If the article you read wasn't John Darowski's "I would be the bad guy: Tony Stark as the villain of Marvel's Civil War" in the anthology The Ages of Iron Man, I highly recommend reading that: it's an interesting essay on Civil War as a political metaphor and why Tony may or may not be perceived as a villain due to his actions despite Marvel wanting the sides to come out equal.
(An interesting bit of trivia is that they were originally planned to lead the opposite sides, which to me makes a whole lot more sense, but that's another topic.)
I think, as garrideb says above, that it's a mistake to think of CW as a direct analogy for real-world politics because of the unclear consensus as to what the SHRA actually was across the various tie-ins. I mean, did the SHRA merely require all superhumans to register with the government, or did it conscript them into working for SHIELD? Because that is a pretty big difference, and I think it would be easy to find people who would support one of those things but not the other. And, comics being what they are, you're really only going to find the portrayal that's the most sympathetic to Tony in the Iron Man tie-in issues... and why would you, the hypothetical reader, seek those out if you've already decided Tony's the villain?
The other reason it doesn't necessarily work (at least for me) is that 616 isn't our Earth. Earth-616 is a world with a long tradition of superheroes, and when Civil War wants you to think about how you feel about people's personal liberties being curtailed and whatnot, it's doing so in a fictional context of a world where, essentially, superhero vigilante justice has been endorsed for decades and decades. That's not exactly the world I live in. So if I look at Civil War and I'm supposed to use my RL views on the Patriot Act to inform my opinion -- well, I can't, really, and it's sort of weird that suddenly I'm being asked to question one of the mainstays of superhero comics. Is it all right for Captain America to punch the bad guys? Well, gosh, it sure helps that Captain America lives in a world where the bad guys are definitely bad and he will always be the moral center of the universe. How is that supposed to help me think about the Patriot Act? The real world doesn't come with the same kind of narrative moral guarantees that the good guys know what's best.
Also, FWIW, as far as I can tell, Steve surrendered but never actually admitted (or whatever verb you want to use there) that his side was wrong. He died before his trial, and when he received his pardon the Registration Act was already gone. I read his surrender as him only attempting to prevent more violence. All the later references to CW by him seem to indicate that he believes that because he was pardoned, it's over, and he has atoned as much as necessary; I kind of wonder what would have happened if he'd actually stood trial. It would have been interesting to see him live under the SHRA by choice as opposed to being active resistance.
(And of course Tony no longer remembers, so whatever Tony learned from the experience is moot.)
I think the fact that we can still discuss this over a decade later at least shows that they did a pretty good job not clearly favoring one side.
no subject
(An interesting bit of trivia is that they were originally planned to lead the opposite sides, which to me makes a whole lot more sense, but that's another topic.)
I think, as
The other reason it doesn't necessarily work (at least for me) is that 616 isn't our Earth. Earth-616 is a world with a long tradition of superheroes, and when Civil War wants you to think about how you feel about people's personal liberties being curtailed and whatnot, it's doing so in a fictional context of a world where, essentially, superhero vigilante justice has been endorsed for decades and decades. That's not exactly the world I live in. So if I look at Civil War and I'm supposed to use my RL views on the Patriot Act to inform my opinion -- well, I can't, really, and it's sort of weird that suddenly I'm being asked to question one of the mainstays of superhero comics. Is it all right for Captain America to punch the bad guys? Well, gosh, it sure helps that Captain America lives in a world where the bad guys are definitely bad and he will always be the moral center of the universe. How is that supposed to help me think about the Patriot Act? The real world doesn't come with the same kind of narrative moral guarantees that the good guys know what's best.
Also, FWIW, as far as I can tell, Steve surrendered but never actually admitted (or whatever verb you want to use there) that his side was wrong. He died before his trial, and when he received his pardon the Registration Act was already gone. I read his surrender as him only attempting to prevent more violence. All the later references to CW by him seem to indicate that he believes that because he was pardoned, it's over, and he has atoned as much as necessary; I kind of wonder what would have happened if he'd actually stood trial. It would have been interesting to see him live under the SHRA by choice as opposed to being active resistance.
(And of course Tony no longer remembers, so whatever Tony learned from the experience is moot.)
I think the fact that we can still discuss this over a decade later at least shows that they did a pretty good job not clearly favoring one side.