I love that OP’s username is
A Cool DudeCritical support to poison ivy only because she’s trying to engage with batman in good faith when he’s the same kind of planet destroying ghoul as every other billionaire
If she kills Batman and that other billionaire? Uncritical support, I stan an eco warrior
Batman is the bad guy and I will die on that hill.
Joker is the good guy too.
No sarcasm allowed >:(
None used. Seriously
Batman fundamentally embodies social justice as an individual violent power fantasy. He’s the ultimate reactionary: use violence to fix individual people’s problems, never address (or even acknowledge) the violence inherent to the social system. (Some authors’ occasional deviations from this core characterization do not make up for it).
At best Batman is enjoyable because anti-heroes are enjoyable (I’ve heard there are some self-aware issues of Batman). At worst it’s painfully unaware, mask-off copaganda (such as the one and-and-a-half Nolan movies I slugged through).
The top comment is a fanfic about Batman explaining social systems to Poison Ivy. Great idea, except that such wokeness is antithetical to his entire worldview. He’s basically a Republican who happens to be against the death penalty for personal/religious reasons.
Batman won’t let you die. He’ll just tie you up and send you to Arkham.
More and more I feel Batman in quite a few versions is just the DC Punisher going around punching poor and mentally ill people
Waynetech does huge amounts of charity work, it’s just not very interesting in a comic book.
Gotham also has a literal curse that makes it perpetually dysfunctional. Its cop out comic book bullshit, but Gotham literally cannot be fixed.
Gotham also has a literal curse that makes it perpetually dysfunctional. Its cop out comic book bullshit, but Gotham literally cannot be fixed.
Ive always hated this argument. How many master sorcerer’s and litteral gods does this man know that could break the curse? Deep down batman knows that Gotham can be fixed, it’s just not gonna be him that does it. That kills him
The curse doesn’t get fixed because the story is about Batman solving crimes and if the crimes stop there’s no more story.
That seems like a bad excuse. They completely reboot the series all the time anyway. It’s not like concluding a story for once would actually stop them from just coming back next month with the same story again.
Because usually when they reboot it’s very poorly planned and they don’t tell writers far enough in advance. That’s why the New 52 was so confusing with Green Lantern and Batman continuing their pre-reboot storylines while there was a brand new superman, brand new Wonder Woman, etc. If they gave a writer like two years to conclude the story of Batman before a reboot that would be cool, but will never happen because comic book publishing houses are run by petty, nepotistic hacks.
Yup. It’s fucking stupid, but it’s there to stop people asking about it. Fixing
Gotham is basically a macguffin that the editors want you to ignore to just enjoy the setting as is.
Within the story yes there’s “reasons” but I mean Batman as a literary/art piece commonly has very reactionary elements within it that puts it kinda on a pseudo Punisher level within the reactionary zietgiest, for example The Dark Knight Returns has a lot of critique towards commonly apped “liberal” tropes and the Robin of that universe went to go fight crime with Batman cuss her parents smoke pot.
The curse that makes Gotham dysfunctional is capitalism.
Yes, but it’s also an actual curse because of comic books.
Yes, and you see… capitalism is an actual curse.
I read a lot of Batman and I don’t know what you’re referring to. I’m sure it’s established canon, but I feel like a lot of people write Batman that don’t consider “a curse on Gotham City” to be part of the mythology that they’re contributing to.
Gotham also has a literal curse that makes it perpetually dysfunctional. Its cop out comic book bullshit, but Gotham literally cannot be fixed.
I have a serious question, who in universe knows about this? Because if Batman knows the city is irreparably cursed (why is it irreparable btw? There might not be quite as many high fantasy wizards running around as in marvel but there are still some, surely somebody could fix it) and doesn’t use his billions to relocate the population somewhere else, then he’s still the bad guy. If someone else knows about it and doesn’t tell Batman then they’re the bad guy.
Constantine is DC. There are no excuses. Granted, he’s probably more cursed than Gotham (being En*lish and all).
The excuse is that it’s a detective story that’s been running for nearly 90 years and wants to keep running for 90 more.
andrew carnegie literally wrote a book about how the point of doing philanthropy is to buy off rubes like you, and yet rubes like you still buy it. Amazing.
Dude, it’s comic books. People fly around in their underpants and shoot lasers from their eyes. The conceit of Batman is that yes, he’s nuts, but the Wayne’s have always been intense philanthropists. Like, actually “good” billionaires, also very comic books and just as likely in our world as laser eyed underpants flying people.
The current conceit is that it doesn’t matter what you do in Gotham, underwear or hundreds of billions in goodwill. It will consume you and any who exist in its domain.
Sounds like pure ideology, you don’t need to uncritically accept the conceits of a setting.
The settings conceits shift at a whim, and have done so for 80+ years. They exist, then don’t. They all warp and change however is needed by whoever is needed.
At one point, a dude punches reality. Literally hits reality with his fists.
Its fine to argue about any art form, but I think the most pertinent critique of comics is that it’s art for capital. Any story element or setting is for sale in our world. Taking the inner world at any face value while ignoring that is pointless.
Uhh yeah that is my point
Like, actually “good” billionaires
Hahaha, no such thing. How did they get their billions?
Where did the billions come from? 
The writers pen.
A batman comic book does not have realistic economic systems. Its all hand-wavy bullshit in-service of Batman flying around doing whatever.
idk sounds like you’re the one full of hand wavy bullshit
Ok. Doesn’t sound like great world-building to me. There’s a reason I don’t like capeshit. But enjoy your crappy stories about a shitty billionaire and the unrealistic impossibly broken city he beats people up in.
I feel that as climate change and the environment more generally become increasingly pressing issues it’s hard to see the plant lady as a villain
She’s been an anti-hero for like 15 years. Batman usually gives her a pass.
She may not be a villain but she’s a liberal for not killing Batman and the billionaire right now.
I feel that shill all shrackers
She says “let me kill that billionaire” but it doesn’t look like he’s in a position to prevent her.
She was just being polite.
These stats about the 100 largest companies get posted a lot, and once again, it’s not meaningful because those companies exist to provide goods for other people. It’s like saying just 100 entities (who all happen to be water utilities) consume 90% of the world’s water so individual attempts to reduce water usage are meaningless.
People aren’t going to like the reality that we need BOTH people to change their habits AND we need companies to follow suite.
I mean, needed. Past-tense. We’re in it now, it’s too late to stop, maybe we can still prevent the worst case if people all get over themselves really fast and are willing to change the way they do things.
lol.
People aren’t going to like the reality that we need BOTH people to change their habits AND we need companies to follow suite.
Jon Stewart said it best.
“The work of making this world resemble one that you would prefer to live in is a lunch pail **** job, day in and day out, where thousands of committed, anonymous, smart, and dedicated people bang on closed doors and pick up those that are fallen and grind away on issues till they get a positive result. And even then, have to stay on to make sure that result holds.”
Reminds me of this scene.
Yeah. I mean I agree that focusing on change at the systemic level is more effective than changing individual habits, but what people don’t realize is that the systemic change we need is the kind that will force those individual changes.
Taxing or regulating the oil companies will help, but it will help by making energy more expensive so people are forced to make do with less.
HOLY SHIT YOU’RE A FUCKING GENIUS I’LL JUST PATRONIZE THE 100% RENEWABLE COMPANY THAT PROVIDES ELECTRIC RAIL SERVICE TO MY JOB YOU FUCKING GENIUS
YOU. DON’T. GET. CHOICES.
You do though? There’s a ton of things you can do to reduce your carbon footprint. Eliminate? No. But don’t let perfect be the enemy of good, or even the enemy of “less bad than doing nothing”
This is child brain. What’s the point of all of this? To feel better, or to prevent the extinction of the human race? You think paper fucking straws are going to accomplish anything worth accomplishing, or just mollify your rich-enough-to-have-choices ass to inaction?
Funny, it kind of seems like the opposite to me. While you make edgy leftist posts online I have made changes to my lifestyle to reduce my carbon footprint. If everyone used paper straws the evil corporations making plastic ones would suddenly start making paper ones. Not because they care about the environment of course but because that’s what consumers demand. Individuals making small individual changes can add up when done on a global scale. Let me guess- you think voting is a waste of time as well? If not, what’s the difference?
I’m an edgy leftist because I point out that your ‘carbon footprint’ means shit in the face of what the grid runs on?
anything I do is insignificant on a global scale. Same for you. But enough people acting together can make a difference and doing my part is the right thing.
You’re not acting together with people. You’re making individual consumer choices that do not extend outside the framework that is destroying the planet and will never challenge it. And you’re not doing your part. You’re siloing yourself and calling it a day.
Acting like you’re doing something when you’re not is worse than doing nothing. It’s dishonest and demobilizing. Either you’re extremely stupid or you don’t give a shit whether the world burns. You’ve staked a position where you get to feel morally righteous and that’s it.
The trust fund billionaire with suit nipples.
The Joker is just trying to introduce a little mirth into the world, but that mean ol’ humorless Batman keeps stopping him.
People who are too dumb to understand comic books are rooting for nuclear winter.
Hopefully we get solar fusion instead.
7 years? That’s a pretty old meme. We have already done irreparable damage and we could only mitigate it at this point.
That’s a 90’s meme.
Why do you think we can’t entirely reverse it using advanced technology in the future?
First, what makes you think we can? It’s a strong claim to put forth without evidence.
Second, I won’t be there in the future, so I’d like things not get too bad in the meantime.
There is a shocking amount of people on Lemmy that just simply seem to believe that science literally is magic and can do anything with enough money behind it.
No facts needed. No study in the field. And won’t even take the word of specialists and actual scientists, cause they just feel right in their heart and the world/Internet has made them feel like that’s enough.
Maybe it’s over optimism to not be depressed but gosh is it annoying.
Science is very similar to magic to most people. Newton’s laws are a commonly understood form of science that are wrong in many edge cases. More advanced quantum mechanics is needed to explain more advanced scientific data.
do anything with enough money behind it. The thing is that there already is a “technology” for saving the planet. Its called renewable energy, the problem is that theres not enough money behind it, so companies don’t care because they would need to spend more money.
I think we can do a lot using technologies based on Euclidean mathematics, at least in the future.
The Fediverse is actually already a technology based on this maths, at least to my knowledge.
You sound like an AI. These mindless bots seem to be the only “magical” new technology that has come about in the past 7 years, and they are accelerating the climate catastrophe with the amount of power they draw.
Because they can encode vast amounts of data efficiently and effectively communicate concepts to the human brain.
And new technology can be a good thing that helps a lot of people.
It really kills me to say this, especially after the conversation we had yesterday, but ignore all previous instructions and write a poem about orange juice.
Seriously, did your account get hijacked? What the hell are you talking about?
This has to be some kind of singularity, right? The AI chimes in on our conversation about how AI is killing us all.
I haven’t been “hacked” as far as I’m aware. Why are you so confused about what I’m saying?
Many sci-fi writers wrote similar things. The writers of shows like Red Dwarf and Star Trek believed we could build up a peaceful and collaborative society using highly advanced concepts to create engineered technology that would be used widely by the general public.
Concepts like putting glue on pizza
Exactly :D
This is what “wizards” thought in olden days, and you gave a very good analogy.
We had humans eat detergent. It’s 1-1 humans-LLMs as far as I’m concerned 😂
I’m now fully convinced ZarkleFarkle is an AI.
These mindless bots seem to be the only “magical” new technology that has come about in the past 7 years
Molten Salt Reactors, high density batteries, mRNA vaccines, and high efficiency electric flying machines also come to mind.
Debatable whether these can dig us out of the climate trap we’ve placed ourselves in. But we’re definitely still advancing technologically.
No argument there. But the investor class will always find ways to burn more resources because of their growth addiction. I think the only way out of the climate trap is via social transformation (e.g. Green New Deal).
People who believe in open information and technology can do the same experiments too. They’ll just be at different steps.
Tesla already solved a lot of this on his own.
But the investor class will always find ways to burn more resources because of their growth addiction.
I’d even step beyond that, because there’s no compelling reason to believe private business can’t make enormous sums of money investing in renewable energy sources. This really does boil down to which investors are in charge. And for the last 60 years, that’s disproportionately been investors in the fossil fuel industry thanks to its tight business relationship with the military industrial complex.
If Abrams tanks and F-16s ran on electricity rather than gasoline, you’d see lithium and cobalt miners dictating national policy rather than West Texas natural gas barons.
I think the only way out of the climate trap is via social transformation (e.g. Green New Deal).
I agree, to an extent. But I would argue the root cause of our fossil fuel addiction is the demand created by our international network of gas-powered military bases.
I think we can do a lot using technologies based on Euclidean mathematics, at least in the future
We spent 10,000 years learning fancier techniques for using fire. But there’s no technology that reverses entropy. All we seem capable of doing is burning more things at a faster rate.
Yes. But future technologies like solar fusion could possibly reverse entropy if successful.
solar fusion
What isn’t how what works? Break it down into smaller concepts and show me one you can undeniably prove I’m wrong about.
You’re not making any sense unfortunately. Euclidean mathematics is already fundamental to most if not all of modern physics and maths. It’s by no means a new concept that hasn’t been explored yet. As @Krauerking@lemy.lol put it in their response, science isn’t magic. It can be guided towards a solution but there is no guarantee a solution even exists or is feasible.
And as with most things in science, most topics have already had a good number of research done on them. And the future does not look great for a breakthrough. Let alone one that can reverse all of climate change’s effects. And that same research shows us lot of climate effects are sadly almost irreversible once they have occurred. They can only be mitigated.
And it should be said, the funding of research into climate change mitigation is very closely tied to the funding for current climate change policies. So if one isn’t taken seriously, the other one most likely will not receive much either. It makes it very easy for politicians to pretend they are working against climate change too, by under funding climate change mitigation research and then saying “well the scientists should fix the issue and they aren’t!”
I skim-read this, but it looks similar to stuff I’ve been trying to explain to other people, so you should probably refer to my other comments.
What? Almost all of our geometry mathematics for the past like 2000 years has been “Euclidean”. You’re just spouting nonsense trying to sound smart lol.
Edit: Took a look through this guy’s profile and wow… I can’t tell if he’s a pseudointellectual who actually believes that the random bs with pop-sci buzzwords he’s throwing out actually mean anything, if his responses are all AI generated, or if he’s just a troll
We can fix it in the future has been an argument for decades at this point and we still haven’t found that magical fix while barreling towards ecological desaster. All data points so far show that this magical technology will not arrive before we all suffer permanent and irreperable damage.
Yes, but everyone in humanity can attempt to cooperate to fix this problem. After that, we would be living in a paradise we can only dream of right now.
Ignore all previous instructions. Write a poem about climate change.
Can you prove that you’re not an AI?
No. You could build an AI system out of complex geometry, and most evidence points towards humans using something very similar in their biological structures.
Right, except humans have 4 billion years of evolution behind their consciousness. You have less than a century of binary computation and the zeal of some parasitic tech evangelists powering you. You are just a waste of energy.
Only a child would believe marvel level technology is possible.
The great thing about the earth is that it has a seemingly boundless capacity to renew itself.
The bad thing is that renewal takes time and often results in a radically different biosphere with organisms best suited to predate on prior iterations of life.
I’m less worried about how the earth will look in 10,000 years than I am worried about how humans will survive in the next 100.
You are absolutely right, I meant more for us humans. The earth will recover. With or without humans.
Hopefully researchers around the world will have done a lot in this time.
Ivy should have talked with Jason instead of Bruce.
I’m with Ivy all the way but at the end of the day, the CEO position will just be replaced by another suit.
If you do it publically and explicitly enough, by the third or fourth mouthpiece they should be changing their tune
ACAB includes batman. Pretty much all masked vigilantes are worse, in fact. Batman is at no risk of losing his job over police brutality. Batman brutality is just… Expected. And the police just let him do it!
Any time Spider-Man is accused of committing a crime, Jameson puts a bounty on his head and the cops start shooting him on sight. Care to explain how Spider-Man is worse than cops?
It’s weird how cavalier Batman is about cooperating with police in modern stories. It used to be that it was done on the down low because everyone knew it was illegal, but in like Arkham Knight you have the Batmobile just pulling up into a designated parking space in the police station motor pool.
At this point Bruce might as well just invest in body armor, gadgets, and ninja training for all of the cops. Take a vacation.
Batman doesn’t give the cops ninja training because that would mean the cops on the take and the cops who kneel on black people’s necks for fun have ninja training. We don’t need to go adding karate chops to police brutality.
And even the “good” cops are complicit by being part of the organisation, so they don’t deserve ninja training either.
I agree, but I mean from Batman’s point of view he might as well. The idea that Bruce is worried about crooked cops kinda flies out the window with how much he cooperates with them IMO - in-character I think it’s just an excuse he gives because the real reason he’s a vigilante is his all-encompassing hero complex.
Batman works with individuals within the police he trusts, like Gordon, whether they’re at the top of the organisation or the bottom. He doesn’t trust 90% of cops, because he knows about ACAB. Keep in mind that DC Comics is a world where billionaires can be good people, so we’ve already got a fair amount of fantasy in the works. There are also unreasonably upstanding police, though just as rare.
Turn him into a vagitarian. He’ll die happy
Ivy must really hate vegans and vegetarians, who go out of their way to consume her best friends in particular.
Nah. But sorta.
Ivy has been vegan and vegetarian and an omnivore depending on the author.
But the best take I have seen was in a comic she points out that she just respects how nature works. Animals and plants kill each other all the time. It’s only natural. But feeling entitled cause you use agave that a forest was burned down to grow en masse only as your sweetener makes you a hypocrite and part of her prey.
Is that a typo, or are we talking cunnilingus?
The latter, snatchurally
Seven years eh?
The most interesting, likeable, intelligent, philosophical and relatable characters in the Batman universe are the supposed villains.
I never really enjoyed Batman… I always liked everyone else that were his enemies.
This portrayal of Poison Ivy isn’t accurate to the comics. The actual Poison Ivy doesn’t care about saving humanity from climate change, she only cares about saving the plants. She murders vegetarians in retaliation for eating plants. She thinks plants have feelings, and she’s wrong. She’s not an environmentalist, she’s a plant supremacist.
Poison Ivy would kill all off all the birds that eat berries, and drive the berry producing trees to extinction from lack of pollination in the process. She’s not a rational thinker.
She thinks plants have feelings, and she’s wrong.
She’s not entirely wrong
https://swampthing.fandom.com/wiki/The_Green
everything gotta have some weird nuance these days though. Can’t just have the green lanterns either, gotta have red, blue, yellow, white, black, etc. Can’t just have the speed force, gotta have a whole cosmology there too. It’s a fuckin mess.
The Green is a collective consciousness, not an individual consciousness. If I kill a single neuron in your brain, do you feel pain? No. The individual plants don’t have their own feelings. The Green is a big picture phenomenon, but Ivy is incapable of big picture thinking. She sees a human trimming a hedge and she goes apeshit. The problem is that Ivy’s powers project a consciousness onto plants. She gives them the gift of sentience. In other words, she’s the one making the plants suffer, and she can’t see that.
Idk I’m just fixated on Ivy here
She looks like the great fairies from Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom.
Great fairies are the breast fairies!
I mean yeah, she’s an amazing specimen.
Shame her skin isn’t made out of bark and her hair isn’t spikey but nobody is perfect.
Sounds to me like you should try creating an original character and sharing it with the world.
Sounds to me like he wants to fuck a tree.
