Star Wars: Is the Emperor Good or Bad?

[Taem]

Not just a peaceful galaxy. A powerful galaxy. The Old Republic was hardly semisedentary nomads with no access to metal weapons. It was a gigantic political body capable of building up a massive army in a matter of years, with the Jedi as elite commanders, scouts and assassins.

The "empires are great!" argument applies to indigenous Americans as much as it does to the Spanish, English, French, Portuguese and Dutch who conquered them. If you're looking for a group that dominates and regulates through the use of military force, the Aztecs and Inca are perfectly valid examples of empires. (And, while we're at it, the indigenous peoples of Central and South America are far from wiped out. The conquest of Columbus and his successors was not primarily one of North America.) What advantage accrues from the Spanish ruling, and not the original indigenous empires? What did humanity gain from the conquistadores that could not have been gained through peaceful coexistence? Unless you take the position that "all empires are good because their emperors say so", or "all existing nations are the best possible ones", which would really be begging the question, I don't see it.

It seems to me what I'm really saying is if the Emperor had destroyed the Rebels and had ended up ruling the galaxy unhindered, and even got a chance to display his might against the Yuuzhan Vong later on with the Death Star, he would have died a "great ruler", which is the basis for my entire argument the the Emperor is the "good guy".

The question isn't if the conquering of the other planets was a good or evil act, but rather the means justify the ends. You see the end of different cultures, I see the beginning of one. BTW, Cortez did a good job of destroying the South American Indians, not only with weapons, but inadvertently with disease.