Steve and the Sokovia Accords
I keep seeing a lot of posts about how Steve was in the wrong in CACW because while Tony had a plan, Steve didn’t offer any alternative to it, he was just like NOPE. The thing is though, something that immediately struck me when I watched the movie was the timing of everything. Ross and Tony bring Steve and the others the Accords THREE DAYS before they are to be signed. Those Accords were not drafted, approved and supported by 117 countries in a week. This was 100% intentional. This is also very, very common in American politics. When politicians want to pass a bill they don’t want people to look at closely, they schedule votes at weird times or when a large # of people are away from the Hill (Capital Hill). So you get these 11th hour bills that are hundreds of pages long that no one has had a chance to read, ask questions about, or negotiate on about changes. These bills are stuffed with completely unrelated stuff that gets passed as well because the whole thing has to be signed off on/approved. It’s called “pork barreling.” Those are the questions Steve tries to bring up to the group. When he’s like ‘what happens when…?’ And Tony brushes aside his concerns like ‘oh, I’m sure we’ll get to make changes later when everything dies down.’ But Steve is like what are we agreeing to NOW though? And practically as soon as they are given the “generous” 3 day warning, Peggy dies. Steve flies off to London and everything goes to hell. What time is there to propose or discuss an alternative plan?? The timing was 100% intentional to make sure the Avengers would be subject to the Accords as written–no matter what was lurking on the bottom of page 440 in fine print. Steve is 100% right to be suspicious. This is one of the dirty tricks of American politics that Steve would be totally aware of. And sure, maybe there’s a chance that everything was above board, reasonable, and so on, but you would NEVER sign a thing like that w/o actually checking/reading it. that would be foolish. I mean, did we forget that Project Insight was authorized and approved by The World Council? I guarantee you that Steve hasn’t. I absolutely believe that Steve would have been willing to talk everything out, negotiate, listen to everyone’s pov, and really consider everything carefully…but there’s no time given to do that. It’s all last minute, non-negotiable, and shady. Steve is a master tactician, natural leader, and a reasonable, thoughtful person who is a Big Picture thinker. It’s weird that people just assume he rejects the Accords because he’s being childish or something. That’s not Steve Rogers at all.
yes, to all of this. i’m still of the opinion that the relentless pacing of civil war was detrimental to the clarity of the narrative, but it’s becoming more and more clear to me that the subtleties behind steve’s motivations for refusing to sign the accords were shafted, especially considering that the narrative is presented in a way that makes tony the most emotional and sympathetic character on first watch.
which is weird, for it being steve’s movie. and civil war is still steve’s movie–every decision that steve makes results in consequences to which the others are forced to react and by which they are dragged along regardless of whether or not they want to be. although he strangely doesn’t carry a significant portion of the emotional weight of the film (that goes to bucky, tony, t’challa, and zemo), you would figure that steve’s thoughts would be clearer.
unfortunately, they aren’t.
[and, if you’re unwilling to brave the long stuff under the cut:]
tldr; the narrative framing of cap 3 places tony in the best position for emotional sympathy, but likewise downplays or frames the highly suspect aspects of the accords and of the larger players on tony’s ‘side’ in a way that severely undermines steve’s more logical reasoning for refusing the accords. it is not presented in a way that would be obvious to a one-time casual viewer with little extensive knowledge of past incidences in the mcu, especially ones regarding the ineffectiveness of thunderbolt ross as an objective, reasonable military authority with the interests of the public at the forefront of his motivations. ultimately, considering the failure of the narrative to emphasize steve’s underlying reservations regarding ross as the primary authority behind the legalized actions of team tony to bring him in, it becomes strongly apparent that steve’s reasons for doing what he does are right, even though the narrative favors tony’s emotional arc so intensely that this conclusion is difficult to reach for a casual viewer, and that the negative consequences of everyone’s actions, whether those actions be good or bad, overshadow the details of why they did what they did, and who made them do it.
Okay reblogging my own post because this is the best commentary I’ve seen on it yet. A brilliant essay that I wish I’d written. This. This. THIS. Civil War does not do Steve’s position *any* favors. And I realized that my confusion about other people’s reactions to Steve in the film was failing to take into account that most MCU (casual) viewers probably don’t remember General Ross at ALL. Either they don’t remember The Incredible Hulk or they didn’t see it. So Ross comes across as a reasonable authority figure asking for a reasonable thing. Never mind he’s shady af and clearly up to no good because when is he not?They also probably do not remember a LOT of pertinent details from 13 films that would make Steve’s position much more understandable. Anyway, please read this.