Tuesday, July 15, 2003

The Constitution and Harry Potter 

Is it a co-incidence that both the Constitution and the Harry Potter series have recently been interpreted as libertarian documents? I don't think so.

The best from the last link:

4. There is no indication that Harry pays inheritance tax on his holdings in Gringotts.

5. The goblins in Gringotts do not monitor large cash withdrawals, or in any way conform to regulations to prevent money laundering.

6. Talking of goblins, "Gringotts Bank - Not An Equal Opportunity Employer". But since everybody seems happy, that's OK. We do not need state-enforced quotas.

8. Nobody is troubled by Political Correctness when pointing out the high proportion of sociopaths in Slytherin house.

10. The Health and Safety Executive have obviously never crossed the Hogwarts threshold. Among the violations of safety legislation are improperly secured moving staircases, flying broomsticks under the control of minors and dangerous wands in the hands of minors.

12. And, since Hogwarts is not bankrupted by ambulance-chasers or insurance claims either, it looks as though contract dominates tort in the magical world.

13. The troll is seen off by the unorganised militia, as are other baddies. You do not see Harry banged up for murder or violation of the troll's civil rights.
Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?