Something to consider..the "Harry Potter" series as pro-CCW message

[Manedwolf]

I don't know how many people here have read the books or seen the movies, but consider something about them if you have. They ARE literally advocating concealed carry of a lethal weapon upon all people at all times as a means of self defense.

Every single character carries a lethal weapon with them, even the kids...their wand. It can be used to kill instantly, and is, in fact, used for that several times in the series, even though unprovoked murder not in self-defense is considered an unforgiveable offense.

But every person carries one with them, in their coat or belt or whatever. If a bad guy draws theirs, they can draw their own and defend themselves...and they do. And all it takes is pointing it at someone and uttering two words to instantly kill them.

Yet they trust everyone, even young people, with one. And nobody talks of "wand control".

The fifth book in particular is outright anti-gun-control in tone, (it didn't quite make it into the movie) with a bad-example character telling people that the Ministry will protect them and they have nothing to worry about, (which isn't the case), and it turns out that only those who practice self-defense with their own weapons manage to defend themselves from lethal assaults later. And said "ministry' is then forced to issue guides to "basic self defense" when the situation becomes much worse...too little too late.

Here's some summary:

As Order of the Phoenix begins, Harry and his cousin are attacked by dementors, the soul-sucking creatures employed by the Ministry of Magic as prison guards. Harry uses the wand he carries in his pocket to drive off the dementors, saving his cousin's life and his own. Minutes later, he receives a message from the Ministry's Improper Use of Magic Office, informing him that he has violated the Decree for the Reasonable Restriction of Underage Sorcery, and that Ministry representatives will be arriving shortly to confiscate and destroy his wand. Harry himself is called to a disciplinary hearing at the Ministry of Magic, where the charges against him are reluctantly dropped on grounds of self-defense.

The idea that private individuals must be able to defend themselves is expressed throughout the book in the Hogwarts students' conflict with the new Defence Against the Dark Arts teacher, Professor Umbridge. Umbridge, also the sadistic High Inquisitor of the Ministry of Magic, teaches Defense Against the Dark Arts from a strictly theoretical perspective. When students complain that they are not learning practical self-defense skills, Umbridge answers that they should not need to defend themselves- the Ministry will see to their safety: "The Ministry of Magic guarantees that you are not in danger from any Dark wizard."

Of course, that proves wrong when a "good guy" main character is killed due to this policy. And as in real life, the "ministry" people can't get there in time to save people who are attacked, only to investigate who might have killed them.

Oh, yeah, they also put criminals in a stone prison on a forsaken island, with guarding spectres that suck all the joy and hope out of their soul as punishment...and except in one case of a frameup, it's considered a good thing, and they continue it through the series. The evil, crime-committing, murdering ones are sent there as they're caught. I think the ACLU and Amnesty International would make a fuss.

Interesting concept to find in a kid's book/movie, hm?

 

[Fosbery]

I don't think it was meant as such, but interesting

 

[EarlofSandwich]

I am pretty sure someone would advocate 'sorcery control'.
We all know powerful magic should not be in the hands of children.

"Puff the magic dragon". I mean AC-130 spectre gunship style. Now that's what I call magic.

 

[Henry Bowman]

In one of the later books, Order of the Phoenix, I believe, they are required to check their wands upon entering the Ministry of Magic (government) building. This does not, however, prevent dark wizards from doing harm there.

 

[WolfMansDad]

There is wand control, and it is shown as a bad thing. I think people are expected to check their wands when entering the ministry of magic, and I'm sure that non-humans (house elves, centaurs, etc.) are not allowed to posess a wand. J.K. Rowling made a point in one of the books (order of the phoenix?) that this (banned posession for non-humans) is an unjust law.

 

[Zundfolge]

There have been hundreds of essays written on the libertarian themes in Harry Potter books.

A quick google search should turn up quite a few.

There's even one on the LP web site http://www.lp.org/lpnews/article_617.shtml

 

[geekWithA.45]

I'm waiting for the ultimate confrontation between Harry and Voldemort to be resolved in the same manner as in Wizards

 

[beerslurpy]

Apparently JK Rowling had a number of unpleasant encounters with the British welfare state when she was a single mother living on the dole in her early years. Supposedly this colors her view of government bureaucracy in the books.

Books like Harry Potter are great in that they have the potential to slowly shift the zeitgeist away from nanny-statism and towards libertarianism. And the awesome thing is that both parents and children read them heavily due to their simplicity and entertainment value. In some ways, it is similar to the social commentary fiction of the Enlightenment like Gargantua and Pantagruel or Gulliver's Travels- something that sneaks in useful messages in the guise of entertaining the reader.

Of course, this is what the socialists have been doing with the MSM for decades. It's so rare to see someone on our side that it almost feels like they have discovered some novel technique of social reform.

 

[Stickjockey]

The fifth book is the first one to be blatantly libertarian-leaning; it gets better from there.

Geek:

"Here's a little trick Mom taught me when you weren't around."

BLAM! BLAM-BLAM!

I loved it!

 

[cbsbyte]

If I remember correctly from an article I read a few years agos, the way she answered some of the political questions(about politics in Britian) made me believe she is probably far left in her views.

 

[Fosbery]

One can be both far left wing and support the RKBA, CCW etc. The two are not mutually exclusive.

 

[El Tejon]

How so?

Socialism needs control. Control means a disarmed peasantry.

 

[jfnemeth]

How so?

Who said that leftists had an internally consistent belief system? I always thought that the majority of people (on this site at least - me included) found leftists irrational. Therefore there is no inconsistency between the RKBA and other leftist beliefs.

 

[up_onus]

wow!

i bet i could think of at least 100 books, tv shows etc that are advocates for CCW. Funny thing is, most are fantasy!

 

[Gordon Fink]

When the evil totem is transformed into something unrecognizable, one may come to realize that, in fact, it is the heart of its bearer, rather than the totem itself, that is the source of the evil.

~G. Fink

 

[cbsbyte]

When I mean she has far left views, it is because she supports Terrorism against Britian.

 

[Gordon Fink]

Really? Supporting terrorism is not “leftist” per se, but do you have a citation to back up your allegation?

~G. Fink

 

[Zundfolge]

If I remember correctly from an article I read a few years agos, the way she answered some of the political questions(about politics in Britian) made me believe she is probably far left in her views.

To a lot of social conservatives, libertarians look like liberals.

Libertarians tend to be pro-choice, pro-gay rights, anti-religion+politics, anti-censorship and support drug legalization ... all these things look pretty liberal to many conservatives.

 

[Autolycus]

I doubt it was her intention to support less gun control.

As it stands I would like to hear her say that she supports terrorism against Britain. I think someone is just taking hardline stance and saying that since she does not agree with him that she supports terrorism.

+1 to Zundfolge. A lot of people think I am liberal because I will speak out against somethings and when I speak on others they get confused.

Its not just the left that wants total control. The Christian Right will not give up control if they get it. Look at Islamfascism, they do not want to give up control either. Fascists are also far right and feel the state has ultimate power.

So please just dont blame the leftwing for everything. Rightwing proponents have also been just as bad.

 

[cbsbyte]

Sorry, I am not a conservative nor a republican. I am a Independent with no party affliation. I just remember the article I read. I will find it on the net.

Here is a link to a blog about why one should not try to read politics from Harry potter.
http://gnosticalturpitude.org/archives/000218.html

A interesting aside she named her Daughter Jessica Rowling after her heroine Mrs Jessica Mitford who was a known anti-capatialist, pro-communist, and a politcal radical of the 20th century.

 

[Low-Sci]

This strays from the topic some, but I think the same thing about the movie "The Incredibles." At least, its a pro-self defense movie.

Anyway, just thought Id throw that in as a sidebar.

 

[Manedwolf]

The Incredibles also had some nice lines about "celebrating mediocrity" and "Everyone is special? That's another way of saying noone is."

In an age where kids are still "gifted" even if they can't figure out the doorknob, that was refreshing.

So there are positive messages in some popular entertainment. Just have to watch for them.

 

[cbsbyte]

I also found some libertarian/classical liberal views in the moive the Incredibles. There are some blogs on the net that try to analize the movie, and many leftist, including some I know, found the movie to be too right wing. Though its hard to prove it without the writers and creators stating that was there intention. In the interviews in the extras on the CD verison the creator of the movie stated he born and raised in Montana, which might be a clue on his beliefs.

 

[Manedwolf]

Brad Bird is the creator of The Incredibles, and yes, he does have a libertarian angle to his writing.

Seriously..the thread was about how the Potter books made a case for CCW being a good thing, intentional or not, as something for people to think about.

 

[cbsbyte]

I stated there where classical liberal, not leftist viewpoints in the Incredibles movie. I prefer Classical liberal too leftist on almost evey issue. Though I did not state anything about the Harry Potter movies being of one ideaology or another. I really can not pin down her belief on CCW since I don't believe she ever commented on it. She is not know to be a shooter in Britian, or someone that would be supportive of CCW at least with a handgun. In truth It might be something you are reading into the movies.