What a bunch of fucking pussies.
When Superman's trying to reason with them, they beat him up with their "Might makes right" and "violence is the answer to everything" rhetoric. But when Superman for that brief period pretends to kill them by showing them his true strength, suddenly they squeal about how much of a hypocrite he is about being about truth and justice. They were kind of right to a point, but never stopped to think what would happen if the other guy has a bigger stick than they do.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
cbr.com
twitter.com
Yes that was the whole point. Might makes right when you're not on the receiving end. Why exactly did you make this thread?
I want to to know if there are anymore villains in fiction that are pretty much like the Elite?
Well for fun you can read Joe Kelly's current Spider-Man/Deadpool run where almost exactly the same thing happens (he wrote both) except this time it's Spidey trying to become Deadpool.
Spoilers: will probably have the same ending.
To troll you.
Is it good?
That was the point of them. Deciding people's lives is fine when you have all the power, but it's not as much fun when someone does it to you.
Superman' "no kill rule" is less about moral faggotry and more about understanding that he has too much power for one guy to determine who should live and die. He has no one to legitimately keep his actions in check, and he understands that.
Not that user, but very, however stay away from the guest writer issues, they're awful
It was really all Black's plan. Dude was a fucking wreck who suffered from a bad case of super power-induced arrested development and actually thought he could trap Superman in some sort of moral paradox. At least Coldcast and Menagerie went on to make something of themselves in the comics for a little while.
The alt-right in a nutshell.
>if there are anymore villains in fiction that are pretty much like the Elite
The most literal answer to your question is that the Elite are a pisstake of Warren Ellis' The Authority. It's Kelly's commentary on Ellis' superteam convinced of its own moral authority. Not surprisingly the team leader is British like Ellis.
To make it fair as well, ANTIFA.
I t must suck to be a cop, what with ANTIFA hating your guts and wanting you dead one minute, and then the next minute they demand that you protect them from someone that they pissed off into biting back.
I haven't seen the alt right do anything but shitpost on the internet
>haha i made superman question his morals
>ow my spine
Superman gets mixed up with Batman a lot, Supes will kill you if he has to. He would rather not but he will fucking do it.
That was literally the point of the movie.
Superman DOES prove what a hypocrite he is by effectively doing to them what he claims to be against.
He fucking LOBOTOMIZES a guy against his will and takes away his powers for good. It's not up to Superman to decide who gets to keep their powers.
A few days ago they were getting butt hurt over a shitty statue getting taken down and lighting torches.
He didn't kill him though, he just took away his means of easily murdering anyone he wanted, he leaves him alive and healthy, just minus his murder button
>Superman' "no kill rule" is less about moral faggotry and more about understanding that he has too much power for one guy to determine who should live and die.
Except he does exactly that in officially licensed piece of DC fiction. Kills General Zod in the Post Crisis DCU, Superman 2 AND Man of Steel. Kills many people in the Injustice games
Yeah, I meant in a discourse level, not that they would actually go out and do shit.
Well, I never saw ANTIFA talking about "might is right". They're hypocrites like you mentioned, but that post I quoted seemed to fit better to the alt-right to me.
What? He just gives him a minor concussion that blocks his powers.
So why doesn't Superman just destroy or take away everyone's guns and nukes? It would make things at least a little bit safer
>Superman DOES prove what a hypocrite he is by effectively doing to them what he claims to be against.
Killing someone else after declaring himself judge jury and executioner? Yeah no, he never said using force to stop someone wasn't okay. In fact, that's exactly what he coached them to do when Atomic Skull came, and taught them how to do it more effectively. He just hurts and scares them for a bit but never actually kills anyone.
>He fucking LOBOTOMIZES a guy against his will and takes away his powers for good.
Because said guy was trying to kill him.
>It's not up to Superman to decide who gets to keep their powers.
Taking away a guy's knife when he tries to stab you and never letting him have it again is actually completely within the law for civilians, so yeah, he can decide. Unlike shooting a helpless and restrained guy in the head after making a speech which is so not-legal it's bizarro legal.
>Injustice
Dude, seriously? That's the whole fucking point of Injustice, which is an elseworld.
Also, killing somebody with his same power set doesn't go against what that guy says. His stand on not killing is different than Batman's. If he didn't have superpowers, he would've probably be in favor of killing the Joker.
Why did no other villain ever do the same thing Manchester Black did to stop Superman? It seems like anyone with a telekinetic power could do this
>So why doesn't Superman just destroy or take away everyone's guns
He does, when they try to shoot someone with it. Anytime someone's pointing a gun at another person and Superman knows? Bam, he's on the case and that gun is gone. What, you think he gives it back or something?
>And nukes
I'm pretty damn sure first time someone fires a nuke he'd try and stop it.
>It would make things at least a little bit safer
Well no. They're not safer until the people who want to misuse them are stopped during the crime they commit(Not before as that's thoughtcrime), and then put away. The weapons don't matter.
General Zod is every bit as powerful as Superman. Clark can make that decision.
Fuck off with Injustice. That's obviously the Bad End AU.
>and takes away his powers for good
that was a lie. he just gave the guy a concussion right on the whammy button. his powers will come back after a day or two of rest
Thats still not Superman's call to make. It's not for him to judge who should have powers or not. He passed judgement and permanently CRIPPLED a guy. And Manchester was killing CRIMINALS. It's not like he was murdering GOOD people. Its fine to kill people who kill. Its the only way to make absolutely certain they wont do it again
This is you, OP. However instead of actual dogs on the other side of the gate you are barking at fictional cardboard cut-outs of dogs.
Superman didn't actually lobotomize him, he was lying to fuck with Manchester Black. He just temporarily blocked his powers with laser brain surgery. They came back like a month later
>He just hurts and scares them for a bit but never actually kills anyone.
So he bullies them essentially. Thinking HIS standards are infallible and beyond question and that everyone must think like him
So I guess him and his cronies attempting to kl superman doesn't count? He doesn't look very crippled to me, having been able to retain full use of all of his limbs, I'm sure atomic skull would agree
How many villains in DC have telekinesis and how many of them can manipulate blood cells? Also how often would someone even get the chance to telekinetically manipulate the blood in Superman's brain before he punched them through a wall?
Yes, yes. Your perfect Supergod is never, EVER wrong. Man you people are almost as bad as Batfags.
>Thats still not Superman's call to make.
Is so if they're trying to kill him. Again, disarming your would be murderer? Totally legal! You don't even have to give it back or anything!
>He passed judgement and permanently CRIPPLED a guy.
He sure doesn't seem crippled aside from the weapon he just tried to make Superman's head explode with.
>And Manchester was killing CRIMINALS.
And Superman was detaining and disarming CRIMINALS.
>It's not like he was murdering GOOD people.
Funny, I didn't see Superman disarming any good people either!
>Its fine to kill people who kill.
Protip, Manchester killed someone in the movie.
Ergo...
>Its the only way to make absolutely certain they wont do it again
So then you're saying he should have killed Manchester?
Wait, then who has to kill Superman after that one? Do they just need to line up in a gun conga line?
Well, this is the eternal argument to be had when it comes to superheroes in some sort of a realistic context. And that's what I hope Civil War (the movie) was gonna be about instead of "Bucky is innocent because I say so". There was some of that, but it was quickly thrown aside and became little more than a McGuffin.
>He does, when they try to shoot someone with it.
That's not what he said though. Superman could easily remove every single gun from everyone on Earths possession at Super speed. If no one has a gun. then no one can get shot. Simple as that
>>I'm pretty damn sure first time someone fires a nuke he'd try and stop it.
Not what he said either. He could at super speed go in and remove every single nuclear weapon on earth BEFORE anyone gets a chance to fire it.
>So he bullies them essentially.
Sure, I mean if that's your standard of bullying. Most people just consider that not getting killed.
>Thinking HIS standards are infallible and beyond question and that everyone must think like him
Or else he'll just kind of say his piece to them and then not actually do anything until they go on a killing rampage. And even then? He just wants them to prove it by going to court. Even then? Doesn't stop them until they try to kill him personally on the moon.
I mean damn pal it would probably be easier to just go to a middle school and wait, getting Superman to be a bully sounds like a shitload of effort.
Yes or no. Is it still officially licensed fiction from the people who own the property?
Yes or no?
Most DC magic users have abilities akin to telekinesis. Even if they didn't have telekinesis, you would think that that a weakness like that would be passed along in the villain community
>That's not what he said though.
Yeah, that's why I pointed out the fallacy.
>Superman could easily remove every single gun from everyone on Earths possession at Super speed.
Sure he can! Wouldn't even be that hard. But why? Most of them aren't doing anything. If they're not breaking a law or threatening someone, including him, why would he take them?
>If no one has a gun. then no one can get shot. Simple as that
Right but up to the shooting part nobody is actually committing a crime. See the problem? No? Don't make the connection between Manchester only being disarmed when he tried to murder him, like the gun?
You'll get it.
>Not what he said either.
Wow you are not quick on the uptake.
>He could at super speed go in and remove every single nuclear weapon on earth BEFORE anyone gets a chance to fire it.
Sure, but why? They're not going to kill anyone just having them unless they, like, fall on someone. Then he'd probably try to save them. If he does something before anyone misuses them, he's punishing someone for not doing anything wrong, which means that they get punished before they've done anything, which would make him the guy who thinks everyone must think his way.
See the fallacy here?
>disarming your would be murderer?
You ARE aware that these people posed absolutely no threat to him, right?
I guess if a toddler started punching you it's then okay to backhand him?
>>Protip, Manchester killed someone in the movie.
And it was either someone who would harm others or some unfortunate bit of collateral damage. Which is a sad but inevitable thing that happens when you wage a war on bad people.
>>So then you're saying he should have killed Manchester?
You just don't get it, do you?
>That's not what he said though. Superman could easily remove every single gun from everyone on Earths possession at Super speed. If no one has a gun. then no one can get shot. Simple as that
Then they'd just start stabbing each other.
>But why? Most of them aren't doing anything.
Why even allow the chance of it happening?
>>Right but up to the shooting part nobody is actually committing a crime
And if you remove the guns, the possibility of that crime is stopped before it can even become a possibility
>>They're not going to kill anyone just having them unless they, like, fall on someone.
Like, with the guns, if you take them away, you don't need to worry about the possibility. Even a 1% chance is still 1% too much
>You ARE aware that these people posed absolutely no threat to him, right?
Actually Manchester did some serious damage there before Superman cut loose. Even then? You're still allowed to disarm someone if you think they're trying to commit a serious act of harm. If someone stabs you with what they think is a knife but it turns out is a rubber knife? Still legal to disarm them and take it!
>I guess if a toddler started punching you it's then okay to backhand him?
You're allowed to restrain the toddler and take away anything they could use to hurt you, yeah. I mean a toddler with a piece of broken glass might do little more than draw some blood but you're still in your full rights to restrain them and take the glass away, completely legally! The parents even get punished!
So grab that toddler man who thinks Murder is the best way and thinks he's cool for doing it, Superman! You have your full right!
>And it was either someone who would harm others or some unfortunate bit of collateral damage. Which is a sad but inevitable thing that happens when you wage a war on bad people.
So then yes he killed someone who didn't deserve it and was innocent. And then he tried to do it again to, wait for it, Superman!
>You just don't get it, do you?
That the "We kill badguys" is a mentality that backfires when you realize it justifies others killing you? Because from everything Manchester did, Superman should have been in his rights to murder the guy right there when he openly tried to murder him. Could he? Hell no. Did Manchester know that? Obviously not.
Thankfully, that guy was just a wanker with a bad coat and shitty hair, and Superman's methods don't involve as much brain splatter.
What would've happened if these guys went out of their way to kill the Joker?
I don't understand how anyone could like this preachy garbage.
Yes, it's a licensed story. All it does is show what Supes would be like if he did take it upon himself to pass more permanent judgment. As the user said, it's a bad end AU. It's canon, but it shouldn't be the main interpretation of the character
Batman instead of Superman
>Why even allow the chance of it happening?
Because it's a machine. It can be used to shoot other things, or even nothing. You can do it just to feel good or pose with. That's even exactly what 99 percent of them are used for! If legislature was passed taking away all guns, Supes would be okay with it. Might even help out, or not, depends on how much they let citizens do. Point is, the chance is worth waging if it means Superman doesn't have to punish someone who didn't commit a crime. If it becomes a crime? Have at it.
>And if you remove the guns, the possibility of that crime is stopped before it can even become a possibility
That particular crime? Maybe. But since they can just make more, and legally, you're not really fixing the problem are you? You're just making Superman break stuff a lot. Gun Manufacturers would have to be compensated for the unlawful destruction, gun owners want compensation for items they spent a lot of money on, and since none of this is even the result of a crime being committed we actually have more to worry about with Superman!
Good job, now everyone is owed a lot of money for not committing a crime.
>Like, with the guns, if you take them away, you don't need to worry about the possibility. Even a 1% chance is still 1% too much
Says who?
Cause Superman doesn't think that. I mean if that's what you'd do, neato, but "Don't do anything until they actually break a law" is a good way not to become a tyrant and force everyone to do what you want!
Which was the point of the movie.
So is Red Son, but that doesn't make Superman a communist.
And by your logic, we should outlaw smoking, drinking, eating unhealthy foods, and sex because of the 1% chance of something bad happening from it. You colossal contrarian.
yeh brah i feel yah
fuck moralfags
where's my venom rapes carnage
Batman would say basically the same stuff that Sups did about letting the justice system do it's thing then proceed to get his ass kicked since tried to take on four superpowered psychopaths without prep.
After that the Elite would play cat & mouse with the Joker for a while before Batman came back fully healed and equipped to take down the Elite.
In the end Superman or the government or whoever would come in to take the Elite to some random super prison then we'd find out that Joker escaped during the fighting, but it's ok because the dangerous vigilantes were arrested. Who cares how many people Joker will murder before Batman finds him again.
Anyone interested in actually reading this comic?
The group is less based on Ellis' Authority and more on Millar's. Specifically the temporary team that took over after the team was seemingly wiped out by the US Government because of reasons.
Are you saying you'll storytime it?
>Hurr, "heroes" that actually kill amoral assholes who kill innocent people regulary and are then sent to a shitty prison they escape from every day are worse then Hitler!
>Real heroes merely catch the assholes and send them to the same shitty prison so they can escape again and again to kill more people.
Do any of these writers have any sense of common sense?
Isn't the whole point of this is that you shouldn't act on the sole basis that you're stronger than others? It's not like Superman doesn't kill it's just that the mindset on why they justify killing bad guys is wrong.
The main leverage these guys had was basically that they seemed to be stronger than Superman so they thought they could do what they wanted.
Yes.
Then please do. I never say not to a free comic.
>and more on Millar's
ofc
I love posting this comic because everyone has their own interpretation of it. I like reading what everyone thinks of it.
>He fucking LOBOTOMIZES a guy against his will and takes away his powers for good.
Said guy was a psychopath who was prepared to annihilate an entire city.
It's supposed to make you question why they keep escaping and why they're not being held/tried and properly sentenced. You're supposed to wonder "Wow the superheroes sure almost die a lot putting these guys away for no money and no reward, but why don't they ever actually manage to keep them gone?" There should be questions as to where is the public outrage, the hate, the reform from action and protesting and eventually the change, when to they make a difference after step 1 is done.
But then the fools put the blame on the hero, thinking they're the ones who need to do it all because clearly they're the strongest and the best, so they should decide everything.
You're not a fool, are you user?
Personally, I liked it the first time, kinda disliked it the second, and now on every subsequent reading I like it more and more.
>Superman could easily remove every single gun from everyone on Earths possession at Super speed
>Implying Superman would disarm the populace
youtube.com
I believe it was basically Kelly saying "if you aren't going to use your powers right, you don't deserve to have them in the first place"
But it raises the question "why doesn't he just do that to straight up villains"
...
>Kills many people in the Injustice games
You've never read a fucking comic book in your entire life have you?
Why not just send every villain to the phantom zone?
I think this issue should have just been a 48-pager, or even an 80 pager. But most likely editorial just had no idea it would become such an influential story at the time.
...
...
Mental powers are Superman's unsung weakness.
Technically would be kidnapping in American law, so he doesn't do it if he subdues an enemy in America.
It's an exception with Kryptonians because they're technically his people and thus could be seen as his responsibility. Like extraditing a criminal to be tried in their own country.
And now this loser is trying to fuck with Clark's son in the current Superman arc.. The britbong never learns.
That wasn't really the point of the story. The story basically just says "Might is Right" doesn't work as there will always be someone better than you anyways then when that person does you can't fall back on it anymore.
The "might" in the story wasn't really their superpowers but their "power to kill" or them being okay with killing others so easily. They were waving it around and were trying to use it against supes but when supes took their own might against them they were a wreck.
I'm sure Supes would've been okay with killing if it was a last resort and they looked remorseful. Batman however would be 100% against it though.
>Steel gives Superman a golden shower
...
...
Yes, it's an officially licensed story in which SUPERMAN IS THE FUCKING VILLAIN.
...
...
So is that story Superman was Frankenstein's monster
...
...
...
So? The story also establishes that it's an AU. There are already a ton of those stories where Supes is the villian anyways. There's a whole other universe that has the whole justice league as villians.
it's fairly common.
...
I would ask how Lex Luthor became president, but I'm sure that answer it several stories on it's on.
Ok thanks Texans user
If anyone's curious, here's a good rundown on the times post-Crisis where Superman HAS killed and why he did it:
cbr.com
>Superman 2
he didnt kill any one, he just nuetalised they poweres and they all jumped into a pit themselves.
hell it since we never see what happens to that they all might just be in red lamp prisons under there
Oh and there's a couple Golden Age slayings in there but everyone killed back then.
I've always been interested in seeing what Luthor would have done, honestly. I mean, besides reluctantly calling in Superman.
In 2001 there was a big storyline called President Luthor where Luthor claimed to be reformed and got elected president.
The interesting part was he wasn't actually a bad president.
In the Richard Donner cut he did indeed kill Zod, but not the theatrical.
...
He'd sick Amanda Waller on them, half of them would be dead within the week, the other half working for Suicide Squad.
...