(3 hours ago)Boredfrom wrote: There is a good monologue in the final issue on why Squadron Supreme utopia was destined to fail (the whole Utopia depends of good people not abusing it and they cannot trust new generations), but Mark Gruenwald put an objection on that with the final scene.Although this is very true, that's a secondary objection for me, I reject the premise that moral purity (not that heroes are shown to be truly morally pure despite the writers best efforts) equals omniscience. Even in the case of Superman, Hyperion or Kyle as Ion I'm reluctant to grant omnipotence as well.
When I was googling it I found the blog of a dude that also seems to have misread the comic
https://archfrivolous.com/2021/06/07/inside-the-hibernacle/
Quote:But now, it all seems bonkers. Let’s accept that you have to reopen prisons, because the B-Mod stuff really isn’t OK (the theory of mind and society it’s built on is absurd, mind you – but the absurdity is fascinating and might be worth talking about later). But the following list seems like a bunch of net goods to me. No guns, no army, and a promise to end death (if you want – the hibernacle program isn’t compulsory). But this is only a partial list – the Squadron has also made inroads into ending poverty and unemployment, according to an earlier issue. Does Nighthawk – or Gru – think that those advances should also be rolled back?
Nighthawk just tell you that all of this depends of a benevolent dictatorship that will never be sustainable in the long run, you tankie…
And to head off the obvious plot defense: a character who cannot be wrong is bad writing.