Not to mention, if you lost one person, then everyone they infected, and those they infected, ad nauseum, would be released.
You could try to mitigate that by having overlapping vectors of infection, but I’m not sure how someone would react to having multiple Imperiuses cast on them.
Granted, the way this was accomplished in the actual story was by Imperiusing people who were poor wizards but politically powerful, to effectively gain control of large swaths of the population with minimal effort. Which is probably a better idea in the first place.
I’m surprised Quirrel hasn’t mentioned something like that in his arguments against democracy. It’s possible that rule by the strong really would be safer for wizards.
Not to mention, if you lost one person, then everyone they infected, and those they infected, ad nauseum, would be released.
You could try to mitigate that by having overlapping vectors of infection, but I’m not sure how someone would react to having multiple Imperiuses cast on them.
Granted, the way this was accomplished in the actual story was by Imperiusing people who were poor wizards but politically powerful, to effectively gain control of large swaths of the population with minimal effort. Which is probably a better idea in the first place.
Still, cool concept.
I’m surprised Quirrel hasn’t mentioned something like that in his arguments against democracy. It’s possible that rule by the strong really would be safer for wizards.
He actually did make this point to Harry.