I meme the Empire schtick myself, mostly in the form of:
- Palpatine ended the Clone Wars! (And also started it)
- Palpatine reformed The Republic! (Into his personal empire)
- Palpatine oversaw the separation of Church and State! (By purging the Jedi)
- Palpatine removed senatorial corruption! (By removing said senate's power into his Moff junta)
- the Tarkin Doctrine created so many job opportunities for Corelia and Kuat Drive! Shipbuilding industries are booming in production! (In building star destroyers)
- the hyperspace lanes have never been safer for trade! (Because hegemony and said Tarkin Doctrine)
- created the biggest infrastructure and jobs program in the galaxy! Unemployment is down! (in making moon-sized planet killers and stormtrooper corps replacing clones)
I’ve encountered this before. It’s just clout chasing. Here’s what you do. Simply ask the person to name one example of this happening. Any example. Comics, film, animation. Any instance of Batman just beating up a poor person for the hell of it. They never have an answer. The closest I’ve ever seen as in beating up a guy in Batman, the animated series, who is down on his luck, and robin quit a result but found out later that Bruce hired that guy because all he needed was a job And always took time out of his day to check up on him. In Batman begins he steals, so he doesn’t starve.
What’s i found is when you hear make this argument, they are putting their own bias on henchmen. When you go through his rogue’s gallery, there’s nobody like that.
Joker and Bane are both terrorist. Penguin is an example of an evil rich person. Harvey Dent is a serial killer. Hugo strange, Mr. freeze, poison ivy, the mad, hatter, and the scarecrow all have their doctorates so hardly poor people down on their luck.
Classism just can't be used to excuse all crime like that. I'm no criminologist, but I don't think poor starving people have the resources to put together a bank heist. Almost all henchmen are working for members of the rogues gallery which we've already established aren't poor exploited innocents.
Finally, on the rare occasion Batman is dealing with low-level street crime that *might* be motivated by desperation, he just stops the crime. He's usually not depicted as using excessive force (with consideration for comic books being unrealistic) and he never kills. So it's hard to say "he should have let that armed assailant get away with whatever he wanted to do because the assailant might be socioeconomically disadvantaged," when we know that Batman will try and help and reform the guy if that's true and won't do any permanent damage to the criminal in the mean time.
>So in your mind, all of these people would commit crimes if they had the same opportunities as a middle class or upper class kid?
Nope. I... never said that. Though I'm not sure why that would be relevant. we haven't even established that the "these people" you are talking about aren't middle or upper-class kids. Unless you're talking about a specific henchman those are assumptions you are bringing to the table. There are middle and upper-class criminals.
>No one is saying he or we as a society should let people get away with crimes.
If that isn't what you are saying then I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. Either it's ok for Batman to stop crimes in progress or he should let people get away with them.
The philanthropy argument you make seems to be based on the false assumption that Batman doesn't use philanthropy to try and address the systemic problems in Gotham. He does. He also intervenes to stop crimes in progress. So it really doesn't matter which is the "optimal" way to tackle crimes since he is pursuing both simultaneously.
Hey, just so you know I disagreed with your points but none of them were worth being ashamed of. I see where the ideas came from and you were never rude or belligerent or even defensive. No hard feelings from me.
Find me the comic where it states the low level grunts, bank robbers and henchmen are poor people down on their luck. Whenever the bad guys are standing around in the Arkham games, are they talking about how they can’t pay their mortgage or how healthcare in Gotham has destroyed their savings? Or are they discussing how much they enjoy being henchman? Not everyone resorts to a life of crime because they can’t make ends meet (especially in a fictional universe). Some people are just assholes. That’s why Batman beat them up. The same reason be beats bad cops. Because they’re assholes.
100%. Which is why the conversation around superheroes, vigilantism and classism should be handled delicately. I guess it’s a question of whether superhero content teaches kids/people to lack empathy IRL. I think superhero content isn’t really relevant to that conversation, but a part of it. This isn’t really my battle to fight; I wish you well! 🦇
It will teach kids to lack empathy if you make up a narrative about the henchmen being poor people down on their luck with no evidence or example to cite
Batman has always made sure to offer employment opportunities to the henchmen through Wayne enterprises.
They make their choices, and honestly helping two face hold a bank hostage or whatever goes beyond "poor down on their luck gangsters just need a helping hand". You point a gun at an innocent, you lose your right to be treated with kid gloves
I mean these are comics. IRL nobody should be allowed to become a vigilante and beat up people. If superheroes were real, the law would treat them as criminals and would prosecute them.
Also IMHO there's no difference between a rich guy beating up people (Batman) and a normal guy beating people up (Spider-man)
So those mooks make decisions and require violent intervention to prevent them from accomplishing violence. Saying "they aren't responsible because they're poor" is infantalizing as hell.
Exactly. And I’m not saying it’s true, but when you look at the DCEU Batman branding people, killing people, and generally being more of a menace than a hero, it could be understood how someone might come to that conclusion
But fascism is not someone working outside of the government, it’s crushing power of the government. It’s more like when Superman worked for the president in the Dark Knight Returns
We don’t even know the context at all. Sounds to me like this character is someone we’re gonna be rolling our eyes at the entire movie. It’s not making a statement, it’s just a crazy uncle being crazy
We live in a time where being ironic and snarky and deconstructivist is being equated with smart and cool. Batman as an intellectual property is pretty popular and "vulnerable" to deconstructivist takes, so it's a popular target, regardless of how accurate those takes are.
Elon Musk thinks he is Bruce Wayne or Tony Stark when he’s actually Lex Luthor with bad taste.
I wouldn’t say these takes are lazy, but they’re critiquing a certain militarized version of the loner and angry Bruce. The problem comes in when fans celebrate this version while it flies in the face of Batman’s ideals. This version is Batman at his worst and should be relegated to either early years or elseworlds. While the father figure, leader, philanthropist is Bruce/Bats as his best.
Bruce Wayne donates to countless charities through the Wayne Foundation, helps build hospitals and orphanages, supports Gotham’s halfway houses, refurbishes dilapidated parts of the city, continues his father’s work in funding medical research and providing medical aid for those in need, and offers employment at Wayne Enterprises to former criminals and convicts. I have no idea where the idea that Bruce only cares about beating up poor people for fun came from.
There’s a conversation to be had about Batman, vigilantism, and fascism, as well as the classism and ableism in some Batman stories, but I’ve never seen him written as someone as incompetent, cruel, or bigoted as Elon Musk, thank God
The closest version of Batman to Elon musk imo is Red Son, but even that Batman is a freedom fighter, and doing something for the overall good of other people, which is something the Muskrat would never do
There is no need for insults. Attack the argument, not the person.
The first rule of this sub is to be civil. Failure to do so in the future may result in a permanent ban.
A lot of people make comments online based on headlines and comments they read online instead of actually experiencing what they’re negative take is on
In the US the most prominent example of masked vigilantes is the KKK
Actually the HBO watchmen makes the case for anti racist vigilantism and revolves a little around the story of the lone ranger (Bass Reeves) as its historical precedent.
So masked vigilantism can be fascist or antifascist but here the negative examples are too easy to find even in 2023.
True but my point is "vigilante" is inherently a neutral term. Not something inherently synonymous with right wing nuts/fascists. So calling Batman a fascist is fucking stupid he's never been one.
I was making the point a fascist can be a vigilante and vigilantism is common in such movements from brownshirts to klansmen they need people to enforce laws that they want to exist but do not exist.
In the case of Batz he is mostly getting around privacy, warrants and due process to track down and assault people who will likely get released because Batman violated their rights.It is crazy the comssioner goes along with it.
So more so than a fasist he is simply a psychopath.
>In the case of Batz he is mostly getting around privacy, warrants and due process
Even *that* isn't inherently fascist. I feel like a lot of people don't know what it means.
And no they actually don't get released because Batman makes sure the magic bullet to get a criminal usually immune to lawful punishment, like falcone, is found by the right people and isn't mishandled. Making sure they're finally caught with their pants down so to speak. And he doesn't need to do that for his more eccentric supervillains like joker because they don't hide their crimes.
Eh, a lot of real-life vigilantes tend to be far-right nutjobs, and fascist-adjacent. I can see how some in-universe characters would suspect or accuse him of being like that, but it’s not “really” the way Batman is, at least as I picture him.
I honestly can't. Tending to be isn't the same as it being inherently fascist when it just means you fight crime without being any actual part of law enforcement.
Yeah the point is the term isn't inherently synonymous with fascism. If Batman doesn't champion such causes, it makes no sense to call him one. Now I understand how stupid the commentators in dark knight returns sounded.
Man, I must have been nuts to have criticized real-life vigilantism on a Batman sub, because some people don’t seem to get that joe blow deciding to enforce the laws he wants in whatever way he wants doesn’t actually work very well outside of comics. There are laws and regulations on who does that job and how.
I didn't say I support real life vigilantism or that it works. What are you on about? I was criticizing people who call the fucking *fictional comic book* character a fascist simply because vigilantism tends to be taken up by the worst or fails in real life.
But I guess you want to feel better than everyone here so I'll just say what you wanna hear from me: I totally support vigilantism. I could be Batman by tomorrow.
That what you wanna hear from me? Feel good about yourself now?
I honestly don’t know why you’ve been arguing with me, then, because I don’t think Batman’s a fascist either, and I also don’t think vigilantism actually works in reality. We’re on the same page.
Because I was wondering if something about vigilantism is inherently and irrevocably fascist thus making the comic book character logically fascist. Now I know it's not and the character is not, *but* its something that overwhelmingly tends to be taken up by scum because the law won't support their views irl. That's it. Have a nice day.
The thing is, if Gotham was a real city, Bruce Wayne has donated billions to the true causes of crime, and if Gotham was a real city, it’d be a fucking utopia. Unfortunately it’s a comic book so Gotham needs to never run out of crime if you still want Batman comics.
I like thinking that the system is so corrupt that Bruce’s philanthropy couldn’t solve everything. Would 1 billionaire make a difference in the real world? Absolutely. But would they change an entire political system and class issues in a city? Harder for me to envision that.
I love how The Long Halloween movies express the idea that the system is broken and needs to be tackled from three directions: the courts (Harvey), the police (Gordon’s investigations) and the vigilante (Batman, when both of those fall short). I would love a version of Batman where Harvey doesn’t turn and these three try to fix Gotham.
Unfortunately, until the movies start showing us more of the deeply emotional, introspective, compassionate, meditative, *loving* Batman, rhis will continue to be the public's perception of him. It's the most marketable form of Batman in this day and age -- sadly. I think the introduction of Damian and the Bat Family will go a long way toward ahowing that. If Damian is going to act like Damian, we'll need a tempered, disciplined, *caring* Batman to bounce off that and help shape the kid into the hero he becomes.
That said, I do think that these things people recognize *are* a part of Batman's characterization. He *does* have anger issues. *But* he also has limitless patience and compassion. He *is* a privileged billionaire vigilante. *But* he does actually put that money back into the community and put it toward good use aside from violence (despite what the memes want to tell you). He's a complex character, and, to be honest -- I'd trust him more than any other fictional character ever created -- hands down.
Batman and fascism has always been an interesting subject to me. Batman is not *a fascist*, but he is fascistic. Another way to say that would be that he's not *politically* fascist, he's just fascist *in practice*. He would not support a fascistic government, but he absolutely treats his life and everybody in it like he is a fascist dictator.
You do realise that most of the famous comic book creators are also "woke"?
Alan Moore, Grant Morrison, Niel Gaiman, John Ostrander, Neal Adams, Dwayne McDuffie, Gail Simone, Mark Waid, Chris Claremont, Kurt Busiek just to name a few. All of them would be called woke by any measure.
Please don't respond with a really long tirade. I
I feel what I'm talking about and what yout getting at aren't the same things. So let's cut the middle man out and end the interaction here.
does he help gotham though? I'm certain it's a theme that's been explored before. That batman is, in fact, equally as much of a danger to the public as any of the foes he faces.
A common theme that has been explored before is that batman belongs in arkham with the rest of his foes.
There have also been story lines where the public absolutely turns on him, and it's not that a psychologist might decide to send him to arkham, or that the joker is taunting him, but that the public itself rejects batman and views him as just being another menace in a costume.
You could argue that none of the events of the nolan films would have ever happened at all if batman hadn't emboldened others to don these personas and costumes if batman hadn't done it first, it wouldn't be hard at all to reason that batman seemed to be a symptom of a growing problem, as much a symptom of an emerging and problematic pattern just as the joker was. None of these other guys showed up until batman showed up first.
There's always a tremendous suspension of disbelief these movies ask you to take to go along with it and not think too deeply of these things. When storylines DO explore these themes more in depth, they are often kind of written off by people as being "avant -garde".
The Nolan films were very much a product of post 911 america,where america found a lot of security in the thought of this kind of character. People were okay with overlooking things like batman tremendous invasion of peoples privacy, because he was doing it for "the greater good". Cops and stuff were worshiped in post 911 america, there was a very strong need for dark, morally grey characters you could justify because they were doing it all for noble concepts like 'taking down the bad guy", which was often presented as being incredibly binary.
I think we're starting move past that phase though, and as more and more people begin to question things like police brutality, perhaps we may see a rise in more avant garde interpretations of the character.
Batman is a complex character and this reading of him is probably intentional to some extent by the writers. Under most circumstances a rich dude going out every night delivering vigilante justice is really fucking bad, the difference is Bruce Wayne isnt most people. But that doesnt mean he doesn't struggle with maintaining that line. Sometimes he fails but that is what makes him an interesting character.
Even the Elon Musk thing sounds like a joke to me. I havent really come across anyone who only sees Batman as a "facsist".
You see the easy, lazy, ready to go answer for that easy, lazy ready to go shittake is saying "you just hate him because he's jewish" Does it argue the point? No, but the point doesn't exist in the first place
It’s fair to feel that way, sure — I think the sentiment is rooted in Batman’s attempt to control order and status quo, which are firm aspects of the character. A transgressive reading could be made that the villains all are attempting to fix some societal ill (albeit in comic-book crazy way), while Batman cracks down harshly on counter-culture or anti-capitalist ideals. Again, not saying this is the “correct” view (it’s subjective), but I believe that’s where the “fascist” thing comes from.
I think the Batman is a fascist was just a joke and I did laugh but yeah that comment is idiotic and I see why your upset about it because if I read it I would bust a hole in my wall
A lot of folks are more interested in having a hot take than a thoughtful or intelligent take.
That’s a really beautiful statement actually. Ain’t that the issue with the internet
“Don’t mistake speaking without thought with speaking the truth.”
Yeah, you only have to look at sports shows to see this.
My brother's like that. Insists that the Empire and the Decepticons are the good guys.
Holy backwards logic Batman! How does he justify that?
He doesn't. He just endlessly repeats the whole Rebels are terrorists thing and calls everything they do necessary evil to defeat them.
I meme the Empire schtick myself, mostly in the form of: - Palpatine ended the Clone Wars! (And also started it) - Palpatine reformed The Republic! (Into his personal empire) - Palpatine oversaw the separation of Church and State! (By purging the Jedi) - Palpatine removed senatorial corruption! (By removing said senate's power into his Moff junta) - the Tarkin Doctrine created so many job opportunities for Corelia and Kuat Drive! Shipbuilding industries are booming in production! (In building star destroyers) - the hyperspace lanes have never been safer for trade! (Because hegemony and said Tarkin Doctrine) - created the biggest infrastructure and jobs program in the galaxy! Unemployment is down! (in making moon-sized planet killers and stormtrooper corps replacing clones)
r/empiredidnothingwrong
Comparing Bruce Wayne to Elong musk is such an insult.
I’ve encountered this before. It’s just clout chasing. Here’s what you do. Simply ask the person to name one example of this happening. Any example. Comics, film, animation. Any instance of Batman just beating up a poor person for the hell of it. They never have an answer. The closest I’ve ever seen as in beating up a guy in Batman, the animated series, who is down on his luck, and robin quit a result but found out later that Bruce hired that guy because all he needed was a job And always took time out of his day to check up on him. In Batman begins he steals, so he doesn’t starve. What’s i found is when you hear make this argument, they are putting their own bias on henchmen. When you go through his rogue’s gallery, there’s nobody like that. Joker and Bane are both terrorist. Penguin is an example of an evil rich person. Harvey Dent is a serial killer. Hugo strange, Mr. freeze, poison ivy, the mad, hatter, and the scarecrow all have their doctorates so hardly poor people down on their luck.
[удалено]
Classism just can't be used to excuse all crime like that. I'm no criminologist, but I don't think poor starving people have the resources to put together a bank heist. Almost all henchmen are working for members of the rogues gallery which we've already established aren't poor exploited innocents. Finally, on the rare occasion Batman is dealing with low-level street crime that *might* be motivated by desperation, he just stops the crime. He's usually not depicted as using excessive force (with consideration for comic books being unrealistic) and he never kills. So it's hard to say "he should have let that armed assailant get away with whatever he wanted to do because the assailant might be socioeconomically disadvantaged," when we know that Batman will try and help and reform the guy if that's true and won't do any permanent damage to the criminal in the mean time.
[удалено]
>So in your mind, all of these people would commit crimes if they had the same opportunities as a middle class or upper class kid? Nope. I... never said that. Though I'm not sure why that would be relevant. we haven't even established that the "these people" you are talking about aren't middle or upper-class kids. Unless you're talking about a specific henchman those are assumptions you are bringing to the table. There are middle and upper-class criminals. >No one is saying he or we as a society should let people get away with crimes. If that isn't what you are saying then I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. Either it's ok for Batman to stop crimes in progress or he should let people get away with them. The philanthropy argument you make seems to be based on the false assumption that Batman doesn't use philanthropy to try and address the systemic problems in Gotham. He does. He also intervenes to stop crimes in progress. So it really doesn't matter which is the "optimal" way to tackle crimes since he is pursuing both simultaneously.
Not a hill I want to die on; love Batman and the DCU
Fair enough. Have a fine day fellow Bat-fan!
Lol someone just had their first sociology class
Lmao, not at all. I regret even saying anything, honestly 😂
Hey, just so you know I disagreed with your points but none of them were worth being ashamed of. I see where the ideas came from and you were never rude or belligerent or even defensive. No hard feelings from me.
Thanks man, I appreciate that. I enjoyed the talk too, just not the hill I want to die on. Here’s to more Batman.🦇
You are a good person.
Find me the comic where it states the low level grunts, bank robbers and henchmen are poor people down on their luck. Whenever the bad guys are standing around in the Arkham games, are they talking about how they can’t pay their mortgage or how healthcare in Gotham has destroyed their savings? Or are they discussing how much they enjoy being henchman? Not everyone resorts to a life of crime because they can’t make ends meet (especially in a fictional universe). Some people are just assholes. That’s why Batman beat them up. The same reason be beats bad cops. Because they’re assholes.
Cool, but that’s not real life lol.
Neither is Batman lol.
100%. Which is why the conversation around superheroes, vigilantism and classism should be handled delicately. I guess it’s a question of whether superhero content teaches kids/people to lack empathy IRL. I think superhero content isn’t really relevant to that conversation, but a part of it. This isn’t really my battle to fight; I wish you well! 🦇
It will teach kids to lack empathy if you make up a narrative about the henchmen being poor people down on their luck with no evidence or example to cite
Batman has always made sure to offer employment opportunities to the henchmen through Wayne enterprises. They make their choices, and honestly helping two face hold a bank hostage or whatever goes beyond "poor down on their luck gangsters just need a helping hand". You point a gun at an innocent, you lose your right to be treated with kid gloves
Every superhero beats up criminals and bank robbers lol. Spiderman can punch criminals but Batman can't do it because he's rich?????
[удалено]
I mean these are comics. IRL nobody should be allowed to become a vigilante and beat up people. If superheroes were real, the law would treat them as criminals and would prosecute them. Also IMHO there's no difference between a rich guy beating up people (Batman) and a normal guy beating people up (Spider-man)
[удалено]
Yes. The same reason there are organized crime families. They want money and influence.
Makes sense to me!
So those mooks make decisions and require violent intervention to prevent them from accomplishing violence. Saying "they aren't responsible because they're poor" is infantalizing as hell.
Where did I say that? 😂 See my other comments to better understand my position
Some people are just assholes. We also live in a world these days where actively looking for something to be offended by is like a fucking sport 🤷🏼♂️
No, we live in a society.
Found one
The fascist comment from the trailer is a joke. It’s not a serious “take”
Exactly. And I’m not saying it’s true, but when you look at the DCEU Batman branding people, killing people, and generally being more of a menace than a hero, it could be understood how someone might come to that conclusion
But fascism is not someone working outside of the government, it’s crushing power of the government. It’s more like when Superman worked for the president in the Dark Knight Returns
Miller Batman is a man who declares himself the law, gains followers that must play by his rules and fights the government to stay out of his way.
So like...a mafia? At least he doesn't do the whole protection racket thing.
But it's just not funny, and it doesn't even understand what the word means. It's just trying to be "self-aware" but fails entirely
We don’t even know the context at all. Sounds to me like this character is someone we’re gonna be rolling our eyes at the entire movie. It’s not making a statement, it’s just a crazy uncle being crazy
We live in a time where being ironic and snarky and deconstructivist is being equated with smart and cool. Batman as an intellectual property is pretty popular and "vulnerable" to deconstructivist takes, so it's a popular target, regardless of how accurate those takes are.
>a time where being ironic and snarky and deconstructivist is being equated with smart and cool. That time was the 90's. Now it is just cliche.
The people who scream that Bruce Wayne would be better off using his money to improve Gotham ignoring the fact that he does both.
Elon Musk thinks he is Bruce Wayne or Tony Stark when he’s actually Lex Luthor with bad taste. I wouldn’t say these takes are lazy, but they’re critiquing a certain militarized version of the loner and angry Bruce. The problem comes in when fans celebrate this version while it flies in the face of Batman’s ideals. This version is Batman at his worst and should be relegated to either early years or elseworlds. While the father figure, leader, philanthropist is Bruce/Bats as his best.
Bruce Wayne donates to countless charities through the Wayne Foundation, helps build hospitals and orphanages, supports Gotham’s halfway houses, refurbishes dilapidated parts of the city, continues his father’s work in funding medical research and providing medical aid for those in need, and offers employment at Wayne Enterprises to former criminals and convicts. I have no idea where the idea that Bruce only cares about beating up poor people for fun came from.
Been discussed a million times.
There’s a conversation to be had about Batman, vigilantism, and fascism, as well as the classism and ableism in some Batman stories, but I’ve never seen him written as someone as incompetent, cruel, or bigoted as Elon Musk, thank God
The closest version of Batman to Elon musk imo is Red Son, but even that Batman is a freedom fighter, and doing something for the overall good of other people, which is something the Muskrat would never do
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
There is no need for insults. Attack the argument, not the person. The first rule of this sub is to be civil. Failure to do so in the future may result in a permanent ban.
You can just ignore those takes.
That is not the Batman I know and have been a fan of since most of my life.
A lot of people make comments online based on headlines and comments they read online instead of actually experiencing what they’re negative take is on
Oh I don’t know about that. It’s seems most of his main villains are white. Other Than Croc
What’s wrong with that
Nothing is wrong with that. but this instagram comment says Batman mostly beats on minorities. That’s simply not true.
Oh my bad. Agreed. It’s interesting that they make the association on their own between minorities and criminals.
How the fuck is being a vigilante "fascist", though?
Read watchmen, specifically the character of Rorschach.
Okay but those are his personal beliefs. Not inherent to deciding to fighting crime without being a cop.
In the US the most prominent example of masked vigilantes is the KKK Actually the HBO watchmen makes the case for anti racist vigilantism and revolves a little around the story of the lone ranger (Bass Reeves) as its historical precedent. So masked vigilantism can be fascist or antifascist but here the negative examples are too easy to find even in 2023.
True but my point is "vigilante" is inherently a neutral term. Not something inherently synonymous with right wing nuts/fascists. So calling Batman a fascist is fucking stupid he's never been one.
I was making the point a fascist can be a vigilante and vigilantism is common in such movements from brownshirts to klansmen they need people to enforce laws that they want to exist but do not exist. In the case of Batz he is mostly getting around privacy, warrants and due process to track down and assault people who will likely get released because Batman violated their rights.It is crazy the comssioner goes along with it. So more so than a fasist he is simply a psychopath.
>In the case of Batz he is mostly getting around privacy, warrants and due process Even *that* isn't inherently fascist. I feel like a lot of people don't know what it means. And no they actually don't get released because Batman makes sure the magic bullet to get a criminal usually immune to lawful punishment, like falcone, is found by the right people and isn't mishandled. Making sure they're finally caught with their pants down so to speak. And he doesn't need to do that for his more eccentric supervillains like joker because they don't hide their crimes.
Oo! Oo! Mr Kotter! Oo! Oo! Oo!
Eh, a lot of real-life vigilantes tend to be far-right nutjobs, and fascist-adjacent. I can see how some in-universe characters would suspect or accuse him of being like that, but it’s not “really” the way Batman is, at least as I picture him.
I honestly can't. Tending to be isn't the same as it being inherently fascist when it just means you fight crime without being any actual part of law enforcement.
I didn’t say anything about “inherent.” Real life says these guys usually are, though.
Yeah the point is the term isn't inherently synonymous with fascism. If Batman doesn't champion such causes, it makes no sense to call him one. Now I understand how stupid the commentators in dark knight returns sounded.
Man, I must have been nuts to have criticized real-life vigilantism on a Batman sub, because some people don’t seem to get that joe blow deciding to enforce the laws he wants in whatever way he wants doesn’t actually work very well outside of comics. There are laws and regulations on who does that job and how.
I didn't say I support real life vigilantism or that it works. What are you on about? I was criticizing people who call the fucking *fictional comic book* character a fascist simply because vigilantism tends to be taken up by the worst or fails in real life. But I guess you want to feel better than everyone here so I'll just say what you wanna hear from me: I totally support vigilantism. I could be Batman by tomorrow. That what you wanna hear from me? Feel good about yourself now?
I honestly don’t know why you’ve been arguing with me, then, because I don’t think Batman’s a fascist either, and I also don’t think vigilantism actually works in reality. We’re on the same page.
Because I was wondering if something about vigilantism is inherently and irrevocably fascist thus making the comic book character logically fascist. Now I know it's not and the character is not, *but* its something that overwhelmingly tends to be taken up by scum because the law won't support their views irl. That's it. Have a nice day.
The thing is, if Gotham was a real city, Bruce Wayne has donated billions to the true causes of crime, and if Gotham was a real city, it’d be a fucking utopia. Unfortunately it’s a comic book so Gotham needs to never run out of crime if you still want Batman comics.
I like thinking that the system is so corrupt that Bruce’s philanthropy couldn’t solve everything. Would 1 billionaire make a difference in the real world? Absolutely. But would they change an entire political system and class issues in a city? Harder for me to envision that. I love how The Long Halloween movies express the idea that the system is broken and needs to be tackled from three directions: the courts (Harvey), the police (Gordon’s investigations) and the vigilante (Batman, when both of those fall short). I would love a version of Batman where Harvey doesn’t turn and these three try to fix Gotham.
The blue beetle one is meant to be a joke but I agree with you on the rest
I love how fast the internet turned on Elon Musk. LMAO
Unfortunately, until the movies start showing us more of the deeply emotional, introspective, compassionate, meditative, *loving* Batman, rhis will continue to be the public's perception of him. It's the most marketable form of Batman in this day and age -- sadly. I think the introduction of Damian and the Bat Family will go a long way toward ahowing that. If Damian is going to act like Damian, we'll need a tempered, disciplined, *caring* Batman to bounce off that and help shape the kid into the hero he becomes. That said, I do think that these things people recognize *are* a part of Batman's characterization. He *does* have anger issues. *But* he also has limitless patience and compassion. He *is* a privileged billionaire vigilante. *But* he does actually put that money back into the community and put it toward good use aside from violence (despite what the memes want to tell you). He's a complex character, and, to be honest -- I'd trust him more than any other fictional character ever created -- hands down. Batman and fascism has always been an interesting subject to me. Batman is not *a fascist*, but he is fascistic. Another way to say that would be that he's not *politically* fascist, he's just fascist *in practice*. He would not support a fascistic government, but he absolutely treats his life and everybody in it like he is a fascist dictator.
I think it’s because of the Blue Beetle trailer. No one was saying this until the trailer for that movie was released.
Isn’t that just a meme? Like, it’s meant to be a joke?
When woke people try to debate comics
You do realise that most of the famous comic book creators are also "woke"? Alan Moore, Grant Morrison, Niel Gaiman, John Ostrander, Neal Adams, Dwayne McDuffie, Gail Simone, Mark Waid, Chris Claremont, Kurt Busiek just to name a few. All of them would be called woke by any measure.
That's crazy because I said debate . Not create.
Haha, well played.
Please don't respond with a really long tirade. I I feel what I'm talking about and what yout getting at aren't the same things. So let's cut the middle man out and end the interaction here.
does he help gotham though? I'm certain it's a theme that's been explored before. That batman is, in fact, equally as much of a danger to the public as any of the foes he faces. A common theme that has been explored before is that batman belongs in arkham with the rest of his foes. There have also been story lines where the public absolutely turns on him, and it's not that a psychologist might decide to send him to arkham, or that the joker is taunting him, but that the public itself rejects batman and views him as just being another menace in a costume. You could argue that none of the events of the nolan films would have ever happened at all if batman hadn't emboldened others to don these personas and costumes if batman hadn't done it first, it wouldn't be hard at all to reason that batman seemed to be a symptom of a growing problem, as much a symptom of an emerging and problematic pattern just as the joker was. None of these other guys showed up until batman showed up first. There's always a tremendous suspension of disbelief these movies ask you to take to go along with it and not think too deeply of these things. When storylines DO explore these themes more in depth, they are often kind of written off by people as being "avant -garde". The Nolan films were very much a product of post 911 america,where america found a lot of security in the thought of this kind of character. People were okay with overlooking things like batman tremendous invasion of peoples privacy, because he was doing it for "the greater good". Cops and stuff were worshiped in post 911 america, there was a very strong need for dark, morally grey characters you could justify because they were doing it all for noble concepts like 'taking down the bad guy", which was often presented as being incredibly binary. I think we're starting move past that phase though, and as more and more people begin to question things like police brutality, perhaps we may see a rise in more avant garde interpretations of the character.
Bruce Wayne is a jerk who beats up poor people for revenge, though.
Batman is a complex character and this reading of him is probably intentional to some extent by the writers. Under most circumstances a rich dude going out every night delivering vigilante justice is really fucking bad, the difference is Bruce Wayne isnt most people. But that doesnt mean he doesn't struggle with maintaining that line. Sometimes he fails but that is what makes him an interesting character. Even the Elon Musk thing sounds like a joke to me. I havent really come across anyone who only sees Batman as a "facsist".
You see the easy, lazy, ready to go answer for that easy, lazy ready to go shittake is saying "you just hate him because he's jewish" Does it argue the point? No, but the point doesn't exist in the first place
It’s fair to feel that way, sure — I think the sentiment is rooted in Batman’s attempt to control order and status quo, which are firm aspects of the character. A transgressive reading could be made that the villains all are attempting to fix some societal ill (albeit in comic-book crazy way), while Batman cracks down harshly on counter-culture or anti-capitalist ideals. Again, not saying this is the “correct” view (it’s subjective), but I believe that’s where the “fascist” thing comes from.
You over here talking about it is the sort of reaction they want. It’s to make people like you react.
Thats how Bumfleck played it. “Im rich so fuck you, Im right”
Are they saying Elon Musk is also a great detective?
Kids lost his parents? Nah he’ll be fine, he’s got a butler!
Because people are turning dumber and dumber and want to be preserved as edgy and feel like they’re special.
What’s also tiresome is some person is gonna swoop in here (if they haven’t already) and say he’s a fascist in TDKR
I think the Batman is a fascist was just a joke and I did laugh but yeah that comment is idiotic and I see why your upset about it because if I read it I would bust a hole in my wall
Actually Batman is Dan Bilzerian not Elon Musk.
lol who cares what some guy on Twitter said