|click to see original image full size at wondermark|
But, wait, let's consider Bruce Wayne's charitable work helping widows and orphans. Strikes me there are two main problems with it: first, he's obviously not giving it his all, or seriously committed to it, else he wouldn't be spending all that money on the Bat Cave, the Batmobiles, all that tech need to support his battling super-villains lifestyle; and, secondly, perhaps more insidiously, he's doing it as Bruce Wayne, indolent scion of wealth, irresponsible playboy. The message he sends by doing this work as that character is that the work of providing the social safety net and caring for most vulnerable members of society is properly left to the whims of the Titans of Industry. To give or not to give, subject to the pangs of conscience and convenience ... the real business of that lot is maintaining their wealth and punishing transgressors of the established social order.
What Gotham needs is an authentic Bruce Wayne: a man who was lucky enough to inherit a fortune, but unlucky enough to lose his parents to violence. His intelligence, resources, and passion for justice should have made him a serious, credible agent for societal good. He could be the public face of civic engagement dedicated to engineering a just society built on the greatest defense human rights and liberties have against thieves, the greedy, and those who would use force to take what they want: the rule of law.
By all means, rather than talking about what our heroes could look like, what would make them worth emulating and worth aspiring to, let's instead debate whether Ben Affleck is a good fit for the role in the next shitty franchise movie. "Does he have the gravitas to play The Dark Knight?"
Spare me. That'll be a debate worth having about the movie where Bruce Wayne puts on his big boy pants and takes on the real problems of society. Like a man, not a stunted man-child living a Libertarian fantasy.
Related: "Batman: Plutocrat"