|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2022 11:21:22 GMT -5
Akin to televised wrestling? It always gets back to wrestling. Every time. Usually in any discussion I am in.  |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Aug 22, 2022 11:30:39 GMT -5
Because, at the end of the day, (removing any supervillains from the scene) a world with superheroes is just identical to a world where law enforcement and firefighters are a little more efficient. Superheroes are reactionaries disguised as revolutionaries. An interesting point. My own suspicion is that superheroes stopped being relevant decades ago, but we imbued them with such rich characterization and continuity that the genre has stuck around as a sort of default. Really, so few non-Batman comics these days are about costumed heroes patrolling and fighting crime. They're more about brightly colored, easily identifiable super-beings who regularly come into physical conflict with one another. I'd argue it's more akin to televised wrestling. Yep. Even the most-street-level Marvel superhero (Daredevil) spends the most of the time battling the Hand or whatever than regular criminals. And not all Americans view fascism in the way that you apparently think they do. I'd like to believe we are not all of a single, collective group-think. I'm sorry, you are right, I generalized and I stand corrected.  |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Aug 22, 2022 11:35:31 GMT -5
Akin to televised wrestling? It always gets back to wrestling. Every time. Usually in any discussion I am in. Well, like shaxper said, almost no hero from the Big Two fights "regular" crime nowadays. But I still remember in the 80s things were different. I remember a story where Spider-Man fights against some gang which was selling drugs to kids. At the end they hired some thug with super-power to defend them from the web-Crawler, but for the rest the story was told in a semi-realistic way. In these days I'm not even sure who Spider-man is fighting. It always seems someone who wants a revenge for something. |
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Aug 22, 2022 11:51:49 GMT -5
Regardless of their origins, superheroes have become fantastical, escapist soap operas. The comparison to wrestling is pretty apt, much s it pains me to admit. (kidding).
On the other hand, maybe superheroes only seem ridiculous to us because we have not had to contend with them. It's pure thought exercise for us, but what if there really was someone with super powers who was a decent person? What if they saw a crime being committed? Could they live with themselves if they didn't try to help? The world is full of stories of regular folks risking life and limb to help others, to save kids from traffic, etc. At some point somehow it is likely to come out, and if there is more than one powered person, there will be another likely, etc. Take it far enough and you likely do get to powered criminals and vendettas, etc.
It's not too far fetched to see things building in scale in a real world with superheroes, as well. Now, I imagine real world governments would absolutely try to either stop it or structure it, so it might be more "authorized."
This is an interesting topic. Do I think superheroes are inherently unethical? No. Could they very likely become very problematic very quickly? Oh, yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2022 11:54:52 GMT -5
Well, if I had powers, I’d want to fight crime, but as there are 650 MPs in parliament, that’s 650 criminals I’d hav to expose on a daily basis.
(Not being political, I’m thinking of Lois’ comment to Superman, “You’ll end up fighting every elected official in this country…”)
As for wrestling and comics, there are lots of parallels. This isn’t the topic for them, but maybe one day…
|
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Aug 22, 2022 12:07:52 GMT -5
There's a line from Pat Mills in the Future Shock! documentary about 2000AD that's always stuck with me (paraphrasing here), "Britains would be less trusting of Superheroes than Americans would." and I think a lot of that has to do with how incredibly destructive they are, regardless of fighting for "god and country/mom and apple pie"
|
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Aug 22, 2022 12:09:34 GMT -5
Regardless of their origins, superheroes have become fantastical, escapist soap operas. The comparison to wrestling is pretty apt, much s it pains me to admit. (kidding). On the other hand, maybe superheroes only seem ridiculous to us because we have not had to contend with them. It's pure thought exercise for us, but what if there really was someone with super powers who was a decent person? What if they saw a crime being committed? Could they live with themselves if they didn't try to help? The world is full of stories of regular folks risking life and limb to help others, to save kids from traffic, etc. At some point somehow it is likely to come out, and if there is more than one powered person, there will be another likely, etc. Take it far enough and you likely do get to powered criminals and vendettas, etc. It's not too far fetched to see things building in scale in a real world with superheroes, as well. Now, I imagine real world governments would absolutely try to either stop it or structure it, so it might be more "authorized." This is an interesting topic. Do I think superheroes are inherently unethical? No. Could they very likely become very problematic very quickly? Oh, yes. I try to bring your example into real life. Let's say I'm a martial arts champion, a revived Bruce Lee, I can knock out people three times my size with a finger. In short, the closest thing to a superpower in real life. Let's imagine that I meet someone in danger (the classic old lady attacked by a robber with a knife). Would I be morally obligated to help her since I have the ability to do so without putting my own life in danger? Certainly. The problem is when I actively look for such situations (as superheroes do). I do not have specific training, I do not have the knowledge of the law that a policeman has, I could attack people who are not doing anything technically illegal, in the long run I could also be harmful to the work of the real police (imagine that I beat up and take to the police station a petty drug dealer that the cops kept under surveillance so they could find out who his real boss was?). We always focus on physical abilities (super strength etc). But maintaining public order is not just a race to see who is stronger, there are also other skills that are indispensable for the job of a policeman (which a superhero does not have). Why in real life having exceptional martial arts would not automatically make me a good officer of the law, but for some mysterious reason in the comics just the super-strength would be enough for me to maintain law, order and public security without any problems? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2022 12:10:01 GMT -5
There's a line from Pat Mills in the Future Shock! documentary about 2000AD that's always stuck with me (paraphrasing here), "Britains would be less trusting of Superheroes than Americans would." and I think a lot of that has to do with how incredibly destructive they are, regardless of fighting for "god and country/mom and apple pie" On that note, I feel that collateral damage is more obvious when you’re watching live-action superheroics. There’s no way you watch Hawkeye or Man of Steel and not come away with the impression that some civilians have been hurt or died. But it seems suspension of disbelief on the collateral damage issue is easer when you’re reading from panel to panel. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Aug 22, 2022 12:12:51 GMT -5
There's a line from Pat Mills in the Future Shock! documentary about 2000AD that's always stuck with me (paraphrasing here), "Britains would be less trusting of Superheroes than Americans would." and I think a lot of that has to do with how incredibly destructive they are, regardless of fighting for "god and country/mom and apple pie" On that note, I feel that collateral damage is more obvious when you’re watching live-action superheroics. There’s no way you watch Hawkeye or Man of Steel and not come away with the impression that some civilians have been hurt or died. But it seems suspension of disbelief on the collateral damage issue is easer when you’re reading from panel to panel. As I said in the other thread, if you decide to fight crimes with powers that are equivalent to WMD, you are already responsabile of the collateral damage (and not only of any "justifies kill" or whatever) .  |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Aug 22, 2022 12:38:00 GMT -5
Let's use the Kantian method to determine if something is ethical: What if everyone did it? Everyone decides that the rules don't apply to them: at that point it's anarchy. Yes, we know we can trust Batman, because, well, he's Batman. But the rules exist for a reason. And virtually all super heroes have decided that they are above the rules. Let's say it's not a fascist concept, but you'll admit it's Nietzschean at least. Let's also keep in mind that police, as we know them, is a very new concept. Up to roughly 250 years ago police didn't exist and the only recourse was to take the law in to your own hands. The other issues that aren't being addressed are "Who is making the rules" and "Are the rules just." Enforcement of unjust laws is inherently unjust. The rules exist because the elites propound them. The fact that they're rules doesn't make them just or unjust; they simply are. We are all painfully aware of plenty of laws that existed and were "the rules" that were very clearly unjust and that the only appropriate action was to violate them. I also keep seeing the assumption in this thread that super-heroes are "above the rules." What rules are they above? What laws are they allegedly breaking? Most states allow citizens arrests. Citizens are also, generally, allowed to use reasonable force in the defense of others and in defense of property. So what rules are they breaking? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2022 12:45:20 GMT -5
I thought police existed long before 250 years ago. Or was The Flintstones lying?
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Aug 22, 2022 12:57:39 GMT -5
I thought police existed long before 250 years ago. Or was The Flintstones lying? The Flintstones are in the future. So...yeah. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2022 12:58:06 GMT -5
They are? Well, one truly does learn something new every day!
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Aug 22, 2022 13:28:01 GMT -5
They are? Well, one truly does learn something new every day! I'm mostly kidding. Since dinosaurs and humans failed to intersect by millions of years some people kid that the Flintstones is a post-apocalyptic future with mutant dinosaurs. As to police as we know them, they largely did not come in to existence until the very late 1700s. And their prime genesis in the U.S. was as slave patrols. |
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Aug 22, 2022 13:40:59 GMT -5
The problem is when I actively look for such situations (as superheroes do). I do not have specific training, I do not have the knowledge of the law that a policeman has, I could attack people who are not doing anything technically illegal, in the long run I could also be harmful to the work of the real police (imagine that I beat up and take to the police station a petty drug dealer that the cops kept under surveillance so they could find out who his real boss was?). Why is that different? Especially if you feel you have a moral obligation since you have powers that others do not. If you are able and willing to seek out people to help and feel morally obligated to do so, how could you not? Surely you could learn about the local laws in your area. If you thought you would be more efficient going through sanctioned proper channels, of course do so. What if instead of leading with attacks you only defend? So get training. Maybe join a law enforcement arm. If you think they are too corrupt, read up on the laws yourself and work within them. This is just doing a citizen's arrest with more bargaining power. |
|
