Avengers Twilight 2 Preview.

[Rzerox21xx]

https://aiptcomics.com/2024/01/26/ma...rs-twilight-2/

[MichaelC]

He doesn't propose any social programs to reduce homelessness. He only fights for the freedom of homeless people to sleep in public, which isn't where they want to sleep, just where they have no choice but to sleep for economic reasons. It's something that's always annoyed me about Rogers: that ultimately he's a very Rightwing-Libertarian character, fighting for freedom and nothing else.

[Frontier]

He doesn't propose any social programs to reduce homelessness. He only fights for the freedom of homeless people to sleep in public, which isn't where they want to sleep, just where they have no choice but to sleep for economic reasons. It's something that's always annoyed me about Rogers: that ultimately he's a very Rightwing-Libertarian character, fighting for freedom and nothing else.

Isn't he just fighting to protect a guy from getting harassed?

[D.Z]

Interesting stuff. Some fans are gonna hate it for reasons I won't bring up.

[Huntsman Spider]

He doesn't propose any social programs to reduce homelessness. He only fights for the freedom of homeless people to sleep in public, which isn't where they want to sleep, just where they have no choice but to sleep for economic reasons. It's something that's always annoyed me about Rogers: that ultimately he's a very Rightwing-Libertarian character, fighting for freedom and nothing else.

Isn't he just fighting to protect a guy from getting harassed?

Both can be true, in the sense that Steve Rogers, as a former Senator in this continuity, should at least propose or enact better or actual solutions for the overall problem of lack of decent housing for people who need and want homes, though at the same time, people stuck sleeping on the streets shouldn't be beaten up for it by law enforcement or whoever else might have a problem with them existing.

Interesting stuff. Some fans are gonna hate it for reasons I won't bring up.

Is it the whole thing with Iron Man's son being a little s***, and not even in the quirkily affectionate kind of way some people might use the term "little s***"?

[MichaelC]

He never does propose any real solutions to help the little guy, because Rogers doesn't actually fight for the little guy. If he fought for the little guy, he'd be proposing the sort of social-democracy you see in Scandinavia. What Rogers fights for is a rightwing-libertarian notion of freedom, where everyone is infinitely free and where personal responsibility is the only social program. Sometimes that accidentally results in him helping an individual little guy, such as that homeless person being oppressed, but it does nothing for homelessness as a whole, and, indeed, that philosophy is a big contributor to homelessness.

[Mantis-Ray]

That is a thing with literally every superhero.

Its not really a Steve specific issue. At that point you should be complaining why Iron Man doesn't take office and dismantle the systems of capitalism that run the US.

So don't make it a big deal, its a dumb thing to be up in arms about.

[Frontier]

Both can be true, in the sense that Steve Rogers, as a former Senator in this continuity, should at least propose or enact better or actual solutions for the overall problem of lack of decent housing for people who need and want homes, though at the same time, people stuck sleeping on the streets shouldn't be beaten up for it by law enforcement or whoever else might have a problem with them existing.

But is that even what the problem is in this comic?

[Huntsman Spider]

But is that even what the problem is in this comic?

In the short, immediate term, no, but it is a longstanding problem that could and should have been addressed much sooner, whether we're talking real life or fiction.

That is a thing with literally every superhero.

Its not really a Steve specific issue. At that point you should be complaining why Iron Man doesn't take office and dismantle the systems of capitalism that run the US.

So don't make it a big deal, its a dumb thing to be up in arms about.

Fair point on it not just being on Steve alone, though it does get to a larger issue with the superhero genre, which is that while immediate threats to public safety can be dispatched with relative ease by superpowered individuals, those same individuals, despite all the powers and resources at their disposal, are somehow less than capable of addressing the more systemic issues that threaten long-term public well-being, which may account for why people in-universe (and, to some extent, in real life) are increasingly cynical about superheroes. I could see Zdarsky commenting on that here, especially given the first issue's in-universe documentary reframing the Red Skull as a secret hero trying to stop Adolf Hitler from within the diabolical machinery of Nazi Germany, a documentary supported by Tony's son seemingly out of that aforementioned cynicism about superheroes and their role in the world.

[Frontier]

In the short, immediate term, no, but it is a longstanding problem that could and should have been addressed much sooner, whether we're talking real life or fiction.

Fair point on it not just being on Steve alone, though it does get to a larger issue with the superhero genre, which is that while immediate threats to public safety can be dispatched with relative ease by superpowered individuals, those same individuals, despite all the powers and resources at their disposal, are somehow less than capable of addressing the more systemic issues that threaten long-term public well-being, which may account for why people in-universe (and, to some extent, in real life) are increasingly cynical about superheroes. I could see Zdarsky commenting on that here, especially given the first issue's in-universe documentary reframing the Red Skull as a secret hero trying to stop Adolf Hitler from within the diabolical machinery of Nazi Germany, a documentary supported by Tony's son seemingly out of that aforementioned cynicism about superheroes and their role in the world.

It just feels weird to bring up when it's literally just Cap saving a guy from getting tazed and plotting to topple a dystopian regime not "Captain America takes on deep and systemic social issues."

[MichaelC]

It's relevant because the narrative frames Rogers as the embodiment of all that is good and holy, when all he is is the embodiment of rightwing-libertarianism. The constant disconnect is tiresome. Generally, at Marvel, most protagonists are presented warts and all. It's an understood part of the narrative that they are flawed human beings. Rogers is the only character who is exempt from that framing, despite his philosophy having clear flaws when examined without the rosy framing.

[Frontier]

It's relevant because the narrative frames Rogers as the embodiment of all that is good and holy, when all he is is the embodiment of rightwing-libertarianism. The constant disconnect is tiresome. Generally, at Marvel, most protagonists are presented warts and all. It's an understood part of the narrative that they are flawed human beings. Rogers is the only character who is exempt from that framing, despite his philosophy having clear flaws when examined without the rosy framing.

I think it's more that he's a freedom fighter fighting a totalitarian regime. He's not even the only hero to be involved.

[Huntsman Spider]

It just feels weird to bring up when it's literally just Cap saving a guy from getting tazed and plotting to topple a dystopian regime not "Captain America takes on deep and systemic social issues."

It's relevant because the narrative frames Rogers as the embodiment of all that is good and holy, when all he is is the embodiment of rightwing-libertarianism. The constant disconnect is tiresome. Generally, at Marvel, most protagonists are presented warts and all. It's an understood part of the narrative that they are flawed human beings. Rogers is the only character who is exempt from that framing, despite his philosophy having clear flaws when examined without the rosy framing.

Say what you will about the overall quality of Secret Empire and its buildup, I did appreciate the potential in tackling the idea that Captain America's image could be exploited and twisted to seemingly legitimize darker, uglier aspects of American ideals and philosophies. Shame about the writer not being able to stick the landing on that, among other issues.

I think it's more that he's a freedom fighter fighting a totalitarian regime. He's not even the only hero to be involved.

Fair enough, though it should be mentioned that totalitarianism only really becomes viable, much less seemingly popular, when a critical mass of citizens feels like democracy has either failed to improve their lot in life or it no longer serves or upholds their interests. A lot of that sentiment is contributed to, exacerbated, or at least not helped by continual and sustained failure by the establishment in power to address longstanding systemic issues that leave a significant portion of the populace with their needs unmet, which is when totalitarianism comes in promising to meet their needs and giving them a target or an object of blame for their frustrations and anxieties.

[scribbleMind]

Presuming Steve is a rightwing-libertarian, who cares? Here's what's important, Steve doesn't judge people solely for the color of their skin, their religion, or political standing regardless of his own. He can believe in whatever he wants.

Also, 1) We don't know what he did and didn't do while he was senator. He could have proposed 1,000 things, it's not going to happen just because he's Steve Rogers because 2) it just doesn't work like that. I work for the state. I know the state isn't the same as the federal government, but the line is thinner than people tend to think. Lots of state programs are federally mandated. Lots of what people assume is state money is actually federal money. Almost anytime a governor is taking credit for a grant that forces them to do something positive, if you trace it back, it's usually actually a federally mandated thing or at the very least something the federal government can take the money from if the state doesn't use the money in a way that was promised. The state just takes credit for publicity and votes. Hundreds of wonderful things are proposed all the time. Thousands and thousands of dollars go into researching them assuming they even get that far, and even if the research determines these proposals are good ideas, most of them don't get off the ground. When they do get off the ground, it's at least two years of budgeting, contracting, finding partners and employees before anything can get started and by that point directors may have changed, mayors mayors have changed, governors may have changed, senators may have changed, presidents may have changed, and maybe something that was a sure thing once before becomes a trial run, which is code for, we don't actually want to do this but we said we would, so we'll do it for a year with intent to cancel. It's also not unusual for money to go from one project to the next as long as it is open and honest and the two are tangentially related.

My point is, Steve as a Senator is lesser than Steve as a vigilante. The other legislators might respect Steve, but at the end of the day, there is not way they could care less. They're out to push their own agendas, to please their lobbyists, to stay in the good graces of the other legislators that support them, and perhaps stumble on to satisfying the public that elected them along the way. The role of Steve as a senator reduces him to just another cog. He's not going to influence legislators the way he influences the public. Legislators have too much baggage to be all that malleable. So what if Steve did propose ways to help the homeless? Why do you think anything would change? Because he's Steve Rogers? No. The homeless would still be on the streets for the exact same reason they're on the streets right now.

You can make the argument that Steve could do more, but as stated above, a lot of heroes could do more. Superheroes attack the symptoms, not the disease, because if they attacked the disease, there wouldn't be a need for superheroes (you can replace the word superhero with other words). Steve doesn't even have the most power to enact the kind of changes he's being called out to make here because he doesn't have money like that. He's had to get money from both Tony and Deadpool. Votes are good. The power to influence people is good. Ain't nothing more influential or powerful than money.

[Nomads1]

Storywise, I'd say it's a done to death unoriginal story that really doesn't interest me at all. However, I have to congratulate Daniel Acuna's artwork. From what I'm glimpsing in the previews, some of the best he's done.

Peace