Superman stops a derailed train, pulls a family from a fire, deflects a meteorite. Lex Luthor devotes his fortune and his newspapers to a different mission: convincing Metropolis that that is the real danger. And he often succeeds. There, in the ability of a single powerful man to point out who "the criminal" is —to the point of making the one who saves suspect and the one who plunders a hero—, lies the sharpest thesis of conflict theory.
// The theoryThe power to define crime
Richard Quinney formulated it in The Social Reality of Crime (1970): crime is not something an act is, but a definition created and imposed by those who hold power, to protect their interests. Earlier, George Vold (1958) had described crime as the result of group conflict: the dominant group criminalizes the conduct —and the subjects— of the rival group. Luthor does both at once. He defines the alien as the threat (the "other" who must be criminalized) and defines himself as the human who protects us, even though the tally of harm is exactly the reverse.
His weapon is not kryptonite: it is respectability. A suit, a charitable foundation, a few outlets of his own and some grateful senators are enough to turn his illegal experiments into "R&D," his bribes into "institutional relations" and his killings into "collateral damage of national security." It is Sutherland's white-collar crime with an added superpower: he not only escapes the criminal label, but pins it on his victim.
That power to fix who the threat is has a name in media theory: Herman and Chomsky's manufacture of consent. When a few actors control what gets told and how, "common sense" about who is dangerous stops being spontaneous and becomes manufactured. Luthor does not always need to lie; it is enough for him to own the frame. His media LexCorp is the machine that turns his private interest into public fear.
The label is set by whoever rules
Luthor's lesson is that "criminal" is not a medal earned by the harm caused, but a label handed out from power. Whoever controls the money, the media and the narrative can whitewash their own plunder and blacken the innocent. That is why conflict theory distrusts crime statistics: they do not measure who does the most harm, but whom the one holding the frying pan by the handle has decided to pursue. Luthor does not fear the law because, to a large degree, the law looks where he points it.
Get the map of theories for free
Subscribe to the criminal archive —one case a week, no spam— and I'll send you The map of theories: the great currents of criminology on a single sheet.
// The subject"I am a man; he is not"
What makes Luthor such a clean case is his ideological alibi: he does not present himself as a villain, but as the champion of humanity against a false god. He wraps his ambition in xenophobia ("he is not one of us"), in species pride and in free-market freedom. His hatred of Superman is not just envy of another's power: it is that Superman, for free and asking nothing in return, refutes the dogma that upholds Luthor's empire —that everything can be bought, that no one helps without charging, that power is there to be taken—. Superman is dangerous to Luthor not for what he destroys, but for what he gives away. And to a world taught to admire the one who accumulates, the stranger's generosity is, indeed, suspicious.
Lex Luthor
// The crackWhat if the consensus is sometimes right?
Conflict theory shines with Luthor, but it is wise not to absolutize it. Its strong version —"all crime is a construction of power"— stumbles on the fact that there are harms over which a real and cross-cutting consensus exists (no one of any class wants to be murdered or defrauded), and on the fact that sometimes the system does reach the powerful. Reducing all law to a weapon of class can become as blind as denying the bias. Luthor's strength is not to prove that crime is always defined by power, but to remind us how much it is — and how easily we confuse "respectable" with "innocent."
Watch who points
Luthor forces a simple and difficult mental hygiene: when someone very powerful tells us vehemently who the danger is, ask who benefits from that definition. Conflict theory does not ask us to believe that all the accused are innocent; it asks us to distrust the accusing finger when that finger owns the means that manufacture suspicion. In a real world of billionaires with a megaphone, the question "and why do you point at me and not at you?" is not from a comic: it is the first defense against plunder disguising itself as law and aid disguising itself as threat.
That is why Luthor does not age: every era finds its magnate capable of buying the narrative and selling his greed as public service. Superman can stop a train, but he cannot stop a press campaign — and Luthor knows it. His true superpower is not intelligence: it is narrative impunity, that of the one with enough power to write who is the hero and who the criminal. Fighting that is not a matter of fists, but of not leaving him the monopoly on the label.
Three key takeaways
- For conflict theory (Quinney, 1970; Vold, 1958), crime is a definition imposed by the powerful. Luthor takes it to the extreme: he manufactures the "criminal" (Superman) while whitewashing his own plunder.
- His weapon is not kryptonite, but respectability: money, media and politics turn his crimes into R&D and philanthropy —white-collar crime that also pins the label on its victim—.
- The crack: not all crime is a construction of power (there are real consensuses). But Luthor teaches the essential hygiene: faced with the powerful man who points at the enemy, ask who benefits from that definition.
Sources · further reading
- Quinney, R. (1970). The Social Reality of Crime. Little, Brown.
- Vold, G. B. (1958). Theoretical Criminology. Oxford University Press.
- Chambliss, W. J. (1975). «Toward a Political Economy of Crime». Theory and Society, 2(2).
- Reiman, J. (1979). The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison. Wiley.
- Herman, E. S. & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Pantheon.
Case-file questionsFrequently asked questions
¿Quién es Lex Luthor?
Lex Luthor («Luthor») es un villano de Superman, analizado en KRIMINIS con la lente de la criminología. Lex Luthor is the richest man in Metropolis: owner of LexCorp, of media outlets and of politicians.
¿Por qué Lex Luthor se convierte en villano?
Superman and conflict theory: Lex Luthor does not fight a criminal, he manufactures one. The billionaire who convinces the world that the danger is the alien who saves lives —while his empire operates above the law— is Quinney's "social reality of crime" turned into a comic panel.
¿Qué teoría criminológica explica a Lex Luthor?
El caso de Lex Luthor se analiza desde la Conflicto de clases. For conflict theory (Vold, Quinney), crime is a definition imposed by the powerful, not a quality of the act. Lex Luthor takes it to the extreme: with his money and his media he turns Superman —who only saves lives— into "the threat," while whitewashing his own crimes as philanthropy and patriotism. He embodies at once Vold's group conflict (criminalizing the "other," the alien) and Quinney's social reality of crime (the one who defines who the enemy is). His respectability is his best alibi.
