#and STOP IGNORING ALL THE POLITICIANS WHO HAVE BEEN FOUND EVIL/CORRUPTED IN THIS FRANCHISE AND RELATED FRANCHISES

[amarriageoftrueminds]

*taken out of the tags cuz it got too big

It's useful to bear in mind: A thing is not a true/accurate proof of a character's beliefs just because they're the one who said it, unless their actions demonstrate that thinking/belief as well. (You could call it... word/deed harmony? 🤔). 

Example: Steve saying this ^ and acting in accordance with it, in this and other Cap movies. 

Example of word/deed dissonance: Tony claiming/telling himself he has got out of the arms dealing business... while continuing to design weapons (Iron Man suits) and selling them to America instead (SHIELD) under his own control. 

That is not getting out of arms dealing. That is merely building a new personal arms-dealing monopoly and altering your customer base to US-centric alone. Proving that Tony doesn't truly believe it was wrong; only that it negatively impacting Americans was wrong. Which is contrary to what he says and what he thinks he believes. 

Never mind what X character says / thinks / genuinely thinks he believes / wishes other people to think he believes... 

What do their actions show?

If Ultron hadn't rebelled... who do you think would have been in charge of pulling his strings, alone? The Avengers? the UN? or just Tony? 

If Tony hadn't died, who alone would've been in charge of EDITH (aka Insight 2.0) instead of Spidey? The Avengers? the UN? or just Tony again?

Tony's actions prove that, when he speaks of oversight, he means: controlled by him (an American) alone... and that rules are for everyone else but him. 

Tony says he believes in the Accords... but his actions don’t support that, not before or since.

a) He’s a non-enhanced billionaire who experiences zero consequences for rule breaking, even within this one movie, so even if the Accords did apply to him (which they don’t) they still wouldn’t affect him in the way they do affect everyone else (even within this movie). So all of his advocating for them that claims to include himself is hollow and hypocritical. As demonstrated by the fact that he:

b) acts completely contrary to the Accords ('I'd have to arrest myself'). 

When push comes to shove, Tony doesn’t put his money where his mouth is. 

He puts his money where his mouth isn’t.

While Steve relies on 'the people' (small group) to protect the planet (vindicated by the fact that in his own/most Avengers movies that usually works), Tony thinks it should be just him in charge (which is not vindicated, because that always goes wrong).

And his actions show that he only appreciates human loss if it’s Americans and especially he himself, as an American.

(What is his PTSD about? the people who died in the battle of Manhattan? the other people the Avengers couldn’t save from Loki? No. Him personally going through a wormhole. Whose death does he care about in Sokovia? Pietro's? all the Sokovians he wanted to blow out of the sky? No. One American, and even then only because he personally was confronted about them. He refuses to help undo The Snap... until he remembers that, of all the trillions of children who died, one mattered to him personally... and because he wants to be able to control how the Avengers undo The Snap, so that it doesn't adversely affect (you guessed it!) ...him personally. etc etc.)

Which is why (and this is wild to consider) none of CACW would have happened if Pepper Potts had been around. 

Because Tony does NOT actually, genuinely believe in the Accords. He just thinks signing them will make him look responsible and will ergo fix his relationship problems. 🤷‍♀️

Steve dealing with casualties vs. Tony dealing with casualties