12-25-2007, 08:30 PM
For some reason or another, this conversation has come up no less than six times in the past two weeks with an argument stemming from each encounter (usually between my wife and I). I'm in the 'Emperor was justified' camp and she is in the 'Emperor is pure evil and should die a miserable death' camp. How could I possibly be rooting for the Emperor? Let me explain. . .
Now first off, I'm not trying to prove rather the Emperor is an evil person morally or not, because that much is made pretty clear by watching the six movies. No, what I'm trying to get at here is if the Emperor's stragegic actions in the movies culminate to an ultimate "good" goal? Of course the first question that comes to mind , is domination an act of evil? I don't think so, and let me explain why:
1) Conquerors; historically necessary to progress our society. Without them, we'd all be split up into villages ran by warlords without any revolutionary progress to speak of what-so-ever. Let me see, the movie Hero was a fictional account of a true king in China that conquered the seven provinces of China and united them to stop all the fighting. King Richard, Alexander the Great, Columbus, yada yada. All conquerors, all looked upon as HEROS. And what did they do? Rape, pillage, and destroy to beat the natives into submission. But a NECCESSARY evil whom without, we would have nothing we have today.
2) The movies put a rather one-sided SPIN on what is happening in the story, showing you only the Rebels struggle against the Empire, not to mention, the Rebels recruited people such as Han Solo, we well known criminal, and Dash Rendar to do their dirty work. Sounds more like a band of terrorists to me. They never show Darth or the Emperor negotiation peace treaties or trade agreements - and you know they must! You can try to reason that the Empire just bullied everyone into submission but I don't agree. If the Empire was such a tyrannical force, then they would not have so many storm troopers working for them after they stopped making clones after Epi. 3. Historically, there are always special interest groups conquerers are willing to barter with to make a better society, but these are not shown. Perhaps Palpatine was also a great diplomat (as seen in the 1st and 2nd movie) when he ran the empire, and the movies only show the few times he was fed up with the rebels. Take Darth strangling the admiral for example; perhaps that admiral had failed Vader more than 10x, or perhaps he was even suspected of aiding the rebels and that mistake was his last. Theres always more than one-side of any story.
3) I don't believe the Emperor was just trying to conquer the galaxy so he could 'torture' and 'enslave' his "empire". No, rather I offer you this vision of his ultimate empire: A galaxy controlled solely by him where any resistance would be squashed instantly, and in return, a strong, peaceful galaxy under one galactic rule! If you ever the Star Wars books and knew of that invasion force that came from another galaxy that was immune to the force (sorry, such a long time ago - can't remember the name of them), they would have been stopped DEAD-IN-THEIR-TRACKS had the galaxy been united. Yes, the Emperor was a visionary, ahead of his time.
4) The main argument I get from people (other than his manipulation of people, which is no different than any other leader, even by todays standards) is how he gave Vader authorization to blow up planet Alderon, a peaceful civilization, technically committing mass genocide. My response to this is that in every conquering crusade, there are groups or societies that refuse to blend into the new order (i.e. the Scotts and Britain, the North American Indians and the Spaniards, etcetera, etc...). Alderon must have been sympathetic to the rebels and a possible strategic location for the Rebels since it was assumed no one would attack it. Evil? Perhaps, but a pure strategic move, and one that would has hopefully loosened Princess Leia's tongue.
So in summation, I feel if the Emperor had destroyed the rebels, he would have been viewed as a "hero" (as all conquerers who 'win' are), and a great leader, especially for uniting the galaxy before the invasion that is forthcoming (but not in the movies). A true visionary and peace keeper who dealt with all "rebels" and naysayers of the law with swift retribution. Someone willing to keep the Jedi in check, who were themselves aligning with criminals and bandits with the rebels. The Jedi's goal was to protect the senate and it's ideals - a goal which they failed miserably - but when they were ready to take the senate by force before they even found out Palpatine was a sith lord; shame on you Jedi! The Emperor only did what any good leader/conquerer would do - squash the opposition! No, in my opinion, the Emperor was the true hero here and the rebels were the equivalent to modern day terrorists.
Now first off, I'm not trying to prove rather the Emperor is an evil person morally or not, because that much is made pretty clear by watching the six movies. No, what I'm trying to get at here is if the Emperor's stragegic actions in the movies culminate to an ultimate "good" goal? Of course the first question that comes to mind , is domination an act of evil? I don't think so, and let me explain why:
1) Conquerors; historically necessary to progress our society. Without them, we'd all be split up into villages ran by warlords without any revolutionary progress to speak of what-so-ever. Let me see, the movie Hero was a fictional account of a true king in China that conquered the seven provinces of China and united them to stop all the fighting. King Richard, Alexander the Great, Columbus, yada yada. All conquerors, all looked upon as HEROS. And what did they do? Rape, pillage, and destroy to beat the natives into submission. But a NECCESSARY evil whom without, we would have nothing we have today.
2) The movies put a rather one-sided SPIN on what is happening in the story, showing you only the Rebels struggle against the Empire, not to mention, the Rebels recruited people such as Han Solo, we well known criminal, and Dash Rendar to do their dirty work. Sounds more like a band of terrorists to me. They never show Darth or the Emperor negotiation peace treaties or trade agreements - and you know they must! You can try to reason that the Empire just bullied everyone into submission but I don't agree. If the Empire was such a tyrannical force, then they would not have so many storm troopers working for them after they stopped making clones after Epi. 3. Historically, there are always special interest groups conquerers are willing to barter with to make a better society, but these are not shown. Perhaps Palpatine was also a great diplomat (as seen in the 1st and 2nd movie) when he ran the empire, and the movies only show the few times he was fed up with the rebels. Take Darth strangling the admiral for example; perhaps that admiral had failed Vader more than 10x, or perhaps he was even suspected of aiding the rebels and that mistake was his last. Theres always more than one-side of any story.
3) I don't believe the Emperor was just trying to conquer the galaxy so he could 'torture' and 'enslave' his "empire". No, rather I offer you this vision of his ultimate empire: A galaxy controlled solely by him where any resistance would be squashed instantly, and in return, a strong, peaceful galaxy under one galactic rule! If you ever the Star Wars books and knew of that invasion force that came from another galaxy that was immune to the force (sorry, such a long time ago - can't remember the name of them), they would have been stopped DEAD-IN-THEIR-TRACKS had the galaxy been united. Yes, the Emperor was a visionary, ahead of his time.
4) The main argument I get from people (other than his manipulation of people, which is no different than any other leader, even by todays standards) is how he gave Vader authorization to blow up planet Alderon, a peaceful civilization, technically committing mass genocide. My response to this is that in every conquering crusade, there are groups or societies that refuse to blend into the new order (i.e. the Scotts and Britain, the North American Indians and the Spaniards, etcetera, etc...). Alderon must have been sympathetic to the rebels and a possible strategic location for the Rebels since it was assumed no one would attack it. Evil? Perhaps, but a pure strategic move, and one that would has hopefully loosened Princess Leia's tongue.
So in summation, I feel if the Emperor had destroyed the rebels, he would have been viewed as a "hero" (as all conquerers who 'win' are), and a great leader, especially for uniting the galaxy before the invasion that is forthcoming (but not in the movies). A true visionary and peace keeper who dealt with all "rebels" and naysayers of the law with swift retribution. Someone willing to keep the Jedi in check, who were themselves aligning with criminals and bandits with the rebels. The Jedi's goal was to protect the senate and it's ideals - a goal which they failed miserably - but when they were ready to take the senate by force before they even found out Palpatine was a sith lord; shame on you Jedi! The Emperor only did what any good leader/conquerer would do - squash the opposition! No, in my opinion, the Emperor was the true hero here and the rebels were the equivalent to modern day terrorists.
"The true value of a human being is determined primarily by the measure and the sense in which he has attained liberation from the self." -Albert Einsetin