>>213600962The more and more I think about it and rewatch, it just becomes painfully obvious to me that almost all of the faults of the series are derived from the fact that J.K. Rowling doesn't understand what role a government is meant to play in governing for its people, which actually makes a lot of sense, because J.K. Rowling is:
1. A woman.
2. British.
A very quick example of this from the most picked-on example from Book 1: The plot is that Dumbledore, a headmaster at a school, is entrusted with a magical stone that can prolong and restore life to half-dead things. This only makes sense because Rowling doesn't understand a government:
1. Should have keen interest in guarding or destroying a rare artifact from an enemy to the nation/world with utmost security.
2. Should have the public funding to afford all amounts of protection and overprotection necessary to stop anything short of a full-scale successful invasion.
3. Would have interest in weaponizing the artifact for themselves.
4. Would, assuming that for some reason they HAD to keep it at Hogwarts, invest a shitton of money and attention to increasing the security to #2 levels, as opposed to several riddles that literal school children could beat.
To continue beating the horse, another great example is the fact that any time any laws are broken or judgement must be carried out, a high-ranking political figure shows up themselves to take care of it. When Harry accidentally inflates his aunt Marge, instead of a low-ranking officer, or a district police detective showing up, Harry is met by Cornelius Fudge personally to discuss the matter. In the same book, Fudge showed up personally to oversee execution of a freaking Hippogriff.
It's no wonder how Voldemort was winning the war. His entire plan was just to organize people into a military presence and then just pick off a seemingly demilitarized and defenseless wizard population.
![cocaine-love[1]](/images/tv/1754964761618665.gif)
