Tom Arena
Dystopia, Revolution, and Leadership
October 22nd, 2012
Watchmen: A Criticism of Power and Morality
The adaptation of Alan Moore’s graphic novel, Watchmen, portrays a
dystopian America in which nuclear holocaust is imminent, and society’s only hope
lies within the hands of a group of superheroes. Jamie Hughes, a writer for the
Journal of Popular Culture, notes in his criticism of the film that “superheroes are
becoming more involved in ‘real world’ scenarios that mirror the current social and
political problems” (Hughes 547). Watchmen, in particular, tends to serve as an
exaggerated criticism that focuses on the role of morality and power within society.
The film, adapted and directed by Zack Snyder, offers a frightening depiction of the
danger that accompanies uncontrolled power. Snyder’s remake frames the issue of
“who will watch the watchmen,” posing the fundamental question that occurs when
evaluating the power structure of a social hierarchy. Snyder’s film serves as a social
commentary on the ever-occurring degradation of integrity within American
society. Hughes notes the way that the heroes of Watchmen “are completely caught
up in ideology…[be it] money, power, fame, or to promote their own ideology”
(Hughes 548). Though Hughes recognizes the extrinsic values of the heroes’
motivation, Snyder’s representation of the Watchmen emphasizes their
commitment to serving the public in a manner that protects society’s best interests.
The film was released in 2009, following the implosion of the American financial
sector in 2008. The economic crisis was a direct result of a process of governmental
deregulation that put the banks in an unchallenged position of power. This system
fostered moral decay, leading to the explosive growth of an industry characterized
by exploitation and decadence. Snyder’s film criticizes and questions the role of
ideology and values within the hierarchical power structure of American culture,
promoting the idea that, in a world where we are governed by an unchallenged
force, morality and integrity are the underlying factors to the preservation and
betterment of society.
Watchmen evaluates the hierarchy of power that is often present in society.
In such a system, those with the most power hold a degree of control over the less
capable. But, in this type of structure, there are none left to govern those at the top
of the hierarchy who hold the power. The film promotes the notion that its heroes
cannot be governed by anyone but themselves. Snyder, through a twisted and
convoluted plot, calls attention to both possible outcomes of Veidt’s master plan. By
doing this, he illustrates the effective role that morality plays in dictating what
occurs in our society, in this case, either nuclear Armageddon or world peace. In the
case of the financial crisis, integrity and morality did not prevail. Moral decay and
corruption was rampant amongst the banks. Their actions led to disastrous results,
causing the national debt to double and leaving nearly thirty million people
unemployed worldwide. The vast majority of Americans felt the sting of the
economic backlash, which was a direct result of the corruption of the banks. Though
Veidt’s plot entails repercussions that are far more exaggerated, the premise of his
goal relies on the integrity of serving society in a manner that preserves its survival.
Through a long process of deregulation of their industry, the banks were eventually
able to consolidate their power to a degree that they were able to act with near
complete freedom within the financial sector. The strategic maneuverings of the
bank ultimately left them in a position that was free of government interference,
allowing them an environment in which they were able to exploit clients and shirk
their moral obligations of serving the customer without fear of consequence.
After the Great Depression, the American economy remained relatively stable
due to the tight governmental regulations that were put in place to stabilize the
economy and prevent the disastrous consequences of speculation from recurring in
the future. The introduction of deregulation in the 1980’s marked the beginning of a
new economic plight. The traditional investment bank consisted of a small group of
wealthy partners who pooled their money collectively in order to invest in stocks or
bonds. Their collective investing minimized any losses that each individual member
might incur (Knight). Before becoming publically traded, these banks invested only
with the money of the partners. In the 1980’s, many investment banks began to
transition toward becoming publically traded corporations, giving them a massive
increase in funds, and vastly bolstering their investment power (Morrison and
Wilhem 4). In 1981, Ronald Reagan chose the CEO of the investment bank MerrillLynch, Donald Regan, as the Secretary of the Treasury. Regan began to initiate the
first steps of a thirty-year long period of deregulation, believing that it would
provide “a long-term solution for troubled thrift institutions” (Krugman). He passed
the Monetary Control Act of 1980, effectively eliminating caps on interest rates
(Atlas). Regan also passed the Garn-St Germain Act of 1982, allowing banks to utilize
adjustable-rate mortgages loans. This meant that lenders could increase and
decrease the interest rate of their loans at their own discretion. It also resulted in a
reduction in the size of down payments required for a loan, and increased monthly
repayment periods, leaving loaners in debt for a much longer period of time
(Campbell and Hercowitz). These steps of deregulation formulated the basis for
what would eventually become an exploitative system in which lenders left behind a
destructive wake of fiscal tragedy.
The initial phases of deregulation would allow for even larger changes to
occur, setting the stages for the economic meltdown. In 1998, Citicorp, a large
commercial bank, attempted a merge with Traveler’s, a large securities firm. At the
time, the move was illegal due to the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, which prevented the
merge of commercial and investment banks (Gross). This act was put in place to
prevent commercial banks from being able to speculate with their depositor’s
money. On November 12th of 1999, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was passed,
eliminating the Glass-Steagall act and allowing for the consolidation of commercial
banks, investment banks, and insurance agencies (Grant 374). This vastly increased
the power of the banks, allowing for merges that allowed them to grow large enough
that they became “too big to fail.” This meant that banks were so interconnected and
large that bankruptcy would destroy the economy, causing investors and depositors
to lose the entirety of their savings. This allowed banks to engage in high-risk
investments and speculation without fear of repercussions, as the governmentfunded Troubled Asset Relief Program was created to provide bailout money to
bankrupt companies (Grant 376). The strategic maneuverings of the banks provided
them with a system of uncontrollable expansion and a guaranteed safety net.
As deregulation continued, the power and profit of banks expanded, and the
impending consequences worsened. Banks use a ratio known as leverage to track
the ratio of their debt versus their actual fiscal assets. Initially, the Federal Reserve
Bank had tight reserve requirements in place. The reserve requirement indicates a
minimum reserve of deposits that a bank must not lend out. This requirement is
meant to keep the ratio of leverage ratio balanced and to keep the financial
obligations of banks in check (Sardi). On April 28th of 2004, financial lobbyists
worked with the Securities and Exchange Commission to relax laws restricting
leverage. This would allow the banks to lend out larger amounts of money, thus
generating more profit for themselves. Initially, leverage was maintained at a lower
ratio, near three to one. By 2007, leverage rates skyrocketed, growing to ratio of
30:1 and higher. Such a ratio, as Barth indicates, would leave only 40 billion dollars
of supporting capital for a loan worth 1.2 trillion dollars (Barth et al. 17). This meant
that should loans begin to default, the banks would not have near enough capital to
cover their exorbitant loans. The massive borrowing of the banks led to a large
increase in subprime lending, and fueled the creation of a housing bubble, also
known as an increase in home prices due to speculation and high demand.
As the financial power of the banks expanded, the integrity with which they
conducted themselves began to diminish. Many banks lost sight of their job to serve
the customer, and soon sought to exploit the clients who they were meant to assist.
The ease of obtaining a mortgage from the increased volume of these loans initiated
the housing bubble, causing home prices to rise substantially. In 2007, home prices
increased to nearly double their prior price (Barth et al. 8). With their newly
increased capital, banks began making loans to low-income families and families
with large amounts of debt. These riskier loans were known as subprime loans, and
have a higher interest rate for the loan recipient in order to account for the higher
risk that the lender is supposedly assuming. This led to a sort of predation on
unknowledgeable families. Banks offered adjustable-rate mortgages, which would
start with low initial interest rates, and rise substantially in only a few years (Atlas).
An increase in loan volume allowed for a greater increase in profit for the banks.
From 2000 to 2003, the number of mortgage loans that were distributed each year
rose substantially, nearly quadrupling (Barth et al. 9). From 2001 to 2005, the
percentage of subprime loans in the country rose from 8% to 21% (Barth et al. 9).
The sharp rise in subprime loans illustrates the effective push toward predatory
lending that was caused by deregulation. Lenders were often able to pass off the risk
of their predatory loans. They did this by selling the loans to investment banks,
which packaged them into securities that they sold to investors. This passed the risk
of the loans back into the hands of the public (Atlas). This process led to a highly
convoluted and interweaved lending chain that was a major cause in the decline of
the economy. As homebuyers began to struggle to keep up with the high-interest
payments on their homes, they began to default on their payments, and were often
eventually foreclosed upon. The process of deregulation allowed lenders the power
to give out loans that were far beyond the capacity of many families, eventually
leaving them broke and homeless. The subprime mortgage crisis ultimately served
as a much more disparaging and realistic example of what can occur in such a
system of power. Snyder’s film seeks to provide a positive example of the benefits of
sustaining moral integrity, providing a contrast to the tragedy of the 2008 financial
crisis.
Watchmen criticizes not only the importance of moral integrity, but the
importance of ideological integrity as well. Snyder utilizes his characters to
emphasize the necessity of preserving personal values. Even at the threat of censure
from their closest peers, or even death, Snyder’s characters never waver in their
ideals. For example, Veidt never loses faith in his plan or the morality of his actions,
even as the rest of the Watchmen band together to stop him. Similarly, Rorschach
demonstrates the same ideological integrity as Veidt. By willing Veidt to kill him
rather than refuting his belief that he must not compromise, Rorschach exemplifies
the importance of integrity that Snyder is attempting to portray. The steadfast and
bold representation of ideological integrity contrasts sharply with what became of
the financial sector during the recent period of deregulation. One employee of
Goldman Sachs came to terms with the corruption that was occurring within the
industry, and stepped up to voice his opinion. Greg Smith, an executive director of
the bank, released an editorial in the New York Times about the “eroding” integrity
of his firm. Smith states that the “interests of the client continue to be sidelined in
the way the firm operates” and that the “decline in the firm’s moral fiber represents
the single most serious threat to its long-run survival” (Smith). He states that
employees “callously…talk about ripping their clients off” and refer to them as
“muppets” (Smith). Smith scathingly proclaimed that he “see[s] virtually no trace of
the culture that made [him] love working for [the] firm for many years” (Smith). The
type of moral decay occurring within Goldman served as a driving force that
perpetuated the financial crisis. Smith’s acknowledgement that the firm strayed
from its original principles highlights the importance of ideological integrity that
Snyder attempts to emphasize. Snyder’s representation of the Watchmen works to
criticize the crass actions of the banks, and provides a positive example of the value
that personal ideals hold.
Snyder’s film offers a positive, yet more exaggerated spin on the story
underlining the economic crisis. His representation of Watchmen seemingly strives
to set an example for how moralistic tendencies should dictate the way power is
used. Hughes, in his criticism of the film, states that “absolute power and freedom
make superheroes both an asset and a liability” (Hughes 547). His commentary
illustrates the effective role that morality plays within the superheroes. If they
choose to follow their original moralistic ideologies, they become a blessing, and if
they choose to stray upon a path of evil, they become a hazard. Through his
representation of the film and its heroes, Snyder seems to emphasize that this is
true for any entity of power. Watchmen illustrates an exaggerated example of the
cataclysm that could occur should the moral order of society break down. Snyder’s
film ultimately demonstrates the necessity of preserving ideological and moralistic
integrity within society.
Works Cited
Barth, James R., Tong Li, Wenling Lu, Triphon Phumiwasana, and Glenn Yago. "The
Rise and Fall of the U.S. Mortgage and Credit Markets." Milken Institute. John
Wiley & Sons, Jan. 2009. Web. 20 Sept. 2012.
<http://www.milkeninstitute.org/pdf/Riseandfallexcerpt.pdf>.
Berthelsen, Christian. "Keating Pleads Guilty to 4 Counts of Fraud." The New York
Times. The New York Times, 07 Apr. 1999. Web. 30 Sept. 2012.
<http://www.nytimes.com/1999/04/07/business/keating-pleads-guilty-to-4counts-of-fraud.html>.
Campbell, Jeffrey R. and Hercowitz, Zvi, “The Role of Collateralized Household Debt in
Macroeconomic Stabilization” May 2005. Web.
< http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=720416>
Dayen, David. "That Timberwolf Was One Shitty Deal." Firedoglake. 27 Apr. 2010.
Web. 20 Sept. 2012. <http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/04/27/that-timberwolfwas-one-shitty-deal/>.
Gordon, Gregory. "How Goldman Secretly Bet on the U.S. Housing Crash." McClatchy.
McClatchy Newspapers, 1 Nov. 2009. Web. 21 Sept. 2012.
<http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2009/11/01/77791/how-goldman-secretly-bet-onthe.html>.
Grant, Joseph. "What the Financial Services Industry Puts Together Let No Person Put
Asunder." Albany Law Review 73.2 (2010): 371-420. Print.
Gross, Daniel. "The Rise of the Commercial Banks." Slate. Slate Magazine, 15 Sept.
2008. Web. 20 Sept. 2012.
<http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2008/09/shattering_the_glasss
teagall.html>.
Gyntelberg, Jacob. "OTC Derivatives Market Activity in the First Half of 2008." Bank
for International Settlements. N.p., Nov. 2008. Web. 21 Sept. 2012.
<http://www.bis.org/publ/otc_hy0811.pdf>.
Hughes, Jamie. "Journal of Popular Culture." Journal of Popular Culture. 39.4 (2006):
546-557. Print.
Knight, Laurence. "What Do Investment Banks Do?" BBC News. BBC, 09 July 2010.
Web. 20 Sept. 2012. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11211776>.
Krugman, Paul. "Reagan Did It." New York Times. 31 2009: n. page. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/01/opinion/01krugman.html?_r=0>.
Kuttner, Robert. "The Alarming Parallels Between 1929 and 2007." The American
Prospect. 2 Oct. 2007. Web. 20 Sept. 2012. <http://prospect.org/article/alarmingparallels-between-1929-and-2007>.
Morrison, Alan D., and William J. Wilhelm. "The Demise of Investment Banking
Partnerships: Theory and Evidence." University of Virginia, May 2004. Web. 21
Sept. 2012. <http://gates.comm.virginia.edu/wjw9a/Papers/ibdemise2.pdf>.
Ng, Serena, and Carrick Mollenkamp. "Goldman Fueled AIG Gambles." The Wall Street
Journal, 12 Dec. 2009. Web. 21 Sept. 2012.
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487042014045745904531769960
32.html>.
Rubinstein, Mark. Rubinstein on Derivatives: Futures, Options and Dynamic Strategies.
London: Risk, 1999. Print.
Sardi, Bill. "A Disastrous Day for the American Economy." Lew Rockwell . 22 2009: n.
page. Web. 22 Oct. 2012. <http://www.lewrockwell.com/sardi/sardi140.html>.
Scheer, Robert. "Robert Scheer on The Great American Stickup." Interview by Amy
Goodman. Democracy Now! Los Angeles, California, 7 Sept. 2010. Television.
Transcript.
Smith, Greg. "Why I Am Leaving Goldman Sachs." New York Times. 14 2012: n. page.
Web. 22 Oct. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/14/opinion/why-i-amleaving-goldman-sachs.html?pagewanted=all>.
Snyder, Zack, dir. Watchmen. 2009. Film. 22 Oct 2012.
Story, Louise. "Mortgage Deals Under Scrutiny as Goldman Faces Senators." New York
Times. 26 Apr. 2010. Web. 20 Sept. 2012.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/business/27goldman.html?_r=0>.
Zuckerman, Gregory. "Trader Made Billions on Subprime." The Wall Street Journal, 15
Jan. 2008. Web. 21 Sept. 2012.
<http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB120036645057290423.html>.
I pledge that I have neither given nor received aid on this assignment.
-Thomas Arena
Word count: 2122