Your gateway to endless inspiration
I feel like something not a lot of people consider when talking about Captain America civil war is that both sides were wrong and right in a way. That's what I feel like, but I can also understand the Captain america sides and the Tony stark sides
I've been wanting to write this for a little while, but I wanted to do some rewatching and research on the topic again.
This is my view on the topic of who was right, and who was wrong.
My answer? They were both right.
Let me explain:
Tony, after all the damage done that leads to this conflict, wants and does sign the accords. He wants the Avengers to be held accountable for the damages they cause and to have some restrictions so supers can't do anything they want willy nilly. He has the point here. People need rules and structure to avoid anarchy and chaos, to avoid things just ending up a mess.
Steve didn't want to sign the accords because his point was that the avengers couldn't be held down waiting for the green light, not when lives were at stake. His argument is made further when you take in the question of: 'who could actually hold this power?' Hydra invaded SHEILD, the government isn't safe either, and lord knows how corrupt politics are anyway. Hell, after Thanos snapped the government had to go make a consensus. Nobody could hold the avengers when lives were on the line.
Steve and Tony are both right. But they end up also being wrong too.
Tony is blinded by his overwhelming guilt at this point. After all he lost, the new trauma, and dealing with everything, Tony is hyper focused on redemption here. He wants to make up for the things he did, for the people lost in the cross fire. But he ends up not seeing the issues presented to him about signing the accords.
Signing the accords is a problem because, like I talked about with Steve's point, no one can simply have a leash on the heros. If they have to wait then people die, if they are leashed then Hydra would have been pulling the strings. Hydra invaded SHEILD and the government, if they pulled the strings then it's over. Not to mention that the person pushing the accords is General Ross, the man who hunted down Bruce to use him- to make the super soldier serum. General Ross is not an ally, he is a threat.
Steve was also wrong too. Avengers can't have full freedom to do whatever they please. Having powers being used recklessly and causing unnecessary damages to surroundings isn't a good thing. It's a risk to the people he wants to protect.
So Both are right and wrong. Mainly cause this conflict is complex, when you see the risks and factors of why things couldn't work one way or the other. But also remember, this is a conflict created by design too. Zemo had a part to play in this issue. Playing the game just right that would cause the leaders of the avengers to reach a boiling point on the argument that they split.
What I personally feel is that because of the trauma, pain, and exhaustion the two of them were dealing with when the accords were just presented that they were even in a good healthy mindset to even begin dealing with any of it. Both were stressed, dealing with issues on all sides, and couldn't see past the black and white view of absolutes. Steve and Tony were stuck on a chest board as pawns and both were fighting to win. Only we know how this ends up going.
I am Team Captain America AND Team Iron Man.
Cause in the end they are still a team, and I don't pick sides of my team- I choose all of them.
As an added part to this post I wanted to share my thoughts on Steve lying to Tony about his parents. It was wrong and unjustified, yes but I'm not talking about that. That is a simple fact. I want to explain my view on Steve's reasoning for this decision: He wanted to protect both friends of his. He wanted to protect Bucky cause he was brainwashed and innocent, he didn't want him hurt or kill for it. He wanted to protect Tony cause already he was traumatized, beaten, and utterly exhausted from so much happening. He didn't want Tony to have another thing on his mind that could potentially cause him to snap a part.
In the end it didn't matter, Tony finds out and everything falls from there. Steve here, from my pov, is the people who have the purest intentions and want the best for us, but end up making decisions that only harm us in the end unintentionally. When we make choice that we think help, but don't.
In conclusion: Do I think one or the other is wrong? No, both are right and wrong for their own reasons- making the answer a more complicated discussion.
Do I think Steve or Tony deserves the bashing they get from either side of the conflict? No. They are fundamentally human characters who wanted to do the right thing but were blinded by their own issues and too twisted and turned to properly communicate things.
Should either one be hated for these choices they made? No. They made the choice they did but in the end worked to fix what had been ripped apart, doing their best to mend that scar. They were adults about it and made up while finally having a more healthier mental state to deal with everything.
Are both still my favorite characters and ship? Fuck yes.