Even though Moore clearly disagreed with Ditko's (Rorschachs) worldview and Philosophy he didn't see that type of view on life as necessarily evil.he saw it as wrong but not evil he even respected it to a certain extent
Veidt on the other hand,His vision of the world and justice is that of a rich Neo-Liberal(which Ozy is), saving humanity from the statistical calculation of killing millions to save billions,he saw that progressive billionaires were in all ways worse then some random weirdo who has political beliefs he might agree not with
as much as Moore hated what Rorschach stood for,he placed a lot more of himself in Rorschach than in Veidt
I mean, we can appreciate the good analysis but this hardly seems enough to make a thread over. Don’t be surprised when it gets no replies.
Dominic Jenkins
I agree. Better would be a watchmen thread, make it one post and some might than reply to this.
Logan Stewart
>saving humanity from the statistical calculation of killing millions to save billions Rorschach approved of the atomic bombings of japan. He believes in the same philosophy as Veidt, he just doesn't like the deception
Owen Cruz
I always thought of it as him approving a thing by an official Head of State in theory but being disgusted by it when faced with the act right in front of him.
Grayson Flores
I think it just mean it's not a big deal when the casualties are subhuman apes on some distant island but it's very different when the victims are civilians on American soil. Americans glorify war and the militar complex because thye never had a war on their own soil, except for the Civil war but that was more than 150 years ago and despite the south is still butthurt, they tend to ventilate their frustration on niggers rather than going deeper. I think Moore was going on a what if America receive a genocidal attack in the name of peace, would they take it as a mean to an end? The Watchmen movie not only removed the corpses but also attack all the major cities of the world by an American weapon, so in a way the American supremacy is unchallenged.
Or maybe Kovac, just like many humans, is a hypocrite who doesn't mind the atrocities committed by their government for their benefit, but when it happens to them, it suddenly becomes horrifying and they realize the effects of such decisions. And now wants to atone for their misconception of the devaluing of human life. No one I know bats at an eye when terrorism happens in the Middle East or SEA, but their response is completely different when it's domestic.
"It shouldn't happen here." "We're a developed, First-World country, we should have countermeasures for these sort of attacks." "We are the civilized ones, such behavior is unacceptable in our society." And on it goes. And before someone makes some uncalled political disparaging remark at me for some kind of preconceived notion of political partiality I might have, making it appear that I'm attacking Liberal/Conservatives. I'm not. This an universal behavior that both parties share.
Wyatt James
So what you're saying is even a filthy commie like Moore knew rorschach was right?
Leo Sanchez
>bring a psychotic enemy to their knees and let them know to accept defeat and surrender or face decimation in full >while also showing off to the rest of the world what new toys your country has and what will happen if you try to fuck with them I'm not even going to try and argue about the specific ideology of a man whose greatest idea for world peace was freaking out a bunch of psychics with a fake squid but you have to accept reality.
Owen White
More like Moore was intelligent and honest enough to examine Ditko's philosophy seriously and present it straight, despite ultimately condemning it (and Rorschach) to destruction. He didn't just turn him into a cartoonish loony who exists to be an easy target, instead he went through the steps of asking >How does this worldview work? >What could cause a person to have it? >How would a person with it react to events in the story? >Where does it break down? In other worse, Moore was a good writer. This is what separates him from cringe-inducing modern day leftist writers and their embarrassing strawmen: he was simply good at his job, and that made all the difference.
