

Too fucking right. I think he's smarter than he lets on. He has really perfected the craft of lulling you into giving him a chance, then holding a handful of shit up your nose while retaining the same slightly bewildered, slightly aggressive expression. He asked Bear Grylls how many people he'd killed halfway through an intense discussion about fatherhood or something.

I don't think they exist in as large a proportion as the right makes them out to be desu. I dislike that they're an easy caricature for the right to make fun of. It's like the left version of the "hurr durr I'm a stupid christian, the world is flat, vaccines don't work, and the universe is 6000 years old"

I always thought it was pretty clearly about national socialism, but I suppose that's just the representation of ultimate evil in the postwar world, so anyone could consider themselves victims of it if something bad happens to them.

Yeah, the Nazi analogy is fairly apparent, but as shown above you can make a statement about how it is about liberal attachment to institutions for authority, or about how it's about racism, or about LGBT, or so on and so forth...

tumblr itself is more like an infinite positive feedback loop

>I imagine that it's typically sociology 101.
i imagine it's tumblr

The non magician and magician division is basically standard social class division, which I guess makes sense given that Rowling is from britistan.
But her commentary is, instead of truly accepting, or evaluating, is the classical kind of shit that I'd expect from a white kid from the suburbs in america that posts on tumblr, sort of like "I'm not racist, but", "I'm not racist, I have a black friend", but instead of race it's social class here (since they are brits).
Harry Potter is a total faggot but gets granted a chance at life and friends because he got lucky genes, and his life is now all good.
For picturesque reasons everything is old and nasty but that's ok because muh old english aesthetics, I won't go into this.
But the argument impression in the end is that social division is bad mright? but wait, don't integrate for real, those are filthy, dumb, and don't have the genetic right to this social class, let's just be kind enough to those of lower social class and protect them because they need to be protected, and they don't know, poor them.
In the end the good guys win because they are supposed to save the poor ignorant and non worthy masses, and the bad people lose because bad morals.
This is the standard movie where white guy saves tribe of black people.
Sort of like Avatar.

And it's not that I'm for, or against, institutions, segregation, classes, racism, etc.
But it's just bad writing and the author is making generalizations and simplifications.

I'm not from the UK nor America, and while I think the conservatives are retards there, I also think that the style of rhetoric and arguments used by the dems/liberals in those places are as stupid and condescending as fuck.
I can see why they got so much hate during brexit and elections.

t. liberal professor

Get fucked

Well yes. I expect a lot of intelligent moderates and extremists avoid saying things because they don't want the social penalties that accrue in terms of losing friends, having social media battles etc If you're an atheist or a heretic in a religiously divided community you would probably avoid the conflict. Or, nowadays, troll about it.

Someone intelligent and who actually wants to get at the truth will come out of education smarter. Most people will go into debnt to be taught nonsense.

They use academic language. That didn't spontaneously appear within their heads.

The whole point of having an education is to have to avoid retreading needless amounts of bullshit that other people have already gone through. Furthermore, if you actually want to have a career in the arts you have to know people and the connections you make in college are indispensable. There's a limit to how far doing everything on your own can take you

Not him but:
Tumblr shits get called out in class for being retards, they just go back and post in their blogs, which in turn gets shared on terrible retarded sites like reddit or Veeky Forums, and people here and there will believe everything so they take it as is.

Also, professors aren't retards. Sure they will have their own values, but they are smarter than to not give the class as it should be given.
Only times you can hear their true leanings are in their special, own, readings and seminars, maybe a comment here and there very rarely during lectures.
Common lectures are strict and adhere to the university standards.
In classes where there's a lot of subjectivity involved, you're graded and heard not because of your leanings/ideas, but rather on following the proper academic method being taught in class.

Extremists (left and right) are mocked and alienated (unless charismatic) not for their ideology, but because they are trying to prove themselves right in a class where no one gives a fuck, instead of choosing a topic and following the methods.

Harry Potter presents a mostly conservative view of the world:

The families in Potter consist of mothers and fathers, not various partners of various genders engaged in various acts of free love. Ron’s family is a shining example of a loving family, with a father who works and a mother who is willing to face mad witches if need be for her large and well-loved brood. Harry Potter himself is saved by his mother’s love and protected from the evil spells of her murderer.

The government in Harry Potter’s world, as in ours, in inept, corrupt, and regarded as an obstacle rather than the source of salvation. Each boy relies on his own wit and courage and friendships to save himself and to save the world.

The press in Harry Potter’s world, as in ours, is inept, corrupt, and a source of outrageous falsehoods. The main reporter-witch can assume the form of a mosquito.

The moral universe in Harry’s world rejects any form of relativism. There are no shades of gray here, or examples of a thing being right for one group and wrong for another. The ends do not justify the means here either: knowing that Voldemort is also an orphan raised in poverty does not automatically make him one of the oppressed and therefore excused in anything he does, as it would in the left-wing world.

Dumbledore is gay! And the one example in the book of Dumbledore’s love is an evil man who manipulated him. Aside from that, as best the text can show, Dumbledore lives chastely.

Do I even need to say anything about the alleged occultism in Potter? We Christians invented the medieval romance from which the modern novel takes its form, and modern fantasies slavishly copy, including this one. Romance is as Roman as Rome. If you think Sir Orfeo or Orlando Furioso or Le Morte D’Arthur is occult, go find the nearest exorcist: you’re possessed by the imp of stupid.

They keep score in Quidditch. I just thought I would throw that in.

There is no cult of victimology here. Anyone who gets ahead, even the Chosen One, is because he works hard. The Twins open a joke shop when they graduate; they do not go on the dole.

“The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.” Harry conquers death by submitting to it at Voldemort’s hand, and destroys the Dark Lord by being reborn. He sees the Dark Lord’s soul as the shriveled and pathetic thing it is, not glorious.

Salvation requires sacrifice.

Rules are made to be broken.

Left of center cutesy liberalism?
>racism is bad but you be violent back okay

Also, I wish J.K. would insult people without referencing her own book series. Like come the fuck on, it's the literary equivalent of snorting your own farts.