Batman: Mask of the Phantasm

[Darth Wedgius]

Something to note, in a city as corrupt as Gotham,some of the money Bruce Wayne might spend to make the city a better place is probably going to end up in the pockets of organized crime. Kickbacks, bribes, protection,etc. That might be useful sometimes as a way to trace down some of that organized crime, but I can imagine Bruce Wayne having trouble doing that in an uncontrolled manner.

[Riedquat]

Something to note, in a city as corrupt as Gotham,some of the money Bruce Wayne might spend to make the city a better place is probably going to end up in the pockets of organized crime. Kickbacks, bribes, protection,etc. That might be useful sometimes as a way to trace down some of that organized crime, but I can imagine Bruce Wayne having trouble doing that in an uncontrolled manner.

You need a reasonable level of stability and security before spending money on anything else achieves anything.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Corruption is pretty much anywhere there is an opportunity to exploit something, especially in a major metropolitan area. And it's particularly one of the motifs of Gotham. Social dynamics such as crime and inequality doesn't really need to be established though with respect to Bruce Wayne Enterprises being so prospective. It's not particularly unprecedented that you have a billionaire in an area with seemingly irrevocable inequality, as areas with high standards of living (countries what not) usually come about through peculiarly developed social systems. Norway, Japan, Singapore.

Then there's also the speculation through the lens of Marxist socialism that the old money that precedes Bruce Wayne is distinctly the cause of such inequality. Kinda surprised that's not touched upon more, though I do tend to discount Dark Knight Rises a bit, where that was a theme in the movie. Still though, movie could have probably focused on it better.

[Nevix]

Something to note, in a city as corrupt as Gotham,some of the money Bruce Wayne might spend to make the city a better place is probably going to end up in the pockets of organized crime. Kickbacks, bribes, protection,etc. That might be useful sometimes as a way to trace down some of that organized crime, but I can imagine Bruce Wayne having trouble doing that in an uncontrolled manner.

Indeed. Money doesn't cure a problem when the problem is greed, corruption, graft, and worse.

Gotham... is like Eerie Indiana, except instead of weirdness, it's corruption. In my opinion, there's a number of laws and such in Gotham that are permanent city codes that unintentionally contribute to the corruption.

Or perhaps that's intentional, caused by the initial problem, and only exacerbated over the years.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

In my opinion, there's a number of laws and such in Gotham that are permanent city codes that unintentionally contribute to the corruption.

Like what?

[CharlesPhipps]

Then there's also the speculation through the lens of Marxist socialism that the old money that precedes Bruce Wayne is distinctly the cause of such inequality. Kinda surprised that's not touched upon more, though I do tend to discount Dark Knight Rises a bit, where that was a theme in the movie. Still though, movie could have probably focused on it better.

Marxist interpretation of Batman is kind of like doing an Objectivist superhero (ironically). You can't do an objectivist superhero, Dikto attempts aside, because superheroism is inherently selfless. In the case of Batman, he is a altruistic member of the ruling class who devotes his efforts exclusively to the benefit of the poor.

It's like Jesus with God being Evil. The premise starts in a place you can't look at it through.

[CmdrKing]

It's like Jesus with God being Evil. The premise starts in a place you can't look at it through.

Less impossible than you'd think. Gnosticism typically casts Jehova as the Demiurge, who depending on particular sect ranges from an ignorant megalomaniac convinced he's the sole god of the universe to a malevolent jailer intentionally trapping souls in the material realm. Meanwhile in most Gnostic systems Jesus is heralded as the bringer of the titular wisdom and laying out the path to liberating souls from material existence.

Marxist analysis has no real way to account for a truly charitable elite because they don't exist in real life and Marxism is a sort of grand analysis of history. Like under Marxism only full collective ownership is properly equitable, but simultaneously Bruce has no means to compel that (he could distribute his shares, but this would immediately cripple the company because while he has a controlling interest he's not a sole owner, and thus literally every employee would have to remain united at all times to prevent other owners from simply banding together, convincing a handful to sway to their side, and creating a far more exploitative company in its place). A full revolution is beyond the scope of even the single richest man in the world, but anything less would be deemed exploitative under classic marxism, so... not a useful lens at all.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

In the case of Batman, he is a altruistic member of the ruling class who devotes his efforts exclusively to the benefit of the poor.

Ah, so like a noble dictator or king, if you will.

[CharlesPhipps]

Yeah, we're dealing with the fictional universe of the Batman, though, which requires the truly selfless billionaire that is part of the system but cannot change it. Instead, he merely tries to alleviate the worst symptoms.

Ah, so like a noble dictator or king, if you will.

There is a good question of whether Batman's devotion to Gotham City is a paternalist sense of ownership to its property.

Mind you, one of the ironies of the French Revolution and the failed attempt at Russian Revolution (which was superceded by the Bolshevik Revolution) was the nobility were neck-deep in attempting to carry out the reform. Human civilization is full of contradictions with people who don't neatly fit into their expected class consciousness or roles. The great irony of Julius Caesar being that his autocratic ambitions were accompanied by a desire to win the eternal love of the average citizen through land and property reform while his assassins were the slave-holding landed class.

In the case of Batman, he's an individual who thinks he can decide Gotham's fate for it BUT it's accompanied by a desire to makes sure "his" city is prosperous and clean.

Interestingly, the Telltale Games went with the idea Thomas Wayne was a criminal and Bruce was unaware his fortune was based on blood money (and ironically, the attempts by Wayne Enterprises to make amends just make things worse).

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Yeah, we're dealing with the fictional universe of the Batman, though, which requires the truly selfless billionaire that is part of the system but cannot change it. Instead, he merely tries to alleviate the worst symptoms.

I agree w/ bold.

Ah, so like a noble dictator or king, if you will.

There is a good question of whether Batman's devotion to Gotham City is a paternalist sense of ownership to its property.

Yeah Batman does change things a bit for consideration. Though he is working within the system and not necessarily above it.

Though regarding what you said earlier:
I'm not sure how contemporary circumstance invalidates a marxist lens on the subject. Just because it's not practical for Bruce to divest his shares to all the employees doesn't mean his family history of old money can't be seen as a product of capitalism. It just seems rather blatant the social landscape of Gotham and the prosperity of Wayne Enterprises to be just the kind of thing that would have provoked Marx.

Also, it does seem plausible that Bruce having a controlling interest could dismantle the current board and convert his interest into a fully democratic council w/ constitution that still overweights the other powerful investors.