Was Norman Osborn Right?

[jackolover]

Osborn stated in the last Dark Avengers, that the world had to control the super humans, the mutants and the monsters, or they would ruin the Earth because of their machinations. He tried to quell their actions, but was removed before he could achieve it.

Now, since the Heroic Age, his warnings come back to haunt us. If it wasn't for the super heroes, Ultron would not have been made. Because of Ultron, the super humans overused time travel and caused the Builders machine to break, making them come to destroy the Earth. Because of the super humans the Inhumans have now infected the rest of humanity and made more super humans who aren't controlled. Now the kings of the super heroes, the Illuminati, are setting up the conditions to destroy Earth, because of these incursions, by using weapons that are planet busters. Right now there is a set of alternate realities in play, including DimensionZ and Uncanny Avengers destroying one possible Earth.

If Osborn was still around today, the Heroic Age would not be upon us, and Ultron would be his problem, instead of Hank Pym;, the Red Skulls daughter may have had no reason to unleash Fear Itself; and who knows why the Phoenix came to Earth? It may have done just as Scott Summers said it would.

Is there any truth to Norman Osborns beliefs that the super humans are the cause of Earths now spiralling out of control and the multiverse fracturing into pieces?

[ShaokhaN]

No, Osborn was not right.

One way to argue that super heroes are the cause of Earth's problems is by going meta - if super heroes did not exist, then writers would not be writing about those crises and villains affecting the Earth. The Joker only exists because Batman was created, the Red Skull only exists because Captain America was invented, etc. etc. This reasoning is, however, insufficient: yes, those menaces would not exist had the super heroes not been invented, but then their universes wouldn't exist either. There would be no Earth-616 if not for Marvel comic books. And I'm pretty sure that Earth-616's inhabitants would rather exist in the Marvel world than not exist at all ,-)

If you abandon the meta level and zoom into the Marvel multiverse, it is unambiguous that the super heroes solve way more of Earth's crisis than they create. In fact, without the Fantastic Four, Galactus would have consumed the Earth (or, if you go with the corresponding "What If?", without the Fantastic Four and the Avengers, and possibly without the Watcher). Without the Avengers, the Kree/Skrull war would have resulted in the destruction of the Earth, etc. Even some of the issues you mention are suspiciously framed. Without the Illuminati, Earth-616 would likely have been destroyed in the first incursion they faced. I'm also not sure where you read that the events in AoU are what led to the current problems faced by the machines of the Builders and to the incursions.

To sum up, despite occasional errors of judgement, super heroes overall do way more good than harm to Earth and its inhabitants.

[Captain Wessex]

Norman Osborne is a full blown loon, he isn't right if he tells you the sky's blue.

[Mark]

On the other hand it was the Illuminati going to Skrull to try and bully them into leaving Earth alone that egged them on. Beast has endangered all of reality by bringing the original X-men forward in time just to make a point to Scott.

[pageturner]

Having a level of accountability is not unreasonable but with most things concerning Norman it was the method not the message.

Many of the Heroes have made mistakes but if you weigh it all not many of them do not come out ahead. Even Ultron for all the bad has given us the Vision, Victor, Jocasta, and has morphed into a new life form with AI, so is it worth it?

The fact is most people with powers use them for ill. So the problem is not the heroes who mess up now and then in between helping people.

[The Overlord]

Norman Osborn is a selfish psychopath who actively created a corrupt system that aided super villains in their schemes and screwed over the general public. Norman's claims lost moral legitimacy from one day.

[jackolover]

For instance, I would take the view that this happened instead of the end of Siege:

Loki didn't give the Avengers a second chance by invoking the Norn stones, a the Avengers were killed. Loki instead used the Norn stones to place the Void in a hidden dimension only to be released for Norman Osborns purposes.

The Cabal was still functional after Siege, and it wasn't the Intelligencia that found the Space Knight and awoke Ultron, but the Dark Avengers, and Norman got Void to destroy Ultron.

No super heroes to mess up Space-Time.

[jackolover]

Having a level of accountability is not unreasonable but with most things concerning Norman it was the method not the message.

Many of the Heroes have made mistakes but if you weigh it all not many of them do not come out ahead. Even Ultron for all the bad has given us the Vision, Victor, Jocasta, and has morphed into a new life form with AI, so is it worth it?

The fact is most people with powers use them for ill. So the problem is not the heroes who mess up now and then in between helping people.

It's not just the heroes messing up, no, but there wouldn't be any villains messing up with the Cabal in charge either, unless they wanted to go up against the Void.

[jackolover]

Norman Osborn is a selfish psychopath who actively created a corrupt system that aided super villains in their schemes and screwed over the general public. Norman's claims lost moral legitimacy from one day.

It's not moral legitimacy, it's the survival of the Earth and the Multiverse that's important. I would think a little dictatorship in exchange for reality survival is a good trade.

As far as moral legitimacy is concerned, one of the things Loki mentioned in Siege #1, was that Volstagg was unaware of the corrupt nature of Man, so that Volstagg would not realize what his actions would cause, in the case of the thieves in the stolen money van, where he smashed the van to stop it. Man isn't a trustworthy creature, as seen from an Asgardian point of view, so to apply ultruistic concepts like moral legitimacy is being very lenient to Man. I don't think we deserve it.

And Asgard is not all. The Skrull would judge us the same, and so would the Spartax, and the Kree. Just look at the murder and wars going on right now. Just this morning there is a report of such an atrocity. These people are not going away soon. I don't know who gave Man intelligence, but is seems to be connected to war. If we didn't have intelligence we wouldn't have war.

[Sutekh]

Was the world devoured in '66 by Galactus?

No?

Then Osborne was wrong.

Yes, super-folk cause a lot of problems, particularly in the modern deconstructionist era when every event is hero on hero violence or dirty secrets of heroes being revealed, but, that's more on bad writing popularized by some misanthropic writers who have flat out admitted that they *hate* the superhero genre.

Historically, back when there were these things called 'superhero comic books' and they fought villains and stuff, they saved the world. A lot. And not just from each other.

Even without traditional superhuman menaces like Apocalypse or Doom, there are still entities out there like Galactus, Dormammu, Set, Chthon, etc. would have torn the 616 world apart without heroes free to stop them.

[Mikekerr3]

Osborn stated in the last Dark Avengers, that the world had to control the super humans, the mutants and the monsters, or they would ruin the Earth because of their machinations. He tried to quell their actions, but was removed before he could achieve it.

Now, since the Heroic Age, his warnings come back to haunt us. If it wasn't for the super heroes, Ultron would not have been made. Because of Ultron, the super humans overused time travel and caused the Builders machine to break, making them come to destroy the Earth. Because of the super humans the Inhumans have now infected the rest of humanity and made more super humans who aren't controlled. Now the kings of the super heroes, the Illuminati, are setting up the conditions to destroy Earth, because of these incursions, by using weapons that are planet busters. Right now there is a set of alternate realities in play, including DimensionZ and Uncanny Avengers destroying one possible Earth.

If Osborn was still around today, the Heroic Age would not be upon us, and Ultron would be his problem, instead of Hank Pym;, the Red Skulls daughter may have had no reason to unleash Fear Itself; and who knows why the Phoenix came to Earth? It may have done just as Scott Summers said it would.

Is there any truth to Norman Osborns beliefs that the super humans are the cause of Earths now spiralling out of control and the multiverse fracturing into pieces?

Did you even read the storiwes? Osborn did not want to quell Super-human actions he wanted to Control them so his super-humans could do evil without being interfered with.

Without super humans the MU earth would have been destroyed or conquered back in the 60s. and a couple of times a year, at least, since then.

[Mark]

Was the world devoured in '66 by Galactus?

No?

Then Osborne was wrong.

Yes, super-folk cause a lot of problems, particularly in the modern deconstructionist era when every event is hero on hero violence or dirty secrets of heroes being revealed, but, that's more on bad writing popularized by some misanthropic writers who have flat out admitted that they *hate* the superhero genre.

Historically, back when there were these things called 'superhero comic books' and they fought villains and stuff, they saved the world. A lot. And not just from each other.

Even without traditional superhuman menaces like Apocalypse or Doom, there are still entities out there like Galactus, Dormammu, Set, Chthon, etc. would have torn the 616 world apart without heroes free to stop them.

I don't know about the world being destroyed. After all supervillains live here too and if the FF hadn't had help from the Watcher that first time they wouldn't have had a chance. If the hadn't been there the Watcher might have aided Doom in saving the planet.

[The Overlord]

It's not moral legitimacy, it's the survival of the Earth and the Multiverse that's important. I would think a little dictatorship in exchange for reality survival is a good trade.

As far as moral legitimacy is concerned, one of the things Loki mentioned in Siege #1, was that Volstagg was unaware of the corrupt nature of Man, so that Volstagg would not realize what his actions would cause, in the case of the thieves in the stolen money van, where he smashed the van to stop it. Man isn't a trustworthy creature, as seen from an Asgardian point of view, so to apply ultruistic concepts like moral legitimacy is being very lenient to Man. I don't think we deserve it.

And Asgard is not all. The Skrull would judge us the same, and so would the Spartax, and the Kree. Just look at the murder and wars going on right now. Just this morning there is a report of such an atrocity. These people are not going away soon. I don't know who gave Man intelligence, but is seems to be connected to war. If we didn't have intelligence we wouldn't have war.

This might be an effective argument if we were talking about Dr. Doom or Magneto, villains who least have some interest in improving the world. Osborn is not one of those villains, he is an immoral monster, who will always put himself above anything else, has no redeeming values.

He created a system that was so corrupt, it was broken from day one, Doom and Magneto would not tolerated the level of corruption that Osborn was comfortable with. His system would have allowed super villains to ride rough shot over people (as long as they were not too open it) and he ultimately pissed away his position, by launching an attack on Asgard. Osborn is architect of his own misfortunes here.

Osborn is both a psychopath and a psychotic, which is a very bad combination, I would not trust him to know what is good for the planet. He created a system so corrupt it was unstable and he is such a loose cannon, that he was going to endanger everything sooner or later. He didn't offer a little dictatorship in exchange for reality survival, he offered a corrupt and unstable system that was not positive in any way.

Plus heroes have managed to save the universe several times already, I think they are better at then Osborn is.

Osborn is the guy who was willing to let Red Skull in Cap's body, take Cap's place. I have to question the judgement of the guy who thinks letting a mass murdering Nazi criminal inhabiting Cap's body work as one of his official representatives. Really Osborn has more common with someone like red Skull then he does Magneto or Doom, both are cruel sadistic monsters who have no redeeming values, I wouldn't someone that immoral in charge.

[Alvarez]

With hair like that, you just can't be wrong.

[jackolover]

Did you even read the storiwes? Osborn did not want to quell Super-human actions he wanted to Control them so his super-humans could do evil without being interfered with.

Without super humans the MU earth would have been destroyed or conquered back in the 60s. and a couple of times a year, at least, since then.

Thats a simplistic way of looking at Osborns agenda. A more probable way of seeing Osborns agenda is to keep super humans away from interfering with the mechanics of reality, and thus busting it.

There is a good argument to say that the super heroes had too much freedom to tamper with things that don't concern them, like time travel, and the Infinity Gems, and the Ultimate Nullifier. If the heroes had stuck to just countering the big bad, then the world wouldn't be in the mess it is now.