I was on Clark's side up until he decided to take over the world. If he had just killed Joker and moved on, I'd have had his back but alas Big Daddy Bat is in the right.
Genuinely, I don’t think there’s any iteration of Superman that wouldn’t kill Joker after the specific crimes he committed in Injustice. Most iterations wouldn’t become world dictators afterwards, but every single one of them would kill the Joker.
Most probably would become way more hardline after Joker pushes them that far, even if they don't go full dictator. Superserters don't wanna admit it but it's true. Superman's not gonna kill Joker for murdering Lois BUT THEN tolerate, say, Black Manta killing Aquaman's baby again, or Zoom killing Flash's babies again, or Darkseid killing people in Metropolis again, or...
See what I mean? Once Superman is pushed that far from Joker he'll instantly come to see how hypocritical it would be if he tolerated every other villain who does similar shit.
Genuinely, I don’t think there’s any iteration of Superman that wouldn’t kill Joker after the specific crimes he committed in Injustice. Most iterations wouldn’t become world dictators afterwards, but every single one of them would kill the Joker.
Most heros would kill the joker after they nuke their city, and kill their wife and child. I think only members of the bat family wouldn't.
he and harley only gutted her like a fish, put a canister of fear gas inside of her, a nuclear detonator and most likely aborted her baby in the process, you know, the usual clown joke.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
But Superman killed her. It's called Injustice because the true killer of Lois Lane was never held accountable for his crime.
Most probably would become way more hardline after Joker pushes them that far, even if they don't go full dictator. Superserters don't wanna admit it but it's true. Superman's not gonna kill Joker for murdering Lois BUT THEN tolerate, say, Black Manta killing Aquaman's baby again, or Zoom killing Flash's babies again, or Darkseid killing people in Metropolis again, or...
See what I mean? Once Superman is pushed that far from Joker he'll instantly come to see how hypocritical it would be if he tolerated every other villain who does similar shit.
This, Superman would become a dictator because there's no other choice. First step is killing crazed supervillains like Joker or Manta (who kill thousands in their entire lifetime).
Next step is killing politicians (who kill hundred thousands in months).
Next step is realising the corporate world and geopolitics kills Millions in weeks
Supergays wanna whine that Superman would never become a dictator because it seems evil and they are obsessed with optics, but Superman has no choice but to become a dictator, unless he wants to willingly allow millions of people to experience the same grief he did.
This is literally what Alan Moore meant when he called superheroes a pipeline to fascism.
When you're someone with a frick ton of power who has been given the license by society to essentially go around kicking the shit out of "evil", then "he who fights monsters" immediately comes into play when you realize how many people can frick over millions with the flick of a pen.
>This is literally what Alan Moore meant when he called superheroes a pipeline to fascism.
I agree. As a fascist sympathizer myself I think all the liberals did was obscure the message built into the system. But I don't agree with your reasoning. It's a pipeline because it establishes power/force as the fundamental governing principle and has irrevocable Nietzschean principles built in. Where I think you/the liberals are wrong is they can't wrap their head around the idea that the whole purpose of a government or policing force (and by police I mean army, cops, vigilante, any 'protector' or 'guardian') is to use overwhelming violence to maintain a certain order. The super hero stuff says over and over that the only way to maintain an order is force. By the very nature of the genre they don't talk things out or compromise. If that was the primary means of solving problems it wouldn't be a super hero story.
I guarantee noone would complain about Injustice if Superman's "dictatorship" looked like a paradise, like how Miracleman ended. It's all about optics, noone actually cares that Superman is a dictator just that it looks bad on his homosexual wholesome image
>I was on Clark's side up until he decided to take over the world.
If the choice is between a world where any supervillain is freely allowed to use weapons of mass destruction against your city. And superman being a dictator.
I think its pretty hard to pick batmans side. Also it's implied that at the end batman is running the world from the shadows via Wayne corps financial power.
>was on Clark's side up until he decided to take over the world. If he had just killed Joker and moved on
Wonder Woman was constantly in his ear telling him that he's doing the right thing, after questioning himself if he's going to far. Of course this was all shown in the comics.
This is the same programming as any other piece of occult fiction. They do the same thing over and over again. How are people entertained by this shit. They don't do anything different.
Superman.
Ares the god of war who draws power from violence and conflict loses his power during Superman's reign and in the sequel the people are begging for Superman to be released.
The point is that Superman is in the wrong for trying to fix and later control the world the way he did, but Batman was barely doing anything to pull Superman out of his spiraling, and in some cases even agitated the issue. The only leading character that was truly squeaky clean and in the right during Injustice was fricking He-Man.
batman enabled crime and freed all the super villains while superman put them behind bars, this for some reason was a bad thing and not what the justice league has been trying to do since the beginning.
No one was right, but Batman was wronger than Superman.
All Batman did was escalating the situation and create a civil war between the heroes that led to the deaths of his friends and colleagues. He should've known better... sided with Superman as a friend and advisor, so he could keep him in check and manipulate him into the right direction.
At worst the world would end up in an Authority or Justice Lords state, thats a lot better than whats the Injsutice universe ends up.
Superman is the villain. It couldn't be any more obvious.
me
Batman side simps for Harley Quinn so Batman's side killed way more people than Superman's has.
I was on Clark's side up until he decided to take over the world. If he had just killed Joker and moved on, I'd have had his back but alas Big Daddy Bat is in the right.
Batman's side protects Harley. If you think killing Joker is right then Batman is wrong for not beating Harley to death.
>Muhhhhhhhh HARLEYYYYYYY
I swear these are Jokergays seething. No Batman doesn't have to 'beat Harley to death'. Cope, seethe, and dilate homosexuals.
Go simp for her mass-murderer ass somewhere else, dyke
Genuinely, I don’t think there’s any iteration of Superman that wouldn’t kill Joker after the specific crimes he committed in Injustice. Most iterations wouldn’t become world dictators afterwards, but every single one of them would kill the Joker.
Most probably would become way more hardline after Joker pushes them that far, even if they don't go full dictator. Superserters don't wanna admit it but it's true. Superman's not gonna kill Joker for murdering Lois BUT THEN tolerate, say, Black Manta killing Aquaman's baby again, or Zoom killing Flash's babies again, or Darkseid killing people in Metropolis again, or...
See what I mean? Once Superman is pushed that far from Joker he'll instantly come to see how hypocritical it would be if he tolerated every other villain who does similar shit.
Most heros would kill the joker after they nuke their city, and kill their wife and child. I think only members of the bat family wouldn't.
Pretty sure some of the batfamily would.
>Most heros would kill the joker after they nuke their city, and kill their wife and child.
Joker didn't kill Lois.
he and harley only gutted her like a fish, put a canister of fear gas inside of her, a nuclear detonator and most likely aborted her baby in the process, you know, the usual clown joke.
But Superman killed her. It's called Injustice because the true killer of Lois Lane was never held accountable for his crime.
yeah but then lex luthor would just send him a letter in a bottle sending clark into an existential crisis that ends with his own self exile
This, Superman would become a dictator because there's no other choice. First step is killing crazed supervillains like Joker or Manta (who kill thousands in their entire lifetime).
Next step is killing politicians (who kill hundred thousands in months).
Next step is realising the corporate world and geopolitics kills Millions in weeks
Supergays wanna whine that Superman would never become a dictator because it seems evil and they are obsessed with optics, but Superman has no choice but to become a dictator, unless he wants to willingly allow millions of people to experience the same grief he did.
This is literally what Alan Moore meant when he called superheroes a pipeline to fascism.
When you're someone with a frick ton of power who has been given the license by society to essentially go around kicking the shit out of "evil", then "he who fights monsters" immediately comes into play when you realize how many people can frick over millions with the flick of a pen.
>This is literally what Alan Moore meant when he called superheroes a pipeline to fascism.
I agree. As a fascist sympathizer myself I think all the liberals did was obscure the message built into the system. But I don't agree with your reasoning. It's a pipeline because it establishes power/force as the fundamental governing principle and has irrevocable Nietzschean principles built in. Where I think you/the liberals are wrong is they can't wrap their head around the idea that the whole purpose of a government or policing force (and by police I mean army, cops, vigilante, any 'protector' or 'guardian') is to use overwhelming violence to maintain a certain order. The super hero stuff says over and over that the only way to maintain an order is force. By the very nature of the genre they don't talk things out or compromise. If that was the primary means of solving problems it wouldn't be a super hero story.
I guarantee noone would complain about Injustice if Superman's "dictatorship" looked like a paradise, like how Miracleman ended. It's all about optics, noone actually cares that Superman is a dictator just that it looks bad on his homosexual wholesome image
>I was on Clark's side up until he decided to take over the world.
If the choice is between a world where any supervillain is freely allowed to use weapons of mass destruction against your city. And superman being a dictator.
I think its pretty hard to pick batmans side. Also it's implied that at the end batman is running the world from the shadows via Wayne corps financial power.
>was on Clark's side up until he decided to take over the world. If he had just killed Joker and moved on
Wonder Woman was constantly in his ear telling him that he's doing the right thing, after questioning himself if he's going to far. Of course this was all shown in the comics.
No one gives a shit about comics. They might as well as not exist.
>he decided to take over the world.
It was Batman's fault in the first place.
At first Batman, but as I got older Superman.
Always Batman.
Superman.
I lost my shit when I discovered an underground deep web fetish where baby animals are stepped on.
Frick that. Superman.
superman of course
Injustice Superman because of pizzagate, animal abusers, murders who don't care anymore...etc.
This is the same programming as any other piece of occult fiction. They do the same thing over and over again. How are people entertained by this shit. They don't do anything different.
change is evil, chud. revolution is evil. status quo is always good.
You guys are fricking idiots.
Superman.
Ares the god of war who draws power from violence and conflict loses his power during Superman's reign and in the sequel the people are begging for Superman to be released.
The point is that Superman is in the wrong for trying to fix and later control the world the way he did, but Batman was barely doing anything to pull Superman out of his spiraling, and in some cases even agitated the issue. The only leading character that was truly squeaky clean and in the right during Injustice was fricking He-Man.
Jason
When was he ever wrong
Superman canonically ended all wars and crime. Batman even admitted it.
Superman
batman enabled crime and freed all the super villains while superman put them behind bars, this for some reason was a bad thing and not what the justice league has been trying to do since the beginning.
Superman but I ain't gonna explain it.
Since this is an Injustice thread, I still play IJ2 from time to time 'cause it's fun. They really should have made the Injustice/He-Man game.
Neither of them. Superman is still unstable, and Batman is still giving a pass to mass murderers.
No one was right, but Batman was wronger than Superman.
All Batman did was escalating the situation and create a civil war between the heroes that led to the deaths of his friends and colleagues. He should've known better... sided with Superman as a friend and advisor, so he could keep him in check and manipulate him into the right direction.
At worst the world would end up in an Authority or Justice Lords state, thats a lot better than whats the Injsutice universe ends up.