Also, Namor contented his desire to kill non-combatants to one person (there were others of course, because that's how war is, but he never deliberately targeted civilians en masse).
And as a few people point out, certain past rulers of Wakanda would have either given him Riri or merked her themselves.
Edited by ArthurEld on Dec 17th 2022 at 11:05:11 AM
I view Namor less as genocidal more as a villainous version of a Proud Warrior Race Guy...maybe qithout the warrior bit. Just a Proud Race Guy.
Like that's a whole part of original flavour Namor too. He loves Atlantis/Talokan and thinks of humans as troublesome but willing to keep to himself. Enocidal indicates first to strike. Namor is strictly retaliatory(in his eyes anyway).
I mean, again, folks are leaping from how he treats Wakanda, the one nation he is attempting to ally himself with and is concerned may actually be a threat, with the rest of the world, which he transparently views with contempt.
You'll notice he captures Shuri and Riri to explain himself to Shuri, but certainly doesn't bother doing that to anyone else.
More broadly, on the first strike question, I don't actually think that's a necessary component of genocide. Lots of genocides emerge out of various wars (most famously, Rome traditionally went to war not against states, but against peoples, with entirely predictable results) and the question of who started the war doesn't effect the question of who committed genocide (especially since in modern times folks like to present their wars as defensive, regardless of the underlying truth).
But I'll point out that the story claims that Riri is somehow the only available source of vibranium detection, which is his alleged issue. He captures her. Talokan is safe (in story, this is fairly silly practically). A ruthless leader would kill Riri and then either hold Shuri hostage to ensure Wakanda keeps his secrets, or release her as a sign of good faith.
He instead proposes an alliance to destroy the rest of the surface. Why? Because that's what he wants to do. The nominally defensive nature of his action is, in my view, an excuse.
Now, again, it's not like we see plans for what he's planning to do, but we see them engage in combat several times throughout the movie and they negotiate/show mercy/talk only to Wakandans, they transparently view themselves as superior even to Wakandans and hold the rest of the surface dwellers in total contempt. Even if they only decided to launch a massive war of aggression against the entire rest of the world for the crime of...accidentally discovering the existence of Talokan, that combination of traits (combined with, actually, apparently, being literally genetically superior to their enemies) is a recipe for disastrous war crimes and genocide.
Now does he literally come out and twirl his mustache and say, "I'm going to kill all the children and your little dog too"? No, Disney is trying to maintain him as a sympathetic antihero figure, but just like with Falcon and Winter Soldier, failing to think through the ramifications and implications of the antagonist's plan leaves them in a position where the conflict isn't nearly as grey as they would like.
We see him engaging with non-Wakandans in limited fashion in other points of the narrative. As a child he attacks the spanish mission and butchers his way through it, he doesn't switch gears and decide to completely annihilate the entirety of the north american continent. When the Talokans are sent to retrieve Riri they likewise attack them hard and fast (and cut their way through the police force surrounding them), they don't decide to cut down every civilian in a thousand miles radius for kicks. There's just nothing there to indicate Namor would suddenly decide to wipe out nations off the map.
Again, he wants to go to wage a brutal war of retaliation with "the surface world" ( whatever that means, Namor doesn't specify if he's going to war with literally every nation above the waterline or if he's using that term as a shorthand for the nations that antagonized Talokan directly) that would cause a lot of colleteral damage and untold death. This is already dark enough a prospect that there's no need to go "did you know Namor is literally Hitler?".
"All you Fascists bound to lose."
Except, the only nation to 'antagonize' Talokan is the United States. If that was what was meant, they should have said that, not surface world. ETA: It's actually somewhat interesting to note the exact extent to which Namor commits the same exact offenses he claims justify his actions against his enemies. The CIA accidentally trespasses in his territory, he deliberately intrudes on both Wakandan and US territory. Nakia kills one of his subjects, he's already killed dozens of US citizens and proceeds to do the same to Wakanda. Now, the first round of offenses, intrusion, could be justified on the basis of military necessity (though the US would claim that too), or response to T'Challa's endangering Talokan by revealing the existence of Vibranium
On the rest of their military actions...I mean, no, the soldiers on a military mission appear to kill everyone who sees them (no witnesses) but don't go on a random massacre? I don't think that tells us anything? ETA: Accomplishing a military goal (usually reduction of military resistance) and then carrying out more organized massacres of the civilian population is a standard way to carry out a genocide, if only because it's far safer.
But, no, Namor is not literally Hitler. But most genocidaires were not Hitler either. Namor being Scipio Africanus who's been going to destroy the Carthaginians (the Surface World) for the glory, honor and safety of Rome (and himself)...that I can buy.
Edited by ECD on Dec 18th 2022 at 7:36:16 AM
Namor's retaliation is brutal and relentless (if sometimes justified, like attacking the CIA is fairly sensible all things considered), that point is fairly obvious in the film, but the point is the burden of proof of "he's all about that ethnic cleansing" is on you. There's nothing in the film to show this.
"All you Fascists bound to lose."![]()
He's not about 'ethnic cleansing' in my interpretation, he's about destruction of at least some (or all non-Wakandan/non-Talokan, or all non-Talokan) national groups which, I'm sorry, still falls under the UN definition of genocide. As I said, we don't have his exact plans, but I think, to return to the initial comment that started this thread, that 'genocidal theocratic ruler' is a legitimate interpretation of what we're shown. It's not certain, but it's a legitimate interpretation.
Edited by ECD on Dec 18th 2022 at 7:48:50 AM
Not really. If he wanted to destroy all none Talokonil civilizations, he would have done that centuries ago. He's literally 500 years old after all. He's a Proud Race Guy, but also isolationist. He's not going go ass-kicking the white folk unless he thinks he has reason to.
I'd also fight on the theocratic but too. We know his people see him as a god, but does he actually see himself as one? We don't really get a clear answer, accept that he most probably sees himself as a dad almost more than a king.
Also I don't think I would count Rome as genocidal. As was mentioned earlier, they wanted to subjugate, not ethnic cleanse. There was lots of racism involved yes. But if it was genocide, then all war can be classified as genocide, which it isn't.
Also my issue with initial review snippet is that seems to fall into the trap of non-white characters as villains or morally grey characters is inherently racist because show them doing bad things is racist.
Edited by Sisi on Dec 18th 2022 at 4:00:09 AM
The scenes here is pretty ambiguous, but the obvious problem with your timing is that he didn't have the numbers then. As far as we see, the initial population is less than 20.
There's quite a lot of scholarship on Roman warfare, but yes, it was often explicitly genocidal (though usually kil all adult men, enslave everyone else, which still fits within the scope of the modern definition).
Edited by ECD on Dec 18th 2022 at 1:33:55 AM
With Namor I'd imagine what he'd probably do is something like fire a bunch of WM Ds at the rest of the world to cause their civilizations to basically collapse. Not necessarily trying to literally exterminate the rest of humankind, but would tend to have massive civilian casualties regardless.
I'll note that mercy he shows to Wakanda should be taken with a bit of a grain of salt, as they seem to be one of the few civilizations he actually has a particular degree of respect for.
I'll say the big argument against him being genocidal is mostly subtext. The story paints him with sympathetic enough colors that it seems to be trying to tell us he's not totally evil.
A big thing is also that he doesn't seem to be cruel to his own people, which is a big thing.
Leviticus 19:34Honestly it comes across a tad like you just started from the premise Namor is a genocidal psychopath and you're working your way backwards to support it.
"All you Fascists bound to lose."
Formerly Hail Muffins (He/Him)
![]()
![]()
![]()
To be clear on sequence here Red Hunter 543 brought up a review calling Namor a genocidal theocratic, they disagreed with that, while I thought, and think, it's a reasonable interpretation.
I do not think he's a psychopath. As noted, he cares deeply about his own people and somewhat about the Wakandans, at least Shuri. But psychopathy is not required for genocidal intent.
Edited by ECD on Dec 18th 2022 at 2:30:26 AM
Shame, part of me would've really liked to see Shuri try to be queen and run the country and how she'd have tried to adjust to the position with the personality she has. M'Baku showed himself to be a qualified leader in his own right, but it'd been nice to see a young woman function as a major world leader.
Edited by AlleyOop on Dec 18th 2022 at 7:23:31 AM
I think it's a bit mire flexible an arrangement IMO. M'Baku ia probably there for everyday government stuff, but I think it's less kingship but more a constitutional monarchy on Shuri's part. At least in terms of the tribes in the council being on equal footing without any one of them in a top position like it used to be.
Makes sense to me though. Shuri feels like she'd prefee to outside id the politics. Stat in the lab and the battlefield now.
As for Namor I still fell like it's making the vidence fit the conclusion by cqing him genocidal. His primary concern is protecting his people, not killing his enemies. Like I said if he was genocidql he wouldn't have kept his civilization secret. He's a xenophobe, not genocidal. He says he wants to burn the world with Shuri, does that also make Shuri genocidal or does he just share her grief and trauma qnd rigbteous anger at the world?
Edited by Sisi on Dec 18th 2022 at 7:39:02 AM
Wasn't Shuri introduced as a villain in the Manga?
And as I understand it, in the mainstream comics, she's a pretty new addition, in 2005.
I dunno, she sounds like a fun anti-heroic foil to T'Challa.
"The Black Rage makes us strong, because we must resist its temptations every day of our lives or be forever damned!"It was the Marvel Manga verse.
She was jealous of T'challa being chosen as the Black Panther and heir to the throne, and left Wakanda, then became Doctor Doom.
I hear mainstream Shuri also has jealousy issues.
"The Black Rage makes us strong, because we must resist its temptations every day of our lives or be forever damned!"

TBH, I feel he is ruthless but genocidal is a bit much for a guy like him.
If he's willing to call a temporary halt of invasion of Wakanda twice, I doubt he's the type to desire genocide of all other nations. He wants to assure that his people are protected first and foremost, and will avenge any deaths he deems unprovoked but he doesn't have much interest in ruling over the surface and genociding all non Atlanteans.
He's more likely to order a crippling of other nations to send a message to the rest of the world not to mess with them.
Edited by RedHunter543 on Dec 17th 2022 at 2:00:45 PM
"The Black Rage makes us strong, because we must resist its temptations every day of our lives or be forever damned!"