Moral Ambiguities

[arithmancer]

Originally Posted by Trixa

You would have no right to order anyone to their death, IMO. You would have to present the situation to the crew member and let her choose whether she wants to do it or not. This is what Dumbledore should have done as well.

This is what Dumbledore did do. He did not order Harry to do anything with regards to the soul bit. He instructed Snape to tell Harry about it, and Snape complied through the expedient of sharing with Harry a memory of the conversation in which Albus explained the facts about the soul bit to Snape. By the time the situation was presented to Harry, both Snape and Dumbledore were dead.

In Harry's case he told him he had to sacrifice himself when it was already too late for him to do anything else or attempt to find another way of destroying the Hocruxes. DD knew this.

Why do you say it was too late? You mean because of the battle? The battle is an event that occured nearly a year after Dumbledore's death. Snape gave the information during the battle for two reasons: He could not wait any longer, as he was seconds from his own death and knew it. and Dumbledore wanted him to tell Harry after Nagini was being protected.

The second condition did not need to happen in the middle of a raging battle at Hogwarts. It happened to because this was the location Harry travelled to after his activities finally gave the game away to Voldemort. This was all very contingent on things completely outside ALbus' knowledge or control.

There wasn't even any chance of trying to find another way.

It seems to me that Albus would have dedicated considerable time and energy, as well as his unique intellect and magical power, to the question of finding another way. He had years to consider the problem, and what we saw implemented in DH was his solution - a solution that was not even available until the end of GoF. It did, in particular, lead to Harry's survival.

So I would agree that there was no chance to find another way. Not because of the timing, but because if Albus could not find a solution you like better in in the 15 years he had, Harry was not going to any time soon. Personally, I believe the magical laws of the Potterverse were such that there WAS no other solution to find.

[MrSleepyHead]

This may be the best place for this question:

Is the Deathly Hallows symbol a hate symbol akin to the swastika?

In DH we see Krum almost punch Xenophilius for wearing the symbol because Krum associated it with Grindelwald's reign of terror. While Xenophilius was wearing it with its original intention/use in mind, was he wrong to do so given its general association with genocide? Would it be akin to someone (in western culture) wearing the swastika say, as a fertility symbol, and others taking offense to it as a symbol of Nazism? If so, is it morally wrong for Xenophilius/the Muggle analog to wear such a symbol?

On top of all that, what are your thoughts on the symbol being used as a general symbol of HP by the fandom? Is it insensitive, a take back of a hateful symbol to be positive/owned (similar to some derogatory words being 'taken back' and used in a nonchalant/positive way by the once-oppressed), or irrelevant because fans only consider the Deathly Hallows part of the symbol (and not the Grindelwald part)? Thoughts?

[HedwigOwl]

Originally Posted by MrSleepyHead

This may be the best place for this question:

Is the Deathly Hallows symbol a hate symbol akin to the swastika?

In DH we see Krum almost punch Xenophilius for wearing the symbol because Krum associated it with Grindelwald's reign of terror. While Xenophilius was wearing it with its original intention/use in mind, was he wrong to do so given its general association with genocide? Would it be akin to someone (in western culture) wearing the swastika say, as a fertility symbol, and others taking offense to it as a symbol of Nazism? If so, is it morally wrong for Xenophilius/the Muggle analog to wear such a symbol?

On top of all that, what are your thoughts on the symbol being used as a general symbol of HP by the fandom? Is it insensitive, a take back of a hateful symbol to be positive/owned (similar to some derogatory words being 'taken back' and used in a nonchalant/positive way by the once-oppressed), or irrelevant because fans only consider the Deathly Hallows part of the symbol (and not the Grindelwald part)? Thoughts?

That's an interesting question. Anything can be hijacked or corrupted to a cause other than its original intent. The Deathly Hallows symbol merely represented the story of 3 very powerful magical objects that can thwart or manipulate death. Whether magical or muggle, one can see the appeal of acquiring the objects if they did exist -- although the tale does warn that none of the 3 can save anyone from eventual death. The symbol only becomes a problem if you acquire the power (as in the wand particularly) in order to use it to suppress/control/eliminate those you believe to be an enemy or less worthy of control of their own lives. Which is what Grindewald did. So to people affected by that, such as Krum's part of the world, his anger is understandable, although Zenophilius's intent was not the same (he did wear it inconspicuously, however, so we can assume he was well aware of how some people viewed it as evil). And yet other parts of the wizarding world were unaware of the symbol's existence.

You probably know that the symbol chosen by the Nazi movement, the swastika, is centuries old in many cultures and represents many meanings -- the sun, acceptance, returning to the earth, protection from evil, etc. But considering the fact that in recent history the symbol came to represent those who wrought evil and death on vast numbers of people, at least in the Western world the symbol has no redemption as the first memory it seems to evoke on seeing it is the Nazi atrocities.