While clearly the ultimate answer may simply (or not "simply") either, neither, both and nuanced, I thought it would be worth having a specific discussion over the relative merits of seeing murder-y fascists - I mean "morally righteous justice bringers" - as either stark warnings and cautionary tales or wish-fulfilment inspirations.
Clearly, all individuals know that THEIR opinions are more morally and evidentially accurate than others', and that goes double for crimefighters, Crimebusters, Judges and vigilantes - after all, if 'the law' were capable of dealing with crime and criminals effectively, they wouldn't need to do what they do, would they?
Judge Dredd IS The Law, speaks for the law, executes the law (and lawbreakers), and as such is morally and ethically valid in being judge, jury and executioner on his own recognizance. Batman is obvious right about everything, always, because he's Batman. And Frank Castle... well.
Does Batman get a pass because he doesn't kill people? (Mostly) Does Judge Dredd's dystopian future setting mean that his situation is tangibly different and demanding of harsher methods? Should 'some people' just be removed to "decrease the surplus population"?
Should Batman kill the Joker? Is the real-world embrace of the Punisher by (some) American policemen deeply troubling? Does merely thinking about taking the law into ones own hands make one a bad person, does the consideration (and faction) give a helpful safety valve to stop it leaching into reality, or..?
Are dictatorial and fascistic tactics reasonable so long as they're presenting the "correct" ideology and prescription? Who Watches the Watchmen, and can either the watchers or the watchmen be trusted, ever?
Clearly, all individuals know that THEIR opinions are more morally and evidentially accurate than others', and that goes double for crimefighters, Crimebusters, Judges and vigilantes - after all, if 'the law' were capable of dealing with crime and criminals effectively, they wouldn't need to do what they do, would they?
Judge Dredd IS The Law, speaks for the law, executes the law (and lawbreakers), and as such is morally and ethically valid in being judge, jury and executioner on his own recognizance. Batman is obvious right about everything, always, because he's Batman. And Frank Castle... well.
Does Batman get a pass because he doesn't kill people? (Mostly) Does Judge Dredd's dystopian future setting mean that his situation is tangibly different and demanding of harsher methods? Should 'some people' just be removed to "decrease the surplus population"?
Should Batman kill the Joker? Is the real-world embrace of the Punisher by (some) American policemen deeply troubling? Does merely thinking about taking the law into ones own hands make one a bad person, does the consideration (and faction) give a helpful safety valve to stop it leaching into reality, or..?
Are dictatorial and fascistic tactics reasonable so long as they're presenting the "correct" ideology and prescription? Who Watches the Watchmen, and can either the watchers or the watchmen be trusted, ever?
statistics: Posted by ntnonII — 8:38 AM - 1 day ago — Replies 5 — Views 174