Politics in Media - The Good, the Bad, and the Preachy

Do you suppose the GCPD has separate locker and squad rooms for the clean cops and the corrupt ones? Must make for awkward lunch conversations if they're together.

Actually there might be some edge cases here. The topic assumes that those who want to be a cop in Gotham either wants to do good are are too stupid to realize the act as a Darwin Award nomination. And that it would deter crookedness because of the high mortality rate

But I think there might be some in between that don't care and would operate in a grey area either because they are suicidal (in a Death Seeker sense) or because they value the well being if their family and friends over their own. The latter does not guarantee that they would act within the law. Especially with the likelihood of Gotham, by virtue of merely being a metropolitan area with a sizable population, having an impoverished underclass. People that would need the money to survive and would give their loves to ensure the survival of their friends and loved ones.

It is already applicable to the costumes masterminds (see, Viktor Fries and low level mooks), why wouldn't it be applicable for the boys in blue as well?

Well there's also the fact that even if you manage to get lots of bribe money as a corrupt cop, and somehow evade the notice of Batman.

Congrats! You are now a rich person carrying a massive amount of money in the middle of Gotham, the single most violent and crime ridden city in the history of always. You are going to be robbed and killed the second you do anything to indicate you have money.

As a disclaimer, I'd imagine the GCPD is probably a big example of Depending on the Writer. The GCPD being anywhere between "Just another gang" and Men of Sherwood is plausible and either can fit the needs of a given story.

I will say that I think it's plausible a crime-ridden town like Gotham would produce corrupt cops, despite also being dangerous to them. In fact, I think these two problems would tend to feed off each other.

Specifically, I think the "mechanism" by which Gotham would produce corrupt cops would be something like this:

• You're constantly thrown into danger, which might give you an us vs. them mentality with the populace.
• The above might also give you the impression that the city sees you as expendable.
• You're not able to make that much of a difference, and your inability to improve things will start to wear on you.
• Your job is probably thankless, and doesn't come with much pay or security. In fact, other cops are probably your main safety net if you will.

As such, a lot of cops would probably start out idealistic, but would become more jaded and unethical after a few years of working there.

It's easy to justify accepting bribes and other unethical actions when you see the alternative as sacrificing yourself to make barely any difference in the lives of a community that views you as expendable and doesn't deserve help.

Fair, but I should mention that despite that, there are still middle and upper class people not named Bruce Wayne. And if you can evade the Caped Crusader, you can likely avoid most of the rouges gallery as well or better yet, ensure you and your loved ones can escape the city before they can notice. Nathan is many thing, but it isn't an inescapable Closed Circle (usually at least)

Also there is the possibility of their death being the means they can get their loved ones enough prosperity to escape. A self inflicted life insurance scam basically (and I wouldn't put it past some given how mentally unwell people are there on top of the desperation factor)

Edited by MorningStar1337 on May 8th 2024 at 1:08:48 AM

Also note that if you are one of those decent people, most will assume you're one of the off brand criminals, which feeds into how bad it is to be a cop in Gotham.

I kinda see the point, but there's always someone (or lots of someones) who think I'm too smart for that.

Some of them might be right....but get killed anyway for reasons beyond their corruption, like being in entirely the wrong place at the wrong time.

For those curious, Gotham Central is all about being a cop in Gotham and was by far one of the best books ever written. The good cops do what they do because they legitimately believe in the cause for one reason or another.

Would a book like Gotham Central work in today's climate, I wonder?

With a talented pen, yes.

Bludhaven in DC comics was even worse than Gotham. It was so bad that the clean cops were the ones who had to meet in secret to discuss the others' corruption.

And Hub City (also from DC comics, being The Question's original home city) made both Bludhaven and Gotham look good. Hub City was so awful it broke The Question, driving him to up and leave the damn place.

Edited by M84 on May 8th 2024 at 11:12:56 PM

That would be true for goons under the hire of wealthy criminals/ mafia leaders too though. I don't agree with the idea that because of Batman and Gotham being crime ridden to an extreme, being a corrupt cop is not pursued by any evil minded or greedy person. All the arguments- them being chased after by Batman, being wealthy in crime ridden Gotham etc would be as applicable for people in higher positions under the hire of mafia and the wealthier super villians too, and Batman has them terrified and superstitious, but there always seems to be someone to replace one taken down. And I don't think supervillians or criminal leaders would be more caring for one of their gang members than for cops under their hire.

Honestly, I am more surprised that there are little to no cases of cops who go full punisher or use their authority to kill or abuse criminals they don't like. I think BTAS had that one episode of a new Arkham warden who abused its supervillian inmates and had them terrified of him, but no other case I believe.

Edited by xyzt on May 8th 2024 at 9:07:44 PM

Lock Up is one of those villains that make sense and border on being designated villain since he's actually able to keep Gotham's supervillains IN Arkham and scare them from doing crimes since Scarecrow was so afraid of him that he wasn't going to commit crime.

And like, the last time Scarecrow had an episode all to himself, he subverted Arkham security, smuggled goons and equipment under Arkham to poison the water supply with fear toxin.

Not to mention all the other times the inmates took over the Asylum.

So Bolton came off as having a very good point. But then the writers had him turn cartoonishly evil, have him start targeting innocent people and ranting about the "liberal media" to distract you from the fact that he's actually able to keep Arkham's prisoners from escaping AND behaved.

It's really telling the Joker didn't show up in that episode, otherwise Batman would look even worse for getting Bolton fired.

It's a plot point in the Year One Batman storyline depicting Batman's beginnings that he, Harvey Dent, and James Gordon tried to bring down Gotham's police corruption. They actually mostly succeeded.

Having Gordon as the commissioner did a lot to clean up Gotham's PD, though even he couldn't get rid of all of the dirty business.

A big part of the Year One, Long Halloween, and Dark Victory stories was that Batman's early efforts did a lot to weaken the more "mundane" systemic corruption and crime in Gotham, though this came with the tradeoff of costumed villains filling the void.

In the DCAU oddly enough, this ends up repeating itself by the time of Batman Beyond. When Batman Beyond begins, massive systemic corruption has taken hold of Gotham again in the form of Derek Powers. The first real threat Terry faces as the new Batman isn't costumed villlains, but Derek Powers and Mr. Fixit. Terry's victory over them starts the cycle anew by turning Derek Powers into another supervillain, Blight. From that point on, most of the threats Terry faces are more colorful costumed villains.

Edited by M84 on May 9th 2024 at 12:12:55 AM

@Red Way back you mentioned how the Sith from a certain point of view could be compared to Shonen protagonists. Care to explain? Is it because of their fiery passion?

Well the Sith in general tend to be guided by their passions and drive for power. If it was pursued in a non-toxic way, it could be compared to how Shonen protagonists seek self improvement and look for fights.

To the Sith, conflict is the point of life, and peace leads to stagnation.

"It is our goal to be stronger, to achieve our potential and not rest upon our laurels. We are the seekers, not the shepherds." -Yuthura Ban.

It sounds like something from Shonen, doesn't it?

From SWTOR, there's this light side Sith moment:

If you pick the right dialogue option when facing Overseer Harkun on Korriban after passing your trials and being made an apprentice, you will genuinely thank him, pointing out that the adversity and struggle the Overseer put in your way allowed you to grow strong and taught you a great deal. After all, strength comes from adversity, and learning strength is the Sith way. Harkun, a racist and classist jerk of the first order, is so shocked and touched that he actually calls you "apprentice" instead of "slave" for the first time, and wishes you good luck, in his own gruff way.

The Sith thrive on conflict, and Harkun's sadist teacher methods just end up making the Inquisitor stronger.

Edited by RedHunter543 on May 9th 2024 at 2:46:08 AM

Wait, who is Harkun and why is he teaching?

Okay, so he's like a Sith teacher who hates you for being a slave, and favors another acolyte who is a Sith Pureblood.

So here's where the whole "Strength through adversity" comes in. He gives the other acolyte easy tasks like translating tablets for the Sith lord you are trying to impress while he makes you go fight hungry monsters, mad Sith spirits, and a Dashade who are resistant towards Force attacks.

Which ends up making you stronger and looking more impressive than the Sith who just took the easy tasks which gets the latter fried to a crisp, while you get promoted.

That's the Sith way. This does weirdly deconstruct those born in advantageous positions in a meritocracy ironically because we see what happens when the spoiled rich kids are at the top and are given less work compared to those who start at the bottom and the ones at the bottom end up rising to the top and replacing said spoiled rich kids.

Power is gained through hard work and the will to get through adversity and hardship regardless if you are Sith or Jedi.

Edited by RedHunter543 on May 9th 2024 at 4:40:05 PM

That's... honestly just kinda quaint, really.

It helps that in real life most societies frown on people getting ahead by flash frying or decapitating the competition.

I'm reminded of House Telvaani from Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind. Of the three Great Houses of the Dunmer, House Telvaani stands out because the only thing that matters to them is power. A player character can advance in their ranks by doing shit for them like with the other Great Houses...or they can fight and kill their way up to the top.

Edited by M84 on May 9th 2024 at 4:54:44 PM

A Sith meritocracy is built on killing your superior to advance, so the Sith who work hard and gain power through conflict and hardship end up becoming stronger than the Sith who just stagnate and rely on their raw power to win the day.

It's oddly similar shonen, like the Sith Inquisitor is contrasted with another Sith who is born into great power and position but doesn't really cultivate it, while the Inquisitor knows hardship and started from the bottom which allowed them to rise to power.

"Conflict forces one to better oneself. It forces change, growth, adaption, evolution… or death."

Yeah, I can see how the Sith can be viewed as Shonen protagonists.

Deceiving everybody around you, using them as tools and stepping on your subordinates, and in general using chaos as a ladder, seems to make you a strong sith just fine. Look at Palpatine who pretty much manipulated every conflict to get on top rather than working hard through conflict to get more powerful. I don't think the sith approach cares how you get powerful as long as you keep on getting powerful and striving for more power, power for power's sake so to speak. It is a philosophy that can just as well apply to shonen villians like Cell who strived to become the perfect being by killing and/ or absorbing everyone, or orochimaru who experimented and kept snatching bodies of powerful beings to get their special abilities.

Yeah but Red is talking in the context of the Sith storyline in SWTOR. Where the Sith character is the underdog who has to fight and endure lots of suffering to cultivate their power and ends up beating Sith Lords who were born into privilege. So there is a certain advantage in a Sith growing stronger through being in the frontlines. Funnily enough your comparison with Palpatine and Cell fits with how Vitiate is as a villain to the Sith Inquisitor.

Terry even says he's glad for Powers' transformation because now it means people can see him for the monster he truly is, "even in the dark".

Edited by windleopard on May 14th 2024 at 6:11:47 PM

The transformation into Blight even derails Derek's villainy. As the first season progresses, more and more of his schemes are about trying to deal with his condition. Right up until he's exposed to the public and then killed off.

And despite his son seemingly stepping up to be the new Big Bad, Paxton ultimately proves to be a pretty ineffectual villain. He doesn't even get an episode to himself dedicated to his fall from grace, instead being a side character in the Royal Flush Gang's own collapse.

Edit:

This "mundane crime making way for costumed villains" plot was also present in the early Batman the Animated Series episodes too. Early episodes featured corrupt corpo Roland Dagett and crime boss Rupert Thorne. They would gradually be phased out in favor of more and more outlandish costumed baddies. Heck, both were even directly responsible for the existence of a couple of Batman's more colorful rogues. Dagett overdosing Matt Hagen on Renuyu turned Matt into Clayface, while Thorne provoking Harvey Dent led to the accident that turned him into Two-Face.

Edited by M84 on May 10th 2024 at 5:47:28 PM