I believe average Wizarding people are more like Slughorn, though they try to show that they don't care about blood-purity, it's clear from there attitude that blood-purity has some place in their mind. It's not necessary, that they have a problem with it, it's just that due to their culture they always recognize Muggle-borns as a different community.

And families like Malfoy, they are certainly the 'conservatives'. In public, they don't show there radical views, but when chances come they always try to get rid of Muggle-borns. Malfoy's being an influential family, still don't go outright against Muggle-borns, this proves that normal public doesn't have anything against Muggle-borns.

As for half-breeds, the difference is quite clear. People are afraid of werewolves and other beasts, they don't want associate themselves with these creatures.

 

Rowling added another superiority complex into the magical community that her audience could easily relate to. Everyone is slightly bias towards their own race, sex, or class. It's base narcissism. Then there are those in the fringe extremes who hate everything different, or just the opposite with bleeding hearts.

Replace this idea with blood-purity and you'll understand the mindset of a wizarding population. You could say that, statistically, most people are going to lie along that middle ground where Slughorn sits, yet vocal minorities of the population will often seem like a majority when they just don't shut up.

Thus, the concept of blood-purity would most likely be universally recognized by those in-the-know. The scale of their prejudice due to this idea is obviously subjective. I'd basically place muggleborns as immigrants coming from another social culture and being looked down upon for not being part of the 'us' collective.

 

I think that those examples you quoted work pretty well at showing the thoughts of the average pureblood, but that is not the average wizard. I always thought that the wholly purebloods were a relatively small minority in wizarding society, that most people have some non-magical blood in them.

So the average person would be more like those we see in DH getting persecuted for having muggle parentage. And as such they wouldn't believe in pureblood supremacy, but they might not see themselves as being able to do anything about it

 

The very fact that the Malfoys adjust their behaviour in public seems to indicate that their views are not shared by the general populace. Further, the trend of increasing legislation against Blood discrimination seems to point towards, at the least, a strong liberal elite who are dragging the wizarding world into acceptance (much like homosexuality in the real world). Thirdly, I can't remember if this is in the books or JKR said it at interview, but we know that there are very few old Pureblood families like the Malfoys and Blacks remaining. The very fact that most of the wizarding world has changed its marriage habits and that there's only a small minority who only marry within a certain set of Pure families is telling.

I think Slughorn's view is moderately typical. He doesn't hate, despise or dislike Muggleborns/Muggles. But he does consider wizards to be superior to Muggles, and has something of a patriarchal view towards them - one which leads to surprise when Muggleborns show talent. I don't thibk Slughorn's position is really all too far away from the Weasleys, or Hagrid. They both show the same condescending view of Muggles. "Amazing what they come up with, isn't it?"

Finally, if Pureblood views were more widespread then Voldemort wouldn't be considered a terrorist by the general population. People wouldn't view him as a boogie man, but rather as some kind of saviour. They would cheer him on, not hide in fear. There wouldn't need to be a war at all.

 

The Wizarding world is in a state of transition, IMO. It is no longer 'kosher' to openly express pureblood supremacist views - but anyone older than young adulthood remembers a time when it was kosher, and some (many) still hold to those beliefs, to varying degrees. Slughorn seems to be a soft supremacist. When he encounters a talented Muggle-born, he seems to gush in a way not too different from someone who is delighted in meeting a black man who, in their words, "speaks so well!" I expect there are many wizards like Slughorn.

Given this state of transition, I wouldn't be surprised if there was something of a generational distinction, with the older generations more likely to espouse the supremacist philosophy.

One interesting question: what effect the two Voldemort wars had on the pureblood supremacist camp? I like to think that the Death Eaters accelerated the destruction of that which they fought for. In the Battle of Hogwarts, greater than 1% of the entire Wizarding English population died, if we use Rowling's lowball population figure. This is larger than the proportion of British people killed over the entire course of World War II.

The horrific losses, the death of the primary figurehead for pureblood supremacy, the fact that all the prominent supremacists were on the losing side - I believe these things ensure that the supremacist movement will never be taken seriously again. The generation after Harry's will look at it the same way that Harry's friends look at Luna's ideas.

 

Consider the scene from Madam Malkin's shop in HBP, wherein Draco calls Hermione a Mudblood, and gets reprimanded for his language by Madam Malkin. It's pretty telling on how much anti-Muggleborn prejudice it is socially acceptable to display, and as such on the views of the majority of witches and wizards. The Malfoys and their kind definitely transgress some boundaries there; if pureblood supremacists got vocal about their views, they'd face about as much social approval as a right-winger saying "nigger" on TV.

I really doubt whatever prejudice there is against Muggleborns crosses the line into active dislike, or even that mentioning your Muggle parentage would get most witches and wizards to give you the cold shoulder. A great deal of wizards probably have some Muggle relatives themselves -- after all, not many families can pride themselves (more or less honestly) on total blood purity, can they?

That said, it may be quite true that the ordinary witch or wizard probably expects less of a Muggleborn, somewhat. Or at least they don't expect as much of them as they do of young people whose parents have been "somebodies" and who'd have to live up to their names. This kind of thinking appears to be common with wizards -- not sure whether I misremember, but in PS Hagrid or other characters who knew Harry's parents might have expressed their high expectations of him. So yeah, most of them would probably agree wholeheartedly with Slughorn there, even though there's a readiness to think ever so slightly less of Muggleborns in his words that isn't apparent in other people, which is perhaps a stronger characteristic in Slytherins such as him.

So. The views of the general wizarding population can be summed up, IMO, as this: the Malfoys are bigots but we won't say much if they continue to donate and keep their mouths shut, Dumbledore's a bit of a bleeding heart but we like him anyway because he's well-intended, and Muggleborns are welcome as long as they assimilate and prove themselves -- the default position being, however, that they're a bit clueless and untalented.

No. What Voldemort and his Death Eaters do is considered abominable by everybody but themselves, people have fought a war against them (how's that for not giving a fuck either way?), and Dumbledore is pretty well liked by the general public as long as the Daily Prophet isn't writing nasty things about him, just like it happened with Harry.

Also, remember that Death Eaters don't really stand for the betterment of wizardkind through blood purity (and other such propagandist bullshit) as much as they stand for imposing upon the wizarding world a superior caste composed of themselves. Some witches and wizards, regardless of their blood status, are doing just fine not being ruled by snotty purebloods and their psychopathic leader, thank you very much. Go figure.

 

I feel that this mindset of Wizarding public concerning blood purity is somewhat similar to the mindset of Germany during second world war. Maybe not that extreme but somewhere along the line similar to it.

I mean, I have read many articles stating, that majority of German public was indifferent towards Jews when Hitler became chancellor and gained absolute control. They looked down upon Jews but that magnitude of hatred was not there; when Jews started fleeing from the country or they were sent to concentration camps, the average public turned a blind eye to it.

During this period, between Nazi's getting absolute control (1933) and start of world-war II, Hitler controlled the media and instilled the hatred in public against Jews.

Now, it is somewhat similar to the case in cannon, people were already indifferent towards Muggle-borns; when Voldemort came, they turned a blind eye to the oppression of Muggle-borns. Voldemort meanwhile would have used Daily prophet, to spread his belief. And as we saw earlier, Wizarding public didn't feel any need to contradict whatever was published.

I think, not much changed in Wizarding world during this period, public remained ignorant and went through the war in a normal manner. Whereas, public in Germany, felt that things were getting out of control and later on would have realized there mistakes. I don't see the same thing happening to Wizarding public, they would have remained as ignorant and bigoted. as they were before.

P.S- My above arguments are based on articles or documentaries I have read or saw in past, if by any chance they are incorrect, I apologize for reading or watching wrong materials. It was not my intention to hurt any sentiment(if I did hurt anyone).

 

This idea makes me want a muggleborn mafia fic. With magic, rather than bats or tommy guns, or course. They may not have moved to a new country, but they definitely enter a new society where people like Malfoy have the minister's ear. It would be a pretty amusing set up for some black market movements within society's fringes.

 

Methinks you're trying to put a certain spin on it that really, really doesn't fit in with the reality of the wizarding society.

Wizards are likely no different from Muggles in how they react to a faction that has been known to be involved in massacres which cost their government important human lives, and which plans to overthrow said government and install themselves as rulers. Even if it says it supports their interests. They'd passively oppose them at first and would want to see them lose the war. They'd probably accept the spin put on the events by the one newspaper they have. After the installment of the new regime, they'd be glad they aren't the main targets for the most part and try to cope with having considerably less freedom. Fighting back isn't an option, and keeping your head down and your mouth shut seems like the best policy.

Nothing -- nothing short of incredibly effective propaganda, that is -- would get them to think that, you know, maybe this Voldemort guy was right after all, and things will be all rosy for us if we support his rule -- no suppression needed! Not after the First War.

I'm grouping them together as everyone who didn't want Voldemort to win the first war. It's not really only combatants that fall under this banner, as I see it -- don't forget that I'm basing this all off the assumption that most witches and wizards aren't that much in the way of magical combat and defense. Judging from the way everybody was afraid to speak Voldemort's name and got scared when seeing the Dark Mark and gave bad reputations to suspected Death Eaters who escaped prosecution... well.

Because they're weak and scared, and the Order is comprised of people who don't have their inhibitors. Most Order members have above average (at the very least) combat skills. During the former war they've been led by the only wizard that Voldemort had ever been afraid of. Dumbledore's been a large presence in their lives and, after his death, they might have taken it upon themselves to fight for the safe, uncorrupted society their leader had also fought for. There are many reasons for that, really.

Not sure we're actually in any disagreement on that. Dumbledore is definitely more liberal than average for a wizard.

LOL. That's not how dictatorships work.

First off, the purebloods you say would've been propelled to the top of the political and social hierarchy are actually only Death Eaters and their families & sympathizers. The ordinary wizard with no non-magical relative in his family tree for 4 generations won't have his life improved as a consequence of the pureblood supremacist system. Totalitarianism 101. The Great Leader awards the top positions only to those within his clique, not to anyone part of the group whose interests he claims to promote.

Which brings me to the second point. In order for any upper class to exist, especially when there's significant social stratification, there must be a lower class. Yes, true, the lowest of the low are Muggles, Squibs, Muggleborns... and then come the half-bloods, and above them the kind-of-pure-bloods, which then get stratified according to how old their families are, how much they're into Dark Arts and how much they support Voldemort.

This is a worse deal than the great majority of wizards already has got. Most of them, who are not filthy rich and cannot trace their family trees back to the Middle Ages and who don't practice Dark Arts, would end up in a clearly inferior position to their "old pureblood" counterparts. Any pretense of equality under the law would vanish, as it does under any such regime. Lucius Malfoy would no longer have any reason to keep up pretense and not force Joe Average to lick his boots, because he'd have a clearly different status as a member of the Dark Lord's inner circle. People would know this, and resent it.

No, you're right -- most would not have stood up for the Muggleborn, and neither would Dumbledore be considered centrist by their standards. No disagreement here.

 

I feel like it's not anywhere near outright hatred for the "average" citizen of Wizarding Britain. It'd probably be mild dislike, the sort of thing where you're not enthused by the prospect of serving them, but you won't refuse them service either.

Madam Malkin's reaction to Draco saying "Mudblood" is typical for anyone reacting to someone saying "Nigger" (By the way, I'm curious if anyone else thinks JKR was drawing parallels between those two words).

Also, in regards to Pureblood Families, the Weasleys have been established as outside the norm, while according to what we know of Pureblood Families, the Malfoys are the norm. The Blacks, The Malfoys, The Crouches (to some extent). All of these had House Elves, all of them treated their house elves like trash, and all of them shared the same viewpoint. I'm going off the assumption that Barty Crouch Jr.'s views were probably silently shared by his father, because children don't grow up and start acting for themselves right away. They see what their parents do or say, assume that that is okay, and begin copying it.

Barty was thrown in Azkaban shortly after he got out of school, again we can safely assume this, and Barty's father was so obsessed with image that he disowned his son on the spot and gave Winky clothes for the mere possibility of her having cast the Dark Mark (and for this we have no idea of the concept of House Elf magics or how they work, thus, no idea of whether or not she could have actually done it).

 

Here's part of my thoughts on this over in the QTDDTOT thread:

I don't know if Rolwing was going for 'nigger' as the correlation, since I'm not nearly as well-versed on the UK's derogatory terms as I am on those of the US, but she could just as well have been thinking of incendiary words from religious or political circles.

When I think of Fudge and especially Slughorn's comments, though, I'm actually pretty forcefully reminded of the most poignant thing our dumbass President Bush once said with regards to his idiotic No Child Left Behind, something about "the soft bigotry of low expectations." No one could possibly think Bush wrote that line himself, but I've always remembered it in spite of the stupid context.

Well, children and teenagers (even adults) often DO behave differently, depending on the company they keep. I could rattle off dozens of personal anecdotes about drug use, bullying, religious and political differences, etc. but the best example in canon is Sirius. No, he doesn't start acting wholly opposite of the other Blacks right away, but it doesn't take long for him to draw enough of his mum's ire to get him kicked out and disowned.

To clarify, though, no one thought Winky cast the Dark Mark, did they? I remember old Barty giving Winky clothes because she disobeyed his orders in leaving the Quidditch box. Maybe I'm mixing up canon and the movies, but didn't Harry see a person cast the Dark Mark and then tell the Aurors/Ministry as much when they showed up?

 

Nobody's gonna listen to a 14-year old kid, even if he's Harry Potter.

 

She was given clothes for disobeying his orders, yes. In the books, the trio don't see anyone, but they hear a man casting the spell. It's only in the film that Harry sees him (apparently long after the Death Eaters have gone, which renders the scene somewhat redundant from the canon!Barty's perspective, but that's a different issue).

 

I think an analogy you could use might be a refugee from a very different society that most of Western society looks down upon. Let's say some poor, starving African nation.

The average person will almost definitely look down on their society - feeling pity for the poverty and famine, and maybe bigotry in regards to some of their social issues.

Now let's imagine someone from said country comes to a Western nation for education. Some may either feel he's being liberated - the poor refugee from a humble background. Or some may fall into the stereotypes you get, seeing him as a potential criminal. Most people may not be directly discriminatory against him, but they probably wouldn't expect much from his education or career either.

If he does something brilliant or becomes very successful, people might think "Wow, that's really impressive for someone who grew up in Africa!". They'll also identify him as someone who has been Westernized - their influence being the thing which made him successful.

And then there will be quite a few who may not have anything against the refugees, but may dislike the idea that their taxes, their university places, their resources are being spent on foreigners who pay no tax or fees, and are not citizens instead of their own kids.

I get the feeling all magicalfolk - Arthur Weasley included - see muggles as a people less fortunate themselves. They either feel pity, or disgust because of it.

Hence when a muggleborn comes into the picture, they might be treated as an unfortunate person from a disadvantaged background. Even those who don't see muggleborns as of a lesser race might not expect much of them. When someone like Hermione or Lily do well, they're overcoming their humble heritage and succeed despite it.

Nothing malicious, just human nature.

 

Using patronage to simulate exceedingly good genes is one of the hallmarks of an aristocracy. Purebloods are exactly that. Also, it's all happening in a failed state.

 

@Jarik - ZOMG, the GOP (and in particular the Tea Party and the Minutemen) are the Death Eaters while the Dems are the Weasleys. That makes Fox News the Daily Prophet (Sean Hannity = Rita Skeeter), and The Quibbler equals Air America?

I guess I'd be better more accurate equating Rita Skeeter to Ann Coulter than Hannity, but either of those cunts will do.

 

Inglourious Wizerds? :awesome

I don't really think it's possible to draw a perfect parallel between the HP-verse and any single instance in human history because it's such a complex issue. Especially when it comes to drawing the line between a natural bias toward what is familiar, and outright discrimination. If you start talking about caste societies and eugenics, then even enslavement and genocide aren't as cut and dried as you'd think.

It's an interesting discussion, but at the end of the day, the HP-verse is just a cartoonish Aesop about bigotry in general.

(Side note: This is why I think I love DLP already -we can have this discussion without it degenerating into the "Goblins are Jews" flame war within 3 posts. Thanks guys ) </blatant cocksucking>