Where it goes from here: If the enemy actually wants to defeat this coalition, nothing happens. This is a temporary alliance against an outside threat, and if said threat goes away, the alliance will probably collapse of its own accord. (It may bring some lasting changes to the leadership of Hogwarts, but people will chafe against the strict security, and old and new grudges will emerge, and the coalition will break.)
If the enemy has been breeding Harry/Draco as the future leader of Magical Britain (much more likely), they will continue to attack or otherwise be active, probably conceding many victories to the new Kids’ Coalition.
I do think there’s a difference between the enemy setting up Harry and Draco as future leader though. If they wanted Draco, well and done, and they’ll do as you say. If they want Harry to lead, however, they are unlikely to be thrilled with his new role of invisible assassin.
That may depend on who wants Harry to lead. To Canon!Voldemort, invisible assassin was a sort of leadership. To HPMoR!Dumbledore, not as much, albeit still more so than most. On the other hand, Yudkowsky takes the strong version of Aumann’s agreement theorem. To Rationalist!Harry, the person matters less than the rationality and the priors.
He thinks draco is much more suited to dealing with the politics, and that it’s much less work to optimize draco’s morals and hand power to him than to figure out how to navigate a political atmosphere for himself.
To put it crudely, harry plans to use draco as a puppet.
Where it goes from here: If the enemy actually wants to defeat this coalition, nothing happens. This is a temporary alliance against an outside threat, and if said threat goes away, the alliance will probably collapse of its own accord. (It may bring some lasting changes to the leadership of Hogwarts, but people will chafe against the strict security, and old and new grudges will emerge, and the coalition will break.)
If the enemy has been breeding Harry/Draco as the future leader of Magical Britain (much more likely), they will continue to attack or otherwise be active, probably conceding many victories to the new Kids’ Coalition.
Well said.
I do think there’s a difference between the enemy setting up Harry and Draco as future leader though. If they wanted Draco, well and done, and they’ll do as you say. If they want Harry to lead, however, they are unlikely to be thrilled with his new role of invisible assassin.
That may depend on who wants Harry to lead. To Canon!Voldemort, invisible assassin was a sort of leadership. To HPMoR!Dumbledore, not as much, albeit still more so than most. On the other hand, Yudkowsky takes the strong version of Aumann’s agreement theorem. To Rationalist!Harry, the person matters less than the rationality and the priors.
What Quirrelmort wants… that’s more complicated.
Draco as future leader? Well, that just means Harry is the power behind the throne.
Which, to be fair, is pretty much correct.
Over the long run Harry wants to be a scientist and no politician.
World dom… er, optimization doesn’t include politics?
He thinks draco is much more suited to dealing with the politics, and that it’s much less work to optimize draco’s morals and hand power to him than to figure out how to navigate a political atmosphere for himself.
To put it crudely, harry plans to use draco as a puppet.
But no doubt as a strong puppet ;)
What if they want a more assassin-like version of Harry to lead?
I think an intelligent enemy won’t consider Draco, or the manipulation thereof, much of an obstacle. But yes, it could irritate such a person.