- Location
- The Temple of the Winds
Yes, because if nothing else Dumdum is a very good politician.
Yes, because if nothing else Dumdum is a very good politician.
Taylor: - this is a solved problem. Did you ever heard phrase "Big Brother is watching you"? Panopticon is very easy to archive now that i have access to pixies.
Yes, because if nothing else Dumdum is a very good politician.
That argument dies with the whole not monitoring the known terrorist thing.Draco being a known quantity, they could minimize any damage he may have done
To a child.Dd would be fine if he was just powerful, but he also presented as wise and all-knowing.
He absolutely could have gotten them, but doing so would have required effectively restarting the war, which Dumbles very strongly did not want to do because he felt too many people had died already.….say what? He couldn't convict death eaters, despite having tattoos identifying them as such, after the first war, with the only exception those literally standing over their victims and admitting their crimes. And an innocent man.
He can't keep the ministry from repeatedly helping Voldemort/blood purists, and he can't stop himself getting removed multiple times for stupid reasons. He's a terrible politician coasting by on respect
I think you mean "Fawkes."
To a child.
Remember; Harry Potter is written from Harry's PoV, not from Third Person Omniscient. Just because someone says something is true to Harry does not mean it is actually true.
He absolutely could have gotten them, but doing so would have required effectively restarting the war, which Dumbles very strongly did not want to do because he felt too many people had died already.
A large number of death eaters (not all remember; Voldemort's most hardcore supporters went to wizard jail) managed to escape by claiming the Imperious because Dumbledore didn't want to push the issue, not because he couldn't.
I think "all adults gaslight Harry to think that Dumbledore wise and all-knowing" is bit radical take.Remember; Harry Potter is written from Harry's PoV, not from Third Person Omniscient. Just because someone says something is true to Harry does not mean it is actually true.
Most people dislike violence and will choose to avoid it where possible.Yeah, how dare he not want to restart the war when his side could win. I mean, it's not like their entire ideology just had its teeth kicked in when their leader lost to a baby. I'm sure Malfoy will devote his life to reflecting on his crimes and never be dangerous again, otherwise a half-decent politician would have had him jailed when he had the chance.
Failing to prosecute his mass murdering, wealthy, and influential political enemies when he has the chance means he is a bad politician. Not to mention all but ensuring another war would happen a few decades down the line, Voldemort be damned
I wouldn't say it is 'gaslighting' because the story makes it very clear that said adults believe it to be true as well.I think "all adults gaslight Harry to think that Dumbledore wise and all-knowing" is bit radical take.
Most people dislike violence and will choose to avoid it where possible.
He avoided it in the short term in exchange for the uncertain possibility of future violence.Yeah, except he didn't avoid it, he increased it massively in exchange for pushing it back long enough he might not have to deal with it himself
He avoided it in the short term in exchange for the uncertain possibility of future violence.
Are you seriously trying to tell me that people making short-term decisions based on what they want to happen now without fully accounting for the potential long-term future consequences is implausible?
Different angle on is he...which political wins does he actually score within the entire Harry Potter arc?Yes, because if nothing else Dumdum is a very good politician.
Dumbledore believed that without Voldemort's power to back them, the majority of his minions would be too cowardly to do a terrorism on their own.It is not uncertain, fanatical mass murderers with wealth and political power don't go away on their own. So no, he traded little violence for greater violence further on. Or he was too stupid to realize this, and thus is a bad politician.
I never said he was a good politician; given his demonstrable failure to actually push his agenda he is clearly not very good at politics. Which makes sense as he clearly also doesn't like politics; he just doesn't trust anyone else to push his agenda on his behalf.And making short term decisions at the expense of the long term is not implausible, it just means he is terrible at planning in the long term, like a politician should
I never said he was a good politician; given his demonstrable failure to actually push his agenda he is clearly not very good at politics. Which makes sense as he clearly also doesn't like politics; he just doesn't trust anyone else to push his agenda on his behalf.
the majority of his minions would be too cowardly to do a terrorism on their own.
Because your logic was wrong; he's not a bad politician because he couldn't push for prosecution of the Death Eaters who claimed the Imperius, he could have done that, he simply chose not to because he was tired and sad and felt that enough people had died.You responded to me explaining why he is a bad politician by ostensibly defending him, saying he may have avoided it because he disliked violence. Then repeatedly ignored my points about him being a bad politician until now.
Because your logic was wrong; he's not a bad politician because he couldn't push for prosecution of the Death Eaters who claimed the Imperius, he could have done that, he simply chose not to because he was tired and sad and felt that enough people had died.
I wasn't disagreeing with you that he's a bad politician, I was disagreeing with your provided reasoning to reach that conclusion.
Having no idea what it would do and was just trying to get rid of an incriminating piece of evidence, not restart the revolution.
He didn't "let off every child-murderer from the last one" though; most of them are in Azkaban. Only about 30 Death Eaters showed up to meet Voldemort in the Graveyard, out of a total of around 400 at their height.If he is so brain dead that he can't see a second war coming by letting off every child-murderer from the last one, even when he can do otherwise, then he is a bad politician due to sheer stupidity.
If you want to exchange "couldn't" therefore bad politician for "didn't" therefore bad politician, those roads lead to the same output?He absolutely could have gotten them, but doing so would have required effectively restarting the war, which Dumbles very strongly did not want to do because he felt too many people had died already.
A large number of death eaters (not all remember; Voldemort's most hardcore supporters went to wizard jail) managed to escape by claiming the Imperious because Dumbledore didn't want to push the issue, not because he couldn't.
No he wasn't? even if we discount Malfoy as acting under Voldy's horcrux, the Death Eater's still did a terrorism at the world cup with no Voldy influence and there was lots of destruction of property and a family of muggles were tortured.
And a stopped clock is still correct twice a day, that doesn't change the fact that you shouldn't use it for timekeeping.If you want to exchange "couldn't" therefore bad politician for "didn't" therefore bad politician, those roads lead to the same output?
Which is a far cry from open warfare and people getting murdered in their homes. It also took over a decade for them to work up to that.No he wasn't? even if we discount Malfoy as acting under Voldy's horcrux, the Death Eater's still did a terrorism at the world cup with no Voldy influence and there was lots of destruction of property and a family of muggles were tortured.
It seems super weird that that happened right as Voldemort was actually getting back to Britain, but AFAICT was canonically a total coincidence.the Death Eater's still did a terrorism at the world cup with no Voldy influence and there was lots of destruction of property and a family of muggles were tortured.
I don't see why you think people getting murdered in their homes is at all on the table for "Dumbles pushes harder to elimate Death Eater Ideology and those who escaped prison". The point you made is that without Voldy, his minions would be too cowardly to do a terrorism. he was wrong about that. Given how dramatically the ministry failed to stop said terrorism, I don't see any evidence that would have been the last word either. That's what happens when you allow an openly genocidal movement to ferment inside your culture, People keep trying to establish that agenda. Instead of using his political influence which you claim he has (doubt personally, people with political influence don't get run out of public life when they oppose the president) to stretch out a slightly longer, much easier conflict for his side to dig up all the roots, he instead waves it away, allowing it to grow and fester to the point that a Mass Azkaban breakout and the dementors literally turning on the ministry isn't enough to convince the public that Dumbledore was right, and then within months of his death, they take over Britain completely.Which is a far cry from open warfare and people getting murdered in their homes. It also took over a decade for them to work up to that.