Well, I'd argue there is one point to this: will, discipline, and integrity are some of the real super-powers that actually make anything else worth having.

Well, you won't find me disagreeing. And, as someone else said, we that's why we have super hero stories, not super power stories.

But Moore's statement that powers - i.e. enhanced abilities or potential - are useless is still nonsense. Sure, a loser could waste those powers...but would still be vastly more powerful than a loser without powers. It's still what you do with them at the end of the day but, dang, super powers would never be anything to sneeze at, especially if most people don't have them. A unique, powerful loser is still going to have a huge leg up on even a dedicated, disciplined non-powered person...at least in specific fields. Now, that's not to say they'd win - the Punisher, Iron Man, Batman, and other non-powered characters are popular for a reason - but they'd still have a technical advantage.

A hero is not what powers he has, but who he is as a person.

Again, agreed. Again, Moore was talking about the powers themselves though. Heroes are great, but this topic seems to be about dissecting the powers themselves, which are unrelated to how heroic someone is.

Unfortunately, since Alan Moore is a degenerate communist, he doesn't believe that people can be heroic at a deep and fundamental level because of how shit of a person he is, which informs how shitty he thinks everyone else is.

Yes, but I think the issue here is just general smug, and Subverting Expectations™. I'm not sure he's even thought through the argument logically or ideologically. He's basically just being edgy. Everyone likes the idea of super powers, so Moore wants to shit on them. Pretty funny, really.