Who do you consider more evil, Zamasu or Moro?

[DBFanTalk]

I'd consider Zamasu the greater evil on account that he has knowledge of the Divine Hierarchy and Super Dragon Balls, and the will to execute a plan which pretty much destabilized the entire multiverse, warranting the entire timeline's deletion. Moro is local to Universe 7 and is evil for evil's sake. Also Zamasu is immortal so power levels don't mean anything in the long-term.

[LoganForkHands73]

Zamasu has purely malevolent motivations for killing, despite his claims. There's no good excuse for racially-motivated genocide. Especially on that scale. If he really had such "good intentions", he would just blow up planets from space, leave the populations none the wiser. But no, he had to sadistically terrorise populations into submission. There's no excuse for that.

Zamasu only terrorized the population of Earth. He wiped out countless civilizations across the cosmos, but he reserved the worst judgement for the earthlings. This is because the earthlings created the Time Machine, thus defying divine law. Only the Gods are allowed to meddle with time. Furthermore, they can only travel to the future, because travelling to the past would inevitably shatter the time-space continuum (which is what Trunks and Cell foolishly did). Even Gowasu said that whoever went back to change the past was a complete fool. That's why Zamasu took his time with the earthlings, instead of downright wiping them out. Even so it is stated that the vast majority of Earth's population was annihilated during the initial assault from Zamasu.

When confronted with the sin of time travel that he committed, Trunks doesn't even try to defend himself or claim he has the moral high ground. He simply accepts he is an evil sinner and moves on. Zamasu was 100% right on wanting to punish the mortals for time travel. If anything it's surprising Beerus didn't try to punish Bulma for creating a time machine, especially when he knows very well how fragile the time-space continuum is.

Trunks didn't defend himself because he realised how pointless it is to argue with an ideological maniac. He says that he doesn't care about Zamasu's ideas of crime and punishment, and if that makes him a "sinner" in Zamasu's eyes, then so be it. The only guilt Trunks feels is the fact that his time travel unwittingly brought the attention of Zamasu to his loved ones, not the idea that it was a heinous moral crime worth annihilating the entire human race over.

Also Zamasu doesn't want to blow up planets. That's what sets him apart from every other villain. He doesn't take pleasure in the destruction he is spreading throughout the cosmos, and even laments how unfortunate it is that he must lay waste to entire worlds. He simply takes solace in the fact that eventually, when all mortals are destroyed, he will remake the cosmos as a golden utopia. It is telling that Zamasu built his base of operations in a lush, pristine forest. At his core he remains a Supreme Kai, and all Kais cherish life and nature.

Hard disagree, Zamasu may show the odd twinge of regret for some of his actions but his immediate enjoyment of the death and destruction he causes is palpable. He kills people and laughs and smiles about it.

Because destroying mortals was a means to an end, not the end in itself. He wanted to destroy mortals, in order to create multiversal peace and restore the cosmos to its utopian state. Good intentions, bad way to go about them.

It comes down to what you think is worse. Starting from the fact that killing a person is morally wrong, do you think it is more despicable if you kill that person because you genuinely think they are evil and dangerous, or because you need to eat? Perhaps there is more honor in straight up admitting you are evil instead of deluding yourself that you're in the right, but I have less respect for a villain who has no ulterior motive for committing genocide.

You really can't separate the solution Zamas has in mind from his overall intention here. When a dictator engages in a violent round of 'ethnic cleansing', one doesn't try to say that their intentions were good in trying to reduce ethnic strife or normalise race-relations within their territory, because that would just be a distortion. One simply condemns them as a Genocide and has done with it.

Okay then give me an example of a villain with good intentions. They are villains, of course they will make questionable choices and actions, that doesn't make their intentions any less noble and tragic.

Fairly overdone example at this point but Ozymandias from Watchmen. He decimates New York with a fake alien attack out of a genuine desire to preserve world peace and prevent nuclear armageddon, and troublingly, it seems to actually work. The USA and USSR make up and his work is done, but he's left alone in his arctic base to wonder if the sacrifice truly was worth it in the long run. Although he's characterised as vain, paranoid, extremist and somewhat disconnected from reality, he isn't motivated by sadism or greed in the slightest. He knew his plan would end with him losing everything and everyone but went through with it anyway.

I can never quite tell if your "rooting for the bad guy" schtick with Zamasu is ironic or not. It feels like you intentionally take everything he says and does at face value -- Zamasu says he's in the right, so he must be in the right, right? I understand and agree with finding him an interesting character but why do you feel the need to defend him all the time? I thoroughly enjoy complex, depraved villainous characters such as Bruce Robertson from Irvine Welsh's Filth and Alex from Burgess/Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange; I'm capable of pitying them but I don't feel the need to justify their heinous actions.

[Lionel]

I've offered my input on the "Zamasu evil" versus "well meaning extremist" conversation before. I feel that his later actions were egregious and totally beyond the moral event horizon. Indiscriminate slaughtering of every sentient being in existence is unjustifiable. I can't help but think that Zamasu was beyond his depth. How in the world did he expect himself to be able to wipe out all thinking, rational entities across five timelines by himself -- including the gods and presumably angels and Zeno -- and then function in their stead? Talk about one man taking it all on his shoulders.

Adding to that point, what would have become of the afterlife functionaries like Yemma? Where or what would have become of the innumerable souls now residing in the afterlife? Are competent articulate animal beings like Octopapa and the pterodactyl from Dragon Ball classic also facing the chopping block? Zamasu was pretty vague about the details of his one-Shinjin reign over everything.

Having said all that, I felt that in the midst of all his ningen diatribes there were some valid points to be made -- namely the corruption of mortals in their activities and the dependency on godly institutions, abilities, and relics for their preservation. These segments of Zamasu's moralist crusade seemed neglected by our heroes -- their surface level reactions of just pummeling Zamasu back with their fists rather than address the notion itself seem in keeping with how they typically operate but on an ideological level they hardly won anything.

It does suggest something when the stability and peace of the broader universe is frequently decided by a small gaggle of genetically gifted remnants of an extinct fighting species on a single backwater planet. Keep in mind, these same beings are dependent on the interests that the deities have in them to bolster their abilities enough to take on the next big menace on the block. How does all of that reflect on the institutions that are actually supposed to be protecting the universe like the Galactic Patrol? Sure Merus was a capable agent for the time he spent amongst their ranks but he himself was an insubordinate anomaly to the celestials he hailed from -- which ironically plays into Zamasu's narrative of ningen requiring gods and their abilities to viably survive. Moreover, while Merus' speech about the principles of justice was sympathetic, it didn't take into account the stark reality of the Galactic Patrol's self-preservasionist blind eye to the dealings of Freeza and Hit utilising time manipulation powers -- even the galactic king, the closest thing to a figurehead that isn't a deity in Universe 7, proved himself to deficient and petty in ignoring Hit's flagrant actions. The Galactic Patrol isn't some benevolent, line in the soil vanguard of justice as Merus was making it out to be. All of this could tie into Zamasu's arguments about the fallibility of ningen.

Zamasu himself I could actually get behind his motivations... Early on when he came across as more of an inquisitive sceptic looking for answers as to the activities of ningen and why Kaioshin are fundamentally unable to try and change things. Beerus' lackadaisical attitude towards most things, including his own role as Hakaishin, only reinforces his point. Universe 7 has the second lowest rating out of any universe. In the very next arc they were pitted against the other universes in a contest that was precipitated by this very inadequacy in the status of said universe. If this Zamasu had remained and not the gleeful mass-exterminating sadist we saw later on throughout most of the arc then I might have seen myself supporting the Kaioshin.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the matter.

[SupremeKai25]

Trunks didn't defend himself because he realised how pointless it is to argue with an ideological maniac.

Not really, because regardless of his mental stability, Zamasu was right. Mortals are not allowed to use time machines or any form of time travel. Period. Those are the laws of the Gods. He was objectively right. Even Gowasu said that whoever used the time machine was a fool, because it broke the time-space continuum.

Hard disagree, Zamasu may show the odd twinge of regret for some of his actions but his immediate enjoyment of the death and destruction he causes is palpable. He kills people and laughs and smiles about it.

He enjoys killing mortals, not laying waste to the environment. He even says many times that he finds the destruction unfortunate but necessary. I don't remember any other villain ever saying that.

Fairly overdone example at this point but Ozymandias from Watchmen. He decimates New York with a fake alien attack out of a genuine desire to preserve world peace and prevent nuclear armageddon, and troublingly, it seems to actually work.

Millions of people live in New York. So how is he not a villain, when he caused millions of innocent people to die? No, if Zamasu is evil for killing tons of innocent people, then so is Ozymandias.

If all you care about are the results, then Zamasu isn't evil either. Because it is an objective fact that we humans constantly fight each others, after thousands of years we always fight each other without learning, so it's true that without us the world would be more peaceful.

I understand and agree with finding him an interesting character but why do you feel the need to defend him all the time?

Because I don't think he's more evil than your generic DB villain like Moro, who is pure evil and motivated by petty reasons. It's that simple.

You want to hold Zamasu accountable for the billions he killed? Moro also killed billions in the past, he consumed countless galaxies, and if left unchecked will become an even greater threat to the cosmos. And while Zamasu did cause a lot of damage to the worlds, he planned to restore all of them, while Moro literally sucks the life out of the planets. And, of course, he does this for selfish reasons.

So then tell me how Moro is less evil than Zamasu? Because he is self-aware of his evil? How does that make it better?

[LoganForkHands73]

Trunks didn't defend himself because he realised how pointless it is to argue with an ideological maniac.

Not really, because regardless of his mental stability, Zamasu was right. Mortals are not allowed to use time machines or any form of time travel. Period. Those are the laws of the Gods. He was objectively right. Even Gowasu said that whoever used the time machine was a fool, because it broke the time-space continuum.

Trunks couldn't have known that time travel was a "sin", and even then, his usage of it has never been for evil or selfish gain. The first god he ever met, Shin, seemingly took no issue with his usage of time travel so how could he have known that it was wrong? Again, Trunks doesn't care about Zamasu's ideals or the godly laws, he actually finds it ridiculous when he discovers that Black attacked his timeline under the pretence of dispensing justice against time travel. Trunks' abuse of time travel has created problems for the heroes in the past but there's never been any real indication that it "breaks the spacetime continuum", since changes to the past simply create new timelines rather than paradoxes.

Hard disagree, Zamasu may show the odd twinge of regret for some of his actions but his immediate enjoyment of the death and destruction he causes is palpable. He kills people and laughs and smiles about it.

He enjoys killing mortals, not laying waste to the environment. He even says many times that he finds the destruction unfortunate but necessary. I don't remember any other villain ever saying that.

Okay fair enough, but as a Kai he should have the ability to restore planets to pristine condition if he destroys them so there's no point in getting picky.

Fairly overdone example at this point but Ozymandias from Watchmen. He decimates New York with a fake alien attack out of a genuine desire to preserve world peace and prevent nuclear armageddon, and troublingly, it seems to actually work.

Millions of people live in New York. So how is he not a villain, when he caused millions of innocent people to die? No, if Zamasu is evil for killing tons of innocent people, then so is Ozymandias.

If all you care about are the results, then Zamasu isn't evil either. Because it is an objective fact that we humans constantly fight each others, after thousands of years we always fight each other without learning, so it's true that without us the world would be more peaceful.

I didn't say he wasn't a villain. You asked for an example of a "noble villain". If Zamasu qualifies, then Veidt passes with flying colours.

I care about both results and motivation. Veidt is heavily flawed, but as far as we can tell, he really does have good intentions at heart. When his plan is completed, it has tangible benefits for the world, as messed up as the sacrifice was. Zamasu's motivation is to selfishly remake reality in his own image with himself the only lifeform left in the multiverse, so his plan only benefits himself. We don't know what his "golden utopia" would actually turn out like if he succeeds since we never seen Project Zero Mortals completed. We only see the results of him laying waste to civilisation.

I mean, to say the least that's pretty misanthropic. War is in humanity's nature, but so is peace. Zamasu only forces himself to see the war and ugliness to validate his worldview. In the Dragon World, universes are ranked based on the quality of mortal life, which is intrinsic to a healthy and successful cosmos. The absence of any mortal life, or indeed life in general, would have catastrophic consequences on the development of universes.

Because I don't think he's more evil than your generic DB villain like Moro, who is pure evil and motivated by petty reasons. It's that simple.

You want to hold Zamasu accountable for the billions he killed? Moro also killed billions in the past, he consumed countless galaxies, and if left unchecked will become an even greater threat to the cosmos. And while Zamasu did cause a lot of damage to the worlds, he planned to restore all of them, while Moro literally sucks the life out of the planets. And, of course, he does this for selfish reasons.

So then tell me how Moro is less evil than Zamasu? Because he is self-aware of his evil? How does that make it better?

It's not just in this thread though, it's in every thread where Zamasu's methods are criticised in any way.

If you want to look at the scope of results, Zamasu has killed far more people than Moro ever has in his billions of years of existence, especially if we go by your theory that Zamasu had already killed all other mortal life in the multiverse by the time he reached Earth. As it stands now, Moro is still small fry compared to the threat Zamasu posed. There's not any indication yet that Moro has interest in attacking other universes or involving himself with the gods again. He's so behind the times that he seems to think calling himself "this galaxy's supreme being" is a big deal, implying that he may not even see himself as a universal threat. I mean, yeah, that's a logical extrapolation for what he could eventually decide to do if he gets his way, but his stated motivation is to live in a galaxy where he can eat to his heart's content. His goal isn't to cleanse all life based on prejudice. Hell, he needs to maintain some mortal-sustaining planets in order to create a survivable ecosystem for himself.

Moro is obviously evil, there's no denying. However, you could say that even Moro has a semblance of camaraderie with his army of convicts -- he may not actually have any real compassion for them, but they're shown to be loyal to him because he treats them well enough and makes them feel powerful. Zamasu doesn't need anyone.

[JewyB]

This is very apples and oranges.

You could argue that Zamasu had a goal and would stop eventually, but we never hit that point and that's still justifying the murder of billions. But then, Moro doesn't necessarily have a goal, he's just eating, but at the same time he's eating for pleasure, not for necessity, and again, the murder of billions(we can assume, since he ate many planets.

The statement basically boils down to "who is more evil, a racist who commits genocide or a cannibal who commits genocide". There are comparable, sure, but to say which is more evil? They're both very evil and have committed very similar atrocities just for different reasons.

[SupremeKai25]

Trunks couldn't have known that time travel was a "sin", and even then, his usage of it has never been for evil or selfish gain. The first god he ever met, Shin, seemingly took no issue with his usage of time travel so how could he have known that it was wrong? Again, Trunks doesn't care about Zamasu's ideals or the godly laws, he actually finds it ridiculous when he discovers that Black attacked his timeline under the pretence of dispensing justice against time travel. Trunks' abuse of time travel has created problems for the heroes in the past but there's never been any real indication that it "breaks the spacetime continuum", since changes to the past simply create new timelines rather than paradoxes.

It doesn't matter what his intentions were because the Gods don't care about that. Gowasu never wondered if Trunks' use of time travel was justified, he denounced him as a fool and nothing more. Trunks might have saved his world by going to the past for help, but he ended up breaking the very space-time continuum in the process. The very existence of alternate timelines is a mistake, because by nature there should only be one main timeline. But since Trunks and Cell split the time-space continuum with their abuse of time travel, other timelines and time rings had to be created. Ironically, as Zamasu explained, Trunks' actions played a major role in the creation of Project Zero Mortals. If Trunks never travelled back in time, Goku would've died in Z and wouldn't have challenged Zamasu, and there wouldn't have been multiple Zamases across time and space.

As for Shin, he is an incompetent and worthless God, so it's not a surprise if he turned a blind eye to time travel. Suffice to say that Beerus, despite his many flaws, warned Bulma that he'd erase her from existence if she created another time machine.

Zamasu's motivation is to selfishly remake reality in his own image with himself the only lifeform left in the multiverse, so his plan only benefits himself. We don't know what his "golden utopia" would actually turn out like if he succeeds since we never seen Project Zero Mortals completed. We only see the results of him laying waste to civilisation.

He says that he wants to be the only lifeform left in the cosmos only in the manga, and manga Zamasu is basically a generic DBZ villain anyway. Toyotaro really doesn't know how to write villains.

In the anime, he creates a sentient bird-like creature that can shoot lightning, proving that he can create sentient life like all other Supreme Kais. A God is nothing if no one is around to worship him, so it's fairly safe to assume that Zamasu would repopulate the cosmos with mortal species mind-controlled by him and thus perfect in his mind.

Zamasu hates mortals because they constantly fight, but mortals fight because they have free will. When two people make different choices, a fight will occur. If everyone is "programmed" to be loyal to a single God, then there can be no war, no conflict, no strife. Everyone is united.

I mean, to say the least that's pretty misanthropic. War is in humanity's nature, but so is peace. Zamasu only forces himself to see the war and ugliness to validate his worldview. In the Dragon World, universes are ranked based on the quality of mortal life, which is intrinsic to a healthy and successful cosmos. The absence of any mortal life, or indeed life in general, would have catastrophic consequences on the development of universes.

There can be moments of temporary peace between mortals, but ultimately it is in their nature to strife and fight. Just look at our irl history. After centuries and centuries of terrible wars, there are still so many conflicts in poor countries, so much death and destruction. Mortals never learn from their mistakes, at which point a God might say "Maybe there is something wrong with these creatures". That's exactly what Zamasu said:

Mortals do not succumb to evil, they are the evil. They create it and spread it with minds they shouldn't possess.

If you want to look at the scope of results, Zamasu has killed far more people than Moro ever has in his billions of years of existence,

Moro was imprisoned for eons, and regardless he is an utterly despicable monster who only wants to feed on life. Even his minions are nothing to him but fuel for his powers. He doesn't have any ideal or motive driving him, he just wants to eat.

[Aim]

I wouldn't say Zamasu is inherently evil, to us he is, however, he saw what he was doing as justice, Moro is just a massive bitch, evil to the core.

[JewyB]

I wouldn't say Zamasu is inherently evil, to us he is, however, he saw what he was doing as justice, Moro is just a massive bitch, evil to the core.

Don't wanna be the guy to make this argument but Hitler also thought what he was doing was justice.

Just because you have a warped self-image and justify yourself as acting in the name of true justice doesn't make you less evil, if anything it makes you more reprehensible, at least Moro is honest with his intentions, Zamasu is so self-absorbed he believes his justice is above morality.

[Psajdak]

Moro is uglier, therefore he is more evil.

[Aim]

Don't wanna be the guy to make this argument but Hitler also thought what he was doing was justice.

Just because you have a warped self-image and justify yourself as acting in the name of true justice doesn't make you less evil, if anything it makes you more reprehensible, at least Moro is honest with his intentions, Zamasu is so self-absorbed he believes his justice is above morality.

I'd argue otherwise, Hitler didn't think what he was doing was justice, he was a bigot who tried to justify his actions, Hitler is far closer to Freeza. Hitler knew deep down what he was doing was awful, he had people tortured as well as numerous other terrible shit, Zamasu wiped out all mortals because he thought they were failures, he even goes as far as to suggest death is a mercy for them, if the mortals weren't stubborn, he would have ended all of them without suffering, which is what he basically did, it was mostly Trunks and the others that resisted as they were powerful enough to.

There's no "at least" with Moro, it really doesn't matter if he's honest or not, he still doesn't care in the slightest who he hurts or kills, Zamasu was out to kill sentient life swiftly, Moro weakens and basically drains most of his victims to death.

[Scientist Fu]

I wouldn't say Zamasu is inherently evil, to us he is, however, he saw what he was doing as justice, Moro is just a massive bitch, evil to the core.

Don't wanna be the guy to make this argument but Hitler also thought what he was doing was justice.

Just because you have a warped self-image and justify yourself as acting in the name of true justice doesn't make you less evil, if anything it makes you more reprehensible, at least Moro is honest with his intentions, Zamasu is so self-absorbed he believes his justice is above morality.

A very interesting analogy you made there.

As for myself, I think that Moro is more evil because he is using people and torment them whereas Zamasu just wants to kill all humans.

[JewyB]

Don't wanna be the guy to make this argument but Hitler also thought what he was doing was justice.

Just because you have a warped self-image and justify yourself as acting in the name of true justice doesn't make you less evil, if anything it makes you more reprehensible, at least Moro is honest with his intentions, Zamasu is so self-absorbed he believes his justice is above morality.

I'd argue otherwise, Hitler didn't think what he was doing was justice, he was a bigot who tried to justify his actions, Hitler is far closer to Freeza. Hitler knew deep down what he was doing was awful, he had people tortured as well as numerous other terrible shit, Zamasu wiped out all mortals because he thought they were failures, he even goes as far as to suggest death is a mercy for them, if the mortals weren't stubborn, he would have ended all of them without suffering, which is what he basically did, it was mostly Trunks and the others that resisted as they were powerful enough to.

There's no "at least" with Moro, it really doesn't matter if he's honest or not, he still doesn't care in the slightest who he hurts or kills, Zamasu was out to kill sentient life swiftly, Moro weakens and basically drains most of his victims to death.

So you're counterpoint is to justify Zamasu's genocide in the same way he did? if anything, if that's your view of Hitler you have just proven Zamasu has more in common with him than you're claiming. Zamasu was a bigot who tried to justify his actions. Zamasu knew what he was doing was wrong, hence why he had the moral struggle before he snapped. Zamasu took as much joy and effort in torturing Trunks and the remaining humans as he could.

Zamasu was a monster, just because he believes he was right does not make him any more moral than Hitler was, it's also quite weird to claim that Hitler believed what he was doing wasn't right. Yes he was a bigot, and yes he tried to justify his actions, because he believed in them. He didn't try to justify genocide just for banters sake.

As for Moro, that's how he eats. I'm sure if he was able to absorb a planet instantly, he would, because that would mean he has the power immediately, and that is what he is after, so i dont think his method proves him more evil. Moro is just as easy to justify as Zamasu, the only difference is to justify Moro you have to take aspects of his character and actions, but to justify Zamasu you just need to quote him.

Moro also kills indiscriminately, whereas Zamasu has a target, one is bigotted, the other is chaotic, they are different brands of evil, thats why i hold that they are on the same level despite any justification.

Also, on the Frieza point, Zamasu and Frieza are much more similar than you'd think.

A very interesting analogy you made there.

As for myself, I think that Moro is more evil because he is using people and torment them whereas Zamasu just wants to kill all humans.

I would rather not make it but it is a simple and honest one, they are both bigots who commit genocide based o nthe self-delusion that it's for the greater good.

I think its tough with Moro, he might kill people slowly but as i say, thats how he eats, he could kill them immediately, but then he goes without food. It's even the reason he left Earth alive, so they could grow stronger and give him a greater meal, not because he wanted to see the despair on their faces.

Zamasu on the other hand, took great joy in torturing Trunks, and he didnt brag about murdering Goku's family for "just killing humans", he took great joy in tormenting them. In fact, the only source we have that Zamasu's killings were swift and just is Zamasu himself, but based on his character, i can absolutely see that being another delusion. Also, if he wanted mortals to stop existing swiftly, he would have wished for it on the Super Dragon Balls, instead he wished for a means to kill them personally.

[Scientist Fu]

I would rather not make it but it is a simple and honest one, they are both bigots who commit genocide based o nthe self-delusion that it's for the greater good.

I think its tough with Moro, he might kill people slowly but as i say, thats how he eats, he could kill them immediately, but then he goes without food. It's even the reason he left Earth alive, so they could grow stronger and give him a greater meal, not because he wanted to see the despair on their faces.

Zamasu on the other hand, took great joy in torturing Trunks, and he didnt brag about murdering Goku's family for "just killing humans", he took great joy in tormenting them. In fact, the only source we have that Zamasu's killings were swift and just is Zamasu himself, but based on his character, i can absolutely see that being another delusion. Also, if he wanted mortals to stop existing swiftly, he would have wished for it on the Super Dragon Balls, instead he wished for a means to kill them personally.

I don't know. I feel like Zamasu is persecuting those who oppose him or those who committed a sin.

[JewyB]

I don't know. I feel like Zamasu is persecuting those who oppose him or those who committed a sin.

I feel that's what he [i[believes[/i], but he also believes that all mortals are opposed to him and guilty of sin, and that is where the flaw in his logic lies. Zamasu is also a massive hypocrite, in that he believes mortals spread death and destruction, so he kills them all, and any gods who could stop him. His answer to death and destruction is more death and destruction, of those he has personally deemed are the culprits.

The culprits are decided based on the fact that they were born as mortals and nothing more. That is what makes him a bigot.

[Scientist Fu]

I don't know. I feel like Zamasu is persecuting those who oppose him or those who committed a sin.

I feel that's what he believes, but he also believes that all mortals are opposed to him and guilty of sin, and that is where the flaw in his logic lies. Zamasu is also a massive hypocrite, in that he believes mortals spread death and destruction, so he kills them all, and any gods who could stop him. His answer to death and destruction is more death and destruction, of those he has personally deemed are the culprits.

The culprits are decided based on the fact that they were born as mortals and nothing more. That is what makes him a bigot.

He believes that because mortals kept repeating the same mistakes over and over but what pushed him over the edge was the fact that Trunks broke the rules and traveled to the main timeline a bunch of times and modified history.

[Aim]

So you're counterpoint is to justify Zamasu's genocide in the same way he did? if anything, if that's your view of Hitler you have just proven Zamasu has more in common with him than you're claiming. Zamasu was a bigot who tried to justify his actions. Zamasu knew what he was doing was wrong, hence why he had the moral struggle before he snapped. Zamasu took as much joy and effort in torturing Trunks and the remaining humans as he could.

No, what he did was bad, but he probably would have been justified in eradicating all mortals if he cited other reasons instead of "mortals bad". Zamasu was a bigot, but he did truly believe what he was doing was right, your drawing comparisons between Zamasu and Hitler because you want to, for whatever reason.

Zamasu began to take joy in tormenting Trunks because he basically refused to die, that's when I'd argue he truly started to become evil instead of misguided.

Zamasu was a monster, just because he believes he was right does not make him any more moral than Hitler was

Zamasu was a monster, no doubt about it, especially at the end. However, he did at one point truly believe he was doing the right thing. I'm not justifying his actions, I'm explaining how he was misguided and how he had a lot of conflict within him on ultimately making the decision to destroy mortals.

it's also quite weird to claim that Hitler believed what he was doing wasn't right. Yes he was a bigot, and yes he tried to justify his actions, because he believed in them. He didn't try to justify genocide just for banters sake.

Stop virtue signaling. Hitler most likely didn't believe what he was doing was right, he was an anti intellectual, all Nazi's are, take the Proud Boys for instance, they want the world to go back to a time where people suffered most, they want this because they feel it will benefit them, regardless of who it hurts, Zamasu wants to kill all mortals, he even mentions that death is a "mercy" to mortals, considering he said he had traveled to other planets, he most likely wasn't out to torture. Before you say the Nazi's believed what they were doing was right, sure, maybe some were brain washed, however, Hitler, the one that came to power, definitely didn't care who he hurt, he had people go through experiments for fucks sake.

As for Moro, that's how he eats. I'm sure if he was able to absorb a planet instantly, he would, because that would mean he has the power immediately, and that is what he is after, so i dont think his method proves him more evil. Moro is just as easy to justify as Zamasu, the only difference is to justify Moro you have to take aspects of his character and actions, but to justify Zamasu you just need to quote him.

I might be missing something here, if it's stated somewhere that's how he eats then please cite it.

Moro doesn't try to justify his actions, he simply doesn't care, he's more like Demon Piccolo if anything, both evil to the core who don't care for others. I honestly don't recall ever seeing a statement that he has to eat planets.

Moro also kills indiscriminately, whereas Zamasu has a target, one is bigotted, the other is chaotic, they are different brands of evil, thats why i hold that they are on the same level despite any justification.

Yep, I can agree on that.

[JewyB]

Stop virtue signaling.

Sorry this here is the place where you lost me. Thanks for the chat.

[Aim]

Sorry this here is the place where you lost me. Thanks for the chat.

Shame, I was looking forward to this discussion. Have a good day/night.

[SupremeKai25]

The ongoing Moro arc truly proves Zamasu right. Who is the main villain? A fugitive mortal monster driven only by hunger and evil. Why did said villain break free? Because an organization of mortals and a few gods known as the Galactic Patrol are incompetent fools who can't do their job. Who is aiding said villain? A throng of mortal terrorists who only want to spread death and destruction across the universe. What are the Gods doing? Literally just watching. What happened to the only God who tried to intervene? He got erased from existence, because divine laws demand that you do not intervene against evil, even if the entire universe is at stake.

Honestly if Zamasu was still alive I bet he'd have a big smirk on his face right now. Especially to Gowasu, he'd say something like "No wonder our universe lost so quickly when only stupid, weak barbarians live in it." (except for Obuni, he's cool I guess).