Do superheroes just protect the status quo instead of enacting meaningful change. pic related

All these pseuds have never picked up a book and think all capes do every single issue is beat up random muggers.

Manchester Black from "What's so funny about Truth, Justice, and the American Way" was exactly for this. But some retards come away from that story thinking Superman was in the right.

No, his thing is that he hates crime. Dealing with corruption is generally treated like a solved problem from the beginning of his career. And even then, it's mainly just 'these cops are taking bribes from 1950s gangsters' stuff. As far as I know, the only time a Batman comic has really dealt with the bad shit cops *actually* do was the Three Ghosts thing from Morrison's run, where a few cops were covering for Bat-Bane while he murdered hookers.
I'll admit I'm a little biased about this topic, though, since my main OC and protagonist of my book is basically 'Batman if his origin story was a cop killing his best friend instead of a criminal killing his parents.'

Literally antonyms you fucking pseudo-pretentious retard, reactionaries fight against some form of change while revolutionaries fight for it.

superheroes aren't real, so they have whatever effect the writer decides they have.

This, it's not complicated.

If reactionaries rise up against a government to enact a change, is it not a revolution?

Not if they were fighting to restore some prior state of affairs, like overthrowing a new government to reinstall the old.

>No, his thing is that he hates crime. Dealing with corruption is generally treated like a solved problem from the beginning of his career.
You 100% don't read comics. At least, certainly not Batman comics.

MCU is partially funded by the CIA and DOD, so it is true that these capeshit movies act as propaganda.

Comic books are bought by people who expect the content to be as advertised. The characters and setting are required to be stagnant.
>pic related
Literally who writes book with a title of meme words about a subgenre of fictional works. I hope he earned nothing for his lack of effort to produce entertainment or progress.
Sometimes (highly marketable) villains are given an excuse as to why they're still around, such as it'd be illegal/anti-government/whatever for the hero to win... because writers are bad and want their villains to have everything-proof shields. That's why people think superheroes are protecting a status quo/bad world.
>He works with the cops constantly.
Gotham's police force don't even have guns half the time, 90% of security is private and the streets are an actual warzone with machineguns, chemical weapons and at least one time an atomic bomb.
The status quo is crime in a decaying slum, not Judge Dredd I am the Law.
You don't know what words mean in a political context.

Attached: batshake.gif (400x300, 1.15M)

...

>copagandish
It's all so tiresome

I always thought they did the "bare minimum" to keep major disasters from happening or people getting hurt so they don't become the omnipotent overlords of the earth. What's that cliche I think even about cops just being Janitors to some extent. And it's probably better that way because for a super hero to enact real change or upset or overthrow the status quo would mean...either forcing people to act according to their will by force or by some cult of personality (i.e. May favorite super heros said do this so I'm doing it without putting any actual thought into the merits of what I'm being told to do). Even a hero running for office in my view seems like an unfair election. Maybe depending on the hero and their supposed range of influence their could be some exceptions. But on scale of the bigger heroes how do most voters not end up voting for the person that, stopped an alien invasion, or knocked a meteor headed towards earth off path.

Even benevolently I can't see heroes making an attempt at lasting change or uprooting the status quo not ending in some form of dictatorship. And at best the benevolent hero realizes this and fucks off and things once again devolve to as they were before.

so going off of this, the most popular form of media today for the vast majority of the world praises the status quo, posits that supermen will fix all problems, that the usa military is the good guys, that rich people will use their money to save the world, and that any negative force against the status quo can be explained away as a tragic backstory or a heartless and evil villain. or alien!

People here bitch but the mcu is about as anti-woke as movies can be. Which makes sense since they're made to appeal to both Amerilards and Chinese.

Because in order to do that they're need to
>Run for politics
or
>Just use their power to make the world however they want
The former could be either really entertaining or boring, Superman running for presidency, might end up feeling pretty preachy. The latter is pretty much just authoritarianism, "I'm stronger than you so it's my way or the highway" shit, which kinda goes against the whole point of a "hero"

They do now. That's why it feels pathetic when you see stuff like Jon protesting climate change when he's fucking Superman, why is he holding a picket sign instead of doing anything more useful?

Remember in Superman IV when he tosses all the world's nukes into the sun? Everybody made fun of it for being silly, and sure it is kind of silly, but it was an example of a hero enacting genuine, lasting change on the world.

Nowadays cape stories are too obsessed with representing a "real" world, but the real world is progressively getting worse in a lot of ways and so it just looks sad and pathetic that none of these heroes actually change anything.

>mcu
>anti-woke
Did you see Falcon and The Winter Soldier? Captain Marvel? Black Widow? Did you know that Dr Strange couldn't save the day in WandaVision because the producers thought it would be mansplaining?

All cyborgs are bastards - said by that guy probably.

Surface level idpol isn't really anything more than a smokescreen, I thought we all knew that. The mcu is still propaganda for corporate interests and defense spending.

Of course they have to protect the Status Quo of they didn't the world they inhabit would driff from our world more and more until it was so different nobody would give a shit.

Attached: and-here-we-go-joker.gif (498x202, 2.15M)

Street level heroes enforce property rights and world destroying heroes don't really give a shit about issues that don't affect them personally. So in a roundabout way, yeah sure.

Batman is actually really interesting because I feel like depending upon the authors interpretation he can range from someone who is basically just a wildcard detective or someone trying to reform the police of their most corrupt elements to someone who is trying to rehabilitate criminals outside of what police could possibly do. The latter I think is underexplored

>the real world is progressively getting worse
No, its only changing to a world where the burger empire is crumbling under its own lard. I dont care for the Han Hive Mind or the Vodkalitosics one bit but better having two or more superpowers keeping each other at check than only one running the show.
And if that drives us to extinction by nuke so be it, we had a good run.

Attached: 5t3uiQtYmCurQPhmDeN7mDvX6FThu-yOOebNrdRrYEo.jpg (678x457, 116.76K)

X-men ruins this whole argument
the point of those stories is that both the heroes and villains are fighting for social and political change but what separates them is the methods of obtaining said change.

I read plenty of Batman comics. Point me to one where the main focus is him dealing with corruption. Not even being sarcastic, I'd be interested in reading it.
>Gotham's police force don't even have guns half the time, 90% of security is private and the streets are an actual warzone with machineguns, chemical weapons and at least one time an atomic bomb.
>The status quo is crime in a decaying slum, not Judge Dredd I am the Law.
Well, yeah, but that's the problem. They're portraying a world where not only are most of the cops good guys, but their militarization is necessary- which is pretty much the opposite of what's true in real life. This is one of my main complaints about White Knight in particular.

I hate the ACAB crowd. Not saying you need to be a total bootlicker or anything, but it's always the people who would be devoured first without any form of law or structure who advocate for the dissolution of the systems that keep them safe.

>Is the only thing you'd consider 'meaningful change' bringing about the communist revolution?
They do.

Anything that shows cops anything more then turbo Satan is copaganda according to these people

They should change society back to the XVIIth century

*as anything

/thread

both right and left hate the cops for different reasons these days; left because of muh dindus and right because they see cops as teeth of the state. Pretty funny when you think about it.

>it just looks sad and pathetic that none of these heroes actually change anything.

If they changed anything it would mean them becoming entirely unaccountable, unilateral authoritarian figures. Is that what you want? Borderline villains?

They don't mean we can't have any law and order. Of course you have extremist who thinks l that but that's a minority and it's a ridiculous strawman to generalize that everyone wants that just to dismiss their criticism. Abolishing the current system is seen as needed action before rebuilding anything in its place because despite decades of efforts the current system keeps protecting its own and covering up for them because it's so rooted in to the culture and hierarchy that you can't exactly fix it without drastic measures. You have plenty of bad apples oyt there who abuse their power on a constant basis because so many cops are schoolyard bullies with a power trip.

We have examples where they will literally laugh at footage of their colleagues manhandling senile people to a point they break an arm because these cops are people who can't handle any situation without immediately jumping to violence, and then they say "nah bruv, you absolutely did the right thing by attacking that confused granny who wasn't a threat to anyone, doing bodily harm was entirely justifiable when she didn't shut up and comply" to condition anyone working there with reservations about such things to think that yes, cops do get to beat up people with dementia without being reprimanded, cops are always in the right by default because they have the badge.

Well, I don't think all strong-arm actions come from a bad place. In some situations, being too relaxed or calm will get you shot or stabbed. A close family friend of mine was a long time state trooper. And he died over nothing.

>routine stop, the dude he pulled over just had a bad tail light
>was super chill the whole time, all smiles
>asked for the dude's license and registration
>looked away for two seconds
>when he turned back, dude had a gun in his face and blew him away

Watchin that dashcam footage really stuck with me. I'm not excusing the actions of anyone who abuses their power. There are dudes like those Mounties who ran the old lady over in Canada. Or people who laugh when they beat up the mentally ill.

But, the world can be a scary place and it's hard to say what I'd do in a situation that called for some more force.

i'd say that superman taking over "assuming he's in character would probably be better than bourgeois democracy were it's oligarchs fuck kids.

>do superheroes just protect the status quo instead of enacting meaningful change.
Yes, and anyone that says otherwise is really kind of coping.
Ask yourself this. In comic book universes, guys like Superman, or the Fantastic Four, or Green Lantern or whoever else are constantly going off into space and doing space shit.
Why do we still have a NASA using the same real looking space shuttles in those universes? Shouldn't they have space travel figured out completely?
They're not allowed to because the super people always hoard their technology because "humanity isn't ready" or whatever excuse they're giving to keep the comic book world reflecting reality.

You're a fucking moron if you can't see that the intended subtext for superhero shit is just status quo, centrist propaganda.

Attached: 25507497438_ffe0604b33_b.jpg (585x453, 71.71K)

[walking up to a homeless man] You're a fucking moron if you can't see that the intended subtext for superhero shit is just status quo, centrist propaganda.

The ACAB crowd hates law enforcement, not because the cops abuse power, but because the ACABs aren't the ones benefiting from the abuse. Make it so their political enemies are jailed for practically nothing, and they would be calling every cop a hero.

Sounds a bit like projection

I've spent a lot of time listening to anti capitalist rhetoric in my youth and ACAB comes from the same place, because they already have an overlap. Bitterness that you're not the guy on top,.and thinking you deserve to be.

And what was the outlet for this rhetoric?

wait a fucking second.
HOLD THE FUCKING PHONE
that last lady is from a chick tract.
She's from the fucking D&D tract, I'm pretty fucking certain.

>Why don't superheroes just become benevolent dictators?!
Such a new take.

Lots of time seething about any perceived slight against them, and thinking the powers that be are obliged to help you in life with minor or major shit.

>muh realist heroes
Unless they overthrow entire governments, institutions and kill around 3 billion people, there's no such thing as changing the status quo.
And then you'd have to account for other heroes and villains in the scene.

I think it's pretty telling that everyone always jumps to "they'd just be dictators" and not "maybe Reed Richards could sell his inventions for once"

>Reed sells his inventions
>Some schmuck from Tijuana reverse engineers them and turns into a weapon of mass destruction

Making "meaningful change" inevitably leads to the common desire to be ruled by a benevolent force. People generally don't like freedom. It puts the responsibility on themselves. People want to be taken care of.

That would still be a departure from the status quo.

>do superheroes just protect the status quo instead of enacting meaningful change.

your premise is idiotic.

>pic related
He deals with superhero movies, shallower than the kiddie pool.

Because you're just focusing on the inventor superhero aspect. How would someone like Superman or Aquaman implement change, if not by brute force and ignoring laws?

It would only cement that you can't departure from status quo.

>How would someone like Superman or Aquaman implement change,
Superman could share some of the space tech he has or be an ambassador for the various alien races that are somehow omnipresent on earth in DC but haven't changed life in anyway whatsoever.
(Which on a semi related note is why man of steel is such an obnoxious movie)
Aquaman...I dunno. You'd think the fact that he's the king of a sovereign nation that takes up 70% of the earth would *matter* in some way but he and Atlantis might as well not exist in the grand scheme of things. If we started dumping toxic waste into...well maybe not Mexico, but Canada, it might look bad. But Aquaman just sort of whines about it and eats it because otherwise that'd be a departure from real life.

Capitalism is inherently good

Oh don't worry, ACAB are the biggest bootlickers there are, the boot is just red fascism.