How Would Civil War Go Down in The DCU?

[greatmetropolitan]

Neither Superman nor Batman would be pro-registration. Batman doesn't trust the government (or many people at all) enough to be down with that. Clark knows why secret IDs are important and ultimately isn't going to tell we'll meaning supers that they need to make big personal sacrifices like signing up to the register and losing their secret ID in order to be good heroes. Clark knows that heroism isn't doing what you're told or obeying the law, it's doing what's right and putting things right when there's wrong in front of you.

If Civil War were to be a DC thing then it's make more sense to have all military and law enforcement aligned heroes on one side, superman and batman and likely wonder woman on the other. Hal, Barry, John Stewart, Captain Atom all Pro reg.

I always thought that DCs version of civil war wouldn't be about registration at all - it'd be about the death penalty and whether or not superheroes should kill. Let's say the Joker does something so horrifying that the UN basically says "dead or alive, you have our permission". Clark and Bruce are both, as Kingdom Come got right, two people who don't want to see others die. They'd immediately lead the anti-execution side. All your military and cop guys, arguably Wonder Woman, on the execute side.

Marvel characters have always had that bit of grounding to them, more aligned to the real world, so it makes sense that their civil war was on a matter of practicality and procedure, whereas the DC equivalent would basically be a philosophical battle about the use of force, morality and the responsibilities of the powerful.

[SebastianS]

Kingdom Come. The same basic split in how things should be handled. On one side you had Superman (Iron Man) and the other you had Batman (Captain America)

Yep. Kingdom Come was Civil War in the DC Universe.

[silly]

Heroes in Crisis could create a civil "war" between the heroes of DCU. Well not really a war, more like schism.

[Agent Z]

Neither Superman nor Batman would be pro-registration. Batman doesn't trust the government (or many people at all) enough to be down with that. Clark knows why secret IDs are important and ultimately isn't going to tell we'll meaning supers that they need to make big personal sacrifices like signing up to the register and losing their secret ID in order to be good heroes. Clark knows that heroism isn't doing what you're told or obeying the law, it's doing what's right and putting things right when there's wrong in front of you.

If Civil War were to be a DC thing then it's make more sense to have all military and law enforcement aligned heroes on one side, superman and batman and likely wonder woman on the other. Hal, Barry, John Stewart, Captain Atom all Pro reg.

I always thought that DCs version of civil war wouldn't be about registration at all - it'd be about the death penalty and whether or not superheroes should kill. Let's say the Joker does something so horrifying that the UN basically says "dead or alive, you have our permission". Clark and Bruce are both, as Kingdom Come got right, two people who don't want to see others die. They'd immediately lead the anti-execution side. All your military and cop guys, arguably Wonder Woman, on the execute side.

Marvel characters have always had that bit of grounding to them, more aligned to the real world, so it makes sense that their civil war was on a matter of practicality and procedure, whereas the DC equivalent would basically be a philosophical battle about the use of force, morality and the responsibilities of the powerful.

How is that not relevant to the real world?

[DrNewGod]

Neither Superman nor Batman would be pro-registration. Batman doesn't trust the government (or many people at all) enough to be down with that. Clark knows why secret IDs are important and ultimately isn't going to tell we'll meaning supers that they need to make big personal sacrifices like signing up to the register and losing their secret ID in order to be good heroes. Clark knows that heroism isn't doing what you're told or obeying the law, it's doing what's right and putting things right when there's wrong in front of you.

If Civil War were to be a DC thing then it's make more sense to have all military and law enforcement aligned heroes on one side, superman and batman and likely wonder woman on the other. Hal, Barry, John Stewart, Captain Atom all Pro reg.

I always thought that DCs version of civil war wouldn't be about registration at all - it'd be about the death penalty and whether or not superheroes should kill. Let's say the Joker does something so horrifying that the UN basically says "dead or alive, you have our permission". Clark and Bruce are both, as Kingdom Come got right, two people who don't want to see others die. They'd immediately lead the anti-execution side. All your military and cop guys, arguably Wonder Woman, on the execute side.

Marvel characters have always had that bit of grounding to them, more aligned to the real world, so it makes sense that their civil war was on a matter of practicality and procedure, whereas the DC equivalent would basically be a philosophical battle about the use of force, morality and the responsibilities of the powerful.

Something similar to this. Although, I could see a split over vigilantism. I could see those who believed in working to support The System lining up against those who people like themselves being necessary against a broken system.

Another version I could see is The Guardians of Oa deciding it's time Earth joined the broader community of species for their own good, and the Green Lanterns and their allies facing-off against heroes who don't want Earth's destiny being dictated by others.

[Güicho]

I'm sure most of you are familiar with the synopsis of the 2006 Marvel event comic Civil War: two of Marvel's most popular character lead opposing sides fighting for or against the Superhero Registration Act. How would this play out in the DC Universe?

As others indicate, this was already pretty much Kingdom Come, well before Marvel's Civil War.

[greatmetropolitan]

How is that not relevant to the real world?

Quite right, poor phrasing on my part. I mean more that the DC guys will deal more on a conceptual level than on what is essentially bureaucracy like civil war. Marvel focussing on the letter of a law, DC focussing on the spirit.

[Ascended]

Like others, I dont see any kind of government registration as providing a strong enough reason for DC's heroes to split. There'd be a few who would be persuaded by the "accountability" argument; Barry, Diana, Orin, perhaps J'onn. Heroes who are or were part of peace-keeping and/or governing bodies. But Clark and Bruce and most others aren't going to get down with that. Trust a government that elected Lex Luthor and keeps the Suicide Squad active? Most major heroes won't support a government that gets down like that. Hell, Clark most definitely is not going to give up his life and all his secrets for the government; he trusts them as little as Bruce does, and Bruce doesn't trust any authority except himself (and as someone said, he really is a State power unto himself). It wasn't all that long ago the Feds were trying to gain access to the Fortress and Clark straight up told them to screw off, and that he'd blow the Fortress up before he let the government even see inside the front door.

I think "proactive v reactive" might be a better fault line for DC; a lot of heroes have tried their hand at stopping crime before it happens, to mixed results.

[Minerboh]

Injustice is the closest we might get for a DC Civil War.

[Vordan]

Assuming that what sparks the Civil War would be a registration of heroes, I think that Iron man would be Superman and Captain America would be Batman, with Wonder Woman taking a more fluid role.

I think that Superman could be relatively easily convinced that a secret identity has become a bad thing, because it allows for a lot of accountability in regard to heroes -especially vigilantes- to act however they want and flout the law. Just look at the current Bat-family, where Batman is going ballistic, Red Hood is increasingly violent, Damian has set up a secret super-prison, Batman allied with former villain without any accountability, etc. To the contrary, Superman and his family are supposed to be those honest and very open heroes, and I can see him wanting to take a step further.

Of course, where things should diverge is that the fault line should fall on the fact that most of the heroes against revealing their identities should be the less powerful metas, at DC, because they are often the ones toeing the line the most. But unlike in Injustice, where Superman is a dictator, here he would genuinely try to prevent things from flaring up, only to have those normal heroes losing when an accident lead to the death of one of their own, because he or she revealed his or her identity. Things would then spiral out of control for a time from there.

Korath I’m surprised that you of all people would think Clark would be down with handing over his personal secrets to the USA government when they’ve tried to KILL him or control him repeatedly in the past. No freaking way would Clark ever be down with taking orders from D.C. When Lex Luthor was President Clark told him to **** off and refused to work for him. Also Clark is someone who has no problem being deceptive or flouting the law when it suits him. I can’t imagine how you came to the conclusion that Supes would ever be down for this.

[Ascended]

A lot of people think of Superman as an "establishment guy." I'm not 100% sure how it started or why or when, though a lot of people will cite DKR for it. I myself think a lot of people see Clark trying to get along with government because it makes everyone's job easier, and think he's accepting their authority when he's just going for peaceful co-existence. Gods know Clark has gone against the government, literally and figuratively, often enough. Dude has never hesitated to put his foot down and go his own way.

Its just one of several misunderstandings people have about the character now. >shrug<

(hopefully that doesn't come across as condescending, its not meant to!)

[Agent Z]

The League once said they felt the Suicide Squad was "necessary" so they may not be that opposed to the government.

[lemonpeace]

I'd imagine Superman would be the Confederation fighting to keep slavery, while Batman would be with abolitionist who, while prejudice and not really a proponent for equal right, recognizes the economic advantages of abolishing slavery. Cyborg (forcibly drafted), Aquaman, and Wonder Woman would be on superman's side while John Stewart, Martian Manhunter, Hawkgirl, and The Flash would be on Batman's.

/s

I think Injustice is the closest and best possible iteration we could get to DC's Civil War

[Agent Z]

I'd imagine Superman would be the Confederation fighting to keep slavery, while Batman would be with abolitionist who, while prejudice and not really a proponent for equal right, recognizes the economic advantages of abolishing slavery. Cyborg (forcibly drafted), Aquaman, and Wonder Woman would be on superman's side while John Stewart, Martian Manhunter, Hawkgirl, and The Flash would be on Batman's.

I don't know if you're serious, but we're not talking about the American Civil War.

[Flash Gordon]

Batman and Superman would both ignore any registration act.