Earlier than we get into this, ask your self a easy query: the place do I stand on the concept the ends justify the means? As a result of, on the finish of this text, you’ll have to make a alternative, and it just about hinges on what your reply is to this query.
Think about you’re dealing with the prospect of world peace, however it depends upon telling a large lie. Or hiding a horrible reality. And what’s extra, it additionally entails murdering thousands and thousands of individuals. It’s like sacrificing a sheep in order that the divine will grant you one thing very nice.
On one hand, you will have your conscience and morality; on the opposite, world peace. What do you select?
This very convoluted dilemma is on the coronary heart of the 2009 film Watchmen. What you see in it’s a villainous scheme; what you are taking out of it’s a philosophical disaster.
So, let’s dig deeper into Rorschach’s uncompromising ethical act, Ozymandias’ nice deceit, and the sport of moral tug-of-war that also continues at the moment. As a result of you recognize it in addition to I do, this isn’t about what occurs; it’s about what you assume ought to occur.
The Premise
In a reimagined actuality of 1985—the place Richard Nixon is serving his fifth time period—clever and resourceful masked vigilantes have taken to preventing crime. Walter Kovacs, a.okay.a. Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley), one of many masked crime fighters, suspects the vigilantes are below assault. His investigation, nonetheless, finds out one thing way more devastating—and that’s the massive reveal we’re speaking about.
Adrian Veidt, a.okay.a. Ozymandias (Matthew Goode), an ex-vigilante turned businessman, is planning to kill 15 million individuals, framing Jon Osterman, a.okay.a. Physician Manhattan—the one vigilante with superpowers—to be able to consolidate world unity in opposition to one widespread enemy.
Ozymandias’ logic in a nutshell: Sacrifice 15 million individuals and create one single worry/enemy that the worldwide powers can unite in opposition to, or allow them to struggle one another and trigger billions of deaths.
The plan lastly goes by way of. Different vigilantes, seeing that the world has certainly united in opposition to one widespread—though false—enemy, reluctantly purchase into Ozymandias’s logic and comply with maintain quiet.
However not Rorschach. He vows to inform the world. Seeing his truthmongering could danger the already fragile world peace, Dr. Manhattan vaporizes him.
Within the denouement, unknown to the surviving vigilantes, Rorschach has already mailed his journal, by which he has recounted this entire affair, to a neighborhood New York tabloid.
The reality can nonetheless come out. However ought to it?
Ozymandias’ Calculation
A Lie That Can Save the World
Ozymandias, now a businessman, has purely calculative instincts and a utilitarian strategy. He sees every little thing as a numbers sport. From his perspective, his logic is easy: thousands and thousands of lives or billions of lives? For him, it’s not even a alternative; it’s a straight-out mathematical answer. Somebody like him would by no means put ethical philosophy into this equation. For him, the ends justify the means.
The Phantasm of Utopia
His plan works. The world powers lay down their harmful arms and unite. It seems just like the world is lastly at peace. “It’s like residing in a world hippie commune,” because the editor of a neighborhood tabloid places it within the closing scene. However not solely is that this sense of utopia constructed on mass graves, it’s additionally very brittle in a world the place friendships and rivalries get previous actual quickly. And to not point out, it additionally depends upon the silence of those that know the reality. If they alter their thoughts and the reality comes out, the world is again to sq. one, and the million deaths had been for completely nothing.
Rorschach’s Ethical Code
“By no means Compromise. Not Even within the Face of Armageddon”
This isn’t one thing that Rorschach simply says; that is ingrained in his central nervous system. If Ozymandias is a utilitarian, Rorschach is an absolutist. Ozymandias doesn’t let his conscience intervene along with his pragmatism; Rorschach doesn’t let pragmatism intervene along with his conscience. Ozymandias interprets his mass killings as a vital answer; Rorschach sees homicide as homicide.
Rorschach doesn’t like puppeteering. He doesn’t approve of taking part in god. Crime should be uncovered, regardless of the fee.
The Black-and-White Morality
Preserve apart the mass destruction. Preserve apart the lie. Dabble in depravity for a second.
Does Rorschach have a better ethical floor, or is he merely inflexible? In a gray world that smooth-sails on compromises, his refusal to take action—is it admirable?
If what Ozymandias says is true—if I don’t kill thousands and thousands, they are going to kill billions—received’t Rorschsch’s steadfast dedication to his ideas straight lead us to the annihilation of humanity?
Surviving on a lie vs. dying for the reality? Life vs. morality? What’s extra vital?
The Debate The place No person Wins
The talk is legitimate, however there is no such thing as a finish to it. And the filmmakers knew it. That’s why we don’t see a conclusive assertion on the finish. What they do as a substitute is maintain up two damaged mirrors, Ozymandias and Rorschach, and go away it to the viewers to look into whichever they approve.
Crew Ozymandias
That is the argument for pragmatism. The world is something however excellent, fairly chaotic, truly. Generally unfair issues should be carried out to determine wider equity. Rorschach’s righteousness is a luxurious in a world that’s dealing with extinction. Preservation of life equals a preventing probability. Issues can all the time be improved later.
Crew Rorschach
A lie is corruption, and life primarily based on corruption is unsustainable. The perfect world is made of people that know and settle for the reality, no matter how painful it’s. The selections they make primarily based on conscience last more and have better worth. One single particular person shouldn’t be allowed to determine the destiny of humanity.
Conclusion
In the long run, this debate is what Watchmen is all about. It reconditions the concept of a hero—whichever you maintain in the intervening time—and asks you: do you favor a chilly, logical god-king who saves you by taking away your free will, or a resolute, righteous knight who defends your proper to the reality, even when it kills you?
