Question Details	Asked By	Asked On
An interesting political science excersize.	ETWolverine	06/07/06
Hello all. A few of you may have figured out from my screenname that I'm a comic book collector (alright I'm a geek, but I don't give a $h!t). This summer, Marvel Comics is having an event called "Civil War" that will be running through several of the titles. Here's the concept: The series will center upon a newly enacted Super-Human Registration Act, an act which splits notable superheroes within the Marvel Universe. This will result in two super-powered factions forming, and will build to the titular Civil War, into which themes from current events will be weaved, although writer Mark Millar has noted "The political allegory is only for those that are politically aware. Kids are going to read it and just see a big superhero fight." According to the New York Times article on the story, "The story opens with a reckless fight between the New Warriors, filming a reality television show, and a cadre of villains. The battle goes awry for the heroes, resulting in villain Nitro creating an explosion that takes out all but one of the New Warriors, a local school, and the surrounding neighborhood. This event crystallizes a government movement to register all super-powered beings as living weapons of mass destruction.The subsequent Registration Act will divide the heroes into two camps, one led by Captain America, the other by Iron Man." Iron Man takes the side of supporting the Super-Human Registration Act, and Captain America will be against. Some people have already taken sides as well. In New Avengers: Illuminati, Mister Fantastic took Iron Man's side on the bill, but Doctor Strange was against it. Black Bolt's alliegence is still inconclusive, due to his inability to communicate vocally. Marvel has said that the Fantastic Four will be divided. All that is confirmed is that husband and wife will be divided and that Invisible Woman will be among those who are against the bill. Along the way, Marvel will unveil its version of Guantánamo Bay, enemy combatants, embedded reporters and more. The question at the heart of the series is a fundamental one: 'Would you give up your civil liberties to feel safer in the world?' " The above was taken from a Wikipedia article on the Civil War storyline, citations eliminated. So, here's the question: do you support the Superhuman Registration Act (SRA), or are you against it? There are several arguments both for and against the SRA. Pro: 1) Right now, there are too many people who are untrained in police activities who are making mistakes that could get themselves or others killed. The SRA calls for uniform training and oversight of anyone who wants to be a "costumed vigilante" so that they don't make those kinds of mistakes and risk hurting people... as the New Warriors did in their search for ratings for their reality TV show. 2) Cops and soldiers are trained and regulated. Why shouldn't superheroes be similarly trained and regulated if they are doing the job of cops and soldiers. 3) The rules would only apply to those who are actual superheroes. Those who have superpowers but who do not wear costumes and fight crime need not register (at least according to my understanding of the SRA). So there is no issue of profiling or rules that apply to a specific class or group of people. People can choose whether they wish to participate or not, but if they choose not to, any costumed superheroing they do would be illegal... the same as if you owned a gun illegally without registering it. 4) Government resouces and superheo talent could be properly pooled to help get the job of stopping supervillians done more efficiently. If superheroes had the NSA's electronic spying ability and the CIA and FBI's intelligence gathering capabilities at their beck and call, they could stop supervillians before they put their plots in motion. 5) Superheroes who sign in under the SRA will get government benefits and salaries like any government employee, which is good for the superheroes, especially those who are not well-off like Spiderman and Luke Cage. Anti: 1) It is tradition fo costumed heroes to remain anonymous, even to the government. (This is the weakest of all the anti-SRA arguments in my opinion.) 2) As Captain America puts it, how long will it be before the government starts deciding who the badguys are? The point of the superhero is to be above political considerations of government agencies. 3) If all superheroes are registered, who will do the "black" stuff that the govenment can't acknowledge doing? The type of stuff that Wolverine does on his own? If all the heroes work for the government, disavowing them is not an option. 4) The SRA restricts the individual liberties of the heroes. 5) Although the identities of the heroes would be kept top secret, if someone got their hands on that information, it could endanger the families and friends of the heroes. 6) Working for the government would actually make their jobs harder: has there ever been a project that the government didn't complicate with red tape and politics and committee meetings? And I am sure that there are other arguments on both sides of the issue that I haven't thought of or read yet. What is your opinion on the matter? Is the SRA a good thing or a bad thing. The superheroes are split down the middle on the issue, and it is going to result, as the storyline's name makes clear, in a civil war among the superheroes. As the tagline for the series says: "Which side will you choose?" Elliot
Clarification/Follow-up by kindj on 06/07/06 4:19 pm: Tom, >> "Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."<< If there were to be one motto for my life, that would be it. Gotta love Orwell. Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 06/07/06 4:48 pm: Thanks for being one of the rough men, Dennis. It is appreciated. And yes, Orwell had that one dead on right. Elliot
Answered By		Answered On
kindj		06/07/06
OK, now I get it. Hey, you picked the best superhero for your name. Me and my 8 year old, Jake, are both Wolverine freaks. If the hair on my head wasn't rapidly abandoning me, I would totally trim my beard and hair a la Wolverine. Well, you know me, so you probably know that, despite some fairly compelling arguments from the pro side, I've got to ultimately come down on the anti side. While I realize we're dealing with fantasy, there are some real-world applications that can be brought in. Registration is merely the first step toward regulation, which is a step on the road to elimination. See the battle for the 2nd amendment on this one. What is it about real-world vigilantes that gives the bad guys such fear? No one knows who they are! The cops, for the most part, drive around in marked cars, and even their unmarked ones are generally obviously police cars (DEA being the exception). The cops usually wear uniforms, or are otherwise obviously policemen, due to grooming standards. Your vigilante, on the other hand, could be any one of a thousand people you see every day on the street. The sulking hulk of a neanderthal on the corner may be the guy that hears everything that goes on, and mutilates the punks that are about to break into Mr. Smith's Kwik-E-Mart. The little bald headed, bespectacled geeky looking guy may be the ex-military sniper that's taking out drug dealers on the street at night from 500 meters out. That's why I like Texas' (and other places) concealed handgun laws. The punks simply don't know who around them is legally armed. Uncertainty is not a criminal's friend. I say use that uncertainty to the advantage of law and order. Sometimes a little carnage and disorder is necessary to get the bad guys, but sometimes "procedure" lets many, many bad guys get away. I could really open up a can of worms by speculating upon how long American citizens will tolerate ineffective police departments before they begin to solve their own problems, but that's probably best put on another thread. DK

Additional Options and ratings are only visible when you login!