Critics and skeptics ask, "What makes these books so special, so influential?" Like most fantasy books, Rowling's protagonists prevail over dark powers. However, some antagonists are truly evil, while others - truly mean though they may be - ultimately do "good." Irresponsible people - even bums and criminals - do good and bad, as do highly placed officials and wealthy aristocrats. Some characters who appear "bad" end up as friends - and vice versa.

Is it silly to mention Rowling along with Aristotle? No, and not just because of the extensive classical references laced throughout the books. Like the Ancient Greek philosophers, Rowling has people of all ages thinking about the ways they should approach life in all its complexity.

Rowling shows some leaders as petty, corrupt and inept, and depicts the dangers of public delusion in the face of "leaders" who abuse their power and influence. This spectrum of greys defies the cookie-cutter "black vs. white" approach usually used in children's books.

The Harry Potter books present politics and the media in realistic and troubling complexity. The media and Ministry of Magic officials work together to manipulate the public and even lie to cover up their failures. Reporters make up fake stories, blaming and defaming innocents. Some in law enforcement make grave mistakes and punish the most honest and decent people.

Uniquely, Rowling's heroes encounter injustice which flourishes because of wide-spread indifference. The Dursleys are petty and mean. Duped wizards and witches blame the wrong people, giving corrupt abusive Ministry officials and teachers at Hogwarts opportunities to do harm. The worst of all - Lord Voldemort and his evil "death-eaters" - violate fundamental laws to dominate and destroy.

In the Harry Potter books, as in real life, people don't wear tags identifying their morality. This flies in the face of simplistic efforts to divide the planet into "us vs. them" and "good vs. evil doers." As in our world, mundane corruption and mismanagement builds in Harry Potter's as the general public blindly supports the misguided and malign who employ counter-productive rules and punish innocents while ignoring real threats. Harry, Ron and Hermione overcome obstacles even though many in power won't help and most people refuse to even listen to them.

In typical children's literature, only "bad kids" disobey adults, and they get hurt or into severe trouble. Heroes seldom question authority, and if they do, they quickly learn their folly. Not in Rowling's realistic view. Her heroes repeatedly defy adults, break rules, and exemplify bold courage in the face of oppressive authority. The Potter heroes' "subversive" attitudes refute rigid right wing dogma. Their example - offering loyalty and respect only to those who earn them - prepares young readers to question authority and think for themselves.

This is the right wing's worst nightmare, because right wingers see the world - especially morality - in stark, simplistic black and white. They see only right or wrong, good or bad. They disdain, even suppress dissent. Right wingers support authority and favor harsh, often excessive punishment for those who - like Socrates - ask too many questions.

We see this today when right wing government officials warn citizens to "watch what they say" about important policies and accuse their critics of helping "evil doers." By contrast, moderates and liberals - like Rowling's young heroes - see life in shades of gray. They navigate currents of ambiguity unique in children's literature and even rare in adult fiction.

Most importantly, children who learn these lessons are putting them into action. This is already happening, in a surprising way. An eMedia Wire press release reports:

"Harry Potter Fans Unite in Global Protest. There is nothing more loyal than a Harry Potter fan. Warner Brothers Pictures understands that to the tune of a record-breaking 1.8 billion dollars in world-wide box office receipts. Now, these same movie executives will get to experience the unusual sensation of having Harry's loyal fans united in protest - against them."

The present controversy pits an ad hoc group called "SaveGOF" (Goblet of Fire) against the media giant. The eMedia press release quotes "SaveGOF spokesperson Amanda Caskey (a.k.a Andaxia Moonstar)":

"So when I learned that screenwriter Steve Kloves had been asked to submit a single 2½ hour screenplay for the fourth movie, to be based on the epic-length novel Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, I became extremely upset ... and now they've actually decided to make a single short movie? It will never work!"

Fans of TV shows sometimes organize to save their favorites, but note the passion, scope and consideration behind this effort:

"[The] movement to save Goblet of Fire (savegof.com) [enlisting] Harry Potter fans spanning the globe - from Brazil to Pakistan - quickly united in an unprecedented e-mail, petition and letter-writing effort with one goal in mind: to convince the decision makers at Warner Brothers to not let Harry down, to not let his creator J.K. Rowling down, and to not let his devoted fans down."

The press release identifies an "adult Potter-fan David Balsam (a.k.a C.H. Snorkack)" as saying:

"[J]ust to be sure, we are going to let them know... in no uncertain terms... that we expect more from them!" He tells fellow fans, "Only a really impressive show of support for Harry will force them to change their minds. Start a SaveGOF campaign at your school! Post messages on all the Potter websites! And of course sign the petition and write letters to Warner Brothers. All the information is available at http://www.savegof.com/."

The international grass-roots SaveGOF effort tells Potter fans "to use the power that they have to influence the movie executives," insisting Warner Brothers do the long, complex fourth Harry Potter book justice when translating it to film. See: Harry Potter Fans Unite in Global Protest, eMedia Wire, September 3, 2003, http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2003/9/prweb78307.htm

These books transcend their genre and parallel current-day social struggles and political controversies - the clash of world-views pitting right wing reaction against needed progress. Newsweek magazine asked Alfonso Cuaron, director of the third film based on Rowling's "Prisoner of Azkaban" if the villainous wizard Voldemort still reminds him of George W. Bush. Cuaron confirmed:

"In combination with Saddam," he says. "They both have selfish interests and are very much in love with power. Also, a disregard for the environment. A love for manipulating people. I read books four and five, and Fudge" - the blindly ambitious Minister of Magic - "is similar to Tony Blair. He's the ultimate politician. He's in denial about many things. And everything is for the sake of his own persona, his own power. The way the Iraq thing was handled was not unlike the way Fudge handled affairs in book four."

See: Caution: Wizard at Work, Carla Power and Devin Gordon, Newsweek magazine, Aug. 4 2003: http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/943721.asp?cp1=1

The Harry Potter books deserve this political treatment, and director Cuaron shares the author Rowling's insights. Rowling is a progressive, but writes for everyone. She reworked the fifth book in the series to incorporate - and decry - current events and trends. Libertarians and others claim these books as their own, but that's fine. Only good can come as millions of people all across the political spectrum take these lessons to heart, acting with a Harry Potter philosophy.

From overturning the unfair Slitheryn house cup victory in book one (which paralleled the Gore / Bush struggle's painstaking tabulation, but sadly not the outcome) to struggles against the abuse of power in book five (like the Bush/Blair rush to war and suppression of dissent), Rowling highlights essential themes:

Might does not make right. Struggle against oppression is necessary, even if it entails heartbreaking costs. In the end justice will win out if ordinary people refuse to accept anything less. Harry, Ron, and Hermione teach Potter fans to expect and demand better. To resist unfair rules and faulty decisions so unjust outcomes cannot stand.

Will these lessons taught to millions of readers and movie-goers translate into political action and social justice? They will if young people resist apathy and work hard to resist abuses, change reality, and support leaders in tune with this philosophy. Howard Dean demonstrates a courageous Gryffindor impetus.

The Internet-powered SaveGOF movement shows the seeds Rowling planted are taking root already. This confirms JK Rowling's stories reach readers in ways which translate into action. Her profound lessons include: Decisions have consequences for good or ill. Nothing negative is settled if people resist and stand up for what matters to them. Protest can prevail over poorly exercised and abused power. Potter fans show they understand all this.