Is Bulma immoral

[MasenkoHA]

The first thing the Saiyans did upon landing on Earth was destroy an entire city full of innocent civilians:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6i0Ub6BH1PA

The Saiyans were murderers and psychopaths just like Moro or Majin Buu, destroying countless innocent lives just for sport.

To pretend that the Saiyans were just misunderstood or somehow redeemable is foolish. Vegeta himself did not redeem himself and will go to Hell once he dies.

Only Nappa killed innocent people. Obviously if you're using the anime a few extra scenes were thrown in there, but Vegeta was never shown killing a normal human. Nappa wiped out that city, then killed Goku's friends.

Vegeta himself never killed anyone on Earth, just like Piccolo himself never killed any of the good guys (King Piccolo is not him), same with 17/18. The closest we got to a reformed villain killing good guys is of course Majin Boo, but at least there you have the excuse of all the evil being fumed out of him into a different form whereas Fat Boo just retains the personality of the Grand Supreme Kai.

It was always rather obvious Toriyama made sure any reformed villain never killed main characters. That's why I was having mental breakdowns when Freeza joined the TOP because it seemed like they were doing the same thing with him, but at least Freeza stayed evil and wouldn't join Goku and co.

Remember if this was real life, none of this would hold up in the court of law. You can't be found guilty for another persons actions.

You do get Vegeta was in charge of Nappa right? Vegeta was the one giving orders.

The fact that you keep bringing up a court of law is laughable. Someone who incited another to kill people would absolutely be found guilty.

[Cursed Lemon]

Remember if this was real life, none of this would hold up in the court of law. You can't be found guilty for another persons actions.

Charles Manson was mentioned RIGHT in this thread lol

[PurestEvil]

The first thing the Saiyans did upon landing on Earth was destroy an entire city full of innocent civilians:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6i0Ub6BH1PA

The Saiyans were murderers and psychopaths just like Moro or Majin Buu, destroying countless innocent lives just for sport.

To pretend that the Saiyans were just misunderstood or somehow redeemable is foolish. Vegeta himself did not redeem himself and will go to Hell once he dies.

Only Nappa killed innocent people. Obviously if you're using the anime a few extra scenes were thrown in there, but Vegeta was never shown killing a normal human. Nappa wiped out that city, then killed Goku's friends.

Vegeta himself never killed anyone on Earth, just like Piccolo himself never killed any of the good guys (King Piccolo is not him), same with 17/18. The closest we got to a reformed villain killing good guys is of course Majin Boo, but at least there you have the excuse of all the evil being fumed out of him into a different form whereas Fat Boo just retains the personality of the Grand Supreme Kai.

It was always rather obvious Toriyama made sure any reformed villain never killed main characters. That's why I was having mental breakdowns when Freeza joined the TOP because it seemed like they were doing the same thing with him, but at least Freeza stayed evil and wouldn't join Goku and co.

Remember if this was real life, none of this would hold up in the court of law. You can't be found guilty for another persons actions.

So only the infantrymen are guilty of war crimes, and not the armchair officers that ordered them to do it...

[Jack Bz]

Hahaha I really don't know what's going on anymore.

Asking us to compare Vegeta to real life and bringing up the court of law is the exact opposite thing you should say if you want to defend him.

[precita]

Vegeta specifically commands Nappa to "Stop" and not attack more random civilians. Nappa was always the one going on a rampage, not Vegeta. Vegeta was his "boss" or "commander" but Vegeta himself did not kill Goku's friends, which is why Yamcha himself moved on and doesn't hold a grudge against Vegeta for that reason.

Also I didn't know we had so many lawyers on kazenshuu? How many of you passed the BAR exam? What are your credentials?

[Koitsukai]

This is the best thread of the year, for sure.

Vegeta is innocent, Nappa was the mastermind, and there's nothing really bad in killing civilizations if it isn't happening like right now. Or if the guy killed liked to fight.

[MasenkoHA]

Vegeta specifically commands Nappa to "Stop" and not attack more random civilians. Nappa was always the one going on a rampage, not Vegeta. Vegeta was his "boss" or "commander" but Vegeta himself did not kill Goku's friends, which is why Yamcha himself moved on and doesn't hold a grudge against Vegeta for that reason.

Vegeta straight up told Nappa to plant the Saibaman one of which did kill Yamucha. Vegeta was the one ordering Nappa to kill the Dragon Team.

Vegeta did not give a shit about innocent civilians and only reprimanded Nappa for being careless about potentially destroying a dragon ball. Vegeta had full intent of wiping out all life on earth after he got his wish and selling it for profit. The mental gymnastics you’re doing are worthy of an Olympic Gold Medal.

Also I didn't know we had so many lawyers on kazenshuu? How many of you passed the BAR exam? What are your credentials?

Wow you think that guy who killed a bunch of people should go to prison? What are you a lawyer?

[MyVisionity]

In that scenario, their commitment to martial arts was at best a secondary priority. They improved themselves for the SOLE purpose of protecting themselves and the planet.

I don't think so. Their commitment to the martial arts *always* comes first, and that includes improving themselves. If anything, protecting themselves and the planet comes second.

It being a warrior code thing is a strange argument because the people who actually get killed in this battle are probably the ones who hold their grudges the longest. Tenshinhan especially hates Vegeta's guts basically the whole time.

Yet their grudges faded over time. And even when they hadn't, the guys were able to put their grudges aside for the sake of the martial arts and doing what needed to be done. Tenshinhan at least tolerated Vegeta during the Androids conflict. And Vegeta himself was able to put aside his feelings for the sake of battle as well, particularly in the anime.

[SupremeKai25]

The first thing the Saiyans did upon landing on Earth was destroy an entire city full of innocent civilians:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6i0Ub6BH1PA

The Saiyans were murderers and psychopaths just like Moro or Majin Buu, destroying countless innocent lives just for sport.

To pretend that the Saiyans were just misunderstood or somehow redeemable is foolish. Vegeta himself did not redeem himself and will go to Hell once he dies.

Only Nappa killed innocent people. Obviously if you're using the anime a few extra scenes were thrown in there, but Vegeta was never shown killing a normal human. Nappa wiped out that city, then killed Goku's friends.

Vegeta himself never killed anyone on Earth, just like Piccolo himself never killed any of the good guys (King Piccolo is not him), same with 17/18. The closest we got to a reformed villain killing good guys is of course Majin Boo, but at least there you have the excuse of all the evil being fumed out of him into a different form whereas Fat Boo just retains the personality of the Grand Supreme Kai.

It was always rather obvious Toriyama made sure any reformed villain never killed main characters. That's why I was having mental breakdowns when Freeza joined the TOP because it seemed like they were doing the same thing with him, but at least Freeza stayed evil and wouldn't join Goku and co.

Remember if this was real life, none of this would hold up in the court of law. You can't be found guilty for another persons actions.

Your argument is very flawed, for two reasons:

The first reason: When a soldier commits an atrocity in war, both the soldier and the commander are to blame. Otherwise why do we blame Hitler for causing millions of deaths, it's not like he's the one who actually shot at people. It's because he is still the one who condoned these actions and caused these things to happen in the first place. So in this case Vegeta was Nappa's commander, and he condoned his war crimes, and not only that but he is also the one who invaded the Earth in the first place, seeking the Dragon Balls.

Vegeta could maybe be excused if he denounced Nappa's actions and punished him severely for what he did, but this is not what happened. Vegeta still watched and smiled as Nappa committed the act, making him equally guilty, as the superior who condoned the act.

The second reason: Vegeta later on tried to destroy the Earth himself with a supersized Galick Gun. So you have no ground to stand on, because Vegeta himself then tried to blow up the planet anyway.

Your argument is simply foolish, of course the superior will be blamed for their underling's crimes. Otherwise we might as well absolve Future Zamasu of all his actions because it was Goku Black who devised Project Zero Mortals and laid waste to the Earth. Are you willing to absolve Future Zamasu because he wasn't actually the one who attacked the Earth, just as you are willing to absolve Vegeta because he wasn't the one who destroyed that city?

[JulieYBM]

Is Metro West in a capitalist society? I don't recall. We do know that she is ludicrously wealthy, though. Acquisition of wealth among us humans is pretty sus, to be fair.

As for Vegeta, who hasn't forgiven a genocide or two to get some of that baby batter in their oven?

[jjgp1112]

Vegeta specifically commands Nappa to "Stop" and not attack more random civilians. Nappa was always the one going on a rampage, not Vegeta. Vegeta was his "boss" or "commander" but Vegeta himself did not kill Goku's friends, which is why Yamcha himself moved on and doesn't hold a grudge against Vegeta for that reason.

Also I didn't know we had so many lawyers on kazenshuu? How many of you passed the BAR exam? What are your credentials?

Hol up - YOU'RE the one using incredibly broken lawyer logic that would get you laughed out of court here. .

Vegeta commanded Nappa to stop because he didn't want to potentially damage the Dragon Balls, but...







I dunno, man. You have eyes. Who do you think is directing traffic here?

If a guy tells his lackey to kill somebody and his lackey does it, he's just as responsible. That's not even lawyer talk - that's just basic ass common sense.

Christ almighty, when did discussion on this place become so utterly asinine?

[PurestEvil]

In that scenario, their commitment to martial arts was at best a secondary priority. They improved themselves for the SOLE purpose of protecting themselves and the planet.

I don't think so. Their commitment to the martial arts *always* comes first, and that includes improving themselves. If anything, protecting themselves and the planet comes second.

You think they will be able to improve themselves if they get killed off? Sure, they might not be superheros actively taking down evil, but they were not going to accept themselves and the rest of humanity dying so horrifically.

It being a warrior code thing is a strange argument because the people who actually get killed in this battle are probably the ones who hold their grudges the longest. Tenshinhan especially hates Vegeta's guts basically the whole time.

Yet their grudges faded over time. And even when they hadn't, the guys were able to put their grudges aside for the sake of the martial arts and doing what needed to be done. Tenshinhan at least tolerated Vegeta during the Androids conflict. And Vegeta himself was able to put aside his feelings for the sake of battle as well, particularly in the anime.

Their grudges fading over time is irrelevant. Most grudges DO fade over time anyways, but for that moment, the fighters held contempt against Vegeta. Like you said, they had to tolerate Vegeta due to necessity.

You are arguing against the facts, here.

[Zephyr]

It really depends, doesn't it?

Is "being moral" a bar that's so high that only the few saints among us can be said to clear it (if even them)?

Is "being moral" a bar so low that only the most vicious of wrongdoers can be said to fail to clear it?

What determines one's attempt to "clear" the bar? Is it the consequences of their actions, or their intentions in performing those actions?

Does remorse even matter at all?

We can pretty cleanly say what the moral nature of some of Blooma's specific actions are; manipulating people out of horniness? Arguably an immoral action. Building a time machine to create a better timeline? Arguably a moral action.

This in turn invites another question: what part of a person's life are we pulling them from in order to evaluate their moral character? Is their moral character at the end of their life an aggregate of the moral quality of their actions leading up to that point? Or is their moral character at the end of their life more a matter of where they are, now that all is said and done?

And these are just the basics of moral critique. We can then apply such a critical lens to things like real world institutions and forms of social organization. It is at this point where we might constructively talk of things like "the evils of" whatever-ism.

But we're also talking about trying to apply this form of critique to not only fictional characters, but fictional characters from a story rooted in "funny comics". These fictional characters also live in fictional societies which are imitations of our current, real-world, lived-in society. So, in applying this form of critique to fictional characters, we can also apply the critique to the institutions and forms of social organization that said fictional characters are themselves a part of. We can draw inferences and comparisons and analogies from the evils of the real world to the evils of the fictional world, because by being drawn versions of real world shit they literally invite the comparison.

But this is also a place fundamentally tailored toward laughter. Real world consequences for being an awful person, and for having an awful form of social organization, don't apply in "funny comics" land, unless they're conducive to being funny. That sexual assault is the butt of jokes and has no lasting emotional or psychological consequences, is a chief example of this playing out in Dragon Ball. So, by its very nature, the Dragon World is a place where our system of moral critique does not and can not apply, because the humor partly operates on it specifically not doing so.

It's just kind of a misplaced question with regards to this kind of work, I think.

[Koitsukai]

There's also a panel, when the saiyans are first introduced and they talk about hybrids and Nappa wants to create an army of them to rule the universe. Vegeta shuts him up and says that would be troublesome and the hybrids could overthrown them, so they are just going to kill everybody on Earth instead.
So, It wasn't Nappa, it wasn't just the fighters that were going to die, it wasn't just people who knew what they were getting themselves into (like that would be an excuse lol), it was everybody.

[JulieYBM]

I feel like there isn't much wiggle room here. Vegeta is clearly a genocidal monster with blood on his hands. I just don't see how trying to paint that as anything different is actually fun.

Now, discussing how you want that evil, short king to do dirty, dirty things to you? Hey, that sounds fun...!!!

[goku the krump dancer]

I mean if we're debating on whether or not Bulma is saint then the answer is a very obvious "NO" but then again no one in this story is even remotely saintly except for Gohan and Future Trunks as someone pointed out before. I guess Dende and Popo could make the cut as well.

Its not on Bulma to solve all of the world's problems, her contribution to society is due to the "Capsule" technology that her and her father's company is named after. That said, it was that same capsule tech that allowed Nam to secure acres of what for his village, that only experienced a drought because of the Sun, which is something that can't really be fought against in Old World villages like that. There's no reason to believe she didn't write Oob's family a nice hefty check after she figured out what was going on post the 28th tournament but even still she's not obligated to do that. She's one of the world's geniuses not the only one, since even she was initially confused by Gero's android blue prints.

A super world genius capable of learning even further to create a time machine absolutely does hold the weight of doing good for the world. I mean, we didn’t get this far hoarding wealth and keeping people poor, not saying this is what Bulma does, but there’s villages out there that are dirt poor, Bulma could easily solve this issue. Though I’m unsure if she’s even aware of it.

If I am capable of saving another human beings life or making life easier for them without doing much because I am a super genius, I’d feel obligated to do that for my fellow human being. It’s a different story if it would take up all my time.

Bulma's contributions to society through Capsule tech is MORE than enough, hell she created time travel to friggen save people in an entirely separate reality, if that's not big hearted I don't know what is. And again she's a genius in the Dragon Ball world but she's not the ONLY genius, I'm sure there are other top scholars who placate there time to issues like "world hunger" or what ever, she's doing her part just fine. What your saying is kinda like how people get upset at the worlds top money earners because they're not just letting the rest of the world leech off their pockets, even if they donate to different charities, they're not obligated to help in other global issues, especially ones in different countries because there's usually politics involved and that's how wars start.

Its not as simple as just giving every homeless person you walk by a million dollars just because you "got it like that" spreading true wealth is taught not just given away. If a wealthy parent passes on their assets to their children whom have no level of discipline then that wealth will be pissed away pretty easily, its why lottery winners never stay rich for long.

[TheGreatness25]

Vegeta also killed Namekians. Do we not count that? How about the implication that Vegeta has killed many people before he came to Earth?

Also, this same thing applies to Freeza... Maybe even wprse for Freeza.

[Jack Bz]

[Koitsukai]

Yeah, I'm framing the post above.

[SupremeKai25]

-snip-

You joke but initially I thought it was real.

Reminder that Goku is the same person who fist-bumped a demonic child who erased an entire timeline.

See, that's the problem, people think that Goku and co. are "heroes" just because they are the protagonists, but Toriyama even said that they are not "heroes". Goku is not a good person nor a hero, in fact he's pretty selfish and negligent.