Would Jor-El’s Ruthlessness Have Saved Krypton in Injustice 2?

In the final moments of Injustice 2, the line of dialogue from Superman is a pivotal moment. He questions whether Jor-El, the late father of Superman, might have prevented Krypton’s destruction if he had been more ruthless like Zod. This raises an intriguing discussion about the nature of leadership and the consequences of power.

Understanding Jor-El’s Dilemma

At the heart of the question is the character of Jor-El himself. In the context of Injustice 2, Jor-El is portrayed as a visionary scientist who recognizes the impending doom of Krypton. Crucially, this aligns with the expanded narrative in the universe post-Infinite Crisis and New52. Here, it is revealed that Jor-El was in direct communication with a scientist called Non, who warned of the planet's impending destruction. Despite this, Jor-El's leadership was hampered by the incumbent leaders who were arrogant and xenophobic, believing that Krypton was impervious to harm and that extraterrestrial threats were negligible.

The Role of Zod in Krypton's Fate

General Zod’s actions and motivations are key to understanding this scenario. During the events leading up to the destruction of Krypton, Zod attempted a coup to rescue the planet. His intentions were to act on the critical warnings from Jor-El and Non. However, his eventual betrayal by Jor-El, combined with the planet's extremely anti-alien population, led to Zod’s imprisonment in the Phantom Zone, a fate which could have been permanent had not Kal-El accidentally freed him.

Given the outcome of Zod’s coup, one might argue that Jor-El’s ruthless actions could have diffused the power structure of the Science Council and allowed him to implement more drastic measures, such as evacuating Krypton or seeking an alternative to the red sun's destructive effects. However, Zod’s actions demonstrate a personal, albeit altruistic, drive rather than a broader leadership approach that would have been necessary for systemic change.

Leadership and Ruthlessness: A Complex Equation

The character of Jor-El, if more ruthless like Zod, would have faced significant moral and ethical dilemmas. His decisions would likely involve authoritarian measures that would need to be balanced against the moral implications of such actions. The history of Kryptonian leadership suggests a pattern of arrogance and xenophobia, making the idea of a completely ruthless leader even more challenging. It’s a scenario where even a more forceful approach may not have been enough to save the planet, given the deep-seated beliefs and practices of the Kryptonian population.

The Red Sun and Brainiac’s Influence

A significant factor in the destruction of Krypton is the red sun radiation, which gives Kryptonians their enhanced abilities but also causes their destruction. Brainiac, a powerful alien parasite who absorbs the knowledge and energy of a planet, plays a crucial role in the destruction as well. Even if Jor-El had taken more harsh actions, his standing as a scientific figure might still have been too limited to defy Brainiac and save the planet. The advanced technology of Brainiac makes it a formidable antagonist that would need to be countered using more than mere human force or authority.

Conclusion

In the end, the question of whether Jor-El would have saved Krypton if he had been more like Zod is complex and multifaceted. While his more authoritarian measures might have helped to stop General Zod’s coup and addressed the immediate threats, it would not have solved the deeper societal and philosophical issues that plagued Kryptonian leadership. The destruction of Krypton was a combination of scientific, political, and technological forces. It’s a story that highlights the human (or in this case, alien) frailty and the difficulty in averting a catastrophic fate through sheer force of will alone.

The interplay of characters in Injustice 2 and the expanded lore showcase the fragile nature of a society when faced with an existential threat. Jor-El’s decision-making, as evidenced by his actions, illustrates a leader who prioritized science and knowledge over brute force, even at the cost of his own son's life. This tale serves as a cautionary narrative about the limits of leadership and the complexity of power in a high-stakes situation.