I can't either. She writes what is basically a morality play about authoritarianism and then turns around and protects the soft authoritarianism of neoliberal policies once it has an impact on her personal economic position. It's really a disgusting display of greedy self-interest over moral values.

I've never given it much attention before but the entire conflict between protagonist and antagonist, good and evil, in the Harry Potter books is completely divorced from any economic motive. It's true that a lot of high fantasy has this in common, but it's so divorced from real-world motives for evil that I think it bears a closer look.

When a villain can exist completely outside the framework of an economic motive, something that real-life villains have almost unanimously in common, it's a work of complete fancy that should NEVER be used as a parable, something liberals are intent on doing with pop culture fiction like Harry Potter, Game of Thrones, etc.

Real-life villains almost always have an economic motive. A simple reading of history bears this out.