• deweydecibel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Yeah people that make this joke don’t pay attention the actual content. Bruce is routinely demonstrated to be a positive force with his wealth. He’s socially conscious, generous, invests in progressive causes, runs numerous charities, restricts his company from participating in unethical practices, creates jobs for convicts, and treats his employees very well.

    Now, I’m not suggesting this is realistic. No one of Bruce’s wealth, in the real world, would be anywhere near as good as Wayne is depicted.

    But within the context we of this world, the actual text of the stories tells us quite plainly he is a positive, progressive influence.

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      … and yet, he’d STILL be infinitely more effective if he either properly funded Gotham, or started actually killing evil people. Instead, he does neither… Batman still sucks balls even in the good interpretations. . … mind, I still enjoy most of his comics and stories, but dude is just as healthy of a role model as The Punisher: Not at all. For the opposite reasons, ironically.

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        IIRC, one of the films noted that his parents had tried to fund serious reform in Gotham (I think the newest film, with Robert Pattinson?), and that corruption and crime siphoned off and diverted all the money away from the causes they were trying to support. I’m not sure if that’s cannon or not.

        Looking at a number of cities in the US that have historically had a serious problem with public corruption, it’s not really an either/or approach; you need to adequately fund public works, but you also need to fight the crime and corruption that tries to take all the public money away from the public.

      • frickineh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yeah, the refusal to kill is the worst part about Batman. Like, it’s cool that you have a moral code or whatever, but when you keep putting mass murderers like the Joker in a prison you know he’s gonna escape from, you should probably think about your life choices. You kind of get why Jason Todd went a little nuts when Batman didn’t kill the Joker after he brutally murdered a child that Batman dressed up and put in his way. Holy shit, just shoot the guy in the fuckin face, you know?

        • qarbone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          As Feathercrown said, most modern stories have Bruce aware that he’s nuts. If he starts killing, then he doesn’t stop killing and things go bad. He’s essentially like on Murderers Anonymous and making sure to stay away from anything that could trigger him down an even darker road.