Ethics And Morality In Superhero Stories

[Silvanus]

Having a functional police force or at least having superheroes be part of it isn't conservative. However, depicting elected authorities as always incompetent and/or corrupt and having it so that society can only be saved by unelected individuals, many of whom are of questionable stability, is a more toxic viewpoint.

Do comics generally depict this state of affairs? Superman works with the US government frequently. Batman works with the GCPD all the time.

Green Arrow challenging the established order amounts to him calling everything fascist and everybody a Nazi without actually doing anything of value. Ozymandias was a terrorist whose plan was never needed for peace. Batman in Red Son is an elseworld. And the X-Men

They're not conservative, though, are they?

 

[Cicada 5]

Do comics generally depict this state of affairs?

It?s pretty much the entire premise of superheroes.

Superman works with the US government frequently. Batman works with the GCPD all the time.

The heroes don?t so much as work with the government as they simply do as they please and the government is either too incompetent to get in their way or when the governments decide they have the right to use force in their own states, they?re depicted as being evil.

They're not conservative, though, are they?

A case could be made for Ozy. Many superheroes certainly have conservative beliefs or end up enforcing conservative views. It?s something the genre has struggled with even o this day.

 

[Silvanus]

It?s pretty much the entire premise of superheroes.

As a frequent reader of superhero comics, I'd disagree quite strongly with this. The authorities are often depicted as incapable of dealing with unique and enormous threats; they are, however, often depicted as otherwise competent or vital.

It's certainly nothing to do with the premise. One can have a superhero and an elected authority validly co-existing very, very easily.

The heroes don?t so much as work with the government as they simply do as they please and the government is either too incompetent to get in their way or when the governments decide they have the right to use force in their own states, they?re depicted as being evil.

This isn't true at all. The "pro-registration" side of the Civil War in Marvel was just about as flawed as the anti-registration side; both were depicted as ultimately well-intentioned and sympathetic. And the pro-registration side was rather unambiguously victorious, with the anti-registration champion Cap America concluding that he was "losing the argument".

Superman is also frequently depicted as ceding his own authority to the US government.

A case could be made for Ozy. Many superheroes certainly have conservative beliefs or end up enforcing conservative views. It?s something the genre has struggled with even o this day.

Some have, some have not. My issue was with the absolutism of the original statement, which claimed they were automatically conservative by nature.

 

[Cicada 5]

As a frequent reader of superhero comics, I'd disagree quite strongly with this. The authorities are often depicted as incapable of dealing with unique and enormous threats; they are, however, often depicted as otherwise competent or vital.

It isn?t just the unique and unusual threats though. Superheroes are regularly seen combatting any crime, from some guys holding up a liquor store to Mongul wanting to make Earth his new playground. And the authorities are frequently shown as being incapable shown as incapable of dealing with any threat no matter how simple it is. Most Batman continuities depict Gotham as a crime-ridden cesspool even before the guys with freeze rays and acid-squirting flowers show up and the very first Superman story had him solving a murder case not fighting an alien invasion or science experiment gone wrong on the loose.
And when the authorities are shown as trying to adapt to these unusual threats, they?re depicted as overstepping their reach and using extremist methods like with Cadmus in Justice League Unlimited. Because the government having a monopoly on force in superhero universes is against the status quo.

This isn't true at all. The "pro-registration" side of the Civil War in Marvel was just about as flawed as the anti-registration side; both were depicted as ultimately well-intentioned and sympathetic. And the pro-registration side was rather unambiguously victorious, with the anti-registration champion Cap America concluding that he was "losing the argument".

Here?s the funny thing, according to Mark Millar in an interview, the pro-reg side was supposed to be unambiguously right and the main point of the story was that Steve Rogers really was out of touch with the rest of the world. But the writers knew they couldn?t write a story like that without inciting fan rage (well more than what they got anyway) as the SHRA was too much of a break with the status quo. So they gave the pro-reg side a bunch of unnecessarily evil actions to commit like locking people up in the Negative Zone without trial and creating clones from dead people. Marvel also refused to actually state what the SHRA actually entailed so what was legal and illegal under the act varied from story to story and eventually it was repealed due to it being deemed unconstitutional.

 

[CrazyGirl17]

This isn't true at all. The "pro-registration" side of the Civil War in Marvel was just about as flawed as the anti-registration side; both were depicted as ultimately well-intentioned and sympathetic. And the pro-registration side was rather unambiguously victorious, with the anti-registration champion Cap America concluding that he was "losing the argument".

Here?s the funny thing, according to Mark Millar in an interview, the pro-reg side was supposed to be unambiguously right and the main point of the story was that Steve Rogers really was out of touch with the rest of the world. But the writers knew they couldn?t write a story like that without inciting fan rage (well more than what they got anyway) as the SHRA was too much of a break with the status quo. So they gave the pro-reg side a bunch of unnecessarily evil actions to commit like locking people up in the Negative Zone without trial and creating clones from dead people. Marvel also refused to actually state what the SHRA actually entailed so what was legal and illegal under the act varied from story to story and eventually it was repealed due to it being deemed unconstitutional.

While the idea of superhero registration sounds good on paper, the way it was handled in Civil War was pretty moronic. My biggest issue with the story is that everyone was so focused on making aly the heroes register, they completely forgot about dealing with the villains, including the guy who started the whole mess to begin with!

...Sorry, but this whole comic is an example of wasted potential. And if the Pro-Registration side was meant to be in the right, then that just makes it even worse in my opinion...

But don't take my word for it, this guy says why Civil War sucks better than I ever could:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=321s&v=q_iCAivfGsg

(Also, screw the idea that the Pro-Reg was supposed to be in the right. That's just dumb.)

 

[Cicada 5]

This isn't true at all. The "pro-registration" side of the Civil War in Marvel was just about as flawed as the anti-registration side; both were depicted as ultimately well-intentioned and sympathetic. And the pro-registration side was rather unambiguously victorious, with the anti-registration champion Cap America concluding that he was "losing the argument".

Here?s the funny thing, according to Mark Millar in an interview, the pro-reg side was supposed to be unambiguously right and the main point of the story was that Steve Rogers really was out of touch with the rest of the world. But the writers knew they couldn?t write a story like that without inciting fan rage (well more than what they got anyway) as the SHRA was too much of a break with the status quo. So they gave the pro-reg side a bunch of unnecessarily evil actions to commit like locking people up in the Negative Zone without trial and creating clones from dead people. Marvel also refused to actually state what the SHRA actually entailed so what was legal and illegal under the act varied from story to story and eventually it was repealed due to it being deemed unconstitutional.

While the idea of superhero registration sounds good on paper, the way it was handled in Civil War was pretty moronic. My biggest issue with the story is that everyone was so focused on making aly the heroes register, they completely forgot about dealing with the villains, including the guy who started the whole mess to begin with!

...Sorry, but this whole comic is an example of wasted potential. And if the Pro-Registration side was meant to be in the right, then that just makes it even worse in my opinion...

But don't take my word for it, this guy says why Civil War sucks better than I ever could:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=321s&v=q_iCAivfGsg

(Also, screw the idea that the Pro-Reg was supposed to be in the right. That's just dumb.)

Like I said, Marvel wanted to make the conflict seem "fair" but what they ended up doing was making it impossible to root for either side by making the pro-Reg side act unnecessarily thuggish and refusing to actually explain what was or wasn't legal under the Act. And if you remove the pro-Reg side's pointless dig kicking, they do come across as having the more reasonable position.

 

[McMarbles]

Damn, I should NOT have clicked this thread. Agent_Z, you really need to preview your post if you don't know how spoilers work here.

 

[CrazyGirl17]

This isn't true at all. The "pro-registration" side of the Civil War in Marvel was just about as flawed as the anti-registration side; both were depicted as ultimately well-intentioned and sympathetic. And the pro-registration side was rather unambiguously victorious, with the anti-registration champion Cap America concluding that he was "losing the argument".

Here?s the funny thing, according to Mark Millar in an interview, the pro-reg side was supposed to be unambiguously right and the main point of the story was that Steve Rogers really was out of touch with the rest of the world. But the writers knew they couldn?t write a story like that without inciting fan rage (well more than what they got anyway) as the SHRA was too much of a break with the status quo. So they gave the pro-reg side a bunch of unnecessarily evil actions to commit like locking people up in the Negative Zone without trial and creating clones from dead people. Marvel also refused to actually state what the SHRA actually entailed so what was legal and illegal under the act varied from story to story and eventually it was repealed due to it being deemed unconstitutional.

While the idea of superhero registration sounds good on paper, the way it was handled in Civil War was pretty moronic. My biggest issue with the story is that everyone was so focused on making aly the heroes register, they completely forgot about dealing with the villains, including the guy who started the whole mess to begin with!

...Sorry, but this whole comic is an example of wasted potential. And if the Pro-Registration side was meant to be in the right, then that just makes it even worse in my opinion...

But don't take my word for it, this guy says why Civil War sucks better than I ever could:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=321s&v=q_iCAivfGsg

(Also, screw the idea that the Pro-Reg was supposed to be in the right. That's just dumb.)

Like I said, Marvel wanted to make the conflict seem "fair" but what they ended up doing was making it impossible to root for either side by making the pro-Reg side act unnecessarily thuggish and refusing to actually explain what was or wasn't legal under the Act. And if you remove the pro-Reg side's pointless dig kicking, they do come across as having the more reasonable position.

Fair enough. Thinking about it, I don't mind the idea of voluntary registration (though I'm otherwise anti-registration). So maybe some of my previous comments were just griping.

Problem is that Marvel took an interesting idea and bungled it up so badly they had to undo it... eventually.

 

[Cicada 5]

This isn't true at all. The "pro-registration" side of the Civil War in Marvel was just about as flawed as the anti-registration side; both were depicted as ultimately well-intentioned and sympathetic. And the pro-registration side was rather unambiguously victorious, with the anti-registration champion Cap America concluding that he was "losing the argument".

Here?s the funny thing, according to Mark Millar in an interview, the pro-reg side was supposed to be unambiguously right and the main point of the story was that Steve Rogers really was out of touch with the rest of the world. But the writers knew they couldn?t write a story like that without inciting fan rage (well more than what they got anyway) as the SHRA was too much of a break with the status quo. So they gave the pro-reg side a bunch of unnecessarily evil actions to commit like locking people up in the Negative Zone without trial and creating clones from dead people. Marvel also refused to actually state what the SHRA actually entailed so what was legal and illegal under the act varied from story to story and eventually it was repealed due to it being deemed unconstitutional.

While the idea of superhero registration sounds good on paper, the way it was handled in Civil War was pretty moronic. My biggest issue with the story is that everyone was so focused on making aly the heroes register, they completely forgot about dealing with the villains, including the guy who started the whole mess to begin with!

...Sorry, but this whole comic is an example of wasted potential. And if the Pro-Registration side was meant to be in the right, then that just makes it even worse in my opinion...

But don't take my word for it, this guy says why Civil War sucks better than I ever could:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=321s&v=q_iCAivfGsg

(Also, screw the idea that the Pro-Reg was supposed to be in the right. That's just dumb.)

Like I said, Marvel wanted to make the conflict seem "fair" but what they ended up doing was making it impossible to root for either side by making the pro-Reg side act unnecessarily thuggish and refusing to actually explain what was or wasn't legal under the Act. And if you remove the pro-Reg side's pointless dig kicking, they do come across as having the more reasonable position.

Fair enough. Thinking about it, I don't mind the idea of voluntary registration (though I'm otherwise anti-registration). So maybe some of my previous comments were just griping.

Problem is that Marvel took an interesting idea and bungled it up so badly they had to undo it... eventually.

This I agree with.