Okay, I guess you disagree with the framing we've given the superhero concept here. But ultimately I think we're just using different words to describe more or less describe the same ideas. You're right about superheroes ensuring protection and accountability - in an ideal world, that's the function the law enforcement and military serve, with the superheroes doing their jobs either because the authorities are corrupt, incompetent or simply out of their depth.
For the record, I
don't think superheroes are necessarily military/cop propaganda. But it's very much possible to interpret them that way as well since functionally they serve the same purpose as the military or cops in the stories. They're what the military/cops
should be, doing what the military/cops
should do or
wish they could do.
Yeah, we
are getting way off topic.
I think the biggest challenge with doing a new ''Hard Traveling Heroes'' is that 'conservative' and 'liberal' are labels that don't stand for what they stood for back in the 70's. The Bronze Age Ollie and Hal would, in today's political context, both be centrists and have far more in common with each other than with most self-proclaimed 'conservatives' or 'liberals' today.
It's been ages since I actually read those stories, but if I remember them correctly, they were also tackling some very serious ground-level issues that affected people's lives. A lot of political discourse today is just about toxic online slagging matches. I mean, do we expect Hal and Ollie to get into a fight about pronouns? Or Elon Musk? Will Ollie refuse to protect a Supreme Court judge who's pro-life? Will Hal use his ring to 'build the wall'?