>>102926446Superman being white is important to his character. He represents old school America and white, rural values. He's not only a hero for white Americans, far from it, but his roots are explicitly white.
And if you're going to throw that away, then you at leastneed to replace it with something. IE: Superhombre works conceptually. Superbrotha not as well.
As a support for what I'm saying, consider the following. At his peak, Superman stood for Truth, Justice, and the American Way. Since writers removed the American Way from him he has generally lost resonance as a character. Certain exceptions prove the rule in this case: some writers EXPAND beyond the American Way into a more worldwide approach, but they do this in a way that builds off of Clark's fundamental character: which is a good mannered, Kansas Farmboy. An explicitly WHITE culture. Compare this to others who have merely thrown that part of Clark by the wayside and see the hollow shell of a character that their stories feature.
But this trend didn't stop at the American Way. Look at how they treat Superman these days. He's constantly thrown in the face of a post-modern quagmire that drowns him in concerns of legitimacy and doubt. He's often corrupted into an outright villain. Just another evil monster who's greatest crime is wearing the S-Shield. Can anyone really say that Superman stands for Truth or Justice anymore? Even the Hope rings hollow in Superman lately. And any attempt to bring him back to his white family roots is shortlived. (fucking Bendis)
To say that being white isn't a fundamental part of Superman's character is in reality an attempt to suggest that explicitly white culture does not, or should not, exist. If we ever want a good Superman movie, we have to Make Superman Kansan Again.
