Originally posted by Alfheim
Exactly. When she gets to become a superhero then she can get to complain about heroes protecting her, stupid bit*h.
I think a bigger issue is that nobody asked to be protected by heroes in the first place....
oh man.... I think I just made up a thesis linking superheroics to communism.... 🙂
Originally posted by inamilist
I think a bigger issue is that nobody asked to be protected by heroes in the first place....
It doesnt matter wether they asked or not. They obvoulsy do need to be protected and shes to weak to do anything about it, thats why super heroes are super heroes they are stronger than anybody else.
Originally posted by Alfheim
It doesnt matter wether they asked or not. They obvoulsy do need to be protected and shes to weak to do anything about it, thats why super heroes are super heroes they are stronger than anybody else.
I disagree 100%.
The best example I can give is JJJ from Marvel Knights Spiderman. I don't remember the issue, but he generally just goes off on heroes. His point is that they are masked and unaccountable individuals that are so powerful that people like you or I are insignificant before them. Add to this, they conceal their identity at all costs, frequently just trample on people's rights and the laws regarding due process, and are normally unwilling to co-operate with the police. Because of all this, their only option for solving crime is through criminal action, thus exaserbating the problems. Now that I think about it, The Authority (i think thats it, the one with the united DC villains) has massive subtexts of this nature. "Having heroes around made people less able to defend for themselves, incapable of standing up for themselves". I agree 200%.
Its really the line "they do obviously need to be protected" that really sticks in my proverbial craw. Who is this obvious to? The person with the power? doesn't it seem a little fascist for a person with power to decide, to themselves, how society would benefit the most from it?
And here is why I made the connection to communism. In both cases, with heroes or communists, you have people with strong ideological beliefs and a general sense of altruism toward those who are suffering. However, in both cases, the cost of helping those in need is incurred by those who are not. In communism, the recourses generated by the hard labor of one person are distributed equally, even to those who are unwilling to do their own share. With heroes, the cost is different. It isn't money or recourses, it's freedom. Every time a vigilante beats up someone who THEY think is a bad person, we loose that much freedom. Why? Because we are saying that, it is ok for that super powered individual to assault us when he doesn't agree with our actions, so generally we act with his/her permission. Sure, I obviously need the help, but in this instance, I need help and protection from those who think they are helping me.
Originally posted by "V"
Paris Hilton is irelavant, almost counter productive. Why would anyone even care if they knew about her or not? Would you think less of a person who didn't know about Paris Hilton? No. Would you think less of a living legend, a war veteran who is practically what.. 70 years old because he didnt know about Paris Hilton? I think what Sally said was despicable to be honest, it's spitting in the face of older generations and more honest ones at that.Steve comes from a more hard working generation, where America sacrificed alot more and their nation wasn't brinking on extremely dangerous levels of obesity or obsessed with celebrities. Would you go up to an old man and berate him for being set in his ways? No you really wouldn't, Captain America is still set in his 1940's mindset, maybe he is. But if anything that is a good thing because he hasnt been corrupted by the culture and pure idiocy of MU America.
616 modern America is something to aspire to? Wrong, they swallow everything and anything they have been told. Despite the fact Spiderman and the X men are blatantly forces for good what do they do? they attempt to drive them out, they do not appreciate them. They sit there and let mass murderers and rapists protect them (ie New Thunderbolts). In my eyes they have got too dependent on the superheroe's, too arrogant and confident they will always be there for them.
It's shown pretty well in Civil War, as soon as a pact of Super Heroes stop fighting for what the masses think is right they are deemed "evil" or in the wrong. Or any new team that doesn't have press conferences and fight off Galactus, like the Runaways for example are seen as a menace and tried to be forced to be split up.
If it came down to be Tony Stark, modern and representing today's Marvel America or Steve Rogers, conserving the Marvel America of the past.. then guess what? Unsuprisingly I would choose Rogers, Every single time.
Just because he doesn't indulge in the same hobbies as them or have a computer or even watch the same television programs, doesnt mean that he doesn't understand what is right and wrong. I think that he more than anyone has a better understanding of morals and democracy, seeing as he fought for it for years and has more life experience than any Myspace addict.
In summary, Sally Floyd needs to be kicked in the vulva. That is all.
You just don't get it. Whether or not Paris Hilton is important or just a fart in a mitten is unimportant. Fact is, love her or hate her, everyone knows about her. Same with Myspace, same with Youtube. Same goes for the obsession with Starbucks, same thing for celebrity worship. Are any of these things necessarily good things? No, of course not but point is you would be very hard pressed to an American (or anyone else in the world) who doesn't get these things. The fact that Cap doesn't get this doesn't make him any less of a hero, it just shows that he's out of step.
Part of what I liked about Captain America is because of his being out of touch, it made him seem pure in a way. He was untainted by the cynism of our time. However thats aldo made him naive. I would follow Cap into battle because he's a born leader, but outside of the battefield I am not going be behind someone who doesn't get me. Who doesn't understand that unbriddled enthusiam won't effect change and that sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette. Cap is a hero, he fights for ideals. Really its all he knows. He is not a policitian. If it came down to say an election not only would I not pick somone who nows next to nothing about how things work in this decade but I would pick someone who understands that not everything is black and white. Give me someone who understands that some things the lines have to be blurred for the common good, not someone who'll smile and hope a hearty handshake will make everything better. Give me a Nick Fury/Batman/Tony Stark in charge any day.
what, so Stark can toss you into prison if you disagree with him? Yes, Cap is flawed in that he's too pure, too idealistic for a man. But at the same time, that's the reason he's so great. He represents an ideal, something better than the average person. Things may not be black&white, but I'd still place my faith in the man who believed in human nature and that people can make a difference.
Inamilist, to quote Danny Rand posing as DD when he fought Deadpool in C&D: "How does that make them feel safe? Galactus could still step on their house tomorrow!"
http://groups.msn.com/ultimatespidermanonlinecomic/issue085.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=42472
Guys like Classic Juggs, Annihilus, Apocalypse, Magneto, who's gonna stop them if not a superhero? These guys recoqnize no authority higher than themselves. Because the govt. sure as hell can't stop these guys. When you get into the grey area, that's when your arguement makes sense. Case in point: The Punisher. He's pretty much the poster boy for your side of the arguement. But is he a bad guy? Hard to say. But he does fight crime, even if he ignores the law. And some of the people he kills would not be brought to justice ever. Example of what I'm saying. Xmen: The Animated Series. First season Episode: 'Comes the Apocalypse' (I realize I'm using Apoc for this again, but he fits the bill and this episode illustrates my point.) Apocalypse and his Four Horsemen attack a world peace conference. The Military gets decimated and Apoc blows up half of paris. Now, if there were superheroes, someone would have tried to stop him. It's obvious someone like that is evil by a general consensus. But what about a mob attacking mutant who has to drain life energy to stay alive? Or the military attacking the Hulk for his rampages? In the first case, it's not under the individual's control. In the 2nd, if they left him alone, there would probably be alot less devastation. You can't trust the govt. to always do the right thing, that's why Superheroes are necessary in comics. To represent an unofficial check on tyrannical power. if that means they have to be above the law, then so be for some of them.
Captain American believed in this country enough to surrender and be taken into custody. Because he believed the people of this country would understand what they were doing and that human nature will not tolerate injustice and evil in government. I'd hate to think he was wrong. 🙁
Originally posted by marvelprince
You just don't get it. Whether or not Paris Hilton is important or just a fart in a mitten is unimportant. Fact is, love her or hate her, everyone knows about her. Same with Myspace, same with Youtube. Same goes for the obsession with Starbucks, same thing for celebrity worship. Are any of these things necessarily good things? No, of course not but point is you would be very hard pressed to an American (or anyone else in the world) who doesn't get these things. The fact that Cap doesn't get this doesn't make him any less of a hero, it just shows that he's out of step.Part of what I liked about Captain America is because of his being out of touch, it made him seem pure in a way. He was untainted by the cynism of our time. However thats aldo made him naive. I would follow Cap into battle because he's a born leader, but outside of the battefield I am not going be behind someone who doesn't get me. Who doesn't understand that unbriddled enthusiam won't effect change and that sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette. Cap is a hero, he fights for ideals. Really its all he knows. He is not a policitian. If it came down to say an election not only would I not pick somone who nows next to nothing about how things work in this decade but I would pick someone who understands that not everything is black and white. Give me someone who understands that some things the lines have to be blurred for the common good, not someone who'll smile and hope a hearty handshake will make everything better. Give me a Nick Fury/Batman/Tony Stark in charge any day.
Wow, I mean if you take that view fair enough, but if you take that attitude you really won't be able to complain when a corrupt politician rears their ugly head (which will happen) ✅
Cap may see the world in black and white and whilst I agree it may be flawed, at least he wouldn't have been a politician who attempts to blur the publics perceptions of right and wrong when the going gets tough. Stark on the other hand, despite his good intentions is much farther down the line to being a villain for this attitude, despite his popularity ✅
Originally posted by Black Adam
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=164096979😆
Who I'd like to meet:
A handsome drunken fascist of a man who sells out his friends and colleagues to make cannon fodder feel a little safer until their heroes can't act out because they aren't ordered to. High-tech armor and money is a must.
Sally has 1 friend, Tom
😆 I love the fact that is her description of her ideal friend and she still manages to get a friend 😆
Originally posted by willRules
Wow, I mean if you take that view fair enough, but if you take that attitude you really won't be able to complain when a corrupt politician rears their ugly head (which will happen) ✅Cap may see the world in black and white and whilst I agree it may be flawed, at least he wouldn't have been a politician who attempts to blur the publics perceptions of right and wrong when the going gets tough. Stark on the other hand, despite his good intentions is much farther down the line to being a villain for this attitude, despite his popularity ✅
I don't follow. I'm not opening the doors for villians, just saying I'd rather have someone in my corner who knows the greater good and would blur the lines a bit to achieve it. I'd rather take my chances with where a policitian has a chance of becoming corrupt than in a place where every official is too idealistic and nothing gets done.
Again, Cap is good on the battlefied rallying the troops but he's not someone I'd want in a position of power, like say SHIELD. He won't be able to make the hard decisions. He is too idealistic. You say Stark borders on a villian, I say he was looking at the bigger picture and the ends justified the means in this case. Guys like Nick Fury are great heading SHIELD cause sometimes he can look past conventional themes of good and evil and get the job done. He may break rules, he may be underhanded but he's doing it for the greater good.
Originally posted by TricksterPriest
what, so Stark can toss you into prison if you disagree with him? Yes, Cap is flawed in that he's too pure, too idealistic for a man. But at the same time, that's the reason he's so great. He represents an ideal, something better than the average person. Things may not be black&white, but I'd still place my faith in the man who believed in human nature and that people can make a difference.
Or you could follow Cap and everytime the government does something that you don't agree with move underground and blow stuff up
Originally posted by TricksterPriest
Inamilist, to quote Danny Rand posing as DD when he fought Deadpool in C&D: "How does that make them feel safe? Galactus could still step on their house tomorrow!"
So that justifies them to be able to run around unchecked every other time?
Originally posted by TricksterPriest
Guys like Classic Juggs, Annihilus, Apocalypse, Magneto, who's gonna stop them if not a superhero? These guys recoqnize no authority higher than themselves. Because the govt. sure as hell can't stop these guys.
Guess thats the beauty of government sanctioned heroes huh?
Originally posted by TricksterPriest
When you get into the grey area, that's when your arguement makes sense. Case in point: The Punisher. He's pretty much the poster boy for your side of the arguement. But is he a bad guy? Hard to say. But he does fight crime, even if he ignores the law.
Most heroes fight crime and ignore the law. Punisher is only different cause he's a murderer
Originally posted by TricksterPriest
Example of what I'm saying. Xmen: The Animated Series. First season Episode: 'Comes the Apocalypse' (I realize I'm using Apoc for this again, but he fits the bill and this episode illustrates my point.) Apocalypse and his Four Horsemen attack a world peace conference. The Military gets decimated and Apoc blows up half of paris. Now, if there were superheroes, someone would have tried to stop him.
Huh?
Originally posted by TricksterPriest
It's obvious someone like that is evil by a general consensus. But what about a mob attacking mutant who has to drain life energy to stay alive? Or the military attacking the Hulk for his rampages? In the first case, it's not under the individual's control. In the 2nd, if they left him alone, there would probably be alot less devastation.
So your answer is to leave the mutant and Hulk alone? I'm sorry, but thats ridiculous. Hulk has rampages whether or not the government tries to bring him in? Your answer to that is to turn a blind eye? What would you tell to the families of the people who died in a Hulk rampage? "We could have stopped him, but we were hoping he's stop on his own"
Originally posted by TricksterPriest
You can't trust the govt. to always do the right thing, that's why Superheroes are necessary in comics. To represent an unofficial check on tyrannical power. if that means they have to be above the law, then so be for some of them.
Thats laughable. Move away your perconceived notion that everyone in the government is evil and out to get you. Superheroes vs the government were staples in comics but they're not the only way things can go. Open your eyes a bit
Originally posted by TricksterPriest
Captain American believed in this country enough to surrender and be taken into custody. Because he believed the people of this country would understand what they were doing and that human nature will not tolerate injustice and evil in government. I'd hate to think he was wrong. 🙁
Captain America didn't surrender because he got a boost of faith in the people. He surrendered cause he was causing more harm than good, plain and simple. He didn't believe the people would hear his voice, or believe him to be some sort of martyr or anything. He realized he was going about his cause the wrong way
That line about Galactus stomping on your house made me just realise something hilarious.
See now if Nova had decided 'aww f*ck it' and stayed with teh NW he would have got hiss ass blow to pieces. Thus while everyone is kicking seven shades of blimey out of each other during the final battle Annihilus would have set off his bomb and wiped out everything
At the end of the day the SRA would have been insignificant .
Lol.
Originally posted by marvelprince
I don't follow. I'm not opening the doors for villians, just saying I'd rather have someone in my corner who knows the greater good and would blur the lines a bit to achieve it. I'd rather take my chances with where a policitian has a chance of becoming corrupt than in a place where every official is too idealistic and nothing gets done.Again, Cap is good on the battlefied rallying the troops but he's not someone I'd want in a position of power, like say SHIELD. He won't be able to make the hard decisions. He is too idealistic. You say Stark borders on a villian, I say he was looking at the bigger picture and the ends justified the means in this case. Guys like Nick Fury are great heading SHIELD cause sometimes he can look past conventional themes of good and evil and get the job done. He may break rules, he may be underhanded but he's doing it for the greater good.
That's fair enough if that's your opinion, I was just highlighting the flaws in Stark's "policies" just like you have done with Cap's ✅ I am just agreeing to disagree ✅