Temperance

A Reflection on Captain America: Civil War

“It is a queer thing. In a time of great need, when powerful leadership is demanded, the people—confused and excited—hear only the strident voices of the audacious, and refuse to listen to the voice of wisdom which, being wise, is temperate.” ― The Robe by Lloyd C. Douglas

There is a great deal to unpack from this statement, which seems to leave part of the equation by the wayside: Sometimes the strident or audacious voices sound temperate. They may modulate their tones, use pretty words, or weave their immutable objections seemingly as “facts” into their statements. Unless one listens carefully and evaluates the words heard these sirens will be able to lure anyone to his destruction. By the time he learns what the speaker really means, evading the rocks is next to impossible.

A film that explicates this very, very well is Captain America: Civil War. The movie is one of the best in the MCU for many reasons but the illustration of politics, the ever-present tension between control and freedom, has to be listed as primary among its great qualities. It quite aptly illustrates the above quote from The Robe by showing just how invasive and tyrannical politicians tend to become from generation to generation.

One may very well say that he has no interest in politics. Fine. However, that does not prevent politics from having an overbearing and downright unhealthy interest in you.

Let us, therefore, examine various scenes in the film which bear on Mr. Lloyd Douglas’ observation about temperate voices in times of need. There may be more to this statement – and the movie – than is apparent at first glance.

Captain America: Civil War (2016) Blu-ray CLIP | The Sokovia Accords & 'Vigilantes' (Scene) | HD

Fans of the MCU near universally despise General Thaddeus “Thunderbolt” Ross in the above scene. Why? First, no one brings up Ross’ own history of abuse of power within the film. The Incredible Hulk is the lowest grossing film of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and was basically ignored once The Avengers took box offices by storm in 2012. So the studio likely felt too embarrassed to put any mention of that movie’s events in Civil War.

However, from the perspective of the characters (please remember that films tend to resort to storytelling “shorthand” much more frequently than prose or audio), it makes sense that none of the Avengers would challenge Ross on his history directly. As the Secretary of State (and wouldn’t we all like to know how he failed up to that position), insulting Ross would only make the team look bad, and/or give him something to quote to the press that would put them on the back foot in public negotiations with the United Nations or the United States. They cannot afford to speak out directly or rashly, as that may come back to bite them in unexpected ways. Staying silent and “taking it” are defense mechanisms they all wisely use to let Ross lay his trap in plain view.

It is also worth noting that a treaty such as the Sokovia Accords could be signed by the U.S. president but, unless it was ratified by a two-thirds majority of the Senate, it could not take effect and thus would have no power over any American citizen or the country at large. Ross never states that the treaty has or will be ratified by the Senate. Without that ratification process, even if the president signs a treaty, it is toothless. So here Ross is threatening them with a power he (potentially) does not have and may never gain.

None of this is to diminish his threat or the manipulations he uses to sway the team to do what he wants. If the Avengers remain unified in their defiance, Ross loses, so he works in various ways to drive wedges between the team members present – to “divide and conquer,” as the saying goes. This is easy enough to do using the team’s recent experience in Lagos, where one of their members saved lives but accidentally threw an explosion too close to a building in the process, resulting in casualties she did not intend.

Ross praises the Avengers by saying “you have fought for us, risked your lives” in an effort to lull them into a sense of security, attempting to stroke their egos and make them feel at ease. He neglects to mention that the Avengers have also died for Earth; Pietro Maximoff’s death is brushed over and ignored by him, possibly due to the technicality that his enlistment on the team was never made “official” before his death. This oversight is not unintentional, as Ross proves when he switches from the proverbial carrot to the stick by saying the Avengers are not only called vigilantes but he himself would characterize them as “dangerous.”

His next move, playing footage of the Avengers’ greatest battles, only furthers this ploy. It is meant to exacerbate any feelings of guilt which the team has for their part in these events while ignoring the fact that had they not intervened, many more would have died. The death tolls counted beside each video are difficult to make out but important nonetheless, since they show the cost in human lives was low. To whit:

1.      Battle of New York: 74 civilian deaths, 88 overall losses

2.      Battle of Washington D.C.: 23 civilian deaths, 208 overall losses (most of them were probably SHIELD agents who died in the line of duty).

3.      Battle of Sokovia: 177 civilian deaths, overall losses 476.

4.      Lagos, Nigeria: 26 civilian deaths, overall losses 14. The second number likely refers to the Nigerian guards and doctors killed by Crossbones and his men when they entered the bio-lab.

While the physical repercussions are enormous, the fact that the Avengers managed to keep the death toll to a minimum in each of their battles means that the team has saved more than they have destroyed. Buildings can be replaced but people cannot, and the fact that Ross and the U.N. are more upset by the former than the latter shows their true colors: They value things – including money – more than people.

I have always found it telling that Ross never shows footage of the Hulk’s rampage through Johannesburg, South Africa, to the team in Civil War. There are many reasons for this in and out of the film, but I have always hewed to the hypothesis that he avoided using that footage because, miraculously, no one died. Despite being in a fury that had more than a little help from the Scarlet Witch, to all appearances the Hulk never killed anyone. Neither did Iron Man when he flew into the city in his Hulkbuster armor to stop him.

Ross did not play the film from Johannesburg, I believe, because no one died. It did not serve his agenda. And his agenda is, patently, to make the Avengers – or at least some of them – feel guilty enough that they will sign on his dotted line to make the guilt go away. To give him and the U.N. control of their actions and, ultimately, control of their powers, their intellects, their abilities, and even their very bodies.

It is what he wanted from Bruce Banner and the Hulk in the first place. Triple bypass surgery following his heart attack did not make him wiser or more temperate. It simply taught him to impose his will on others in a more decorous manner than he had previously exercised.

Although he modulates his voice to pleasant levels Ross is not, in fact, exhibiting moderation. He is audaciously calling for the veritable enslavement of individuals who could, if they wanted, kill him where he stands. Promising them freedom from ‘responsibility’ he holds a set of invisible cuffs out to everyone present in the room (and Hawkeye, as we learn later, who is not present there). He tells the Avengers directly: “Just give me what I want, and not only can I make all your guilt go away, I can make sure you never have to feel it again.”

Snake oil salesmen would envy him his performance, in no small part because it works, as seen below:

Sokovia Accords Debate Scene Captain America Civil War 2016 Movie Clip HD

Now this scene has a great deal to unpack as well, starting with Colonel James “Rhodey” Rhodes. Many people think that Rhodey supporting the Accords with very simplistic arguments is out-of-character for him, and with regard to the comics it may be. However, when it comes to the MCU, Rhodes has shown himself to be a rather trusting fellow. This is implied not only in this scene from Iron Man but in Iron Man 2, where he confiscates Tony’s prototype armor.

Yes, Rhodey removed the arc reactor and he took the armor in an attempt to shake sense into his seemingly senseless friend. That being said, he knew precisely what the government would do with the prototype armor he “borrowed” – or, as Jane Foster put it when SHIELD confiscated her life’s work, it was actually stolen by the government via Rhodey. He then trusted Justin Hammer’s weapons technology to be capable of at least firing, something that proved to be a mistake. Iron Man 3 has him accepting a name-change for the suit from the government without protest, despite the fact that it is an absolutely atrocious name everyone despises and mocks.

Contrary to popular belief, with this track record, Rhodes’ support of the Accords is unfortunately in character for him. He trusts Ross’ military record and his claims to have had a change of heart. Moreover, he extends his trust of the U.S. government to governments all around the world. Many of these nations, if they are not more prone to corruption than the U.S. government, are openly proud of their records of abuse and cruelty. Yet because they all “came together” to sign the Sokovia Accords, Rhodey is willing to sign away his freedom to them.

This is the source of Sam Wilson’s anger with him. Having fought a government infiltrated and nearly destroyed by HYDRA, Sam has seen the effects of corruption far more closely than Rhodey. The trust he had in his government – not his country but his government – has therefore been restricted to those whom he can be reasonably certain are not dishonest. He understandably does not want to lose his self-determination, and the Accords are a carte blanche for the Avengers to be controlled by an entity answerable to no single government nor even a fair consensus of governments, thus stripping him of his dignity as a human being.

Given the necessary physical distance between Sam, the other Avengers, and these politicians, there is little hope he can learn – let alone keep track of – who is actually in charge. By the time he discerns who is or is not in command and whom he does or does not answer to, it could be too late. The next threat to human life as man knows it in the 21st century might have appeared, won the battle, and be on its merry way to eradicating everything Sam holds dear. When one factors in graft, bribery, personal vendettas or desires of the politicians whom the Accords would likely place in charge of the Avengers, potential future matters go from bad to worse. Sam can see them being subjected to HYDRA-esque control, facing once again the same threat they did in Washington, D.C. But this time the threat would be a global governing body rather than a national one.

Rhodes and Sam illustrate, as Tony and Steve do later on, the difference between “feeling” and “thinking.” Between seizing on the audacious voice that seems to have a plan and the prudent one that calls for calm thought. One convinces a person to act in the heat of the moment while the other relies on patience, study, and understanding.

As Tony flat-out admits, he is in pain and discomfited. No one is denying the validity of those feelings but the point is that he is allowing those emotions to drive him. He seems to be reasonable, and given his intelligence, I would be worried if his arguments did not have any logic to them. Logic, however, is not reason. Thanos used logic to come to his conclusion that the universe needed balance, but right reason would have told him there were too many variables left unaccounted for to make his plan a worthy one.

In this case, Tony is making a similar error born of guilt instead of the hubris Thanos exhibits. He is allowing his emotions to drive him, which is why he becomes more strident the longer he talks. The pain of his guilt, which he has struggled with throughout his arc in the MCU, has reached a crescendo. All he wants now is for the pain to stop.

As sympathetic a motivation as that may be, it is not something the other Avengers cannot challenge him on. Steve rightly states that signing the Accords would be signing away their responsibility for the actions they take: “This document just shifts the blame.” As private individuals, teammates beyond bureaucratic manipulation, the Avengers must face every waking moment the sure, certain, and obvious fact that they are responsible for their actions. Their historic existence and notoriety require accountability; they have saved individuals and nations, for which they are rightly honored and praised worldwide. Envious of this the political class seeks to take it for themselves.

It is this responsibility, this freedom, which Steve is reluctant to surrender because if lost its restoration will not be possible without a great deal of bloodshed. More than any of the other Avengers, he is intimately familiar with the consequences of abdicating obligations in favor of some temporary advantage. Not only did he see it in World War II but it was brought home to him in a new, more visceral way with the SHIELD/HYDRA conflict. Would HYDRA have gotten as far as it did if SHIELD – or those within SHIELD – had not sold their souls for personal gain in the short term?

Steve knows how poisonous that is to the human soul. He knows the temptation it provides even good people, like his friends. Tony is vulnerable to it and in their conversation, Steve very temperately tries to steer him away from it as a friend, not a team leader or an authority figure. He does not want his friend hurt by this and he never orders him to change his mind. Even when he believes Tony is making a mistake, he never countermands his right to make his own choices.

The same cannot be said, sadly, of Tony. Desperate to make the pain stop and “fix” his previous errors, he attempts to overcompensate for his prior mistakes by allowing Wanda Maximoff and Vision to be locked up in the Compound. The focus is on Wanda but the fact remains that Vision is at least as dangerous as she is, meaning he was kept at the Compound for his “own good” as well. Ross would not see an android as a person but a piece of hardware no different from any other tool. Both young members of the team are being held, but only one of them recognizes it and decides she wants out (after a pep talk).

Tony does it again halfway through the film with Peter Parker, but before going on with that, it is important to note what Ross says to Tony and Natasha at the start of this clip:

Tony Stark Meets Peter Parker (Scene) | Captain America: Civil War (2016) IMAX 4K (+Subtitles)

When Natasha asks Ross if he’s going to kill Captain America he calmly replies: “If we’re provoked.” Who decides what qualifies as provocation? If Steve puts his shield away and his hands over his head, Ross could very well declare that provocation and get away with shooting Steve dead. Ross may claim responsibility for it, but Natasha and Tony will know they will also be responsible, which is why Tony scrambles to hold Ross off.

In that desperation he likely misses a key fact Ross lets slip before he leans on Tony’s guilt again: “Barnes would have been eliminated, if Rogers hadn’t interfered.” Sergeant Barnes’ record as a brainwashed assassin is not unknown, and by some lights, it makes him a prisoner of war held in captivity for seventy years. He is still an American citizen, one who did not willingly abdicate his citizenship to serve the enemy of his own free will. To be perfectly blunt, the accusation that he bombed the Accords signing in Vienna is so outrageous that if Ross and the U.N. were concerned with anything more than power and complete control, they would want to catch him to at least interrogate him in a search for answers.

But all they really wanted to do, as far as we can tell, is kill him. Why? Any number of reasons, including the fact that despite being an unwilling HYDRA operative, he might have dirt on more than a few politicians around the world. Or he might know where certain skeletons were buried, which could bring down regimes HYDRA helped establish in the metaphorical blink of an eye.

It is also entirely possible that “eliminated” here means “put under our control.” Ross and the U.N. may not have the Russian code words but if the Winter Soldier could be reactivated and Bucky Barnes’ personality erased forever, then Ross was being quite brutally honest in that he wanted Barnes eliminated but the Winter Soldier very much alive.

That may be another reason why he pivots to reminding Tony that people were killed in the breakout scheme perpetrated by Zemo. Apart from the fact that it serves to wind Iron Man up further, fueling his fear and goading him to take more extreme action, it covers the Freudian slip that Ross and the people Tony sold his freedom to want to murder a potentially innocent man. Whether one likes Barnes or not, the fact remains that he was a slave for seventy years. In line with one of the film’s major themes, he had no choice beyond deciding not to take pleasure in or to extend the suffering of those he was forced to kill.

Unfortunately, Tony goes on to make the same mistake with Peter Parker, a fifteen-year-old boy. He coerces and practically blackmails a child to go to another country without the knowledge of his only living relative and legal guardian. Ross’ tactics, in other words, are catching; his temperate voice hides his strident demands. This convinces Tony to stop reasoning and start rationalizing his decisions, for there can be no other way to describe conscripting a fifteen-year-old into traveling to another country to confront some truly dangerous people. If Tony were not terrified of things spiraling out of his control again and potentially costing him his friends, he might have realized this and not done it.

A word deserves to be said here about Wanda, who is also described as a “kid” in the film. She is a “kid” in the sense that she is the youngest member of the team before Vision (who is a one-year-old with the equivalent experience thereof) and after Cap, who is physically younger than the rest of the Avengers. That being said, Wanda is in her early twenties; she is legally of an age to fight if she so decides. She was also old enough to volunteer for HYDRA’s experiments in the first place.

Furthermore, she was being held against her will in the Compound. Like Tony she was being driven by fear to stay in place, but once she faces that fear, she is quite ready and willing to leave when an opportunity arises. Comparing Steve’s method of recruiting Wanda to Tony’s forcible enlistment of Spider-Man is to compare apples and oranges. There is no equivalency between the two; they are plainly not the same thing.

Most of us associate temperance as described in the quote from The Robe as being quiet, steady, and calm. But apparently calm voices can, in fact, hide strident, bold, and outright harmful intentions. In this case, temperance does not apply to voice modulation or tone. Rather, it applies to what the voices are actually saying.

What does Ross say? What do Tony and Steve say? Among the three of them, who is actually exercising prudence in speech and ideas? The one who wants living weapons at his command, the one desperate to make amends to make the pain stop, or the man who refuses to stand by and allow innocents to be killed by the whims of bureaucrats and politicians?

Think about it, readers, and for heaven’s sake listen when the voices of the would-be or wannabe powerful are raised. Listen to what is actually being said, not what you want to hear (and see) or what others tell you is said. Audacity has its place but, in the affairs of men and nations, prudence is an absolute necessity.

For if prudence is discarded, the results can be and often are beyond terrible.