A Return to Humanism

Humans have become far too conditioned into the belief that cynicism equates to realism, that hope and kindness are inherent weaknesses, or "boring". As a result of this grotesque framework, a common held belief is born: power corrupts.

It is difficult to challenge this notion because it has been so ingrained into the way we observe our world. It has become a foundational certainty. Although this idea has never sat right with me, recently it has become clear to me why: the theory that power corrupts implies that humans are inherently corrupt creatures. Under enough pressure, enough prodding, and enough nudging, it will reveal that underneath every one of our skins an unsightly evil lies beneath.

It is the undeniable truth that humanity's capacity for evil is, in reality, far worse than anything that could be dreamt up in fiction. However, I do not merely question this proposition; I find it profoundly repulsive. Think about the people we most admire in our lives: a grandmother, a best friend, a father, a mother, a brother. Are we truly meant to accept that the people we look up to the most share the same vile core as humanity's greatest villains? That in the right environment, they will be no different? I find this to be a complete bastardization of the human character.

In modern times, this abhorrent notion has been imposed more forcefully than ever. It is precisely at this juncture where our hero emerges as a complete refutation to these ideas, cynicism's antithetical kryptonite: enter Superman.

The Blueprint to Heroism

Superman is undeniably the most iconic superhero of all time, the first of what we define as a "superhero" today. Every superhero-adjacent concept was built on the scaffolding of Superman; his character has been etched into human culture like few others.

Despite the grandiose CGI battles with oddly dark lighting and the universe-shattering stakes we associate with modern superhero culture, the birth of superheroes marked by Superman was one of humble beginnings. Superman may soar the skies and leap buildings with a single bound, but what defines him are his two feet firmly planted amongst the people. Our humble hero is less of a cop patrolling universes and busting up bad guys (although he does his fair share) but more of a firefighter and a champion of the people, helping cats out of trees, fixing buildings, and assisting the elderly across bustling roads. A small-town boy at heart, acting as the beating pulse to all that is good. Superman has always been hope personified.

The Anti-Hero

ior to James Gunn's 2025 Superman, the classic blue and red hero had largely faded out of public consciousness, mischaracterized beyond recognition amongst the masses. This perfectly serves as a reflection of society's shifting mindset towards what defines the human character. With the release of Christopher Nolan's smash hit success, 2005's Batman Begins, a notable metamorphosis began to take place. Prior to this, superhero media, in particular, superhero films, had established themselves in the eyes of the people as campy, bright-colored fun. Nolan shatters and remolds the superworld in his image: dark, gritty, and realistic. And with it, the emergence of one of the most oversaturated and misunderstood roles in history: the anti-hero.

This role is defined by the moral line it sits along, a protagonist often with a lack of, or conflicting traits with, the traditional hero. The appeal of the caricature stems from moral ambiguity, an element of darkness that challenges the traditional hero role. The role of the anti-hero is not a new one, gaining prominence as far back as the 19th century along with the Romantic Movement.

However, its oversaturation in popular media can be traced back to The Dark Knight trilogy. Studios and writers were quick to capitalize on its success, and the superhero genre was quickly flooded with these types of characters. The anti-hero caricature quickly appeared sloppy; the market was bombarded with characters that lacked any proper depth under the thin veil of the 'anti-hero' due to poorly written moral ambiguity.

One of the biggest issues that arose from this was that characters with traditionally heroic roles had their personalities and behavior altered beyond recognition in order to fit the lines of the easily replicable anti-hero formula, most notably Superman under Zack Snyder's direction. Resulting in a much darker take on the character and a far cry from the figure people typically associate with Superman. Many fans of the superhero genre vocalized their dissatisfaction with the character, expressing that they believed Superman should not simply be a rehashed Batman (and a very mischaracterized Batman at that).

People began to take notice that there were now more protagonists with undefined ethics and moral ambiguity than there were heroes. A large part of the appeal for anti-heroes is that they are different from the traditional hero, but when every character, including characters who previously hadn't, is suddenly an anti-hero, the appeal quickly loses its charm. When executed poorly, which it was more often than not, it starts to wear on the viewer and becomes cynical and crude just for the sake of cynicism. Studios often fail to realize that not all of the audience is blind to lazy writing.

Superman was a difficult character for studios to tackle, as, at the time, Superman was widely regarded as a "boring" character. This was a direct result of a lack of understanding of the caped hero. He was reduced to a simple strongman juggernaut archetype, stripping him of all that makes him Superman and, therefore, a "boring" character. Superman is defined by his desire to protect others, his kindness, his grappling with what it means to be human, his burning passion for the belief that all life is sacred, and most importantly to the topic at hand today: kindness in the face of immeasurable power.  

What is "Human"?

After two long decades, James Gunn's 2025 Superman breaks the tired formula we've been seeing since 2005, and the timing could not have been better. Bright colours, an uplifting message, and a humanist core. A breath of fresh air. Despite beatdown after beatdown, possibly the most we've ever seen Superman struggle on the big screen, his moral character reigns supreme.

He acts as a complete refutation to the theory posed earlier – that power corrupts. Superman is one of the strongest characters in superhero history and certainly the most powerful character in the film by a margin. A minor deviation we see from typical superhero media, but not a first, Superman's parents send him to Earth in order to conquer the planet as a cruel dictator exercising his power over a biologically inferior race. However, even after his parents' intentions are revealed to him, his character doesn't waver in the slightest. Superman is able to remain strong in the face of adversity; his worldview is challenged not only by his opposition but also by his loved ones. He fails countlessly and gets up every time, and because of this, he succeeds. He is given every opportunity to fall into what proves to be the easier option: to give in to evil. But by denying this, he defines strength. Hope and kindness are traits that inherently require strength.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, cynicism is inherently rooted in fragility and weakness. The reason cynicism is equated with reality is because it's the easier path; it's easier to throw in the towel than to fight on. Therefore, examples of those who fought on are deemed "unrealistic" out of jealousy of what could've been, out of disbelief that this could have been achieved had they not forged on. Cynicism is defined by weakness.

This plays into another modern issue that has particularly affected our youth, the lack of role models who demonstrate true strength. The importance of positive role models is severely overlooked, now more than ever, with the most funnelled examples of strength and masculinity to the youth being superficial characters preying on the fragility of those without strength or, the often frequently sold alternative, rejecting strength entirely and embracing weakness. Now the question arises: the character of Superman himself is not human, so why should he be championed as the epitome of it? The answer lies in a quote from the film:

“I’m as human as anyone. I love, I get scared. I wake up every morning and despite not knowing what to do, l put one foot in front of the other and I try to make the best choices I can. I screw up all the time, but that is being human. And that’s my greatest strength.” - Superman (Superman, 2025)

Superman, although not human by biological composition, perfectly embodies the traits of the most humanistic human. Therefore I consider him human. Similarly, there are certain "people" from our own history and living amongst us now that are human by biological composition, however, I do not consider them human. They merely wear our skin and attempt to deceive us by appearing as us.

Political Allegory

Another demonstration of Superman's moral character against weakness thinly veiled as realism is the film's political commentary. Although James Gunn claims that the film was produced before the events of October 7th, which sparked a major escalation in the Israeli genocide of Palestinians and the destruction of Palestinian land under Israeli occupation, whether or not the film was a direct reference to this or not (although the occupation and genocide have been going on since the establishment of the Israeli state in 1948), it still serves as an incredible allegory for this atrocious affront to humanity and God. There are a number of parallels that can be drawn throughout the film.

Jarhanpur (Palestine) is terrorized by the significantly more powerful Boravia. Jarhanpurian civilians, women, children, and the old are shown to be the victims of Boravian armed soldiers and armored vehicles, not supposed "Jarhanpurian terrorists." Jarhanpur is even heavily implied to be without a standing military, similar to Palestine.

Lois Lane, Superman's lover, pressures and speaks to Superman off camera during an interview in order to censor him on his stance of an unjust one-sided attack. She claims that Jarhanpur has historically not been a friend of the United States, drawing obvious parallels to how various North African or Western Asian nations are frequently framed as "terrorists" that the United States must combat when the reality is very different. Superman counters this by stating regardless of whether or not Jarhanpur is a perfect nation, this does not justify another nation's right to invade it. Lois Lane then attempts to counter and justify Boravia's actions, asserting the Boravian government claims they are freeing Jarhanpurians, drawing parallels to how Israel's "official reasons" for the genocide of Palestinians are to "free them from Hamas" (although Israel's official reason changes however it is needed to frame their narrative). The "war" itself and its public presentation are entirely fabricated by powerful individuals in order to benefit themselves and partially used as a tool to profit weapons manufacturing corporations. The parallels are even further enunciated through the USA and Boravia's deep ties, the former calling the latter their ally, mirroring the United States often referring to Israel as their "greatest ally."

The character of Vasil Ghurkos (played by Zlatko Burić), who dictates the fictional terrorist state of Boravia, and his similarities with Benjamin Netanyahu (whose original family name was Mileikowsky, only changing it after settling into Palestine) dictating the fictional terrorist nation of Israel. Later, the Boravian dictator can be seen calling for the murder of civilians in private. Superman even acknowledges this, correctly pointing out that Vasil Ghurkos was going to murder people; however, Lois reframes this into a political matter rather than a simplistic moral one.

The reason that Superman's moral character is opposed to cynicism is demonstrated here because Superman establishes a firm stance on the side of Jarhanpur and takes direct action against the Boravian terrorists, much to the dismay of journalism outlets and the American government. In this situation, the easiest and the most encouraged thing to do is fence-sit. Fence sitting is rewarded because it is essentially siding with the perpetrators, as you bear witness to their action and take no counteraction. You become an associate in the crime. Instead of making a clear stance, fence-sitting typically results in virtue signaling, a superficial and hypocritical act that by definition is a conspicuous expression of moral value intended to project good character rather than to take effective action. It poses no challenge to the perpetrator; in fact, it benefits the perpetrator. 

Superman could have easily taken no stance, following the majority of celebrity figures in our reality, by reducing a matter of the most simplistic moral right or wrong to a complicated political matter. A commonly used argument for this is that reality is supposedly more "complicated," when it is often not the case. This is used as an excuse used by the weak in order to protect themselves. In the words of Malcolm X:

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything"

Superman demonstrates his strength by picking and taking action for a firm stance on a moral debacle. Just like blinkers to a horse, a well-conditioned person who refuses to see is an easy person to control. Truth, strength, and hope are the antithesis.

Recall to a Romantic Notion

In conclusion, Superman refutes the theory that power corrupts through his strength in his humanity. He presents the epitome of human character. As a recall to a romantic notion: we, as a collective, must revitalise our passion for humanity, our pride, and our faith in moral character. The strong must protect and uphold the weak until the weak become strong. I present a new nationalism, not one defined by the borders we have drawn across our globe but a belief in the collective nation of the human race.