The obsession with being ‘pure’ for example. Hitler saw the Aryans as the ‘master race’, just as Voldermort saw pure bloods as superior. Interestingly to note, Voldermort was not pure blood just as Hitler was not the typical blonde hair, blue eyes Aryan. The ‘Magic is Might’ statue seemed to be very Nazi Germany-esque. And of course, the rounding up of Mudbloods can no doubt be compared to the rounding up of Jews.

Furthermore, the propaganda. All the ‘Undesirable Number One’ leaflets, and removing any anti-Voldermort teacher from Hogwarts mirrors the propaganda and censorship imposed by the Hitler Government.

Finally, the general feeling of fear: many people knew what was going on was wrong, but were too afraid for their families to speak out. I think JK captured this concept very well indeed.

I was interested to see that the film played up the Nazi Germany nature of Voldermort’s rule. For example, when they’re escaping from the Ministry all the guards seem very much to resemble Nazis; they even wear red arm bands!

I very much liked this symbolism. JK has always been a critic of racism and extremism: as early as Book 4 the Death Eaters seem to resemble the KKK.

I just wanted to point out the different between racism etc and the treatment/opinion of Slytherin house is that Race is not something we choose…House choice at Hogwarts is. Isn’t it a continually running theme from the moment Harry hears about Slytherin to the epilogue of the final book, that the sorting hat takes your choice into account? Didn’t Harry always have the CHOICE to join slytherin but asked the hat to put him in Gryffindor?

If we ignore the choice issue for a moment though, the sorting hat is supposed to look into the hearts and minds of the students and sort them accordingly. Hagrid makes the comment in the very first book that basically all the witches and wizards who went ‘bad’ were from Slytherin. This appears to be common knowledge, and yet the students placed in that house seem happy to be there nonetheless. This would imply a bit of moral ambiguity of the slytherin individuals. They also seem to have no issue with the fact that the founder of their house, Salazar Slyhterin, was opposed to muggle born and half blood wizards and witches being educated at Hogwarts. Our heritage and the conditions of our birth are not under our control this sort of intentional discrimination or ‘racism’ if you like is not only despicable, it is also downright unfair.

Maybe the other houses do sometimes pick on slytherin hoouse a little too much, but the idea that they are inncocent vitims of griffyndor bullies? Well that’s just ridiculous. I do appreciate though, that the message is strong and clear that even if one does become a slytherin, it does not mean they cannot contribute positively to the world. Narcissa Malfoys love for her child, Snape’s love for Lily and his dedication to bringing down Voldermort…heck even good ol’ slughorn fighting in his dressing gown show that there is always the choice to do the right thing, not matter what has happened in the past.

Just my two cents =)

Earlier at a friend’s house we got talking about Caesar Nero and how he blamed Christians for Rome’s problems…

It reminded me greatly of Lord Voldemort and his treatment of what he calls “Mudbloods” in Deathly Hallows.

August 10th, 2007 at 9:15 am
I see. But one of my main problems with the books, as a whole, is that Rowling herself seems to have a moral double standard. The Unforgivable Curses are evil and will damage your soul and should never, ever, be used by a good person – except when the good guys use them. Snape can never be redeemed or seen as a hero because he is a bully – but we never actually see him bullying *anyone* in DH, whereas both James and Sirius are cruel, unrepentant bullies, which is perfectly okay because they are bullying Snape, who deserves it. And on it goes.
__________________—–
It’s not really so bad as that. All three Unforgivables are condemned by society (the same society, be it noted, that calls the other Magical races “brethren”– I’m becoming more and more inclined to see “Unforgivable” as a sample of Ministry of Magic hyperbole and hypocrisy) but only Avada Kedavra is specifically said to damage the soul. Interestingly, it is made very clear that even Avada Kedavra is not truly Unforgivable: the soul damage is healable and presumably forgiveness is attainable (albeit not, perhaps, from the MoM) on precisely the same grounds as any other wrong: repentance. Voldemort cannot be made whole because he has no remorse in him. As for James and Sirius as unrepentant “good guy” bullies, both Sirius and Lupin are depicted as regretful about the way they treated Snape in the conversation they have with Harry in OOtP after he sees Snape’s Worst Memory. We can at least hope that had James Potter lived, he would have thought better of his youthful cruelty as well.

As for the depiction of the Slytherins, there is a little nuance there. Narcissa Malfoy at least loves her son, and lies to protect Harry in order to be able to go find Draco. Draco himself seems to be trying to avoid fighting with Voldemort at the end and he tries to keep his execrable cronies from harming Harry. Slughorn does fight with the defenders of Hogwarts in the end. Snape actually proves to be a hero. And the final word on the House of the Serpent is when Harry, in the epilogue, tells young Albus Severus that it’s okay with him if he winds up in Slytherin.

So, if the Death Eaters are compared to Nazis when they do these evil things, why aren’t the Order *also* compared to Nazis? If racism and discrimination is the worst evil in the world, why is it okay for everyone in the books, including the narrator, to condemn the Slytherins out of hand simply because they are Slytherins? Why is the greatest compliment Dumbledore can manage to give Snape “you should have been in Gryffindor, not in Slytherin”? You see what I mean? Racism is wrong; exploitation is wrong; torture and brainwashing are wrong – except when we, the good guys, are doing it. Then anything goes.

It is this hypocrisy on Rowling’s part that, to me, makes all the Nazi analogies and condemnation of discrimination fall particularly flat. And that is why I, personally, found them simplistic and offensive.