Snapshot Civil War #1 Spoilers

[jackolover]

It’s been 14 years since CW#4. It’s awkward reliving those emotions so many years after, so to enter that event again by the writer is a fair challenge. Ahmed has to find a suitable target and he chooses Clyde Dobronski as a SHIELD agent or more accurately, a Cape Killer, and challenges Clyde to obey the Law, but he fails. It looks like Kurt Busiek is the editor of this so correct me if I’m wrong, and Kurt has to navigate the treacherous currents of the story, placing Captain America at the Cape Killer attack in CW#1, and at a Chemical leak in Toledo, so that actors in the story can bounce off Cap. You don’t see Iron Man or Ms Marvel, (Carol Danvers held the title then), but you do see Maria Hill, and Clor, the cloned Thor, killing Goliath.

In amongst this setting you have the anonymous “The Helper”, Yusef Abbas, and a similar flyer to Cloud Nine, but someone new called Olga. Now this story brings up a few touchy subjects on diversity and Middle Eastern culture, and of course, the banality of Southern States-type bigotry. Kamala Khan hadn’t been introduced yet, so Muslim culture was still taboo in America after 911, so I don’t know how this story could be told about the Helper in 2006. 911 was too sensitive in CW, because it was an allegory of the attacks on the Twin Towers by suicide bombers, and it would have been interesting what would have happened to a kid who was ME in heritage. The girl Olga was dark skinned too and the commander of the jail where Clyde worked was an out and out bigot of the worst kind, calling the two kids “Little Thugs” when they hadn’t done anything.

The exercise of bringing a hidden story of the CW to light like this did have some issues about diversity that may have negated its being told in 2006, but not in 2020, but the thread in it was about Clyde and his cup “Worlds Best Dad”. Clyde used the cup to smash over his commanding officers head and nearly kill him, to let the two kids go. He didn’t want kids to be put into a system that dehumanises them, and kills them if a bigot gets the opportunity. The story portrayed a suitable amount of viciousness shown in the original books, so for that, the story achieves a sign of those times. But it also shines a light on how far we have come from that bitterness post-911, and where we are today, so well done Saladin Ahmed.

[Huntsman Spider]

Indeed, and if anything, with the benefit of hindsight, this should put paid to the idea of the pro-registration side in Civil War, especially the fine people at or in charge of S.H.I.E.L.D. at the time, having been the "good guys" at all. Starting with Maria Hill attempting false imprisonment, as it would legally be called, on Captain America for voicing his moral opposition to the SHRA, that was the first sign to me Civil War wouldn't end well. Not to mention that Hill spearheaded S.H.I.E.L.D.'s "Cape-Killer" operation to bring superpowered people to heel after the perception by her superiors that they'd gotten too many free passes from previous leadership, which included shoving captives into an extradimensional prison where Earth's laws in regards to the rights of suspects and prisoners wouldn't (have to) apply and exhibiting no apparent remorse for Bill "Goliath" Foster's gruesome death at the hands of a cyborg Thor clone gone out of control. That aside, as you did bring up 2020 vs. 2006, 2020 also saw the interrogation of and furthered protests against oppressive and repressive law enforcement practices that had been previously accepted as a necessity in fighting crime and terrorism, although disproportionately targeting those already disenfranchised and marginalized in or by society, so this Snapshot would be especially relevant in that context.

[jackolover]

Indeed, and if anything, with the benefit of hindsight, this should put paid to the idea of the pro-registration side in Civil War, especially the fine people at or in charge of S.H.I.E.L.D. at the time, having been the "good guys" at all. Starting with Maria Hill attempting false imprisonment, as it would legally be called, on Captain America for voicing his moral opposition to the SHRA, that was the first sign to me Civil War wouldn't end well. Not to mention that Hill spearheaded S.H.I.E.L.D.'s "Cape-Killer" operation to bring superpowered people to heel after the perception by her superiors that they'd gotten too many free passes from previous leadership, which included shoving captives into an extradimensional prison where Earth's laws in regards to the rights of suspects and prisoners wouldn't (have to) apply and exhibiting no apparent remorse for Bill "Goliath" Foster's gruesome death at the hands of a cyborg Thor clone gone out of control. That aside, as you did bring up 2020 vs. 2006, 2020 also saw the interrogation of and furthered protests against oppressive and repressive law enforcement practices that had been previously accepted as a necessity in fighting crime and terrorism, although disproportionately targeting those already disenfranchised and marginalized in or by society, so this Snapshot would be especially relevant in that context.

Yes, your bringing up BLM in 2020 does reignite images similar to the SHRA in 2006, so this issue is a topical story for the times. The similarity to “Cape Killers” is not lost on me here, so on that account, I am grateful that this issue was published in an environment so explosive, because as you say, the “disenfranchised and marginalised” bear the brunt of law enforcement so very disproportionately. BLM seems a direct response to the overly Empire-like SHRA that seeks to maintain one racial superiority over another. BLM is the push-back. What we see in Snapshot CW is that SHRA still exists today in 2020, and it is the Clyde Dobronski’s that stand up to it even though they are part of the system. He recognised the system stinks.

Maybe there should be a second Snapshot CW as a follow-up? Maybe introduce an “Outlawed” flash forward, because it’s worth connecting the two events, equating “Cape Killers” with C.R.A.D.L.E., so Captain America can recognise you can’t address people’s responsibilities, by applying a sledge hammer. Or in BLM’s case, where profiling perpetuates injustices. I like that kind of bringing out in the open a political inconsistency. It’s like a lie that gets perpetuated on down through history.

[Huntsman Spider]

Yes, your bringing up BLM in 2020 does reignite images similar to the SHRA in 2006, so this issue is a topical story for the times. The similarity to “Cape Killers” is not lost on me here, so on that account, I am grateful that this issue was published in an environment so explosive, because as you say, the “disenfranchised and marginalised” bear the brunt of law enforcement so very disproportionately. BLM seems a direct response to the overly Empire-like SHRA that seeks to maintain one racial superiority over another. BLM is the push-back. What we see in Snapshot CW is that SHRA still exists today in 2020, and it is the Clyde Dobronski’s that stand up to it even though they are part of the system. He recognised the system stinks.

Maybe there should be a second Snapshot CW as a follow-up? Maybe introduce an “Outlawed” flash forward, because it’s worth connecting the two events, equating “Cape Killers” with C.R.A.D.L.E., so Captain America can recognise you can’t address people’s responsibilities, by applying a sledge hammer.

To be somewhat fair, the SHRA was explicitly about curbing superpowered vigilantism and its excesses, though the fact that it got turned into an excuse to crack down on superpowered people in general and fell prey to its own excesses didn't exactly speak well to its or its enforcers' overall morality or rightness. That said, having C.R.A.D.L.E. recognized as "Cape Killers" by another name, just like Silhouette called out "Kamala's Law" as superhero registration, but for kids in the latest Champions issue, would be a great callback.

[jackolover]

https://screenrant.com/marvel-shield...war-confirmed/

There was also this article on the issue from December 4th, stating Marvel are admitting SHIELD were the villains of the Civil War, together with a link that Captain America’s speech to Peter Parker had flawed logic. Both arguments being subjective, although many now agree the governments SHRA was wrong.

I can’t see the flaw in Caps speech as the article writer states it, because it sounds like a diplomats perspective. If that was right, then all the people voicing BLM should shut up and negotiate in the background. I equate Steve Rogers speech to not keeping quiet and resisting (in the SHRA case by not registering and giving up secret identities), and in the BLM case, not stopping giving the knee, and keep doing it to shame the culture of profiling. You can’t negotiate BLM because bigots are everywhere and won’t shut up either.

[Huntsman Spider]

https://screenrant.com/marvel-shield...war-confirmed/

There was also this article on the issue from December 4th, stating Marvel are admitting SHIELD were the villains of the Civil War, together with a link that Captain America’s speech to Peter Parker had flawed logic. Both arguments being subjective, although many now agree the governments SHRA was wrong.

I can’t see the flaw in Caps speech as the article writer states it, because it sounds like a diplomats perspective. If that was right, then all the people voicing BLM should shut up and negotiate in the background. I equate Steve Rogers speech to not keeping quiet and resisting (in the SHRA case by not registering and giving up secret identities), and in the BLM case, not stopping giving the knee, and keep doing it to shame the culture of profiling. You can’t negotiate BLM because bigots are everywhere and won’t shut up either.

I can agree with that, though I think the writer's argument in rebuttal to Cap's speech inspiring Peter in ASM's Civil War tie-in arc after Peter turned against the SHRA boiled down to, "But what if you're wrong?" Otherwise, it's a great, inspirational speech about staying true to your values and your sense of right and wrong in the face of a society, media, and culture trying to browbeat you into compliance, but it can also be taken as justification for maintaining wrongheaded beliefs and belief systems. That said, because it's Captain America, we all know, or should know, what he means in that speech, which kind of blunts some of the more troubling inferences made by the writer of that piece critiquing said speech.

[Mike_Murdock]

This was a fun story. I do think more work at the time needed to be done to make the pro-registration side seem reasonable (at least in a reasonable minds differ type way) and I don't think this helped there at all. But, especially with the passage of time, it's hard to think the pro-registration side would look better today than in the mid-2000s, so I definitely don't fault Saladin Ahmed. For a boots on the ground snapshot, it was really good.

[PCN24454]

It only ever worked in a superhero setting.

[Huntsman Spider]

This was a fun story. I do think more work at the time needed to be done to make the pro-registration side seem reasonable (at least in a reasonable minds differ type way) and I don't think this helped there at all. But, especially with the passage of time, it's hard to think the pro-registration side would look better today than in the mid-2000s, so I definitely don't fault Saladin Ahmed. For a boots on the ground snapshot, it was really good.

Funny enough, judging by the actions committed on-page by the pro-registration forces, they weren't that reasonable in the first place, starting with --- again --- Maria Hill deciding to have Captain America arrested for voicing his moral objection to something that hadn't become law yet. Once that proverbial Rubicon was crossed, it became all too easy for what would have otherwise been (presented as) a well-intentioned movement toward greater accountability for superpowered costumed vigilantes to descend into crypto-fascist efforts to control and repress superhumans in general. Hell, even after Civil War was over and the pro-registration side won, they still forced a girl who just wanted to fly around on a cloud and not fight crime to join a boot camp to be registered and trained as a superpowered government operative, which traumatized her a fair amount, and then with Norman Osborn taking over the Initiative in Dark Reign after foiling the Skrulls' Secret Invasion . . . it just spiraled from there.

It only ever worked in a superhero setting.

Yeah? How's that?

[Mike_Murdock]

Judging from the actions committed on the page, yes. But that's my point. The writers had a position and didn't care to present both sides balanced - with a very few exceptions.

Back when Acts of Vengeance happened, the Fantastic Four presented a Superhero Registration Act. They described it as a selective service like the draft for the army. Likewise, government training and oversight isn't inherently bad. But what we got was clearly wrong and immoral and characters who supported it were worse for it.

[PCN24454]

Yeah? How's that?

I'm talking about Pro-Registration being a good thing. It only works in a world where people can accidentally cause nuclear explosions just by existing.

[Huntsman Spider]

Judging from the actions committed on the page, yes. But that's my point. The writers had a position and didn't care to present both sides balanced - with a very few exceptions.

Back when Acts of Vengeance happened, the Fantastic Four presented a Superhero Registration Act. They described it as a selective service like the draft for the army. Likewise, government training and oversight isn't inherently bad. But what we got was clearly wrong and immoral and characters who supported it were worse for it.

Fair enough. The premise of Civil War could have been better-balanced between those who were for registration and those against, or at least not have portrayed the pro-registration side as chomping at the bit --- especially the fine people at S.H.I.E.L.D. --- to commit what would be considered civil and/or human rights violations in a real-world context. That spoiled the whole idea of "both sides have valid points," because nobody in their right mind would (or should) listen to anyone trying to justify civil and/or human rights violations committed in the name of "security."

I'm talking about Pro-Registration being a good thing. It only works in a world where people can accidentally cause nuclear explosions just by existing.

Hmm, that makes sense.