For the record, I also think the Weasley
Twins are economically successful too, through the development of their joke
shop (discussed in Article 3). And undeniably Harry is perhaps the epitome of
‘all-round’ success; magically competent, slayer of Voldemort (no ‘biggie’) and
from what we know of his later life, professionally esteemed too.
So there are clearly economic lessons to be
learnt from the rise of Voldemort, despite his manifest evilness. How did he
make it? How did he gain support? How did he game the system? All these
questions, despite his evident evilness, can help teach us about how we can
build a society that encourages social mobility, maintains freedom of speech
and prevents tyranny. These are key questions in today’s society as much as
they have ever been.
Why
the Dark Lord, and not Barty Crouch?
Voldemort was a talented wizard. We learn
this in the Half-Blood Prince (Book 6) when Dumbledore recounts a visit to the
orphanage where young Voldemort (real name, Tom Riddle) lived. The future
mass-murderer is able to move objects without needing a wand and to command
animate beings, such as small animals, as he wishes; things which your average
wand-toting student can’t do.
So Voldemort was gifted, and he presumably
could have pursued that gift in any direction (although in the books, Rowling
implies an ingrained malevolence in Tom Riddle, which probably makes the future
Dark Lord more credible). As we discussed in Article 3, though, the Potterverse
is skewed against outsiders through the active preservation of the societal
status-quo. In part this is due to pre-existing prejudices; wizards seem
generally afraid of socio-economic change and so are not too concerned with
economic growth or the emancipation of minorities such as house elves.
The chief consequence of a static society
is that it reduces the pobability that fresh talent and ideas will come to the
fore. Logically if it is not encouraged, and is in some cases actively
repressed (witness Hermione’s Elf-right’s campaign), it will not grow. This
means that there is less competition at the top; to break through and be
talented, you don’t need to do very much. In other words you just need to be
marginally better than everyone else, in an area where you have a comparative
advantage (thanks Ricardo!).
The implication here is that Voldemort
wasn’t actually the greatest wizard
of all time; rather that he was marginally better than his peers during that
particular period, and had the capability to ‘cash in’ on his magical comparative
advantage without requiring societal support. There’s no reason why Barty
Crouch, or anyone else for that matter, couldn’t have been as talented; it’s
simply that the social structure they required to discover their skills was
inadequately equipped to enable this.
Expelliarmus
– disarming the system
So having looked at how Voldemort was a bit
better on average than everyone else; how did he manoeuver his way to the top?
By definition he wasn’t one of the elites,
like Minister Fudge or the Malfoys. He had no apparent economic power, and the
financial system didn’t offer adequate funding (in part due to wizards’
distrust of finance, but you’d also hope that Gringotts had robust KYC
policies!). This meant he needed to recruit acolytes, preferably rich and
powerful ones. This he did with success; the Death Eaters are a rich and
privileged gang, ranging from the mercenary Lucius Malfoy to the die-hard
Bellatrix L’Estrange. All have a vested interest in preserving the status quo.
With powerful retainers comes access to
power and capital, we see Lucius bribing Fudge in the Order of the Phoenix
(Book 5). These are things that would ‘grease the wheels’ of Voldemort’s
takeover bid, as even the Dark Lord couldn’t do it with just a big wand and ego.**
Voldemort also benefitted from a stagnant
government, which was unable to counter a significant internal rebellion due to
its unclear decision-making and review powers (Article 4). The general feeling
of terror that swept the wizarding community upon Voldemort’s return is in part
a comment on the trust people place in their government to address threats to
society.
What’s
next for the wizarding world?
There are laudable aspects of the Potterverse
economy; universal, high-quality education for example. However much remains
unresolved, stagnant economic growth, an underdeveloped financial system and
lack of effective debate both in society and government to name a few. All this
contributed to an unacceptable period of social instability, culminating in a
terrorist’s successful seizure of power which need not have happened. Voldemort
was un-exceptional; yet it was the un-exceptionalness of wizarding society that
allowed him to flourish.
This series has taken a (hopefully)
tongue-in-cheek look at the economics and sociology underpinning the
Potterverse. Of course, we couldn’t examine everything in depth, and it is
still a fascinating world with many similarities to our own that could be explored
further. Thank you for reading this far, now time for me to disapparate!