Batman: Vigilante Plutocrat Fighting a Class War

It's fairly rare for a single police officer to randomly encounter a violent felony in progress, though it does happen. In those cases, police are required to give an audible warning and instruct the felon to surrender. Such a case may very well end with the officer firing his or her weapon, but there are strict guidelines on when and how an officer can use force, and all such incidents are subject to review. A police officer may use force in the course of his or her duties, but it's the last resort - their primary duty is to apprehend criminals.

Batman does not subject himself to any of those guidelines or review.

No knock warrants are still subject to a judge issuing that warrant. The police are very limited in the circumstances in which they can just break a door open without any prior approval or anyone looking at what they are doing - if they hear gunshots or a fight on the other side of a door, for instance. Our legal system uses a variety of systems to keep those in power from exceeding the limits of their power.

Batman opts out of that entirely. Better trained than the police or not, he's a force unto himself. The only thing keeping him honest is himself, which works in fiction, but we don't trust that in our real-life systems. In fact, we tend to look at those who see themselves as unaccountable with their power in a negative light.

Absolutely - that's a central part of my thesis. We want to see Batman busting heads. That's what we signed up for, and that's what we want to see when we read a Batman comic or watch a Batman movie. It's all part of the fantasy.

But, when we step back and apply a little real-world thinking to him, he gets to be a little scary. We have to trust him, because we have no other way to keep him accountable.

The things he does, there are precedents for civilians getting involved. But those precedents are limited, and in those cases those actions are carefully examined. Our legal system, for good reason, tries to keep law enforcement activities restricted to trained professionals. Even an individual investigation should then be turned over to law enforcement for confirmation and followup. Batman does the investigation himself, and then does the apprehension himself. That's all well and good, assuming that he doesn't produce evidence that would be thrown out of court because of how it was collected, resulting in a dismissal. "Getting off on a technicality" is usually a result of the exclusionary principle, which is foundational to protecting the rights of citizens from police abuse. (Batman's methods probably result in no few acquittals.)

I agree with this statement completely. Again, the narrative demands that Batman do these things, because no one else will. That's the agreement we enter into with the authors of Batman when we sit down to read it.

That does not mean that the underlying assumptions of the narrative are immune to examination.

Yes. But the underlying assumption is that it takes a specially gifted, self-appointed individual who is not bound by the law to enforce the law. The system is corrupt, and the only way to save the ordinary citizens is to operate outside the system entirely.

When the legal system is that far gone and we have to look to a self-appointed strongman to protect us from crime, that's pretty much the end of the line for the social order.

(Incidentally, that's what I loved most about the end of The Dark Knight - Nolan acknowledges that in order for Batman to do what he does, he has to be hunted and opposed by the legal system. Batman as an institution is a threat to civil society and the rule of law.)

None of them possess wealth on the Wayne family's scale or come from the same patrician background as Bruce Wayne. Only Ra's, though from an entirely different culture, could conceivably count as an aristrocrat, but he's a self-made man who has amassed similar wealth over the centuries.

That's certainly what Batman stands for in principle but doesn't really put into practice in the comics. As the article points out, none of his most notable opponents (typically from in the Golden and Silver Ages) either come from similarly patrician backgrounds or possess equivalent wealth and resources. For the same period, Superman was already battling against opposite numbers Bizarro and General Zod, the Flash against Professor Zoom, Green Lantern against Sinestro, Aquaman against Ocean Master, etc., etc.

What was the best that DC could furnish for Batman at the time? The Killer Moth, a nameless criminal a who created a fake identity as wealthy philanthropist Cameron van Cleer in order to crash Bruce Wayne's charity parties. Despite having a Moth Cave, a Mothmobile, a Moth Signal, etc., he remains strictly C-list.

Let's talk when the Batman starts regularly punching out actual millionaires.

Many of the crimes Batman stops in Gotham revolve around the criminals obtaining money through illegal means. If the villains were already rich, there wouldn't be as many committing those crimes. The other crimes that Batman stops are violent ones and, as previously pointed out, there's really no inherent bias to that.

That's a rather large assumption about wealth, but never mind. The point under discussion is not simply an index of being rich but the sources of wealth with respect to class background as well.

The Batman made a name for himself primarily by fighting tie-wearing nerds whose noms du crime consist of unthreatening verbs and nouns preceded by a definite article (aliases that began with "Doctor", though, were guaranteed to be evil-sounding). There isn't a millionaire playboy, much less a crooked capitalist, slum lord, or decadent aristocrat, among the lot of them.

It's not until the 70s that Ra's al-Ghul arrives to provide the Batman with anything resembling an evil counterpart (though I maintain he is an ultimately poor match for the profile). Nor is it coincidental that at about this time, Gotham City's police and politicians started to develop a reputation for corruption in order to provide the Caped Crusader with a more suitable backdrop for his vigilante activities.

Penguin, Hush, Bane, R'as al Ghul, Black Mask, and a few others are all "old money" Rich.

As far as "no one on the same level" Of course not. Wayne is the richest person on the planet. The only competing person is Luthor, though any one that estimates their wealth within what they do and such that is a joke to say that it is a comparison, but none the less Lex is often stated as equivalent to Bruce and as such one would expect if this is a "Class War" Bruce wouldn't have a problem with Luthor... but that's not the case. He does have a problem with Lex, lets his stuff get messed up, and cons him into fixing up Gotham and then having to walk away and all to BENEFIT the lower class/middle class... and lets not forget his opting to finance a whole bunch of lower class people to rebuild Gotham's businesses.

If there is an over riding theme in Batman for a theme about class it is that Good business is good for the little people and the environment. If it's not good for both of them it isn't good for Big business either.

Oh, so it isn't so much about if they have money, thus taking away a large motivating factor for their crimes, but whether or not they grew up always having the money, thus taking away a large motivating factor for their crimes. That makes sense.

>.>

How is Bane "old money" rich? He grew up in prison because his father wasn't around to serve the sentence.

Does Ra's still control the League of Assassins? If so, I think having a personal army and your beck and call would have to count for something against Bruce only having the Bat Family.

Bane is the son of King Snake and for a time he was possibly the son of Thomas Wayne


While Ra's is extremely wealthy and it is even said that he has something like 100x more resources... But that is not "personal wealth" per say. Bruce can be said to have billions to trillions of dollars of personal wealth (aside from Wayne Enterprises' corporate holdings) which Ra's can not... This means that Ra's "corporate" holdings far exceeds Bruce's, but not his "Personal" holdings.



Also I was thinking...

Another theme one could say is that of the struggle between the controlling forces of society. Bruce representing Corporation. Gordon Representing Government. Batman and his cohorts (more specifically Oracle) the will of the people. And the Villains being the Criminal elements.


But we know the theme around Batman is largely that of the exploration of psychology of what someone with Batman's psyche would do, and how if one of those elements were twisted slightly how that would turn out. And one could use a lot of various example to point this out as many Batman centric movies use as special features in their DVD/Blu-ray release >.>

It's been done (and parodied).

Wow.

Batman really HAS taken Superman's place as the hero to hate on.

Psst, look who you're quoting.

Not really, as Batman isn't a hero - he's a vigilante.

Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow City of Heroes is a game about freedom of expression and variety of experiences far more so than it is about representing any one theme, topic or genre.

Well it is true.

You due to a run of bad circumstances, end up unable to get a job and have to turn to theft to feed your family. Batman will kick the stuffing out of you, despite you deliberately making sure that you were never violent in your crimes.

With that done Batman will go off into the night, for a bit more assault, peppered with some breaking and entry, wire tapping and thef... evidence gathering.

All this despite having enough money to single handedly correct all of Gotham's none Batman related problems.

Citation needed.

This doesn't count.

Penguins fly?

One does not have to be duly deputized under the law to stop criminal acts in progress(felonies that is, only law officers can do something about misdemeanors).

Of course all the investigating, wiretapping, breaking and entering, and other stuff one might have an issue with.

Now, now, we all know that the Penguin's crimes revolve around birds of every feather, not just flightless Antarctic seabirds, in much the same way that Catwoman's are not limited to those involving domestic felines.

Then again, perhaps the flightless Penguin is inherently jealous of the frequently airborne Batman.

Hence the helicopter umbrellas

The Penguin's crimes may revolve around a variety of flying animals, but the Penguin himself is themed on a flightless bird. And given that Batman doesn't only stop crimes that revolve around bats, the comparison only works around a personal theme.

Not like the police who will listen sympathetically and send you off with a pat on the head.

They're funny that way.