• deweydecibel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      89
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Why are people so intent on this meme?

      Bruce Wayne is literally the kind of .1%er that can only live in fiction: an actual good one, that uses his wealth ethically in all the ways no one with that degree of wealth would ever do in the real world.

      Not unlike how Batman is the ideal fantasy vigilante taking the law into their own hands (i.e. uncorruptible, unbiased, and uncompromising in his ethics), Bruce Wayne is the ideal fantasy billionaire that isn’t a drain on humanity.

      Neither are realistic, neither exist in real life, and that’s the whole damn point. It’s aspirational and escapist.

      It’s the reason why Lex Luthor is a villain and Bruce Wayne isn’t.

      • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        People are exactly as intent on imagining Batman as a real world evil billionaire, as they are on imagining Elon Musk as a comic book superhero billionaire.

        A lot of people consuming superhero media are kids who don’t know how the world works. They’re learning about the real world from paying attention to the mundane parts of comics and movies. I learned what an insurance agent is from watching The Incredibles. Most kids these days know what a Walkman is because of GOTG.

        Kids know Batman isn’t real because they don’t see anyone talking about real batman in real life. But they hear grownups saying billionaires have their best interests at heart, so they don’t question Bruce Wayne.

        If your argument is we can have any unreasonable myth we want in comics, why not have Aryan Man, the genetically perfect superhero created by white supremacist eugenics? Batman is a problematic myth on par with Aryan Man.

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 month ago

        uncorruptible and uncompromising in his ethics.

        Yet that’s the source of so much suffering because the system is incapable of confining super villains. Yeah comic code rogues gallery etc.

      • jol
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        How do you know he uses his wealth ethically? When you’re a billionaire, your money is not sitting in a bank. Your money is out there working for you, growing.

        • hglman@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          If you have a billion then the very act of keeping it all means you are making someone else life harder.

          • jol
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Exactly. And where did these billions come from if not the exploitation of the working class by his parents?

          • jol
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            Sure, every billionaire does some philanthropy. But most of their money is out there being invested in high profit industries like war and oil.

            • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              Just off the top of my head. During the cataclysm arc when Gotham was destroyed by an earthquake and the government and all the other corporations pulled out Bruce was going to fund everyone to start businesses by himself in order to rebuild . For an entire city. That’s not just “some philanthropy”. He wouldn’t have had the resources to do that if his corporation was not highly profitable.

              • jol
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                How is his Corp profitable then, huh?

                • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  It’s not like they put the balance sheets in the comics but generally it’s due to being widely diversified and into cutting-edge technologies and Lucias Fox being a good manager.

    • onlooker@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      He was trying to save his love by freezing everything and she wanted plants to become the dominant lifeform on the planet. So yes, we’re rooting for the billionaire that has a better adjusted moral compass than those two yahoos.

          • onlooker@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            I would watch a Batman movie that’s framed as propaganda by Bruce Wayne. At least it would be better than the trainwreck that was Batman & Robin.

  • John_CalebBradberton@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    160
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    As I get older, the more I feel like Batman is billionaire propaganda. Like I get that it’s fiction. But they want us to root for the billionaire and that fucking annoys me.

    • kralk@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      70
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      This is the subtext of the Nolan trilogy. Batman makes everything worse and literally everyone tells him that to his face, but he doesn’t listen due to belief in his own exceptionalism. The only good thing he ever does is at the end of the third movie he fucks off forever.

    • madcaesar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      My man, if every billionaire had the ethics and morals of batman we’d be a much better place.

      Not everything in life is a conspiracy theory. Him being a billionaire is a cool concept precisely because most billionaires are assholes. Not to mention it’s the only way he could afford all his gadgets.

    • EndHD@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      I felt they were using the fact that Batman is an orphan, and being a billionaire is an excuse to explain how he can fund his… hobby?

      But I could see the billionaire propaganda aspect as well. I guess it depends on the author’s intent.

      • Khrux@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        1 month ago

        I definitely doubt the average comic author is pro billionaire. I think having an absurdly rich protagonist is just interesting for plot, not just does it easily justify the funding, but it easily generates a lot of plot hooks.

        Growing up, I absolutely loved Peter Parker as just being the average broke kid, but I was never excited by the plot that generated that was largely school drama or conversations in small apartments.

        On the other hand, there are plenty of cool things that Bruce Wayne gets to do. Sometimes he blends in with high society functions and you get an almost James Bond style investigation and sometimes you capture that Dracula style recluse skulking in his enormous manor, and both of those are very evocative even before you consider how it funds his heroics.

        • hglman@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 month ago

          The question is what were they thinking on 1939, any comics that came after Batman was popular are just stuck with the formula.

      • jollyrogue@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        Basically. Batman being broke without a regular job is the Punisher minus the guns.

        The wealth part does read differently in 2024 after 44 years of Reaganomics and screening for psychopathic tendencies when looking for CEO candidates.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s right-wing propaganda in general.

      Who’s the hero? One of the richest men in the city.

      Who are his allies? The cops.

      Who are the enemies?

      • An immigrant who wears a mask
      • A psychiatrist
      • A psychologist
      • A female environmentalist
      • A male environmentalist

      What happens when his enemies are defeated? They are sent to a mental hospital… a mental hospital that is falling apart and chronically underfunded. That leads to them escaping, giving Batman another excuse to go beat them up.

      If Mr. Wayne is a billionaire and very influential in city politics, the way they always portray him, shouldn’t he be advocating tax increases on the wealthy, and using that money to fix up the city… or at the very minimum to fix up Gotham Asylum?

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Who are his allies? The cops.

        No, just one cop. Right? I’m not super familiar with all versions of Batman lore but I’m pretty sure it’s a typical plot point that only Commissioner Gordon likes Batman.

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Commissioner Gordon is his buddy, and they work together. But, it’s not like he’s otherwise suspicious of the cops. Instead he thinks the problem is just a few corrupt cops but that the overall police institution is wonderful.

    • laughterlaughter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Come to think of it, growing up I remember thinking of certain scenes, like he goes to temples to meditate, “to find himself” or “fight his demons” or whatever, or joining fight club-style events with randos, again “to find himself” or for the fun of it, who knows - and even then I was thinking “damn, I guess it’s good to have that much money to act like a clueless brat!”

      • Sarcasmo220@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        I do agree a lot of stories about “finding yourself” are like that (Eat Pray Love for instance). But to be fair in the Nolan movies he went out into the world with no money. Now, if he somehow formed another billion dollar company then it would have become full on capitalist propaganda, lol.

        • laughterlaughter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          But did he have millions in his bank accounts or not? He had a damn butler and took a Russian ballet crew on a sailing trip!

          If he went into the world “with no money,” it was still his choice. At any point he could have said “you know what, fuck this, I’m coming back to my mansion.” Not everyone has that luxury.

    • WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Most superheroes are built on the idea that the world is unjust. The people who acquire power often do so through sheer chance rather than any merit of their own, but it’s still their responsibility to use that power ethically, even if society fundamentally isn’t built for people like them and they have to adopt a secret identity to have any chance of a normal life.

      Batman’s different. He was born with a great deal of wealth and power, sure, but then he took it upon himself to acquire even more power and put himself even higher above the people around him. He’s exactly who society is built for, but he wears a mask anyway to shield himself from accountability.

      Somehow, we’re supposed to think of him as a hero.

  • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    134
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    Does killing the billionaire solve anything though? The system will just put some other stooge in his position instead. Systemic change is the only way to solve this.

      • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        44
        ·
        1 month ago

        I mean yeah if every CEO or VP or whatever who doesn’t agree to immediately addressing climate change gets dead, then you’ll probably be left with a leadership that is willing to address climate change. In the comics, too.

      • Khrux@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        If I had a button that when pressed would kill the richest person in the world, I’d press it until I physically couldn’t any more. Hopefully the remaining millionaires would have the sense to see what’s happening and spread their wealth more evenly amongst people, and every now and again, I’d press the button a few more times just to keep things from reverting.

        Killing a billionaire does nothing but presenting the idea that being among the richest people would result in some regular, omnipotent death would do a lot.

    • Bye@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Poison ivy would argue we don’t have time for systemic change. She’s doing what is in her power to do. She’d probably say that if your potted fern is droopy, it needs to be in the sun. But if you can’t afford a place with sun, maybe you need to do what you can now, and get a grow light.

      • Ledivin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        She’s doing what is in her power to do.

        …but her actions don’t actually achieve anything other than fulfilling some sort of revenge/punishment fantasy.

        The billionaire isn’t personally responsible for the emissions, and the companies will continue to operate without him. If we’re not talking systemic change (i.e. government-mandated, I guess?), then she needs to either target the businesses/facilities/supply chains directly, or convince the billionaire (or someone else with power in the companies) to change things.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            The Incredibles movies are even better examples, IMO.

            Edit: by the way, this part of that video seems like a nice rebuttal to link in threads where pearl-clutchers bitch and moan about “disruptive” protests.

        • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Well if they can’t convince the billionaire, maybe she can convince whoever inherits the billionaire’s ownership. If not, there’s always the next in line.

          Historically this has had mixed results

          • Ledivin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            29 days ago

            He’s not directly responsible - removing him from the equation doesn’t change anything. It’s not like he’s a machine and turning him off stops the emission. The companies will still run and nothing will have actually improved.

              • Ledivin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                17 days ago

                Yes, and compared to the companies they run, even their emissions are completely negligible. Individual action will not fix our climate crisis, regardless of who does it. Systemic change is the only option that has the possibility of a statistically-useful effect.

        • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 month ago

          Couldn’t be the one directly responsible for it, but he for sure is the one ripping all the benefits and paying none of its costs.

      • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        She’d probably say that if your potted fern is droopy, it needs to be in the sun. But if you can’t afford a place with sun, maybe you need to do what you can now, and get a grow light.

        Reminder that Ivy cares more about plants than people. She would consider tearing down part of your wall so the fern can get natural light even if it means you will die of exposure to be a perfectly sane solution.

    • Iheartcheese@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      after the 15th or so killed in a 6 month period things might start changing. Maybe.

      One way to find out.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      This is what we are taught.
      But what we want is to change the system. And those specific people of that specific class are what stands in the way of many/all.

      Tl;dr: Ivy is a hero, the hero we need.

    • Sordid@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 month ago

      I mean… if you play whack-a-mole long enough, eventually they’ll get the message.

    • xantoxis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 month ago

      In that condition she could probably have convinced him to “legally” deed all his properties to her. (She would need to be able to enthrall everyone in the room when it happens, otherwise witnesses will testify he wasn’t of sound mind, but that seems like something she could solve.)

      It gets complicated after that, though, lots of shareholder suits if she does anything too drastic. Maybe she converts all those assets into investments in renewable energy, which would keep shareholders off her back.

      Then she only has to deal with assassin squads sent by the rest of the oil stakeholders but, again, that seems like a problem she could solve.

      • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        Didn’t the revolution spiral out of hand, allowing Napoleon to seize power and crown himself emperor, leading to a series of wars that killed millions of people?

          • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Not since the Third Republic. But directly after Napoleon, power went back to the monarchy for like 50 years, so I’m not sure how much credit the guillotine deserves.

            • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 month ago

              A 50 year relapse to eradicate an infection that lasted for 1300 years ain’t bad.

              The reality is the French Revolution is why most of Europe is democratic now, it demonstrated more than anything else until the Russian Revolution that the “commoners” could not only win a war against the entrenched nobility, but that those nobles should be very, very fuckin scared of the idea and maybe get on board with the idea of a constitutional monarchy if nothing else.

    • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      The emphasis in her word bubble is “And doesn’t care.” The next stooge might have more of a reason to care, since as far as Poison Ivy here is concerned: systemic change isn’t coming fast enough, if at all.

    • AFaithfulNihilist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Killing the first one probably won’t any more than killing a single mouse doesn’t stop an infestation, but once the mice realize that you got a couple of cats they will find the exit.

      That’s why you need to put traps by the exit too, the mice know too much and might potentially regroup to return with better tactics. You’ve got to get them all in one swift purge.

      • migo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 month ago

        The thing is that we’ve gone through multiple generations of new owners each thinking a bit more than the last. Now they know how to appear decent while continuing to exploit earth, humans and other animals.

        And people keep voting for their puppets.

  • Zombie-Mantis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    1 month ago

    I never understood this… Poison ivy isn’t a misunderstood anti-hero, she’s a villain. She’s not a villain because she wants to save the world from pollution or climate change.

    She’s a villain because she’s a mass-murderer and terrorist.

    • Lianodel@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Also, Batman isn’t opposed to her environmentalism, and a ton of his rogues’ gallery are rich assholes. A situation like this would be likely to end in Batman stopping Poison Ivy and sending her to Arkham, but also stopping the billionaire’s plans through destroying his project, exposing his plans, finding a reason to send him to jail, etc. It very much might involve kicking the shit out of a billionaire. More or less radical depending on who’s writing that story.

      And really, not to be a wet blanket, but Batman’s been written by tons of people over nearly a century. Depictions of him and his surrounding characters are going to vary. Poison Ivy tends to be more of an antihero nowadays as her cause has only gotten more sympathetic.

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        but also stopping the billionaire’s plans through destroying his project, exposing his plans, finding a reason to send him to jail

        I think you’re missing the point here – that Bruce Wayne is the billionare she’s talking about.

    • This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Poison ivy isn’t a misunderstood anti-hero, she’s a villain.

      Recent comics have changed her from outright villain to eco-friendly Punisher as far as I know.

    • festnt@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      whaaaat? are you trying to say the villain can have bad intentions? you cant do that, thats illegal!

  • vertigofilip@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    My reaction would be: No… hmm, that’s fair. No, just mind control him in secret to make him care about environment. That would be more effective. He is going to have resources to make things more eco friendly.