CAPTAIN AMERICA Was Wrong (And Homelander Proves It!)

Thanks to Established Titles for sponsoring this video! Go to establishedtitles.com/ScreenC... to shop their Early Black Friday Sale, plus get an additional 10% off any purchase with code SCREENCRUSH and help support the channel!
The Marvel Cinematic Universe's superhero Civil War divided the MCU into Tea, Captain America and Team Iron Man. But in hindsight, we can say that both heroes were wrong. But Steve Rogers was especially wrong.
Thanks for supporting our channel! Check out our MERCH Store Here → screencrushmerch.com/
Go here → screencrush.com/
TikTok → / screencrushnews
Like us → / screencrush
Follow us → / screencrushnews
Get our newsletter → screencrush.com/newsletter/
Written and Edited by Pavel Terehovsky (pavel8866.wixsite.com/pavelt) [e-mail]
Hosted by Ryan Arey ( / ryanarey )
#Marvel #MCU #CivilWar
The movie dealt with a really powerful debate on superhero accountability. Though, despite all the incredible kicking and punching, the movie never answered the question of who was right, Captain America or Iron Man.
And it seems like Marvel Studios, as well as all its heroes, pretty much forgotten about this as well. Because Thanos showed up, and the debate around superhero supervision…. poof, it got dusted.
Since then, no one is talking about this. But we didn’t forget, and we are here to remain the Avengers that the bill comes due, now more than ever.
The central conflict in the amazing Captain America Civil War is the ideological clash between Captain America and Iron Man.
Tony was all in for government supervision, believing that the Avengers must be held accountable for their mistakes. The only path forward is for the Avengers to register and be overseen by the government.
Steve on the other hand believed that the Avengers must remain autonomous, free to take action in the world and use their abilities without the limitations of government supervision.
So who’s right here?
Well, you might be surprised here, because Steve was wrong, but that doesn’t actually mean that Tony was right.
Usually with these types of videos, we go into the nitty gritty of why certain heroes were wrong. But this time, it’s going to be different.
Because while Steve is wrong, he’s also right, in principle. While Tony is right, to a certain degree, he’s mostly wrong.
After one too many collateral misshapes, the Avengers face the consequences for their actions as independent heroes.
While they save the world, they do tend to leave a lot of havoc behind them.
This leads to the sokovia accords, a legal bind that will allow the world’s governments to regulate the Avengers.
Tony was totally on board with the accords, while Steve was against it with all of his heart.
They are both right, to a degree, but also so very wrong.

[@ScreenCrush]

Thanks to Established Titles for sponsoring this video! Go to establishedtitles.com/ScreenCrush to shop their Early Black Friday Sale, plus get an additional 10% off any purchase with code SCREENCRUSH and help support the channel!

[@KFP_Fanboy]

i like kung fu panda

[@luisperoso2210]

Please check the video about Established titles scam.

[@etriganthedemon666]

I love your channel and your work but you gotta stop taking sponsors from them

[@gavinokeeffe598]

established titles is a scam

[@TheDigitalcrack]

Best video I’ve seen from you. Good thoughts and deep consideration

[@heavyspoilers]

Thought this said Captain America was Wong for a second and thought we were gonna get hit with the wildest fan theory of all time

[@RaviTeja-rv8eg]

Bruvv

[@quacksilver7427]

Damn

[@RoweRowe]

oof

[@sapphirewitch5071]

😂

[@FireJach]

In some universe

[@aaditchaudhary5067]

Monica Rambeau's argument is Wanda could have murdered a thousand people but, she only murdered 100 people, so we should be grateful to Wanda for her mercy. 😂

[@omalor]

Hayward was right.

[@dylanpalmer5151]

Literally the perspective of most religious people: X god has murdered Y amount of people, but because all of us here are not among those Y people, we should be grateful to them for their mercy.

[@TheGotreck]

@@dylanpalmer5151 To be fair, afterlife is a thing in religion so a god kiling someone is not the same as a mortal killing a person. If a person kill a baby, that is a really bad crime, if a god kills a baby, and brings it's soul to the paradise in the afterlife, this is actually good.

[@TheGotreck]

@@dylanpalmer5151 there is also divine punishment, if a god killd a bunch of person because they deserved, there is no evil on that, thanks to the metaphysical concept that proves that a God would necessarily be perfectly good.

[@dylanpalmer5151]

@@TheGotreck Since Christianity is the most immediately relevant example: the tower of Babel was collapsed for simply infringing on God's divinity, and I don't remember off the top of my head if it was mentioned people were in it. However, one of the principal things in the Bible is Noah's flood, which supposedly wiped out all of humanity except for Noah and his family. Not exactly a kind or merciful god, but it has been rebranded as such in the modern day.

[@thomassmith6232]

As I recall SHIELD launched a nuclear missile on New York. Wonder how much collateral damage that would have caused had Iron Man not redirected it, and who would have been held responsible?

[@Oturan20]

That was the World Security Council _NOT_ SHIELD.

[@brianb4898]

The governments came to them with a very lengthy document. They had no intention of negotiation, because they believe themselves in charge. Hard to negotiate with someone that believes themselves above you, and does not view you as a team member.

[@TheCrownedSun]

Eh, the government producing a huge thousands of pages worth of document is not really meaningful. That's like, "Hi," in government.

[@RachelAnnPotter]

@@TheCrownedSun lol sounds about right

[@goddessrick8734]

Why would you allow a group of heroes to be on equal ground with a counties government when meta humans and gods are causing massive collateral damage.

[@brianb4898]

@@goddessrick8734 Is that collateral damage less than what would have been if they were not there? If it is an improvement, sounds good to me. And governments go to war ... Not much of an argument, considering the hundreds of millions that died last century at ths direction of those governments.

[@mandalorianhunter1]

@@brianb4898 Also some of the things that happen in the movies is because of the governments. Stark industries getting rid of weapons thanks to Tony having seen the error of his ways. However, Stane and corporate would try to over throw him and just make more weapons. Also those same weapons are what led Wanda and Pietro to losing their family, then wanting to become stronger for revenge. The government wanting to use re create the Super Soldier serum was what led to the Hulk's creation. Hydra had taken control of SHIELD and was going to eliminate all of its enemies. Their is more but we all know what else happens and what major thing happened when the Avenger's were fractured due to these accords.

[@jaysanti1718]

I think it's worth noting that at some point in Civil War, Steve was willing to sign the Accords. He said it wouldn't be impossible, but there would be have to be safeguards. And then he found out Tony was keeping Wanda in lockdown and objectifying her to a weapon of mass destruction. It wasn't until then that he went into absolute refusal mode. Which no one can blame him because, as a someone who lived through and fought in WWII, he saw internment and human objectification first hand.

[@taeb1279]

This needs to be pin low-key

[@akale2620]

True

[@purplecat4977]

I feel like the humans actually interned in WW2 would take issue with their situation being compared to having the run of a giant cushy building. Not that I couldn't see Steve succumbing to that loss of perspective, but I've also always thought he was unable to tell the difference between things that sound sanctimonious and cool, and things that are true.

[@1narutogirl6]

Low key need a Steve Rogers and Erik Lehnsherr team up 🤣

[@Rahul-ll1en]

My thoughts exactly. He went through the events of The Winter Soldier personally, He knew what would happen to some supervision board like S.H.I.E.L.D when it got compromised. When Wanda's confinement came up, that all rang up in his brain, Safeguards was necessary since not everyone can be as good as him but "The Safest hands are still their own", which he rightly said!

[@jonathanlauber293]

This situation reflects the world we live in today. Everyone is certain that they are right. They see only that they are right, refuse to see where the 'other side' has good points, and refuse to acknowledge the weaknesses in their own arguments. This view leads to an inability to compromise because compromise means that the wrong side gets what they want and the right side doesn't get everything they think that they deserve. This is a perfect example of art imitating life.

[@Darkstar1484]

The problem that i have, and that i hate that the MCU ignored, is that in previous movies the bodies of authority were either launching nukes at population centers, creating a monster and also uaing soldiers kn civilain spaces or were severely comrpomised with hydra agents. The problem isnt just about freedom to use power but that wr had been shown just how fallible and potentially dangerous said governing bodies were.

[@mandalorianhunter1]

That's true when literally 3 people who were in the room had dealt with what happened in The Winter Soldier and they were treated like they barely did anything. Although it's probably the directors thinking we saw the previous movies and didn't want to spoon feed us. Wanda despite being in the wrong in AoU and is the reason for what happened, she is still a problem now, was the result of her home being targeted by the government. Tony is racked with guilt due to him creating Ultron and Rhody is a military guy, so he is forced to obey the government or he is black listed.

[@Darkstar1484]

@@mandalorianhunter1 Sure, I am not saying that I can't understand WHY or HOW people might go to certain positions. Rhodes is career military and probably has more trust for the institutions. Stark is operating off of guilt, that's fine. But in the arguments, the discussions, no character confronted General Ross or anyone else on the registration side pointing out exactly why they might have some very logical reasons for not trusting this system especially as said movie was basically a sequel to Winter Soldier

[@mandalorianhunter1]

@@Darkstar1484 Oh I wasn't pointing that out as you not seeing that, just pointing it out but yeah I wish that was pointed out.

[@QuietGiant]

The problem with super hero registration, is that it only really works with borderline or mostly human heroes like Capt America or Ironman. Imagine trying to enforce it on someone with incredibly high power levels like the (savage) hulk. Or on supernatural beings like Dr. Strange and Ghost Rider, or even on alien 'Gods' such as Thor and Hercules. Mighty impractical. Then there's the question of where the border between human and transhuman even begins. Do you have to register if you are a world class martial artist like Shang-Chi or Daredevil. Do you have be registered if you have the engineering skills and intellect to create a suit of power-armor? Then there is the question of X-Men style mutants that are simply born with super powers? Probably too many questions to address in tne scope of few two(ish) hour movies, which is why it was dropped after infinity war.

[@stevenscott2136]

X-Men are basically a race (Magneto certainly thinks so), so wouldn't registering them be discrimination? It's not like they set out to be different (like building power-armor or taking performance-enhancing super-steroids.)

[@QuietGiant]

@@stevenscott2136 Exactly my thinking, but not only mutants but Asgardians, Olympians, Eternals/Deviants (the comic versions) and Inhumans. Marvel also has no end of 'supernatural' races like vampires and werewolves, the whole concept of Superhuman registration would an unholy mess for any country that tried it.

[@Guardian582]

@@QuietGiant not just the unethical side of registration to start with, no matter how secure you make something someone WILL find away to steal it, and if that registration falls into the hands of someone like Obadiah, Thanos or even a 'normie' who just dislikes someone for having power they dont and gets 'disgruntled' about it, the privacy and nastiness that could ensue is horrifying...and while tony makes the argument 'things can be repealed after the accords are made' is faulty in that, i bet that registration would be the one thing anyone at the top of the chain would NEVER repeal

[@innovation_s6079]

easiest answer you only sign up if you want to perform heroic acts given there's an obvious weapon of corruption there in say a superpowered individual saves someone from getting run over by a car the government could go hey you didn't sign up

[@Guardian582]

@@innovation_s6079 thats just it though the registration as part of the accords would NO T have been selective it would have been AMNDATORY of anyone with powers, which is an invasion of privacy if nothing else..oh by the by, you CAN be arrested from helping someone now, particularly if you give med training witthout some sort of paper proving you have med training which is a bone-dead stupid idea

[@alistairgrey5089]

I think you missed one of Caps biggest points. The Avengers and other super heroes police their own. Every time a super powered person started doing bad things the Avengers stepped in. That's what Steve means by "the best hands are still our own" it wasn't about moral superiority, it was about not letting power hungry people with agendas have access to the most powerful forces on Earth.

[@burningsickle]

Eh, superheroes and supervillains are perfectly capable of being power hungry people with agendas themselves. Without any sense of accountability, there really isn't anything the average person can do if the big heroes decide to rule the Earth.

[@neilrobinson4494]

>Every time a super powered person started doing bad things the Avengers stepped in. Irrelevant. Laws exist for a reason and the Avengers do not exist outside of them. And what if they stopped 'stepping in'? Then what? >it wasn't about moral superiority, Yes it was. >it was about not letting power hungry people with agendas have access to the most powerful forces on Earth. No, it was about saying "We should be able to do whatever we want and be able to ignore any and all laws we chose to"

[@lanereynolds4567]

@@neilrobinson4494 every government up to that point had been guilty of so very much worse than the super powered people. Let's not forget the ending of Avengers. Tony stopped a nuke from hitting NYC. A nuke. With civilians still there. That can never be a choice that can be allowed to be made and must be stopped, every time. Then winter soldier had plenty of examples of various governments sending soldiers into population centers to fuck shit up. Hydra usurped the greatest weapons on the planet. And that's just the crimes we've seen the governments do on film. We know their history has all our history built in. Government is not the good guy here. Government is the cause of the greatest evils of the past thousand years. Wars, genocide, slavery, just to name three. None of those happen without government support. Even the black market slave trade that goes on today, still has governments supporting them. Just in clandestine ways instead of openly, in the west. in other areas, it's openly. Governments didn't give a fuck about Rwanda, cambodia, Mao's revolution. Dekulakiazation. the holodomore. In fact, worse than not giving a shit, theose were all government backed actions, and other governments aided and abetted by standing by and doing nothing. They did the only thing those governments needed to succeed in evil. Nothing. Frankly, these individual super powered people are less of a threat than the governments are to their own people. Hell, Thanos is a government leader of his own intergalactic nation. Government is as trustworthy as a pedophile in an orphanage.

[@Devakiinable]

@@neilrobinson4494 ITs not like the government could ACTUALLY force to act or not act should they deem the order morally unjust.

[@RickCicchini]

@@neilrobinson4494 Not all laws are just.

[@sharleenshouse3238]

I've always had a problem with people who blame the heroes for the damage and mess they cause when they are defending someone, be it a single person, a city, or the world. Think about what would have happened if the Avengers DIDN'T defend New York, or if they just didn't do any of the other things when they prevented the bad people from doing whatever they wanted to do. Any "damage" CAUSED" by the avengers is far below the amount of damage that would have happened if the avengers weren't there. So no, Cap was not wrong.

[@naqibdaik7241]

Your mom: *dies because of a building crash on her by Hulk smashing the big bad guy.* Your logic: Oh, man. My mom died because of Hulk, but Hulk is part of the Avenger and did save the city, so I shouldn't put him accountable for my mom's death.

[@thetwistable]

@@naqibdaik7241 lets put this another way...the American military has occupied several spaces over the last couple of decades, which has caused civillian casualties in their course...are the members of the American army held accountable when one of their missiles causes a civillian death? Is the American military held accountable? is the American Govt even held accoutnable...sure a building landing on your mum is never a good thing, but why should the hulk be held accountable, he is a missile sent agains tthe enemy, and American soldier fighting against a dictator, a stray bullet or missile that missed its mark...who is held accountable in todays world? Sure the govt's do spend some cash setting up rehoming/rebuilding etc but who is going to be held accountable for a single civillian death in what is in essence a war like scenario?

[@naqibdaik7241]

@@thetwistableLook, you do logically sounds it, and I agree to some of it. But in the end, humans are emotional based beings, there's no way someone is gonna make rational thought especially when they're in perils, a lot of them are gonna make irrational ones. I've seen a lot. What I try to sarcasm out is that you're pretty heartless if someone, let's say your closest one (I just say your mom, because I have no idea who you're closest to) died being killed accidentally or so on but you didn't suddenly sprout "he killed my mom, he should be accountable for his actions!" sorta thing. Besides, you said a lot about the American military. Yet you didn't speak about WW2 German, Japan, etc. Like for example, America's action to nuke at Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Sure that's to end the war, but that's overkill and overreaction over the Pearl Harbor attack. So they held no accountability for it, but how about the Holocaust? Yet suddenly Germans need to be accountable about it? Seems like being accountable is only to those who lose the war to me.

[@teddybaker4759]

@@naqibdaik7241 The Avengers do nothing. The Chitauri invasion is successful. Thanos snaps your mom out existence. The Avengers never go back in time. Hulk never brings your mom back to life.

[@naqibdaik7241]

@@teddybaker4759oh, wow. Never knew that such big changes came from Avenger simply not choosing to do anything. *Clap clap* you found the key. Sounds like everyday life, eh? Big alert dude, everyone eventually dies. Even if the Avengers are trying to do something or nothing doesn't change that. Besides, Thanos is the bad guy, what am I supposed to do? Force accountable on him, when he, as the bad guys do what he needs to do as a proper villain in this saga? Let's say he destroyed a city, and people died. So what do you say about him? He is the bad guy, he is the villain. The proper response will always go fight back. History proves that. Then what about the Avengers? They're supposed to be good guys, yet in the process of saving the city, people died. So what does that make? So far, nothing of such action=consequence. Wait, I guess it was in order to create a new villain that successfully ripped a part of the Avenger like what happened in Civil War. You called out about what happened if they did nothing. So I'll ask about the aftermath of the Age of Ultron. They're heroes, so after fighting the big bad guy in a city filled with people, what do they do? Because according to the Civil War, they did nothing to relieve the survivor. Did they? According to the wiki, the battle has 177 fatalities and a net loss of 474 Billion USD. So, 177 people died, and 2(?) of them is the child of the perpetrator Civil War. Oof, sounds like big karma to me, they did nothing aftermath of that battle to survivor, and they get ripped because of it.

[@rafaellariosa4815]

People always forget that Tony was only willing to sign the accords to get Ross and the government off their backs. He said to Cap when he (cap) was supposed to sign that if they don't like what government eventually does to them, they can just fight it. Together

[@johnstockley6976]

Cap standing before the entirety of the world and saying "no" is very much in character.

[@raydrexler5868]

I love how all of the heroes reached their opinion on the Accords through their experience in their solo films and that they were all understandable

[@richardbastuck3902]

You make an interesting point about there being no team to hold each other accountable. It makes me wonder if that was meant to be a theme throughout phase 4. The Avengers didn't consider the consequences of reversing the snap and then the team leaders either died, retired, or flew off into space, leaving a vacuum of power and a mad scramble for it. That kid in Far From Home said it: "Are the Avengers even a thing anymore? Does anyone have a plan??" Yes, lots of people: Scarlet Witch, S.W.O.R.D., the GRC, the Flag-Smashers, the DODC, Spider-Man, the Skrull, the Clandestines, the Hand, the Ten Rings, Talokan, the Thunderbolts, Wakanda, the Celestials, the TVA, vampires, Venom, mutants, the Fantastic Four, Loki, Sylvie, Zeus, Hercules, He Who Remains, and Kang, just to name a few. All these individuals, groups, and nations coming out of the woodwork in full force has been chaos, but maybe that's the point! With no solid Avengers team anymore, the opportunity to fill the void is too good to pass up for anyone! Things are going to continue get MUCH worse for our characters in the MCU to lend weight to how badly a new super team is needed in this universe. I think of it kind of like Zack Snyder's Justice League how the Mother Boxes didn't call out to Steppenwolf until Superman died, the time heist in Endgame is sending out quantum signals to every corner of the multiverse that a new war is brewing and it's time for everyone to prepare. Which is fitting considering what we can hope to look forward to in Secret Wars.

[@The_Infamous_Boogyman]

Thank you. Someone who finally gets what phase 4 was really about and why it was such a "mess" but I'm still very satisfied w new character introductions, organizations and teams all while making it clear that it needs a restructuring of some fashion. You go homie. Thankfully I'm not alone.

[@eyespy3001]

That’s an interesting subtext you pulled out of thin air. I only say “out of thin air” because, unfortunately, none of these movies or shows has thus far tackled the idea of a power void being filled by the wrong powers. Don’t get me wrong, I think that’s a brilliant concept. It’s just that phase 4 doesn’t explore that. Phase 4 doesn’t explore anything, really. It’s all meandering stories designed to introduce a bunch of characters and Easter eggs that will supposedly pay off in Secret Wars, which will be like No Way Home, but on steroids. (In case you’re not familiar with it, the plot of Secret Wars is that some cosmic entity observes the existence of superheroes on Earth and decides to create a Battle Royale planet to pit them all against each other, gladiator-style. It’s kind of simplistically dumb. Granted, there might very well be changes to the story when it comes to writing the screenplay, but as far as tackling a heavy concept like you presented…I highly doubt they’ll go there.)

[@arsenalunsungplays5188]

Didn’t expect to get this intense in a comments section

[@doubletime9098]

I ain't reading all dat shit

[@tolliSTFU]

@@doubletime9098 🥛🍪

[@grogvaughan5649]

As a former member of the United States military and watching for decades the civilian leadership mishandling military operations the Avengers policing themselves seems like a fanfreakingtastic idea to me.

[@shado7418]

I can only imagine if the Avengers had a collar. "Permission to engage, hostile forces, coming through portal to destroy NY, Sir?" "Only once they have started firing at you, WITH intent and all potential collateral damage, has been moved away."🤡

[@shado7418]

@@SciFiSecrets many of the best Military have had authority issues. McCarther, the dirty 13, SAS (When they first were brought together), Rommel, Tommy Prince (From Canada). A good soldier knows when to ignore dumb ideas.

[@grogvaughan5649]

@@SciFiSecrets well, it's like this... my commander tells me to accomplish a mission.. he doesn't tell me how to do it and doesn't really care as long as it's done.

[@grogvaughan5649]

@Shad O exactly.. sounds like one of my deployments to 🇮🇶... LT's can be More dangerous than the tangos you face sometimes.

[@ExeErdna]

The problem with the accords is when mutants get involved since is the Comics version of the Civil War, Genoshan massacre already happened and a lot of world's government were in on the Sentinel program. The government already crossed the moral rubicon. What might happen in the MCU is that the Sentinel program will show up and that's when the accords will be brought up again for the "secret wars" movie whenever we get that shit

[@notproductiveproductions3504]

And then the MCU will make the mistake of painting the moral blacks as a grey situation cuz the political bias requirements to not get blacklisted in Hollywood

[@ExeErdna]

@@notproductiveproductions3504 Like them unironically painting the world governments right in making murderbots because they also forgot what Ultron did. Yet the excuse will be "mutants are scary"

[@likecrazyhorse]

You should have paralleled this with Kang becoming He Who Remains in order to keep himself in check. It's the whole premise behind the next two phases

[@vernonhampton5863]

This whole video could have been the basis of She-Hulk: Attorney at Law. Instead of her getting a suit, we should have had many cases of inpowered people trying to ensure they are protected under law and been funny. But Instead, we got Daredevil's walk of shame

[@iboothby]

The "best" people you picked to be in charge were like you said The Power Broker and two Skrulls. One of which forced Spider-Man to work with Mysterio which is what lead to his identity being revealed. Who has a government non-corrupt enough to supervise near infinite power? It feels like now that you have heroes like Steve retiring it could be those that do the job, those with experience but who no longer are directly involved. Maybe... from the moon.

[@godlikemonolith]

Indeed just look at The Watchmen comics. That is how the government would use super heroes. To subjugate other countries.

[@emmyn9574]

One thing to note: the Accords in the MCU were never actually stated. The audience doesn't know how restrictive they were. If there was options for compromise. The comics Superhuman Registration Act was a totally different thing.

[@Seasonal-Shadow_4674]

Captain America to Ironman in age of Ultron: “I don’t like it when people keep secrets from me” Captain America to Ironman in Civil War: “I didn’t know it was him” Ironman: “Don’t bullshit me Rodgers, did you know” Captain America: “Nods in hypocrisy”

[@Emmanuel-ig5iy]

He never said he hated keeping secrets from others tho

[@rufiooo7]

@@Emmanuel-ig5iy hence the hypocrisy

[@shietcard9649]

There’s a difference Ironman kept the secret for his own gain while captain America kept his secret to protect tony and Bucky but more so Bucky

[@AlphaEarth]

Stark proved time and time again that he was the least trustworthy of all the Avengers. If it was anyone else, Steve would have them. How to you break the news to a man who you like, but can't trust and created a Murder-bot without the team's knowledge, that your best friend in the world, the man you trust beyond anyone else, killed Stark's parents, when he was under the influence of HYDRA? How do you start that conversation, when that same man had repeatedly lied to your face and been disloyal to you? Steve is not a saint by any means, but I'm on Team Cap on this one. Besides, had Tony bothered to read the information released by Nat, he would have found out for himself. Too busy creating murder bots on that day I guess.

[@thatomanaka323]

Rogers is still better than Tony

[@gr8tbigtreehugger]

Thunderbolt Ross said a panel would determine all Avenger's activity but then, later in the same movie, doesn't convene a panel and makes up orders on the spot.

[@ucmanhvuong4301]

I mean you gotta give them a break. They were not in a good mental state when all of this was going on. Tony just broke up with Pepper, then got slapped in the face with accusations from a grieving mother. Steve on the other hand just lost Peggy, one of the only connections he had left of his era. Now to see his last connection (Bucky) about to be taken away from him as well, ofc he ain't gonna be in his right mind. At the end of the day, both are just humans trying their best with their own circumstances, driven by emotions to make decisions that usually would go against what they stand for (Tony used to hate gov control, while Steve used to be patriotic and believed in the gov)

[@AlphaEarth]

That was nicely said.

[@purplecat4977]

Doesn't this drive home the fact that oversight is necessary, though? Life throws everyone curveballs, but most people can't destroy a city because they're too messed up to talk to each other.

[@ucmanhvuong4301]

@@purplecat4977 Wdym? These are decisions to stop such dangers, not to create them. Different circumstances.

[@purplecat4977]

@@ucmanhvuong4301 I'm talking about the issue of people not making their best set of choices when their judgement is compromised by some kind of personal tragedy, traumatic past experience, guilt, etc. There are a lot of things that can cause anyone to make questionable choices, but for most people, the scope of damage that might come from questionable choices is limited. The Avengers can break cities. If they're just as susceptible to compromised judgement (which clearly they are, given the events of the movie), some outside oversight might be needed to limit the damage of Tony having a Wanda-induced nightmare, or Steve losing Peggy, or Bruce losing his crap, or Thor getting a little too excited about a battle.

[@emmyn9574]

good point

[@ChicagoBornPilsenBred21]

Everyone wants to be or thinks they're actions are right until it's time to be held "accountable" for what they've done. Even when someone does something right there will always be someone that says they are wrong.

[@victuz]

So what are you suggesting or implying?

[@thomasmullen644]

One other problem is the the UN just dropped the accords in the Avengers lap and told them to sign or else. They never once thought to talk to the Avengers about it in the first place.

[@ASageCalledQ]

yup it was already decided.

[@Oturan20]

Do you know how _long_ the UN takes to make a document? They were probably being worked on since the NY invasion. Also the UN makes all document Public, them not knowing is on them.

[@AnoNYmous-bz2ef]

Loki has a simple answer: "If it were easy, everyone would do it."

[@ron6083]

You present a great theory. But the problem with it is The Avengers can't just tell the bad guys to stop and that's it. For instance in A.O.U. yeah Tony and Bruce did create Ultron so yes they should have discussed it with the other Avengers but Ultron lifted a whole city and there were going to be casualties whether they stopped him or not. I know you could go back and forth with the what ifs but most of the villains in these movies had done some damage before the Avengers arrived.

[@oghennylo3]

"The avengers needed to negotiate a diplomatic solution" as Michael Corleone signs Johnny Fontaine to perform at the Casino five times a year.

[@Adam_Bosscoe]

Ryan, your first point about the government vs Cap is essentially saying they're too strong for Cap to face, basically "Might makes right"

[@davidh3823]

No government or piece of paper is gonna stop Dr. Strange from doing whatever he wants.

[@notproductiveproductions3504]

But a government puppet at least tried to stop the Avengers from reassembling when the threat became cosmic

[@Damiancontursi]

That is exactly what happens on She-Hulk, multiple times Wong does whatever he wants without accountability, even when confronted by it.

[@emmyn9574]

But it might make him stop and re-think what he is going to do, even if he does it anyway.

[@chriscormac231]

@@Damiancontursi two Wongs does not make it right

[@ryadinstormblessed8308]

Another point that illustrates your idea here is the excessive force used during the police chases in Wakanda Forever. I found it concerning that when the warehouse was surrounded and they tried to arrest the Wakandans, the method of escape was simply to kill dozens of law enforcement officials who weren't trying to kill them, but were just trying to arrest them, and for an ostensibly justifiable reason. They thought the Wakandans were there to assassinate this kid and were there to stop them. Yes, you could point to the other team who invaded a Wakandan facility to steal technology and vibranium, and who were also very readily using deadly force to do so. But that team was clearly portrayed as villains, and their use of deadly force was typical of their villainy. Now, we have this team of heroes with vastly superior technology, resources and skill, under a threat of only arrest, not death, and they immediately start killing. That's not what I call heroic. When you study martial arts, one of the most important lessons you learn is that your superior skill makes you responsible any time you defend yourself to always properly assess and apply the correct degree of violence to end the altercation, and not escalate it unduly. Especially you must never use lethal blows if your own life or the life of another is not on the line. I'm not saying this is solely a Wakanda Forever issue of course. Hasty and excessive violence resulting in killing of police is not unknown in superhero-type movies when you're looking for spectacular action sequences. But that doesn't justify it, especially when the heroes resorted to violence first, and they didn't even _try_ to get away without using violence.

[@Devakiinable]

I think they just want to have a "demographic attack on police"

[@crystaldottir]

When Google's motto was "Don't be evil", it was so obviously hollow. Every villain is the hero of the story in their own mind. "Don't *do* evil" is hard, but it means something.

[@Neil070]

Imagine the scenario. Avengers: "We have 45 minutes to save the Earth. Quick, get in touch with the UN and ask them to assemble the committee to pass a resolution and decide on a course of action. What? Russia can't make it, they're invading another neighbour today?" I rest my case

[@JakalairVG]

This was a fascinating thing to think about, and a great video. As a retired soldier this kind of thing always makes me wary. Every soldier I know is trained to kill, that is the whole point. So, what the government does is try and keep us away from our weapons, contained in specific locations, and lay out very clear rules for us to follow. But, when the soldier and the weapon are one and the same it stops working. Also, delving into Steve's backstory he is betrayed by the military, the government, and that can cause some serious trust issues. Steve and Tony never got along from what I could see. They were good coworkers, but they seemed to disagree on just about everything. ...I forgot where I was going with this, but this video dug up a bunch of thoughts to think. :) I just remembered! If you want to see a TV Show that spends 5 seasons exploring this idea, Person of Interest is fascinating!

[@nafisanis1606]

Oh I did watch PoI. It was a pretty good show.

[@JakalairVG]

@@nafisanis1606 My wife and I are in the last season and it holds up pretty well.

[@jaywilk7249]

"Persons of Interest".. Loved it.. absolutely loved it

[@GregsGameRoom]

There is no right answer. People in power will always abuse it.

[@blaze556922]

That has traditionally been true but we're actually seeing the first wave of politicians entering not for their own ambitions, but for the greater good. Look at Stacy Abrams, AOC, etc. People who have helped communities and raised money outside their own districts because they actually care about bettering this world. What a concept!

[@AdishaMusic]

that's why I like the idea of choosing people that are not interested in power to be leaders, rather than letting those that want power trick you into voting for them

[@prinka2096]

​@@AdishaMusic That doesn't exist. Wanting to be a leader means wanting the power that comes with it, otherwise there's no point in being a leader.

[@cliftonrblandin3860]

Putting the GOVERNMENT in charge is like letting the inmates run the ASYLUM

[@maxus8075]

Fair but some accountability should be done

[@cliftonrblandin3860]

@@maxus8075 you are correct but if you think you're going to get it from the government you are the KING OF WISHFUL THINKING

[@maxus8075]

@@cliftonrblandin3860 nah I know we aren't hence why I think tony was 90 percent wrong. I do think Superheroes should form their own supervising community that works in tandem with each other and citizens

[@cliftonrblandin3860]

@@maxus8075 that sounds like the best solution because they know their strengths and weaknesses and could have a plan incase someone goes rogue

[@maxus8075]

@@cliftonrblandin3860 yep like even ignoring irl governments marvel governments often suck but krokoa has shown something like this is possible

[@BoltBandicoot]

I always had the same mindset about Civil War. Tony Stark was right if we approach the situation at a Legal level. (Imagine having to trust that some selected randoms with tremendous amounts of power are just Ok with helping people, with the uncertainty that they cant turn to a different mindset at any moment). Steve Rogers was right if we approach the situation at a Moral level. (Since these tremendously powerful people are now working under a Government, this is basically like giving the most powerful weapon and a guaranteed world domination to a Country. Also less work would be focused on helping the common people, and instead shifted towards more influential situations.

[@andreag.8870]

This is the answer. It's all about perspectives, like in The Winter Soldier, Steve realized that he was serving to the purposes of hydra all along. No wonder why he could not trust in the "good intentions" of the government or any other kind of powerful group.

[@t00sa]

I liked that they made Tony on the side of holding heros accountable bc it shows well the development of his character. I don't remember which movie it was, but I remember that Tony had a personal encounter with a woman who lost someone in one of the fights and blamed Tony/Avengers for it. That stuck with Tony

[@ucmanhvuong4301]

it was in the same movie dude kekw. That's what drove him into a bad mental state and hindered his ability to think critically. It was coming from a place of guilt and this is sth he has never faced before in the MCU, so ofc he is just lost on how to deal with it. And him and Pepper just broke up for a while so he literally had no emotional support and guidance (which is kinda weird since he could always confide in his best friend Rhodey or Happy but oh well movie needs to happen ig)

[@t00sa]

@@ucmanhvuong4301 oh it was in civil war? Haha lol...

[@throwpie1771]

Yup, plus what happened to sokovia and the first mission in civil war that was kinda the last straw that broke the camel' back

[@MrBazBake]

@@throwpie1771Tony's entire arc is learning accountability. Steve's entire arc is learning humility. Tony spends his entire life creating conflicts with huge consequences he can't account for, while Steve spends his entire life fighting for a chance to prove he can be the hero. Civil War is when Tony realizes he needs to be accountable to someone else and Steve realizes he can't trust himself over other people.

[@Teraformic]

@@MrBazBake I don't think that's correct. Steve was always humble, Tony wasn't. Tony also never really learned accountability. In the same movie he preached accountability, he went and recruited a teenager to help him fight then after that fight lied to the government/Ross so he could go do what he wanted AGAIN. And the biggest reason for the Accords was Sokovia, which was really all Tony's fault as he built an AI without talking to anyone about a vision he didn't tell anyone about. Cap's motivation was entirely founded as his previous movie had him destroying a gov agency he helped found so why would he trust other govs when he cant even seemingly trust Tony. In the end, Steve still trusted Tony enough to give him a phone to reach him if he ever needed it.

[@FireJach]

I would love to watch What If episode where Thanos just won and created his perfect world. He would be King Thanos. The episode could be about his kingdom and the audience could judge if he was a good ruler.

[@Seasonal-Shadow_4674]

@FireJach Kevin Feige doesn’t ask the right questions when it comes to MCU What If ideas we WANT TO SEE

[@Seasonal-Shadow_4674]

I would love to see where Killmonger won and what’d happen

[@ked49]

@@Seasonal-Shadow_4674 we saw that. It lead to a war and a lot of bloodshed

[@mangamegs]

@@ked49 twas a glorious affair.

[@jorgecarbajal8076]

7:58 Don’t forget about Wanda. Anyway, I’ve always sided with Team Cap during Civil War, but you did a great job explaining how both Steve and Tony had some fair points.

[@libertyprime1614]

Don't know about Cap or Iron Man but government always wrong.

[@devonbeechley3981]

I honestly think Jemma Simmons had the best response to the whole higher power argument. When humans can't solve problems by themselves, they must turn to superpowers to solve it for them. And that in creating that problem solver, they only make worse ones.

[@sobreaver]

The only deal is to try to keep going on. No matter the nature of the problem, we may be able to cope with it or not, but we're all in it, in the problem and the solution. It's just another day under the same old sun. We've had plenty of historical facts about people in power and 'good grace' doing shitty scams and people in the lowest doing 'good' moves for the better of most. There is never a guarantee we just always deal with all the shit the 'best' we can, times a billions of people on the planet. So it's easy to see the chaos versus the order. Order that everyone have an idea about but seldom coincide in masses.

[@thomasboland540]

Oh hey, a SHIELD fan!

[@Unethical.Dodgson]

Oh god. Established titles. That aged well.

[@grendelprime4]

What part does Homelander play in all of this? You didn't even glance over that part.

[@TheBlackwolf30]

Honestly I thought they were going to be supervised by shield, since the avengers was their idea in the first place.

[@kerlyenai]

I suggest watching Lindsay Ellis's video on captain America (Loose canon: captain america) where she shows that the author of the civil war comic fundamentally misunderstood the characters of both Captain america and Tony Stark when he wrote the mess that is civil war.

[@srayj]

I’m pretty sure you also could call this video, What Captain America New World Order is going to be about. It would make total sense that the governments of the world realize that they do need to consider how superheroes need to be overseen and Sam, given how he was in his show, recognizes the importance of accountability, just like he expressed to Bucky, so I think that’s what the next Cap movie is going to be about.

[@pikapalooza7339]

It kind of reminds me of the watchmen and even some of the superman stories where the government's use their supers against normal people and the losing side just gets absolutely obliterated. Then you get the arms race of supers (like in the boys or even winter soldier program to an extent). The danger of becoming cops or even soldiers is being told to do something they may not necessarily even agree with when they're the deciding factor. I think the vid was correct in saying there should be a committee with supers on it to ensure that other supers are falling in line and people aren't just using them as a tool.

[@Guardian582]

the problem with that is corruption, of which over time EVERYTHING is subject to and raises other issues

[@notproductiveproductions3504]

@@Guardian582that used to be the problem til the MCU went cosmic. Now we have to consider abstract issues too (like how the controversial nature of the Accords led to a series of butterfly effects resulting in other planets we didn’t see suffering cuz we let the Avengers divide themselves)

[@pikapalooza7339]

@@Guardian582 for sure. And I think the op vid touched on that too - without any supers on the governing board, guys like Ross can have free reign and then everyone is just trying to make a better super. But at least with a committee with supers on it to keep other supers in check should they step out of line (like the illuminati before they were killed). It's not saying there won't be any corruption, but if they're not keeping their own in line, then who will? It reminds me of a justice league episode where captain atom was called back to AD by waller and had to fight superman. Atom is being directed by non supers to fight a super just cuz the non supers said so. If there had been supers in that entity, they could have at least given some insight and if supes was out of line.

[@Damiancontursi]

Actually in Multiverse of Madness, the world with the illuminati compose of supers seemed like it was working pretty well. They even kill Dr. Strange and he saved the universe.

[@ts25679]

Steve didn't realise that to the governments of the world The Avengers are the helicarriers pointing guns at the world.

[@wille4w]

John Walkers actions were sanctioned by the government.

[@CaptainPikeachu]

And Walker had to face legal and public accountability. Had to face consequences. Last I checked, no one is holding Hawkeye responsible for his 5 year murder spree and he’s still lying to the world and keeping his hero status.

[@nightlibrarian1938]

It's worth remembering that the in the MCU, UN & US governments are not "super -powers". There are 2 in the new Black Panther movie. Start of said movie also highlights this fact. The 3rd "super -power" is controlled by Dr. Victor Von Doom.

[@morelamj]

Before Loki series, Kang wrote all timeline's events in order to continue his reign over everything. So maybe it was Kang's choice to make both sides short-sighted regarding the accords, so it could lead to the civil war and(ultimately, I think, Stark solving time travel). So now, does everyone in the mcu have agency over their lives?

[@bemasaberwyn55]

This is why Batman created the Babel Protocol. That's a contingency that keeps the JLA in check(Superman even gave Bruce the kryptonite to subdue him)

[@seankingdon8346]

I think the topic of superhero accountability will be extremely prevalent in the street level team. J Jonah Jameson consistently makes the point that if Spider-Man didn’t exist, supervillains wouldn’t need to, that the existence of superheroes is just an escalation towards catastrophe, which is exactly what vision said in civil war

[@jaywilk7249]

Which doesn't make sense to me, because villains will be villains whether they are "Super" or not. You can't blame super heroes for the wrong doing of others. If spiderman didn't exist, regular villains would still rob banks, kidnap people, shoot and kill people, so where is the argument? The moment any kind of IT security is enhanced, hackers go into overdrive trying to defeat it. Circular logic!

[@prestoncaldwell4387]

Thanos existed before the Avengers. What Vision said was incorrect, from a certain point of view. There was escalation but it was in the Avengers favor! Without Earths Mightiest Heroes, the snap would of been permanent and there would of been no one to oppose Thanos.

[@dylanpalmer5151]

@@jaywilk7249 Except the difference here is that for "villains" to be successful, they have to be able and willing to do more damage on a larger scale. And since the scale these villains are operating on involves human life... Yeah. It is quite literally the arms race, but between two unaccountable, non-governmental entities, rather than the relatively safer governments.

[@Damiancontursi]

@@jaywilk7249 yeah i never understood that argument very well, its not like thanos wouldn't have wipe off half of life, or red skull tried to conquer the world with the tesseract, if "good" people started having super powers.

[@JohnLaw3742]

I’m glad someone finally said it: the heroes are starting to act like the villains - and I think this is slow character journey that will slowly change the MCU public perception of heroes - and a new hero team will be needed to reign them in- probably the Dark Avengers. The MCU public will think they are their saviors but some of us will know better, of course will be a huge twist for those not familiar with the Marvel comics

[@victormy8897]

In essence it's all very simple: to hold a super hero accountable, you MUST have enough strength to hold him accountable. If you got no such a strength, than you should obtain it. If you can't, then, bad luck. Life is unjust. Because of all this, I think Cap was right. The only ones who realisticaly could held Avengers accountable are themselves. Not any government, committee, bureau or something else. So only viable option are oath among themselves, that if one of them goes wrong, everybody else enforce punishment on him\her.

[@shubhampathak2728]

Wakanda in Civil War : 'We wont let the superpower individuals to have authority anywhere in the world' Also Wakanda in Falcon and Winter Soilder: 'The Dora Milaje would have the authority wheresoever it finds fit'...

[@ASageCalledQ]

lmao

[@spartacus1610]

It would have been amazing if T’Chala had been in the role of the ambassador for the avengers and others as part of a committee to make sure the avengers operate within the laws of the countries they go to and incorporate support worldwide and new laws. Similar to NEST in Transformers.

[@Dishinshoryuken]

He was Snapped away before he could implement most of his plans for Wakanda to step into a leadership role And as has been stated, things changed during that 5 years

[@coreypacillo8204]

I dunno. I think this video is negating the fact that Steve Rogers was right to reject a certain overstep in governmental authority instituted by a little country called Germany in the 1940's. If you were to replace Germany with America during WW2, then Captain America would have been the governmental hit-squad that Tony Stark was ready to sign them all up for. During the Civil War MCU movie, Steve Rogers wasn't afraid of the government mandating the removal of their conscience. Also, the video puts a lot of weight on relying on a committee of countries to face threats together. We have that, and we see that fail during the latest Black Panther movie.

[@brandonshingle574]

For me Captain America has the most popular flaw that we see in heros these days: they're willing to let the world burn to save their friends. The circle of people that Steve truly cares about shrinks every movie, and I think that nowhere is this more apparent than his total abandonment of all the good people in SHIELD who were willing to go against orders and believe him more than their superiors. At least Tony helps out people like Sam Hill, but for Rogers everything is about Bucky. Probably the reason why he not only kept quiet about the murder of the Starks (even if he didn't know who exactly did it, he knew it wasn't an accident, and he chose to keep that a secret) but from what I can tell from rewatching it he also knew that Bucky participated in the assassination of JFK or at least that HYDRA was involved. But as far as I can tell he never tells anyone anything that he's not forced to and never even reaches out to Agent 13 until he needed her to do something that would land her in prison (and then broke out everyone else involved except her because she apparently only was a means to an end and to steal a quick kiss- thanks for making that supervillain Steve). Also, I think that everyone forgets that Wanda's powers make you do crazy things, and while everyone wants to excuse Bucky for being brainwashed no one wants to excuse Tony for Ultron. Surely one form of brainwashing is as much of an excuse as another In a similar thread, we see everyone else on the team struggle to overcome Wanda's powers except Captain America. I think that deep down, Captain America was still affected by Wanda's powers several movies later, terrified of a time of peace where there were no more wars to fight and no one would need him anymore. Remember, Ultron said that Wanda could tear the Avengers apart. And the Avengers didn't tear apart until Civil War. Maybe she should have gone through everyone's heads at the end of Age of Ultron to remove any lingering bad juju, even at the very end Steve is like "You know what, #$*€¥√ the timeline, I'm going to ignore everything that we said about time travel and go live with Peggy".

[@jermonejackson8437]

Damn your kinda fucking right and I forgot about the brain wash Tony and the others got

[@byobllc]

The She Hulk / Meg clip was timed perfectly 😂

[@Jordan-c4200]

100%

[@Entinu94]

Question: who is going to keep the power levels of Thor and Hulk in check? Or Captain Marvel? We have to rely on them either keeping each other in check, or trusting that they won't decide to just let loose and wreck things when they feel like it.

[@festro1000]

I agree that compromise would have been the best solution and a lot or your sentiment, but sometimes the ends do justify the means, whether it be starting a war that will inevitably end with countless dead to topple a dictator on a path of genocidal conquest, or in the case of the MCU tearing up a city to stop an alien invaders from conquering the planet. Yeah, the means are usually unfortunate and can be devastating, but we don't live in a world where dangers openly announce themselves in advance and give us time to prepare, like you said the government launched a nuke at New York, and the city was going to be devastated either three ways, whether it be the nuke, the invaders, or the heroes with collateral damage that is common in wars. They're neither god, nor possess the infinity gauntlet, so it's not like they could snap away the dangers that threaten the world terrestrial or otherwise, they have to do things the hard way and that usually means destruction or death for the greater good.

[@theyellowmeaning7507]

In this case, it isn't an issue of ends justifying means. It's a comparison of means and ends. to compare them in conjunction would be to compare 2 separate items. Since we are speaking of more than just ideal theory and philosophy, we cannot make the mistake of assuming the ends before the means, especially in application. We cannot predict the future, so how can we assume that the ends are sufficiently like that we might compare then compare means. We can ONLY compare means when we are considering the present and future, since the ends are technically still in flux. Or at least, that's kind of the point of the statement: "Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you." We can discuss scenarios in post, but we must in all cases evaluate by means first and foremost. To do otherwise is hubris.

[@festro1000]

@@theyellowmeaning7507 You don't always have the luxury of time to ponder the consequences of your actions, it's the prime reason police are often let off lightly when using lethal force, a thug could have a gun pointed at them, they don't have the time to wonder if he has a family, having a rough day, whether he's bluffing or actually going to shot them and likely wouldn't let them call a therapist, these are cases where hesitation gets people killed. I agree if you are in a position to take a step back and evaluate the situation great, but as I alluded to earlier, the invaders aren't going to announce themselves, and in this case they were pouring through a portal and destroying the city, every moment the avengers waited countless more would have died.

[@theyellowmeaning7507]

@@festro1000 I don't think you read through what I said.

[@festro1000]

@@theyellowmeaning7507 I was responding to the tail end of your comment "we must in all cases evaluate by means first and foremost" as I understood it to be the most relevant to our conversation, firstly I'm not familiar what you mean by "it isn't an issue of ends justifying means. It's a comparison of means and ends" you're saying it as they're two different things but I've never heard of "means and ends" secondly I understand we don't have future sight and can't know if our actions will turn out how we like, but as I was saying before hesitation is costly; if you have a goal in mind and are sitting on your hands when opportunity passes you by, chances are you're going to miss it, not every scenario is going to let you play 4d chess with it to decide the best outcome, sometimes you just have to go with is best in the moment.

[@theyellowmeaning7507]

@@festro1000 correct me here if I'm reading you wrong, but it appears to me that you're saying that it is necessary to act, first and foremost, since we don't have an unlimited time to consider our options. Your first statement in this chain is: 'sometimes, the ends justify the means'. These 2 statements are diametrically opposed. I disagree with that initial statement and I'm saying that the means must justify themselves. We don't have omniscience, and therefore the ends cannot justify the means; that would require us knowing the ends--which we do not. You appear to be agreeing with me here in your responses, and I am extremely confused at why you are responding to my disagreement with affirmation (from my perspective).

[@paulie5533]

Thank you for this I get a little tired of everyone blaming everything that is wrong on Tony. Even after his death

[@Seasonal-Shadow_4674]

MCU normies in a nut shell

[@Teraformic]

It kinda was mostly his fault though

[@tolliSTFU]

Exactly. I also like how people like to look at Ultron as like the biggest mess up in the MCU that’s far.

[@emmyn9574]

Ultron had 3 parents, Tony, Bruce and Wanda.

[@CarltonPhillupBanx]

"If you trust your government, you've obviously failed history class."- a random meme

[@ShaylaTheMouse]

I'm so late commenting but really enjoyed this video. I love discussions about Civil War. Its interesting to discuss. You're very right that phase 4 expanded on this theme of superhero accountability and the reactions of authority becoming more aggressive with heroes. To me this was made very apparent in Ms Marvel with how martial the Department of Damage Control were going after literal teenagers. The actions of Agent Deever gave me full on X-Men mutant oppressing vibes such as the Sentinel Program for the near future of the MCU.

[@SignumInterriti]

Just think how easily the roles could've been reversed. Tony rejects government oversight in iron man 2 but changes his mind because he feels responsible for ultron. And Steve was serving his country right until the hydra plot blew up in winter soldier and wrecked his believe in authority. If the UN had made their move just a year earlier, Cap would've been the their loyal soldier and Iron Man would have rebelled.

[@weltallelite]

What exactly would a comity do? They’d have the superhero come in front of them and chastise them for whatever action they perceived in hindsight to be wrong. Then when one of the heroes has had enough of their crap, they blow them off and they can do nothing about it. At best, they send other heroes after them in hopes of policing them, which they probably would have done anyway if things ever got out of line.

[@housesg5981]

This is why i love Baron Zemo, he puts tries to put EVERYBODY on the same level and playing field; he believes no one is a hero. Good deeds may not be good if you look carefully.

[@DBunkYoMind]

Isn’t it a question of “Control” vs. “Accountability”? Even in the Homelander scenario Vought has “control” of their superheroes (to the point of manufacturing missions). But, even with that control there is little true accountability… By giving the UN supervisory control, it wouldn’t stop the UN from “looking the other way” or officially absolving crimes. The “new” Captain America was not put on trial for murder… Simply stripped of rank and title. (And that was the “harshest” punishment the supervising committee came up with). Meanwhile for simply not signing onto the accords, others were incarcerated indefinitely… (or in the case of Ant Man, live with potential “parole” violations resulting in jail time…. Even Abomination in She-Hulk proved with the right friend (Wong) incarceration is only a choice… The Sokovia Accords would have controlled heroes’ actions, but not truly resulted in accountability… IMHO…

[@zeitgeist265]

Tony was right in endgame when he said “what we NEEDED was a suit of armour around the world, if we have to give up our freedoms or not “ going under the government came with certain benefits like a huge amount of funding that not even stark industries can match, including being able to properly complete ultron and transfer the mind stone from vision to ultrons body sooner like they intended to do in infinity war. With ultron properly complete, thanos would be a simple slice in half like we saw in what if. The part where he was wrong was being under the total control of the government.

[@brendamartin3444]

Steve was constitutionally correct, and if Tony was willing to sit down with Steve they all could have worked together to create a constitution for themselves, Steve wants order and rules to obey, he just wants the team to have a say in creating them, Steve is a modern day George Washington/James Madison The team could have worked this out in the same way the Founders did, they were just not given a chance to, and Tony was not in a place where he could get over himself to listen, he had already made up his mind that he was right…

[@tolliSTFU]

I’m sorry but didn’t him and Tony try to sit down and work out things until Steve got upset that they had Wanda under surveillance so that she wouldn’t kill more people??….

[@brendamartin3444]

@@tolliSTFU Tony was attempting to sway Steve To his own point of view, which Steve was open to because he sincerely wanted to work with Tony, when he discovered that Tony had made Wanda a prisoner in her own home, with Vision as her prison guard without her knowledge or consent, and realizing that Tony made these choices on his own behind everyone else’s back (just like he did creating both Ultron and Vision) it made Steve upset… Tony did not learn his lesson, he is still making the same mistakes Steve is a George Washington/James Madison person, there are things you just never do, and one person choosing for another person if they are free or not behind everyone else’s back in the team, is a big no no… Tony proved time after time that he does not play well with others, the team should have been making every choice together, but it was Tony making all the choices on his own behind everyone’s back, because he thinks he is right, and because he thinks being the smartest guy in the room gives him the right to behave this way Tony is a one man show, wanting all the glory for himself… Steve is a team player, willing to do whatever is the correct thing for this moment, the first movie for each one sets this dichotomy up, and these two truths are carried throughout each movie…

[@ThisIsMeAndNotYou]

Happy thanksgiving

[@catsithx]

To be honest neither are right. Yes they could work together. Yet both with there egos. It would never happen. Especially stark who believed he was right 100 percent.

[@ladyorapma]

It's funny that you say that when Stark was the one trying to work together during the whole movie.

[@captnaberystwyth2879]

Sometimes you just need to plant your feet and say "no, you move".

[@maxgremln]

The thing is that Steve and Tony are both right AND they are both wrong. What shouldn't be skipped over is that an entire city wouldn't have been destroyed in AOU if Tony hadn't messed with the mindstone. That definitely demands some level of oversight. However, Steve is correct in saying that the Avengers needs to retain a level of autonomy to be effective. Where Steve goes off the rails in CW is when he makes a ridiculous comparison to Wanda and Japanese internment which is not even remotely the same thing. Now if Tony and Steve decided to work TOGETHER to amend the accords, things would have worked out better not only for the Avengers but for the universe as well because the team could faced off against Thanos as a unified front.

[@gerardchartier9016]

I always thought someone should have told Steve, "Look, sign the accords. Then later if we have to, we break the rules."

[@OhCarlJr]

We’re seeing the effects of the 3 snaps from IW and EG and after effects of Blip. In the MCU world the 5 years of the snap really affected everyone that wasn’t dusted. With Phase 4 we’re seeing the effect it has on the folks that were snapped away and we’re seeing first hand how their handling it. Phase 4 might not be heavily favored but folks remember this is technically “phase 1” all over over again just in the multiverse saga. Phase 5 is gonna get much worst in terms of our fellow heros either losing more loved ones or us losing more heros. Phase 6 will be the end of the multiverse and everything’s leading up to Kang Dynasty and Secret Wars.. So if you’re tripping and worried that Marvel is dying or losing it’s audience, don’t cause with Iger coming back and giving power back to the creators and I can see Feige taking control again over at Marvel Studios..

[@jaywilk7249]

Lets hope phase 5 has better character building and story arcs than phase 4.. Phase 1 beats phase 4 any day

[@bigreaderpike]

To be fair there was something to keep Heroes check in Multiverse of Madness with Doctor Strange and Spidey his name was Wong he left them to it

[@alexthoman96]

Didn't expect to see a midnight mass clip in this episode lol. Fantastic video as always! Been team "baseball cap" since I read about Civil War from the comics, more so from the movie then. I've never really been swayed to see some of the consequences of the act of dismissing the accords and what that meant. Well said Ryan!

[@mikewootson2675]

They pretty much explained this in falcon and winter soldier with the government making a new captain America. So technically the accords is still in effect due to the dialogue what was said from daredevil in shehulk

[@jaywilk7249]

hate the new caps head gear.. his look as falcon is way better, hope they change the suit or at least the head gear over time, hopefully take it off.. yeah yeah i know comic book accuracy but some things just don't translate well into live action - like Goku's hair... lol

[@michealfreeman9714]

Most of the problems with them becoming more and more Villain Like is due to the s***** writing in Phase 4

[@jermonejackson8437]

And or maybe wanda never having control of her powers and never getting rid of the brain washing quick enough or fully maybe?

[@brendaspence1824]

Yeah no

[@cacarey01]

a BIG difference between the movies civil war and the comics is that in the movies they only wanted the Avengers to sign up and be under the control of the governments. Which I think is not as big of a deal. Just a few very dangerous people who are already involving themselves in international affairs. In the comics it was ALL super powered people had to register. They also would not be allowed to use their powers unless in service of the government. This is at best monopolizing superpowers and at worst the first step in persecution of all supers. the stakes were much higher in the comics and so Cap being willing to go against the establishment and friends made way more sense than it does in the movies.

[@tiberiusgrey1529]

alternative title - Why Natasha Was Right - She was suggesting the same thing when Steve and Tony was arguing; quote "if we have one hand on the wheel we can still steer - I'm reading the terrain, we've made very public mistakes and we need to win their trust back."

[@n1ghtmar3w0lf3]

i think if they did do like tony said it may have been fairly easy to make the public pressure the govt to give the heroes back freedoms,say if some govt's held them back from doing their job and that allowed something worse to happen as a result would erode much of the govt;s controling ,both from facts they would let this happen and pressure from people everywhere

[@danishsamir8807]

3:12 i think you might you might not realise but Established Titles is a scam. Don't take sponsorships from them

[@alexlogue2505]

"Either you die a hero, or you live long enough to become the villain..."

[@bigblakgaming]

(1) 117 nations signing at the UN means only a bit over half. Lotso f nations apparently didn't sign, and wanted a different model for the Avengers..I'd be interested in the MCU exploring that too. (2) Re: Established Titles - "Walking distance." I lived in Scotland, and the right to walk means that walking distance might be anywhere in Scotland lol! (3) I love Doug. Completely and utterly. That is all.

[@callo3]

The thing with Wanda in Wandavision was that she was being manipulated by Agatha and also Tyler Hayward who used her grief to get her to unknowingly power up the rebuilt husk of Vision's body.

[@RaviTeja-rv8eg]

Steven rogers was always right with words he speak and things he do infinity war and endgame proved it! Otherwise Thanos would have killed all of us!

[@allencarnes2477]

Actually no. Had he come to some sort of compromise instead of choosing an absolute no the entire events of infinity war may have been prevented since the avengers may have never broken up.

[@tolliSTFU]

That’s bs

[@MWhaleK]

Cap was far more right than Tony. Homelander proves nothing because he isn't a hero, he is a f-ed up celebrity psycho with the power of Super-man. Also, Steve wasn't given chance to negotiate as Tony accepted a deal on behalf of all the Avengers and then told Steve to take it or leave it. So Steve left it and then Tony decided to force the issue.

[@mr.fancypants878]

When someone works for you,you have a right to tell them what to do. Every Avenger could say, well I guess I'll just get an office job and quit saving people. Wanda redirected an explosion from a square full of civilians to a building full of civilians. If she was only saving Cap,then there would be an issue. If the world's governments said we want some input on your missions and we'll make it easier for you when you're in our countries... Now we can talk. Tony was financing them which is why he felt he could speak for them. Tony is the only one to that point that had caused a world ending disaster. He needs some boundaries.

[@quantumgreen8845]

Great video Ryan! It's refreshing to see people not get swept up in the Cap charisma and realize he was wrong. I've held the stance that Tony was right from the jump, and you've made a great analysis into both sides! Like Tony said, the Avengers definitely needed to be checked. Initially I was also put off by the idea of "the govt" having full control of these supers out of fear of corruption, abusing their powers, etc. However, for all the reasons Cap was right (belief in the good of people, belief that the Avengers chose to sacrifice their safety to protect the world, and belief that the Avengers *should* be able to hold themselves accountable), why would the Avengers, as a morally like-minded collective of super-powered mfs, not be able to say "No" if told to act corruptly or abuse their power? Couldn't they expose the corruption of whoever is overseeing them, like they did with HYDRA? The HYDRA infiltration would surely influence his decision, and reasonably so. However, the threat of that happening seems, to me, from no angles as looming as that of the continued unsuporvised vigilantism of the Avengers. That's not to say HYDRA couldn't do more damage than the Avengers, but that on each mission the Avengers have left relatively unmitigated catastrophe in their wake and that HYDRA, as far as we know, has been stamped out. Speaking about Tony *choosing* to stop manufacturing weapons once he realized what they could do in the wrong hands, Cap says that if they sign the Accords they forfeit their "right to choose." My problem with this is that before now Steve wasn't really concerned with wether or not he or the other Avengers were acting totally within their legal rights. TLDR: 1) Cap + the others previously have both chosen to dissent from corrupt leadership as well as simply disregard laws/policies that would impede them saving the day 2) The Avengers, while "formed to make the world a safer place," have endangered countless in their efforts 3) Signing the accords doesn't take away their ability to work towards a safer world nor their ability to hold their superiors accountable (I think), but adds some necessary (hopefully cooperative) oversight

[@charlesthompson5645]

The fact vision supported tony says a lot

[@digitalfantasies4570]

Well, it was mentioned in She-Hulk that the accords had been dropped and are null and void. So that must mean the lawyers of the MCU chose to try to get rid of the accords due to the fact that superheroes brought half of the universe back without talking to the government about their plan first. The government is shown to be struggling with the mass influx of people after the snap in Falcon and the winter soldier which would probably make most citizens believe that the avengers would of never been allowed by the government to do what they did if they followed the accords, thus they had made a trial to get them removed for the sake of possible situations in the future where heroes are needed without the government hanging over their heads. Basically, my belief is that the government has a hatred towards heroes due to the ramifications of not following the accords and just bringing back half of all life without thinking about the consequences, but the citizens of the world believe they owe their family and friends lives to these heroes, so the citizens got the accords removed, and the government keeps a personal vendetta against heroes. Which will most certainly result in exactly what you said, the government will be making riskier and riskier steps towards controlling heroes as they form more agencies to prevent their damage, and lord forbid what may happen if mutants start showing up. In the comics there was a town hidden away that contained the mutants, maybe we haven't seen mutants yet because the government already has a bunch of people contained and locked up in this town, it wouldnt be too hard to do given the confusing state the world was in after the snap, just go through the camps of people you have and pick out those with mutations. Could be a direction were headed in with the MCU.

[@4supergamma]

I think you're ignoring Gen. Ross' absolute refusal to compromise. He wanted superheroes under his control, and he wasn't going to accept half-measures. If Ross had to kill Steve to get the accords done, he would. Steve had no negotiation power, he was a soldier and when he chooses not to accept the UN's rules, he was insubordinate. An individual solder cannot question direct orders.

[@ScreenCrush]

Who was right?

[@eldeadkilljohnkennedy3946]

The punisher was right.

[@KFP_Fanboy]

kung fu panda

[@Bryzental]

Not you

[@Kay3o]

Heavy Spoilers

[@AnthologyOfDave]

Thanos

[@cruzinthruspace]

You're the most insightful channel on KZbin and you couldn't be more wrong on this one. The Thunderbolts movie is going to show that and what registrating yourself would look like. Not to mention the mutant registration act which will most likely be coming up soon

[@comicfan1324]

According to the MCU fan wiki, the Sokovia Accords literally infringed on due process and civil liberties. I think Captain America was right to stand up against it. 1. The Accord forces compelled speech as it requires all enhanced individuals to reveal their secret identity to the united nations. 2. It requires all enhanced individuals, even if they are not currently active superheroes, to register with the Government and they have to willingly allow their every motion to be monitored (meaning there every step will be tracked presumably without warrant.) 3. They have to allow professionals to determine how dangerous they are as to rank the enhanced individuals potential threat level. 4. The rule that states they are not allowed to act outside of their country is poorly worded and could extend to anything between vigilantism or simply going on vacation. 5. The cords would force the avengers to fight in military practices whether they like it or not (in other words forced servitude/slavery.) 6. This is the most damning thing against the cords. It is stated that anyone who takes part in extra legal acts of vigilantism or even people who have never use their powers but simply have outstanding abilities can be detained for an undetermined amount of time without any form of trial. In other words simply because someone has super powers they can be arrested for life or even executed. Sure maybe the avengers should be put in check and maybe there should be more laws put in place to make sure superheroes answer for the consequences of their actions, but the Sokovia Accords are a direct violation of civil and human rights.