He calls superman, a hypocrite for not wanting to use violence to end conflicts as clark decks manchester in the face without any attack on the elite's part.
He says, superman cant understand them ie the elite as he's not human and never had the weakness to get abused as most others had, goes on to prove him right as he fake kills his friends and everyone then clark goes look he's bad cause when the chips are down, he will act bad like clark is so puritanical that he cant litterally understand human emotion.
He seemingly murdered all his friends and then acts like him trying to blow the city up to kill superman in the cross fire was evil, From Manchester's perspective he was acting out of self defense and was perfectly justifed. He never tried attacking anyone unprovoked nor never tried doing anything at this until clark pushed him
The writers are so arrogant about pushing, the anti hero bad and unwavering boy scout good that they ignored the context of their own narrative and ended up proving the exact opposite of what they intended
He says, superman cant understand them ie the elite as he's not human and never had the weakness to get abused as most others had, goes on to prove him right as he fake kills his friends and everyone then clark goes look he's bad cause when the chips are down, he will act bad like clark is so puritanical that he cant litterally understand human emotion.
He seemingly murdered all his friends and then acts like him trying to blow the city up to kill superman in the cross fire was evil, From Manchester's perspective he was acting out of self defense and was perfectly justifed. He never tried attacking anyone unprovoked nor never tried doing anything at this until clark pushed him
The writers are so arrogant about pushing, the anti hero bad and unwavering boy scout good that they ignored the context of their own narrative and ended up proving the exact opposite of what they intended
