All the accusations that batman just runs around punching poor people but I'd like to see a social worker stop a guy dressed like a fridge from destroying the city with a freeze ray.
It's an origin story for Bruce Wayne, millionaire playboy philanthropist. In The Batman, he's an obsessive weirdo no one likes, a recluse who gets the "well look who came out of their cave" treatment everytime he makes a public appearance. He's jaded not just on the death of his parents but the futility of their philanthropy; the funds that were supposed to help orphans were mismanaged and embezzled, creating more criminals.
Yeah i saw the movie and that's obviously going to be the angle when it was written to be that way from minute one. But the sum of all batman media is more about stopping supervillains that could level a city than it is improving minimum wage so some guy doesn't have to hench for the joker to put food on the table. Playboy philanthropist is a fine angle for Bruce Wayne and afaik he usually is big on funding anything that'll improve Gotham and reduce crime rates but the point of putting on the costume is specifically to stop criminals the police have no chance of dealing with.
>Hi, this is my 62th 'Batman is a fascist, he should just donate his money' hot take of the week!
Shut up, I'm tired of reading this trash every other day!
There's no metropolis in this world that is one billionaire-donates-his-money away from becoming a crimeless utopia. None at all, zero. Such things are not a matter of "just throw money at it". New York's annual spending is bigger than the liquid fortune of any single billionaire in the world. By May 2020, 15 trillion dollars globally had been dedicated to covid-related welfare. By the logic of "throw money at it", the world should be an utopia by now. It isn't because this "logic" never made any sense.
You show great faith not only in money, but also in the institutions. The "throw money at it" approach never accounts for corruption, of which Gotham doesn't lack. In The Batman (2022), how much of the "Renewal Fund" reached the people of Gotham? Nothing. It all ended up in the hands of the mafia and the city officials. If Bruce Wayne's approach to improving Gotham was simply "I will liquidate all my assets and give it to the city", the most likely result of it would be a much richer Carmine Falcone, while the population at large wouldn't see a single penny.
And yes, objectively, when Victor Zsasz is holding a knife to a woman's throat, going out there and punching Zsasz in his face will do much more for the woman than some donation to the GCPD.
I understand that you read some Twitter threads, listened to some podcasts and Twitch streamers and are now eager to share your amazing EUREKA moment regarding money and violence and class and Batman. But you picked the wrong target. Of all pop-culture characters, I don't think there's any that is shown doing more charity and donating his money than Batman. Pick his movies, his comics, his books, his TV shows, his games, you name it, it's always there. How can anyone miss it is a mystery for the ages.
>How can anyone miss it is a mystery for the ages.
Not really, it’s pretty easy to understand: >most Batman fans are casuals who don’t read comics >Batman movies only give his charitable activities a very small amount of screentime as so not to take too much time away from the action >Batman video games mostly talk about his charity stuff in side lore that most casuals won’t read (and the few that do only skim over it, not really paying attention) >Batman cartoons bring it up a lot but "cartoons are for children" so most casuals aren’t going to actually pay attention and the actual children that are watching ignore the Bruce Wayne parts because they’re waiting for the Batman sections
If you want to end this meme about how "Batman hates the poor" then what you need to do is in every adaptation you have to have Bruce look directly into the camera and loudly say "NOW THAT I HAVE FINISHED CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS FOR THE DAY, I WILL PUT ON MY COSTUMES AND FIGHT THE BAD PEOPLE IN SOCIETY WHO CONTRIBUTE TO SOCIAL DECLINE" because that’s the only way they would take notice.
SMBC short about the slippery slope written by the same guy as the comic. How many boxes mentioned in the "nightmare scenario" have been ticked in just 10 years?
This guy clearly doesn't read the comics. Batman/Bruce uses his wealth to help people as well, he paid for people's education and gave them jobs on a few occasions.
Several comics show him doing actual work for his company and therefore putting labor into it.
And he never required Robin to do Robin shit just to keep the roof over his head.
I have a feeling the same people who call Batman a cryptofascist for beatinf up thugs would demand that Kenshiro would be given the death penalty for what he does to them.
>Why the frick aren't this guy's comics deleted on sight?
The blade of tolerance cuts one way, and Assigned Male is so bad it actually makes people more conservative after seeing it so that can't be allowed.
A lot of people seem to struggle with the basic premise of Batman, the notion that Gotham is simply too corrupt for any conventional solution to its rampant crime.
And his solutions are to never push for a different system where that wouldn't be possible. He doesn't punch CEOs gutting employee benefits for share holder profits, he does attack the concept of share holder profits. What are his thoughts on lobbyists?
A lot of people seem to struggle with the basic premise of Batman, the notion that Gotham is simply too corrupt for any conventional solution to its rampant crime.
https://i.imgur.com/6ZEO8br.jpg
Huh....I never thought of it like that
Both sides are right
The meta philosophical argument that Batman's method of fighting crime is inefficient and ineffective is unquestionably correct, as is the point that Batman can't solve crime through societal means because it's boring and kills the setting and ends the franchise.
The only time Bruce is allowed to see or cause any actual change is in epilogues.
The meta philosophical argument that Batman's method of fighting crime is inefficient and ineffective is unquestionably correct, as is the point that Batman can't solve crime through societal means because it's boring and kills the setting and ends the franchise.
The only time Bruce is allowed to see or cause any actual change is in epilogues.
>proving the point
What part of "Gotham is simply too corrupt for any conventional solution to its rampant crime" do you not understand.
Any smartass "real" solution to Gotham's crime can be assumed to have been tried and failed.
If you can't accept that, you shouldn't be reading or even commenting on Batman. It's as foolish as complaying about superpowers being unrealistic.
>What part of "Gotham is simply too corrupt for any conventional solution to its rampant crime" do you not understand.
Gotham is fricking fictional. It's a noir setting.
Keep up.
>Any smartass "real" solution to Gotham's crime can be assumed to have been tried and failed.
That's what The Batman addressed; the Wayne fund failed because of corruption and the children it was meant to save became terrorists. You can't punch government corruption, but you can be an active part in politics and project management instead of just playing bat detective to solve crimes after they happened rather than address the conditions that make crime.
>but you can be an active part in politics and project management instead of just playing bat detective
Yes, that's what he does during the day, in junction with running his company.
Anyone that says the only thing he does is run around in his long johns has never read the comics.
The OP is a joke comic and The Batman was a "what if Bruce was a just a weird recluse" story. The commentary about a billionaire fighting crime with his fists is just funny out of context.
That's not bait, that's just the movie. It's different than the comics.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Yes, the movie ends with Batman deciding he needs to do more philantropic and political work.
And obviously that's going to fail, otherwise there's no room for sequels.
Because the basic premise of Batman is that conventional solutions won't work for Gotham.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's not going to fail, it just doesn't stop all crime. By that logic, Batman shouldn't do anything because he never stops all crime.
2 years ago
Anonymous
The real answer is that Gotham City is faced with 2 separate issues. Systematic ones like corruption and poverty, and supervillains. It doesn't matter how much money Bruce spends on anti-corruption and social programs when the Joker rounds up a gang of fanboys and burns down the town, and by the same ticket it doesn't matter how many times Batman punches Joker in the face when kids are going hungry. Saying it should be one or the other means he'd only be addressing half the problem.
Also this argument overlooks that canonically Bruce has had a major impact on improving Gotham City since he first showed up by specific actions taken against systematic issues.
2 years ago
Anonymous
The Joker henchman problem is like the incel problem: They're systemic in that feeling of disenfranchised or aggrievence that leads one down that path can be lessened. Of course you're not going to save everyone, "some men just want to watch the world burn" but just saying that and shrugging does more harm than good.
I'm tired of explaining to homosexuals that Wayne Industries does its best to help Gotham, Bruce Wayne himself donates to charity, Batman doesn't just beat everyone all willy-nilly and does put effort into helping criminals turn a new leaf.
IT'S JUST THAT BY THE NATURE OF THE BEAST GOTHAM IS NEVER SUPPOSED TO GET BETTER AND HE'LL ALWAYS HAVE TO PUNCH SOMEONE BECAUSE THAT SELLS COMICS
Not to mention half the villains are just straight-up lunatics with no money issues. Hell, Penguin is also a billionaire and he uses his money FOR crime.
Hell, instead of jail, many of those villains get thrown to an Asylum that frankly, has gotten better in recent years so there's clear care for their mental health.
>White >Lives in first world country >Lives a life better than 90% of the planet despite providing nothing of value to human race
If we showed this to some Pajeet coal miner and ask him how he feels that this dude makes more in a week than he does in a year.... I wouldn't blame the thirdie to put all his life saving just to fly to usa to shank this moron
I'd find this remotely funny if this take wasn't the exact same one brought up dead ass seriously by so many brainlets instead of being brought up as a joke
To the point even the bat books themselves suck out all the fun of it
>Who writes this shit
Well-meaning kids that wouldn't be making a living writing comic books if they had a strong grasp of accounting.
It doesn't make their opinions or ideals wrong, but it does make them annoying.
If anything, I think Bruce Wayne does a little too much for Gotham. Dude's basically a feudal lord, he owns and runs almost everything and donates to what he doesn't.
Gotham is completely dependent on him, the city would probably collapse if his cash flow stopped.
I think Weinersmith & his wife are the only people who hate capeshit more than Garth Ennis but it's always from this weird communist point of view like an old Pravda comic strip.
This is too complex for Batman. Here's how it really is: Batman is just a spoiled brat. A big fat baby in a onesie who doesn't want to do anything other than play with his toys all the time. This is why he doesn't kill his villains, because they're HIS toys, and if he breaks his toys, he can't play with them anymore. This is why Batman hems and haws and says that Gotham can't change. Because he doesn't WANT it to change. If there weren't supervillains and criminals constantly wreaking havoc, Batman wouldn't have anything to do. So he'd rather let the supervillains go to an easily escapable prison and keep terrorising innocent people, and he'd rather let a psychopath like the Joker live, because he wants to preserve the status quo where he gets to keep doing whatever he wants and frick everyone else because he's Batman.
communist superman will stop this fiend!
>a piece of paper
AAAAIIIIIIEEEEE SAVE ME LENIN
frick yo paper
I really fricking hate the popularity of this and superman's version of this.
Also specially bad because Superman got old in that comic
I don't like this one either
This one is at least kind of creative. The first one in OP is tired gay boring tripe everyone has heard before
There is always Wonder Woman
who the frick talks like this?
An ethics hypothetical.
Every man who uses Twitter needs to be executed
That's pretty much the plot of The Batman; recognizing societal and systemic causes of crime is part of preventing crime.
All the accusations that batman just runs around punching poor people but I'd like to see a social worker stop a guy dressed like a fridge from destroying the city with a freeze ray.
It's an origin story for Bruce Wayne, millionaire playboy philanthropist. In The Batman, he's an obsessive weirdo no one likes, a recluse who gets the "well look who came out of their cave" treatment everytime he makes a public appearance. He's jaded not just on the death of his parents but the futility of their philanthropy; the funds that were supposed to help orphans were mismanaged and embezzled, creating more criminals.
Yeah i saw the movie and that's obviously going to be the angle when it was written to be that way from minute one. But the sum of all batman media is more about stopping supervillains that could level a city than it is improving minimum wage so some guy doesn't have to hench for the joker to put food on the table. Playboy philanthropist is a fine angle for Bruce Wayne and afaik he usually is big on funding anything that'll improve Gotham and reduce crime rates but the point of putting on the costume is specifically to stop criminals the police have no chance of dealing with.
This but unironically, that sounds like a great concept for a comic book.
>Hi, this is my 62th 'Batman is a fascist, he should just donate his money' hot take of the week!
Shut up, I'm tired of reading this trash every other day!
There's no metropolis in this world that is one billionaire-donates-his-money away from becoming a crimeless utopia. None at all, zero. Such things are not a matter of "just throw money at it". New York's annual spending is bigger than the liquid fortune of any single billionaire in the world. By May 2020, 15 trillion dollars globally had been dedicated to covid-related welfare. By the logic of "throw money at it", the world should be an utopia by now. It isn't because this "logic" never made any sense.
You show great faith not only in money, but also in the institutions. The "throw money at it" approach never accounts for corruption, of which Gotham doesn't lack. In The Batman (2022), how much of the "Renewal Fund" reached the people of Gotham? Nothing. It all ended up in the hands of the mafia and the city officials. If Bruce Wayne's approach to improving Gotham was simply "I will liquidate all my assets and give it to the city", the most likely result of it would be a much richer Carmine Falcone, while the population at large wouldn't see a single penny.
And yes, objectively, when Victor Zsasz is holding a knife to a woman's throat, going out there and punching Zsasz in his face will do much more for the woman than some donation to the GCPD.
I understand that you read some Twitter threads, listened to some podcasts and Twitch streamers and are now eager to share your amazing EUREKA moment regarding money and violence and class and Batman. But you picked the wrong target. Of all pop-culture characters, I don't think there's any that is shown doing more charity and donating his money than Batman. Pick his movies, his comics, his books, his TV shows, his games, you name it, it's always there. How can anyone miss it is a mystery for the ages.
>welfare bad
correct. batman should not donate his wealth, his workers should seize his means of production.
Think you meant to respond to someone else buddy
>How can anyone miss it is a mystery for the ages.
Not really, it’s pretty easy to understand:
>most Batman fans are casuals who don’t read comics
>Batman movies only give his charitable activities a very small amount of screentime as so not to take too much time away from the action
>Batman video games mostly talk about his charity stuff in side lore that most casuals won’t read (and the few that do only skim over it, not really paying attention)
>Batman cartoons bring it up a lot but "cartoons are for children" so most casuals aren’t going to actually pay attention and the actual children that are watching ignore the Bruce Wayne parts because they’re waiting for the Batman sections
If you want to end this meme about how "Batman hates the poor" then what you need to do is in every adaptation you have to have Bruce look directly into the camera and loudly say "NOW THAT I HAVE FINISHED CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS FOR THE DAY, I WILL PUT ON MY COSTUMES AND FIGHT THE BAD PEOPLE IN SOCIETY WHO CONTRIBUTE TO SOCIAL DECLINE" because that’s the only way they would take notice.
It's a joke, homosexual. A billionaire using violence against bank robbers with the help of an unpaid orphan "intern" is funny.
If it’s a joke shouldn’t it be funny?
SMBC short about the slippery slope written by the same guy as the comic. How many boxes mentioned in the "nightmare scenario" have been ticked in just 10 years?
This guy clearly doesn't read the comics. Batman/Bruce uses his wealth to help people as well, he paid for people's education and gave them jobs on a few occasions.
Several comics show him doing actual work for his company and therefore putting labor into it.
And he never required Robin to do Robin shit just to keep the roof over his head.
I like SMBC, it still has far more hits than misses
My favorite one. I just can't help but imagine that scientist sodomizing the poor reporter.
>Joker: hero of the working class.
Directed by Todd Phillips
In theaters 2027
I have a feeling the same people who call Batman a cryptofascist for beatinf up thugs would demand that Kenshiro would be given the death penalty for what he does to them.
Politics only allowed when its leftist commie bullshit. Mods are gays.
Why the frick aren't this guy's comics deleted on sight? This is just /misc/ bait, hardly any better than Stone toss or assigned male.
Nobody before has ever bothered to read them if they're posted
Is assigned male banned on sight now?
To be fair, his stuff is varied. But then again, so's Stonetoss. Like the one about obnonxious cyclists.
>Why the frick aren't this guy's comics deleted on sight?
The blade of tolerance cuts one way, and Assigned Male is so bad it actually makes people more conservative after seeing it so that can't be allowed.
A lot of people seem to struggle with the basic premise of Batman, the notion that Gotham is simply too corrupt for any conventional solution to its rampant crime.
And his solutions are to never push for a different system where that wouldn't be possible. He doesn't punch CEOs gutting employee benefits for share holder profits, he does attack the concept of share holder profits. What are his thoughts on lobbyists?
Both sides are right
The meta philosophical argument that Batman's method of fighting crime is inefficient and ineffective is unquestionably correct, as is the point that Batman can't solve crime through societal means because it's boring and kills the setting and ends the franchise.
The only time Bruce is allowed to see or cause any actual change is in epilogues.
>proving the point
What part of "Gotham is simply too corrupt for any conventional solution to its rampant crime" do you not understand.
Any smartass "real" solution to Gotham's crime can be assumed to have been tried and failed.
If you can't accept that, you shouldn't be reading or even commenting on Batman. It's as foolish as complaying about superpowers being unrealistic.
>What part of "Gotham is simply too corrupt for any conventional solution to its rampant crime" do you not understand.
Gotham is fricking fictional. It's a noir setting.
Keep up.
>Any smartass "real" solution to Gotham's crime can be assumed to have been tried and failed.
That's what The Batman addressed; the Wayne fund failed because of corruption and the children it was meant to save became terrorists. You can't punch government corruption, but you can be an active part in politics and project management instead of just playing bat detective to solve crimes after they happened rather than address the conditions that make crime.
>but you can be an active part in politics and project management instead of just playing bat detective
Yes, that's what he does during the day, in junction with running his company.
Anyone that says the only thing he does is run around in his long johns has never read the comics.
The OP is a joke comic and The Batman was a "what if Bruce was a just a weird recluse" story. The commentary about a billionaire fighting crime with his fists is just funny out of context.
>still suggesting conventional solutions to Gotham's crime
Am I being baited?
That's not bait, that's just the movie. It's different than the comics.
Yes, the movie ends with Batman deciding he needs to do more philantropic and political work.
And obviously that's going to fail, otherwise there's no room for sequels.
Because the basic premise of Batman is that conventional solutions won't work for Gotham.
It's not going to fail, it just doesn't stop all crime. By that logic, Batman shouldn't do anything because he never stops all crime.
The real answer is that Gotham City is faced with 2 separate issues. Systematic ones like corruption and poverty, and supervillains. It doesn't matter how much money Bruce spends on anti-corruption and social programs when the Joker rounds up a gang of fanboys and burns down the town, and by the same ticket it doesn't matter how many times Batman punches Joker in the face when kids are going hungry. Saying it should be one or the other means he'd only be addressing half the problem.
Also this argument overlooks that canonically Bruce has had a major impact on improving Gotham City since he first showed up by specific actions taken against systematic issues.
The Joker henchman problem is like the incel problem: They're systemic in that feeling of disenfranchised or aggrievence that leads one down that path can be lessened. Of course you're not going to save everyone, "some men just want to watch the world burn" but just saying that and shrugging does more harm than good.
>I made a Batman movie about how Batman shouldn't be Batman
I'm tired of explaining to homosexuals that Wayne Industries does its best to help Gotham, Bruce Wayne himself donates to charity, Batman doesn't just beat everyone all willy-nilly and does put effort into helping criminals turn a new leaf.
IT'S JUST THAT BY THE NATURE OF THE BEAST GOTHAM IS NEVER SUPPOSED TO GET BETTER AND HE'LL ALWAYS HAVE TO PUNCH SOMEONE BECAUSE THAT SELLS COMICS
GODDAMN
SAME REASON JOKER ISN'T DEAD. MONEY.
A billionaire working to maintain the status quo with illegal violence and the help of an unpaid kid is funny.
It is, but homosexuals like the comic posted in OP take it too far.
Not to mention half the villains are just straight-up lunatics with no money issues. Hell, Penguin is also a billionaire and he uses his money FOR crime.
Hell, instead of jail, many of those villains get thrown to an Asylum that frankly, has gotten better in recent years so there's clear care for their mental health.
And then there's mafia and organized crime, yes.
>meanwhile, in actual Batman comics...
Wouldn't it be wild if some salty homosexual tried to retcon that Batman pissed himself for some stupid reason during this scene?
Isn’t this the weedy little bastard who thinks people being fit is bad?
>White
>Lives in first world country
>Lives a life better than 90% of the planet despite providing nothing of value to human race
If we showed this to some Pajeet coal miner and ask him how he feels that this dude makes more in a week than he does in a year.... I wouldn't blame the thirdie to put all his life saving just to fly to usa to shank this moron
I'd find this remotely funny if this take wasn't the exact same one brought up dead ass seriously by so many brainlets instead of being brought up as a joke
To the point even the bat books themselves suck out all the fun of it
>20k
Did she seriously spaz out over pocket change for an operation that will eat through those funds in 1-2 months? Who writes this shit?
>Who writes this shit
Well-meaning kids that wouldn't be making a living writing comic books if they had a strong grasp of accounting.
It doesn't make their opinions or ideals wrong, but it does make them annoying.
If anything, I think Bruce Wayne does a little too much for Gotham. Dude's basically a feudal lord, he owns and runs almost everything and donates to what he doesn't.
Gotham is completely dependent on him, the city would probably collapse if his cash flow stopped.
I think Weinersmith & his wife are the only people who hate capeshit more than Garth Ennis but it's always from this weird communist point of view like an old Pravda comic strip.
This is too complex for Batman. Here's how it really is: Batman is just a spoiled brat. A big fat baby in a onesie who doesn't want to do anything other than play with his toys all the time. This is why he doesn't kill his villains, because they're HIS toys, and if he breaks his toys, he can't play with them anymore. This is why Batman hems and haws and says that Gotham can't change. Because he doesn't WANT it to change. If there weren't supervillains and criminals constantly wreaking havoc, Batman wouldn't have anything to do. So he'd rather let the supervillains go to an easily escapable prison and keep terrorising innocent people, and he'd rather let a psychopath like the Joker live, because he wants to preserve the status quo where he gets to keep doing whatever he wants and frick everyone else because he's Batman.