PalpatineWasFramed posted:The way I see it, Emperor Palpatine's ultimate goal was to unite the galaxy. He went to great lengths to discover exactly who were the enemies of the Republic: he secretly created an opposing faction to test who would be willing to betray them, and once he had them all in one place, he destroyed them. Like luring the cancer out of a body.
PalpatineWasFramed posted:We're introduced to the Galactic Empire in ANH as a tyrannical, increasingly oppressive government. At the same time, we're introduced to the Rebel Alliance, a group that seems to be gaining momentum. Wouldn't it stand to reason, then, that the Empire is probably increasing their security because of the Rebellion? Really, what better way is there to make a government drastically increase their defensive measures than to demonstrate a clear intent and capability to overthrow said government? If the Emperor had felt secure in his control of the galaxy, the Death Star would have been completely unnecessary.
PalpatineWasFramed posted:And really, the Empire doesn't seem that awful. We barely even see them bothering anyone besides the Rebellion. If the Rebels hadn't come to Bespin, the Empire would have had no reason to come in and disrupt life in Cloud City. The only reason the Empire ever harassed the Ewoks on Endor was to build a shield generator to protect the Death Star II, which was only necessary because they knew the Rebels would have tried to blow it up again! They even blew up Alderann just to intimidate the Rebels! All the aggression we see from the Empire in the OT is essentially a panic response to the actions of the Rebellion.
PalpatineWasFramed posted:The first Death Star was essentially a military base, and the rebels mounted a well-informed assault on it with the intention of destroying it. That's not too different than someone attacking the Pentagon, and the people who did that in 2001 were labeled terrorists (and rightfully so). The Rebels caused more problems than they solved.
PalpatineWasFramed posted:Like I've said, Palpatine obviously wanted to bring the galaxy together and be free of those who likely to cause problems. He even learned the Dark Side in his pursuit of the power to unite the galaxy; he more or less sold his soul for peace. While the ethics of his methods (i.e. killing off the Jedi, lying to Anakin) could fairly be called into question, it's undeniable that had the Rebels not interfered, Palpatine's rule would have been extremely beneficial to the galaxy.
PalpatineWasFramed posted:As far as I'm concerned, Palpatine should be regarded as the hero of the saga. Luke is a terrorist, and Darth Vader is a traitor who got what he deserved. The whole saga is a tragedy: the story of a smart, competent leader assassinated by a group of short-sighted radicals. What do you guys think?
Merlin_Ambrosius69 posted:To extend your metaphor, if the US perpretrated murder, genocide and fake wars, motivated by greed and powerhunger, then it would merit being the target of military strikes by a rebel force.
VadersLaMent posted:I think we average...what? Once every 4 months someone makes a "The Empire was not really evil" thread. There are like 20 of them.
PalpatineWasFramed posted:And really, the Empire doesn't seem that awful. We barely even see them bothering anyone besides the Rebellion.
xx_Anakin_xx posted:Palpatine saw the Rebels as the bad guys from his perspective - they were messing with his program and had to be exterminated. But from an OOU perspective, Palpatine was the bad guy (evil one) - that is why he got to use the title "dark lord".
Merlin_Ambrosius69 posted:The opening scrolls clearly establish that the Rebels are "struggling to restore freedom to the Galaxy" and that Vader and the Empire are both "evil".
PalpatineWasFramed posted:Merlin_Ambrosius69 posted:The opening scrolls clearly establish that the Rebels are "struggling to restore freedom to the Galaxy" and that Vader and the Empire are both "evil". The opening crawl was obviously written by a Rebel sympathizer. I prefer to come to my own conclusions, rather than simply believing what I'm told.
zweebex posted:How typical, "dark" is bad.
posted:Sounds like racial hate speech to me. Why don't you take your simplistic good/evil dualism and found Zoroastrianism? Oh wait, someone already did that--Zoroaster. Let's look at this issue without your obfuscating false dichotomy, and consider the actual situation from a position removed from the traditional (Rebel biased) narrative:
posted:The assertive nature of Empire control stands in stark contrast to vague whining of the Rebels--the Empire was a force for stability, the Rebels had no clear political platform. At the time of ANH, the Empire's increasing stability has created legal clarity and reliability (see legal philosophers Bentham, Austin, and Hare), benefiting mankind (and other sentient forms of life with rationalized systems of politics). It is also clear that their power is growing, and as a result, their control and range of influence. This is a governmental system in expansion, and must be given further time to grow into what it will before a total judgment of its effectiveness can be rendered--however, it is clear that Palpatine has accomplished much within a relatively short time.
posted:On the other side of the coin, the rebels never forwarded values aside from a vague concept of "liberty",
posted:a cry that, since the fall of monarchies and mercantilism, has often meant unbridled control of private power over public interest.
posted:The only effective response to such forces (which often act against the public interest in the Western world) is state-controlled hegemony like the Empire. Ideally, such a state would be democratic in its decision making, but clearly this is unfeasible in a massive future galaxy (where the internet has not been invented). At the same time, do you really want Ewoks voting on issues outside of a localized and tribal government scenario? Clearly, the simple path to take is leader(s) acting upon the interests of the uninformed masses as French liberal philosopher, Jean Jacques Rousseau, suggested in his classic treatise on political philosophy, The Social Contract. Who better than a man like Palpatine who has not only the capability for rule, but also the willingness to accept such great power?
posted:Next, any honest person turns to the ancient question, Qui Bono?--who benefits?--and examine with suspicion the action of rebellion. Rich mercantile classes and deposed royalties would clearly have the most to gain by the overthrow of a stabilizing (and therefore, controlling) force, and as is the case in most "Revolutions", such groups would hijack the proletariat into a soldiering force for their own means. Clearly the system of ranks and deference to royalty are present amongst the groups consistently thought of as "good" by naive viewers of the film. The opulence of both royalty and capitalists rests on the shoulders of the oppressed and downtrodden and lends itself to wasteful decadence, or what 20th century economist Thorstein Veblen termed "Conspicuous Consumption". The force of chaos represented by the Rebels is in actuality a threat to the safety (read: stability) of working men/women/other throughout this fictional galaxy. In contrast to the use of civilian soldiers, the Empire has taken the both useful and benevolent step of using clones who would not suffer from the rigors of combat and policing in the same ways as a civilian force--show me one shell-shocked storm trooper and I'll show you a hundred Ewoks crying over their dead and diving under bushes at the sound of a wooden spoon falling on the floor. An army such as the Empire's evokes the image of a prudent and benevolent military structure aimed at efficiency--no small feat for a galaxy-wide bureaucracy. Although one may argue that the Rebellion is unable to attain such technologies, they could have spent the resources needed for such technological goals or bide their time instead of turning to what appears to be a ragtag assortment of under-equipped forces--we see a civilian army lead by defunct leaderships willing to take massive risks with the lives of their soldiery in a manner that evokes British Lord Cardigan's famed "Charge of the Light Brigade" or Custer's "Last Stand". All of this ignores the category non-violent methods; history has shown such behaviors successful and less prone to manipulation by self-interested groups.
posted:Clearly, there is much to be said for "liberty" and "freedom of rule", but coercion will always be a necessary part of state control, and is in fact the only means to be used in public morality. In the words of liberal American political adviser and theologian, Reinhold Niebuhr, "All social cooperation on a larger scale than the most intimate social group requires a measure of coercion". This state exertion of power would ideally be lessened once external threats had been minimized and the state had further time to stabilize (a necessary restriction of rights in favor of the development of a new system of governance has been a constant theme in many societies, Lenin argued on these grounds prior to his ouster by even more totalitarian and less public-minded individuals). Such temporary coercion does not require violent methods (and even so, it is clear the Rebels are not against violent coercion), and acts to turn man's selfish nature (as well as the natures of the other galactic species of sentience who seem largely in-line with the psychology and affectations of mankind) into a positive force by creating a Hobbesian system of control over individuals who cannot see the larger picture and greater good sought by more detached visionaries like the good Emperor.
zweebex posted:xx_Anakin_xx posted:Palpatine saw the Rebels as the bad guys from his perspective - they were messing with his program and had to be exterminated. But from an OOU perspective, Palpatine was the bad guy (evil one) - that is why he got to use the title "dark lord". How typical, "dark" is bad. Sounds like racial hate speech to me. Why don't you take your simplistic good/evil dualism and found Zoroastrianism? Oh wait, someone already did that--Zoroaster. Let's look at this issue without your obfuscating false dichotomy, and consider the actual situation from a position removed from the traditional (Rebel biased) narrative: The assertive nature of Empire control stands in stark contrast to vague whining of the Rebels--the Empire was a force for stability, the Rebels had no clear political platform. At the time of ANH, the Empire's increasing stability has created legal clarity and reliability (see legal philosophers Bentham, Austin, and Hare), benefiting mankind (and other sentient forms of life with rationalized systems of politics). It is also clear that their power is growing, and as a result, their control and range of influence. This is a governmental system in expansion, and must be given further time to grow into what it will before a total judgment of its effectiveness can be rendered--however, it is clear that Palpatine has accomplished much within a relatively short time. On the other side of the coin, the rebels never forwarded values aside from a vague concept of "liberty", a cry that, since the fall of monarchies and mercantilism, has often meant unbridled control of private power over public interest. The only effective response to such forces (which often act against the public interest in the Western world) is state-controlled hegemony like the Empire. Ideally, such a state would be democratic in its decision making, but clearly this is unfeasible in a massive future galaxy (where the internet has not been invented). At the same time, do you really want Ewoks voting on issues outside of a localized and tribal government scenario? Clearly, the simple path to take is leader(s) acting upon the interests of the uninformed masses as French liberal philosopher, Jean Jacques Rousseau, suggested in his classic treatise on political philosophy, The Social Contract. Who better than a man like Palpatine who has not only the capability for rule, but also the willingness to accept such great power? Even if the Rebels may have idealistic goals, they are clearly naive ones. Expecting localized governmental units to adhere to any standard of human and non-human rights would surely reduce areas to lawlessness (clearly the planets with less Empire control were not politically egalitarian by any means--see the abject poverty on Tatooine, degenerate behaviors, and oppression--this is a planet where the Empire presence seems more like a minor military occupation than a localized and bureaucratized system of governance. In our own very small planet, so-called "democratized" forces have proven entirely impotent (or unconcerned) to stop genocide and starvation throughout the globe. The alternative calls for centralization of power and strong-armed tactics. Next, any honest person turns to the ancient question, Qui Bono?--who benefits?--and examine with suspicion the action of rebellion. Rich mercantile classes and deposed royalties would clearly have the most to gain by the overthrow of a stabilizing (and therefore, controlling) force, and as is the case in most "Revolutions", such groups would hijack the proletariat into a soldiering force for their own means. Clearly the system of ranks and deference to royalty are present amongst the groups consistently thought of as "good" by naive viewers of the film. The opulence of both royalty and capitalists rests on the shoulders of the oppressed and downtrodden and lends itself to wasteful decadence, or what 20th century economist Thorstein Veblen termed "Conspicuous Consumption". The force of chaos represented by the Rebels is in actuality a threat to the safety (read: stability) of working men/women/other throughout this fictional galaxy. In contrast to the use of civilian soldiers, the Empire has taken the both useful and benevolent step of using clones who would not suffer from the rigors of combat and policing in the same ways as a civilian force--show me one shell-shocked storm trooper and I'll show you a hundred Ewoks crying over their dead and diving under bushes at the sound of a wooden spoon falling on the floor. An army such as the Empire's evokes the image of a prudent and benevolent military structure aimed at efficiency--no small feat for a galaxy-wide bureaucracy. Although one may argue that the Rebellion is unable to attain such technologies, they could have spent the resources needed for such technological goals or bide their time instead of turning to what appears to be a ragtag assortment of under-equipped forces--we see a civilian army lead by defunct leaderships willing to take massive risks with the lives of their soldiery in a manner that evokes British Lord Cardigan's famed "Charge of the Light Brigade" or Custer's "Last Stand". All of this ignores the category non-violent methods; history has shown such behaviors successful and less prone to manipulation by self-interested groups. Clearly, there is much to be said for "liberty" and "freedom of rule", but coercion will always be a necessary part of state control, and is in fact the only means to be used in public morality. In the words of liberal American political adviser and theologian, Reinhold Niebuhr, "All social cooperation on a larger scale than the most intimate social group requires a measure of coercion". This state exertion of power would ideally be lessened once external threats had been minimized and the state had further time to stabilize (a necessary restriction of rights in favor of the development of a new system of governance has been a constant theme in many societies, Lenin argued on these grounds prior to his ouster by even more totalitarian and less public-minded individuals). Such temporary coercion does not require violent methods (and even so, it is clear the Rebels are not against violent coercion), and acts to turn man's selfish nature (as well as the natures of the other galactic species of sentience who seem largely in-line with the psychology and affectations of mankind) into a positive force by creating a Hobbesian system of control over individuals who cannot see the larger picture and greater good sought by more detached visionaries like the good Emperor.