ON THE MORALITY OF CAP'S BEHAVIOR

[Doctor Bong]

I decided I wanted to concoct a little poll to see if, as I suspect, our acceptance or rejection of both Cap & Iron Man's behavior during CW stems from an increasing generation gap consisting on how, in comics, we view things like Good & Evil, Moral & Immoral actions & responsability for your actions... I thought it would be interesting....

[Doctor Doom]

I refuse to vote for a single reason.

Cap's BEHAVIOUR was inexcusable.

But I can see Cap being justified in opposing it. I think the question is badly worded; I don't have a problem with him opposing the SHRA, I think how he did so is immoral in the extreme.

[balok]

docdoom said:

But I can see Cap being justified in opposing it. I think the question is badly worded; I don't have a problem with him opposing the SHRA, I think how he did so is immoral in the extreme.

Okay. How would you have him oppose it? From a prison cell in another dimension, without legal representation? Remember that when the conflict started, that's what the heroes thought they faced, because Tony wanted to scare them into supporting the act. (This point is made in Frontline #11, a book you seem to wish had never been written - but it was written and it is canon.) A number of them were even imprisoned there for a time. Cap's worst choices occurred after matters had escalated to violence. Tony's worst choices started the whole thing.

[The Night Phantom]

docdoom said:

I refuse to vote for a single reason.

Cap's BEHAVIOUR was inexcusable.

But I can see Cap being justified in opposing it. I think the question is badly worded; I don't have a problem with him opposing the SHRA, I think how he did so is immoral in the extreme.

Perhaps the question should have been worded differently. But the title of the thread speaks of the morality of Cap’s behavior, and so I believe that your position would be consonant with a “no”.

(Now, whether you would be morally justified in taking that position would be another issue…  )

[redstatecap]

I actually have a tough time voting on this poll as it is worded, and I'll explain why.
The whole set of issues surrounding SHRA and its enforcement was so poorly written and badly mangled that untangling the right and wrong of opposing it is for me extremely difficult.
Something like the SHRA in concept, IMO could be written so as to be constitutional and Cap would not be justified in opposing it just to preserve business as usual for masked vigilantes.
However, SHRA as written and particularly as enforced by Iron Man's Gestapo is not constitutional and Cap is justified in opposing it.
On the other hand, Cap's hog-wild methods were both completely out-of-character, and totally wrong from the start. The method of fighting an unconstitutional SHRA and unconstitutional enforcement methods lay in the courts and in the press -- not on the streets.
Unfortunately this was rendered a non-option immediately by Millar and ilk, who wrote stories where little things like the constitutionality of SHRA was ignored, trials were ignored, and opponents were just "disappeared" by SHIELD.
But Millar and his ilk did a stunningly poor job of getting Cap's rationale across, that is if they even thought it through that far. Cap's basic rationale at the start was never developed further than: "I'm fighting for the right to be an unaccountable masked vigilante." That doesn't cut it for a reason to start a war.
Tony's side was portrayed as criminal and fascistic throughtout, and it is truly hard to see how a writer could make the other side look unjustified in opposing it -- but Millar managed!
If there was any truth in Tom Brevoort's statements pre-CW that this was to be a "balanced" story, its that Marvel tried to make both sides look morally reprehensible.
Cap, rather than looking like the freedom fighter he is against Tony's fascist repression, comes off as a thoughtless, selfish, bumbling thug.
The honest answer is that Cap -- as written by Miller and crew -- has acted immorally (and out of character) throughout the series. Just not as any where near as immorally as Tony, who has been effectively destroyed as a character. Only by comparison to the ludicrous and wrong characterization of Tony can the ludicrous and wrong characterization of Cap be made to seem justifiable.
That's how I have to answer the poll's question -- Cap is only morally justified in that Tony was far worse. So I'll vote yes, with serious qualifications.

RSC

[imperiusrex]

You know it's interesting. I got to see an advance screening of 300 so let me throw a spoiler alert for anyone who doesn't know the basic story:




S
P
O
I
L
E
R

King Leonidas essentially defies Spartan law and engages a foreign power which puts all the people of Sparta in jeopardy all for an ideal.
an ideal which may not be justifiable.
but the way the story is presented, there's no doubt he's supposed to be the hero of the story. However they could've easily slanted it so he was this reckless out of control swordslinger.
Now I thought about it and Cap and the Avengers have defied the gov't numerous times. In fact in the Kree Skrull War they destroy mandroid armor in a battle in midtown Manhattan (of course no one gets hurt because people just didn't get hurt in those days...)
The difference is marvel decided that this time Cap was the bad guy and it's the only reason he's the heavy.
otherwise he was doing what every marvel hero has done a hundred times over.
oh and sally's inane speech about america gets stupider every time I re-read it. First of all there are huge honking parts of this country that don't care about myspace youtube or who won the world series (even though I remember cap being a baseball fan and also most people can't recall who won the world series two years ago because it is just minutiae and if Jeff Foxworthy is a better American because he's gone to Nascar then get me on a plane to France, tout de suite...).
but these folks are good Americans.
And Cap likely knows who every senator and congressman is, what our laws are, and five different ways to pierce Kang's force field.
all things considered, I'd rather he know those things...
I just want to dropkick everything about Frontline #11 into deep space.
it is easily the most awful comic I've read.

[Shiryu]

Tough to say...
I think he can be justified because of the way the all situation developed. With heroes thrown away in another dimension, with no process coming in the foreseeble future, then his way might have been the only possible one.

However, if I remember correctly, the details on the Negative Zone prison only came out after Cap going underground, so I think that his first reaction was somewhat excessive. He resorted to brute force straight away, without at least trying to do something else (speak with the President, explain his point to the media etc). Today I found out I have to pay some custom charges for a parcel I was waiting for, apparently it's the law, and I'm not happy about it. But I'm not going to the post office with a gun in my hand, I'll complain in more "civil" manner.

So in the end I vote yes, because of the way things developed, otherwise it would have been a no.

[balok]

imperiusrex said:

oh and sally's inane speech about america gets stupider every time I re-read it. First of all there are huge honking parts of this country that don't care about myspace youtube or who won the world series (even though I remember cap being a baseball fan and also most people can't recall who won the world series two years ago because it is just minutiae and if Jeff Foxworthy is a better American because he's gone to Nascar then get me on a plane to France, tout de suite...).
but these folks are good Americans.

I *hope* that the point Jenkins was trying to make was that the typical American, for whom Sally Floyd may be a stand-in, is relatively uneducated about the real America, and that this is why that person supports the registration act and opposes Cap. If Jenkins, and by extension Marvel, really believe that those things, and not freedom and liberty, are the important facets of America, that's just sad. Of course, they MAY simply by suggesting it because focus groups have told them that this appeal will connect to and lure in new readers - a somewhat more refined version of the "foil/hologram/rare/multiple cover" phenomena of a decade or so earlier - a cheap marketing ploy. But if that's the case - if people think this country is about YouTube and NASCAR and MySpace, and not about freedom... then rough times lie ahead for all of us. For when people lose respect for freedom, they shortly afterward lose freedom itself. And like a lot of things, it's a whole lot easier to lose it than it is to get it back.

imperiusrex said:

I just want to dropkick everything about Frontline #11 into deep space.
it is easily the most awful comic I've read.

Doctor Doom agreed with you so strongly that he didn't even want to consider it a part of the Civil War continuity, claiming it would be retconned within a year. But it was a part of the Civil War continuity, and the things it revealed about characters and motivations are a big part of the reason why I regard Civil War as poor writing, because it ignored established characterizations.

[imperiusrex]

balok said:

imperiusrex said:

oh and sally's inane speech about america gets stupider every time I re-read it. First of all there are huge honking parts of this country that don't care about myspace youtube or who won the world series (even though I remember cap being a baseball fan and also most people can't recall who won the world series two years ago because it is just minutiae and if Jeff Foxworthy is a better American because he's gone to Nascar then get me on a plane to France, tout de suite...).
but these folks are good Americans.

I *hope* that the point Jenkins was trying to make was that the typical American, for whom Sally Floyd may be a stand-in, is relatively uneducated about the real America, and that this is why that person supports the registration act and opposes Cap. If Jenkins, and by extension Marvel, really believe that those things, and not freedom and liberty, are the important facets of America, that's just sad. Of course, they MAY simply by suggesting it because focus groups have told them that this appeal will connect to and lure in new readers - a somewhat more refined version of the "foil/hologram/rare/multiple cover" phenomena of a decade or so earlier - a cheap marketing ploy. But if that's the case - if people think this country is about YouTube and NASCAR and MySpace, and not about freedom... then rough times lie ahead for all of us. For when people lose respect for freedom, they shortly afterward lose freedom itself. And like a lot of things, it's a whole lot easier to lose it than it is to get it back.

imperiusrex said:

I just want to dropkick everything about Frontline #11 into deep space.
it is easily the most awful comic I've read.

Doctor Doom agreed with you so strongly that he didn't even want to consider it a part of the Civil War continuity, claiming it would be retconned within a year. But it was a part of the Civil War continuity, and the things it revealed about characters and motivations are a big part of the reason why I regard Civil War as poor writing, because it ignored established characterizations.

for me the problem is the speech doesn't make sense no matter how you toss it.
Sally's a New Yorker. So am I.
I could walk into the Museum of Modern Art and find fifty people who've never been to NASCAR, don't use myspace, youtube, watch the world series...yet some of them might be leading civil rights attorneys.
And any woman who lives in New York would not have this attitude by any stretch. In fact she seems like a New York intellectual, and I would guess most of these views would be far from who she is and she would know those things aren't America.
This stupid speech wouldn't sound right coming out of anybody. Even Dubya at his most pandering wouldn't proclaim these the values of America.
It just is truly terrible.
And believe me I am no fan of Civil War. To me any comic that puts Captain America in a light where he's shown to be unable to make smart decisions about battlefields, how much force to use and being involved in the death of fifty civilians (at least according to Frontline 11) is a pointless exercise in futility. The whole thing will have to be retconned from page one at some point.

[balok]

The really sad thing is, this is apparently what appeals to the emerging generation of comic readers. Marvel has found its audience, but that audience is no longer me.

[Nutcase65]

is it just me or didn't Sally's tirade just sort of repeat her going off on Cap earlier in the series?

He doesn't rate as a real American example because he doesn't get on you tube?

And explain to me the crack about the World Series. Cap is all about some baseball.

[balok]

nutcase65 said:

is it just me or didn't Sally's tirade just sort of repeat her going off on Cap earlier in the series?

He doesn't rate as a real American example because he doesn't get on you tube?

And explain to me the crack about the World Series. Cap is all about some baseball.

Sally's tirade only proved that it is she who does not understand America. But I suspect (given what happend) that Jenkins used her voice to utter Marvel's new editorial policy: America's core values no longer matter, only the bread and circuses that serve to keep the younger (and desired) audience entertained. Since I'm sure he knew that Cap wouldn't live to see his ideas put on trial, he took the opportunity to demonstrate in part why Marvel decided to kill Cap.