The Batman (2022)

→ in
Tools    





The idea of superheroes as fascists dates back (at least) to Dr. Frederic Wertham's war on comic books (as compiled in his book Seduction of the Innocent) which led to the Congressional hearings on comic books in 1954.

However, Hitler banned Superman comics in Germany at one point simply because the character was powerful, American and fought Nazis.



The idea of superheroes as fascists dates back (at least) to Dr. Frederic Wertham's war on comic books (as compiled in his book Seduction of the Innocent) which led to the Congressional hearings on comic books in 1954.

However, Hitler banned Superman comics in Germany at one point simply because the character was powerful, American and fought Nazis.

And Coke sold Nazis Fanta, IBM sold them Hollerith tabulation machines, Chase and Siemans banked with them and we still firebombed Dresden and Japan and we still plucked German scientists in Operation Paperclip to get the moon. None of this, however, really settles the question of whether comic book heroes embody fascist or proto-fascist ideology.



And Coke sold Nazis Fanta, IBM sold them Hollerith tabulation machines, Chase and Siemans banked with them and we still firebombed Dresden and Japan and we still plucked German scientists in Operation Paperclip to get the moon. None of this, however, really settles the question of whether comic book heroes embody fascist or proto-fascist ideology.
Wernher von Braun - now there's an interesting historical figure. He's said to have known the secrets about UFO's.



Batman uses violence to solve problems
To be perfectly honest, there are tons of problems that could be solved with violence (some probably can't be solved without at least some of it).
__________________



To be perfectly honest, there are tons of problems that could be solved with violence (some probably can't be solved without at least some of it).

I feel like this statement unintentionally supports Corax's point.



Victim of The Night
I feel like this statement unintentionally supports Corax's point.
That doesn't mean it's wrong.
Violence does not equal fascism.



That doesn't mean it's wrong.
Violence does not equal fascism.

I think the division in this thread might spring from how much one associates vigilantism with proto-fascists, or sees a streak of a vigilantism mentality in proto-fascists (and not so proto in their fascism).


But to the post I responded to, let's imagine a Venn diagram of these sets.
1. Problems that could be solved by violence
2. (Some) Problems that need to be solved with at least some violence
3. Set 1 - Set 2 = Set of problems that could be solved without violence
4. And then kind of think of what proportion the subset of number 3 that would be, "Problems that could be solved by violence but probably shouldn't be." Probably a large percentage. What's the ratio of #2 to #1, probably a low percentage.


We'll also throw in a wrinkle of number 4 - problems that shouldn't be solved by extra-judicial violence. And vigilantism often has that baked into the system in these type of stories. Or, I guess. I haven't seen The Batman, but probably like most people in this thread, have read The Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen.



To be perfectly honest, there are tons of problems that could be solved with violence (some probably can't be solved without at least some of it).




We'll also throw in a wrinkle of number 4 - problems that shouldn't be solved by extra-judicial violence. And vigilantism often has that baked into the system in these type of stories.
This is a particular concern. The superhero's right to extra-judicial violence is underwritten by their ability to coerce (via super powers).

Consider the flip-side of Spider Man's mantra

With great power comes great responsibility
The innocent "happy face" reading of this statement is, "Hey, you shouldn't use your great power any way you please. You have a responsibility not harm people with all of that unearned privilege!"

The statement, however, also functions as justification for the powerful to take it upon themselves to break from the herd, convention, and law to set things aright. "Hey, you have all this power! You have a great responsibility to punch evil in the mouth!"

Read in this second way and Spider Man has a responsibility to engage in using extrajudicial violence, because that is his great responsibility, his unique burden, his struggle.

There is, however, a reason why we give the state a monopoly on initiating force on others. This is the exchange we make for leaving the Hobbesean state in which anyone may do anything and the strongest man or largest mob succeeds by sheer might. We exit the war of all against all in exchange for leaving the right to initiate the use of force to the state.

The superhero casually excuses him/herself from the social contract on the basis of some apparent exigency which only they can address. Once the problem is solved, however, the hero remains as the unelected champion of their city. And there is always another problem, another villain around the corner. Just as their is nothing more permanent than a temporary government program, there is nothing more permanent than the super hero franchise. Eventually, they unify with other champions who are above the law and hang out in a Hall of Justice or Stark Tower.

The message is that we need people who are better and stronger than us to use primitive coercive solutions (e.g., punching, kicking, smashing, zapping, freezing, burning) to directly deal with societal threats without interference from the government or international community (we'll play nice until Thanos arrives, but after he's here, the Avengers will assemble and you can wipe your backside with those Sokovia Accords).

It's not that the world is complicated and that there are dilemmas of morality and principle and that we should work together to find mature solutions around which we can unify, but rather that we should
  1. Identify the "bad" people responsible for our ills.
  2. Let our "heroes" break the law to violently suppress them and be grateful that they're there to handle the next threat.
  3. Rinse and Repeat.
That this is the predominant fantasy of our society is not indicative of a healthy culture.



That this is the predominant fantasy of our society is not indicative of a healthy culture.
Our culture hasn't been healthy for a long time (and in various respects it never has been, nor have few others).



My notion about violence wasn't about superheroes or vigilantes; violence remains violence, even if it's done/approved by the government. In an ideal society, there isn't a need for vigilantism (and no, I'm not even trying to define what ideal means in practice - it's most likely an unreachable utopia anyway). If all problems could be solved without violence, what is the "reason why we give the state a monopoly on initiating force on others"

And as Starship Troopers was brought up, I think the society, as it's described in the book, isn't half bad.



To be perfectly honest, there are tons of problems that could be solved with violence (some probably can't be solved without at least some of it).
or sex.




This is more like it.



The idea of superheroes as fascists dates back (at least) to Dr. Frederic Wertham's war on comic books (as compiled in his book Seduction of the Innocent) which led to the Congressional hearings on comic books in 1954.

However, Hitler banned Superman comics in Germany at one point simply because the character was powerful, American and fought Nazis.
A guy like Hitler could not stand an alternate source of power or influence. It was HIS power, not Superman. That's what I mean about the use of the word fascist or its more malignant cousin, nazi. In spite of its cultural migration, having been used in lots of contexts, the word does have a meaning, derived from the Latin word for a bundle of sticks, which are stronger together than separately. It's that forced cohesion that defines fascism. Superman, Batman, etc, are none of those, since they are individuals, and report to nobody.



Wernher von Braun - now there's an interesting historical figure. He's said to have known the secrets about UFO's.
It's more of a historical topic, but Von Braun was one of a bunch of German scientists that came to the US after the war, preferring to be American commodities rather than Soviet ones. He was, of course, one of the models for Doctor Strangelove.



A guy like Hitler could not stand an alternate source of power or influence. It was HIS power, not Superman. That's what I mean about the use of the word fascist or its more malignant cousin, nazi. In spite of its cultural migration, having been used in lots of contexts, the word does have a meaning, derived from the Latin word for a bundle of sticks, which are stronger together than separately. It's that forced cohesion that defines fascism. Superman, Batman, etc, are none of those, since they are individuals, and report to nobody.
So... that would make the banding together of mystery men & superpowered vigilantes in such groups as the Justice Society or Justice League the Fascist League?



And as Starship Troopers was brought up, I think the society, as it's described in the book, isn't half bad.

Which threatens the other endless debate about whether the book itself is fascist or just militaristic. Paul Verhoeven obviously leaned into fascism in the movies (just look at the outfits and propaganda reels), but we could debate that as well.



In today's world, it seems far more likely to get you in trouble than to get you out of one

Likewise, a lot of problems that can be solved with violence (and even ones that have to be solved with violence) usually create a lot more problems when one does so.



So... that would make the banding together of mystery men & superpowered vigilantes in such groups as the Justice Society or Justice League the Fascist League?
Just my guess, but they would seem like more of an oligarchy, rule by a small elite. I think the terms can blend together.