8 Bit Philosophy: Is Batman Just?

[immortalfrieza]

His Rogues Galleries repeated ability to get out of prison over and over renders Batman's nonlethal methods bullshit.

I think everyone but the most ardently idealistic pro-life person would all be for giving Batman a pass if he finally finshed off the likes of the Joker, and what could he do if whatever state Gotham is in finally grew brain cells and introduced a fast tracked death penalty for supervillains?

I say any sane person and even most insane ones including even the most rabid prolifer would have killed the Joker and most of the rest of Batman's Rogues gallery (not to mention a lot of other supervillains) themselves within their first couple of escapes from Arkham, tops. Only someone that not only had as warped a version of justice but was insanely fixated on it as Batman is wouldn't have done so, any remotely rational logic supports it.

 

[Charles Phipps]

I find any question of Batman's justice needs to take into account he primarily fights terrorists (The Joker, Ra's Al Ghul) and organized crime (which predominately preys on the poor despite coming from it). He's also a man who runs numerous charitable foundations and actively works to benefit the masses.

The assumption the criminal are automatically victims fails to consider that, yes, the rich and powerful are criminals too. It's just they are less often likely to get caught or punished as severely.

People who think Batman is a rich guy who beats up poor people are like people who think Call of Duty: Modern Warfare is about how America rocks. They're people who probably very likely have never really seen the material they're discussing.

 

[Mason Callaway]

Came back to this series after a long hiatus. Instantly remembered why I stopped watching. Is Rawls really the only voice on justice worth considering? You ask a question like "Is Batman Just?" and then offer only one definition of justice. That hardly even begins to consider the question, let alone answer it. You present Rawls as the definitive answer when it comes to defining justice and that just comes across as gross bias.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

The difference is that the mega-billionaire might fund social projects and special industrial initiatives to provide less incentives to perform criminal acts and rather labour for both their own and society's benefits? Good argument that Batman might better fight more crime, and in a much more socially cohesive way, if instead of spending billions on crime fighting technology he spent the money building better schools and better workplaces for the poor.

Of course, that and Batman's refusal to kill people who are obviously going to murder again, and again, and again ... and the fact that Gotham, despite being such a screwed up place, doesn't have a decent jail. Maybe Batman should build a better jail.

... and I just realize that I hard necro'd this forum topic <.<