Brubaker’s Captain America is a bloody brilliant book. I’m a Brit and it’s one of my absolute favourites.

You can move away from a protest that turns mostly hyperbole and racist, but that’s it.

As for sweeping statements – I don’t think I made any.
I think I made it clear how people may perceive it as taking a jab at the protesters and calling them racist. I think the writer went too far, but I don’t support the boycotts – since there is still a reasonable room for doubt.

But Brubaker isn’t helping – posting links to articles saying Marvel shouldn’t apologize, which also seem to say that the jab was intended.

As for implications – I don’t see how an entire movement is to blame for people calling it racist. Some racists using a protesting movement, which is hard to govern, doesn’t turn the movement into a racist one. I would expect any person making such a claim to back up his claim, or to avoid making one.
It just widens the rift between people.

As for the link – I’ll read it later (busy working).
If anyone wants to continue this conversation else where – since I’ve been told I’m passive aggressive in the past, and since I don’t want to seem as grabbing the last word, I’m “fanboychlop” in Twitter. Send me a text and we’ll choose a blog to speak in.

Thanks, Arie AKA chlop.

Thanks for pointing that out. Also – I didn’t say he was twisting characters, but rather using them to complain or convey his own feelings on the subject – which isn’t disallowed, but the way he chose to do it is stupid – either with those signs the letterer is said to have added later on, or without them.

Whether the character is acting in his regular way, doesn’t lessen the iconic way in which he was used – a black man from Harlem – which is associated with poverty & abuse from the (white) government around the 70s, white government-hating protesters, “this isn’t New York City” – while they’re in Idaho, which alludes to the image of rednecks, who are free to do whatever they like, due to the stereotypes associated with this place and with New York.

Saying that government hating isn’t limited to a racist group – The Watchdogs, draws comparisons straight away. Especially because of the way the book was lettered. I doubt the writer didn’t choose to add a big panel showing protesters, and “… bunch of angry white folks” lettered on it.

As I said – I might be seeing things that aren’t there, but there are too many arrows pointing in one direction, and too many things alluding to a commentary on the Tea Party, which was sneaked into a comic.
I doubt Marvel doesn’t check to see that the letters sit correctly on the page – despite previous omissions of censorship of swear words, or due to it – since they would be more inclined to check the finished product before printing it.

@Monica – yes, I did.
It is a matter of definition. A well explained view or argument is not preachy to me, or at least an acceptable level of preachy, but pointing to protesters and saying they are government haters and equating them to a racist group, is simply using a somewhat famous platform, to spout your ideas.

Especially with the nature of the big 2′s comics – being printed on a mostly timely manner, on a mostly regular schedule.

And it didn’t present a view, but rather sneaked in a jab at the movement, equating it to a fictional racist group, and saying it hates the government. That type of commentary is juvenile and stupid – it paints an entire group of people as bad, instead of addressing their views.
It says that by simply protesting in a civil manner, they are government haters.

It is the same as saying Obama is anti-America, that he’s a socialist (which isn’t a crime or a bad thing), that he’s a Muslim – so he’s not pro-America, etc.
It’s the same as saying that a certain part of the political spectrum is enlightened or correct, or white guys with silver spoons, or fascists, or even traitors.

It doesn’t deal with the contents, but rather dismisses people based on who they are, or what they look like. It’s a Twitter commentary, which I expect a writer to avoid doing in print – when there’s time to cool off, and re-think things.

I might be crucifying the writer for nothing, but it reeks of trying to take a jab at a big group of people and getting away with it – especially due to the aftermath. I expect more from a payed professional.