Star Wars: Is the Emperor Good or Bad?

[Taem]

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.

[Hammerskjold]

>is domination an act of evil? I don't think so, and let me explain why:

Domination is not evil imo, -if- and only if it is done on someone who can not or will not control themselves and starts to endanger others. Or in a game of intergalactic pod racing featuring precocious child slaves.

>... But a NECCESSARY evil whom without, we would have nothing we have today.

What did Obi Wan guy say again, he heard a million voices suddenly crying out then nothing? Now what if one of those voices were, before they snuffed out were on the verge of finding the key to the cure for cancer? Ok in the spirit of the genre, space cancer.

While I do hold that war or war like condition can actually speed up a certain kind of progress, there are better ways in fostering development other than a literal do or die situation.

>the Rebels recruited people such as Han Solo, we well known criminal,

Han Solo was an outlaw, not really a criminal IMO. Jabba was a criminal, yet he was more within the law than someone like Han. And IIRC, Han was deemed an outlaw because he opposed slavery and slave labour. I don't know about you or anyone else, but I'd like to think that in a galaxy far far away, I'd become a 'criminal' too if it means fighting the Empire's slavery. Free the Wookies!

> 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!

Oh but they did show the result of one trade agreements didn't they? Just ask one Lando Calrisian on his sweetheart deal he got with ole respirator breath with the force choke fetish.

> 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.

I would guess that Empire recruited so much cannon fodder because the alternative the recruits are facing probably sucks in comparison. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Palpatine dangled a fast track to citizenship in the Empire for military service. And a little patch to call home on whatever Force forsaken outer rim territory should a troop reach retirement or honourable discharge. Though at the rate they're going, Palpatine can promise them a choice island on Naboo since he knows very few, if any troopers would reach retirement.

For all their reputation, Palpatine's combat troops seems to be given poor marksmanship training, and I wouldn't be surprised if a crooked intergalactic contractor severely shortchanged the troops armor considering an ewok with a rock can clobber one dead.

>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.

Palpatine was a great politician at one point, considering he knows he will win no matter who emerged victorious, the Droid army or the Clone army. As long as it eliminates a lot of Jedis, Palpatine FTW (at least for a while). And like the arrogant and complacent suckers that they were, most of the Jedis fell for it.



>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.

Palpatine's so far ahead, his cranium actually loops around and reaches his exhaust vent-hole. There's some strength in the idea of a monoculture, but also a glaring weakness. Assuming he could actually crush all dissent or resistance or any counter-culture, he's also crushing a potential hidden ace up his sleeve.

Here's a hypothetical scene. The Mandalorians are getting uppity, let's get rid of all of them. Oops, it turns out they would've been the perfect countermeasure for a new invasion force that laughs at Force powers but are not immune to a good blaster in the face. It's really too bad we killed off the Mandalorians, because the Empire could sure use a few (thousand) clone soldiers right about now. Or maybe the new invaders are deathly scared of fighter droids. Ooops, now did we kill off the Techno Union? Didn't they use to be really good at churning them out? Why are they not answering my calls?! Vader, you choked them? All of them? Ok then...do you have a lot of INXS on your holocron player by any chance. Why am I asking? Just curious as all.

> 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.

See I think this is one of his fatal mistake. Alderon's kablooueing up could be seen as a rallying point and legitimized the rebel movement. Planets and species that was not happy under the yoke of the empire but still liked being alive realized they might not have anything more to lose, with Alderon being obliterated. Alderon might have been the trigger that convinced the normally gentle Mon Calamaris to rise up and join the rebel alliance, and giving the previously rag tag fleet some needed numbers. And one thing you don't want to face, is an enemy who is not afraid to die.

Instead of silencing the peasants, it might have backfired right in his highness's face. Remember t3h Alderon!!!1111 FREEDOM!!!!111

> No, in my opinion, the Emperor was the true hero here and the rebels were the equivalent to modern day terrorists.

See to me, Pulpyteeth commited a few, but fatal mistakes common to a lot of megalomaniacal space dictators.

1) He -used- the Death Star, which imo functions much better as a deterrent weapon or a stylish armada destroyer, and he used it on a weakling planet instead of a stronger and more uppity one. I propose this action gave more sympathy to the rebel cause instead of silencing dissent.

2) He put form over function, see lack of handrails in Death Star architecture and the dangers caused by.

3) He cut back on training and gear for his troops, and instead relied on 'reputation' aka propaganda. Reputation only goes so far before an Ewok with a slingshot and a rock takes down a space trooper.

Not to mention his officers training are also, kind of weak. Papadon'tpreachateen seems to favour a system where officers gain higher rank by blindly following orders. There's chain of command, and then there's yes men. The price Pulpabeen paid for that is a lot of choked to death officers, and officers commanding their star destroyers to stay put and hold a stupidly vulnerable position, -despite- an opportunity to crush the rebellion armada once and for all, because the emperor wants to put on a special laser light show for Luke.

4) He overestimated the strength of a monoculture, and ignored it's weaknesses.

5) He got impatient. Dissolving the Senate in one fell swoop was a mistake. He should've kept them, but keep them corrupt and lazy and impotent. Removing it all at once made the frog jump out of the pot of boiling water. He should've kept it simmering slowly, until it generated sufficient apathy that all citizens of the Empire pretty much ignores the Galactic Space Senate by their own will.

So my opinionated answer to your question is, I think the Emperor is not good at Evil. Many of his succesess was to me, thanks due to the Jedi's shortcomings. While it does take a respectable level of skill to recognize an opponent's weakness and exploit it, I wouldn't go overboard and say it's all due to Palpitations great skill overall.

I'm not sure if he's entirely bad at being Evil, but in the longer term and tactically speaking, I think he's incompetent. How long was his reign, probably 20 years or so? Considering the amount of work and the (long life)time he spent on it, that's not a very long time he spent on the throne.

[Jester]

So, let's see.

He's very much like the most brutal conquerors in history. He wants to rule the galaxy with an iron fist. He is ruthless with his subordinates, uncaring about mass genocide, and regularily employs people who have similar tendencies (Darth Vader, Grand Moff Tarkin, etc...). Dissent is brutally crushed, and democracy is destroyed. He fights rebels who conspire with known criminals (convicted of such horrible acts of terrorism as smuggling, wearing an excess of leather, and killing bounty hunters sent to kill him). He also very likely is an administrator, who works in concert with interest groups to negotiate trade agreements. People join his armies. Histories written by him and his will support his side. And, despite the galaxy apparently functioning just fine for millienia on end under the Old Republic, these things are "necessary."

Therefore, he's a good guy.

You'll pardon me if I don't follow. That sounds like the definition of a smart, evil guy with an empire.

-Jester

[Occhidiangela]

The emperor did what he did for a simple reason: chicks dig it, "it" being power.

I had always figured that his deep, abiding anger and hatred began when the nubile young princess refused to be his mistress, which makes his turning her boyfriend into his puppet/pawn a rationale, albeit envy and hate inspired, course of action.

Occhi

[Munkay]

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. . .

Whoa whoa. Time out. You and your wife can talk Star Wars and her response is more than 'that sci-fi movie with Klingons?'. You're a lucky man MEAT.

As for the Emperor... I'm with Jester on this one. You've done a good job at cutting the various pieces apart and justifying them individually. But when you take a step back and look at it, at the end of the day he's an evil wanna-be-tyrant. Now, if everything was chaos and broken before his attempt at unifying an empire, then you might have a stronger position. But as Jester pointed out, the Old Republic seemed to work just fine and dandy before. All in all, he's a man on a mission - an evil mission.

That, and as Occhi pointed out... it's all about the chics man... yeah, the chics.

Cheers,

Munk

[Taem]

Whoa whoa. Time out. You and your wife can talk Star Wars and her response is more than 'that sci-fi movie with Klingons?'. You're a lucky man MEAT.

As for the Emperor... I'm with Jester on this one. You've done a good job at cutting the various pieces apart and justifying them individually. But when you take a step back and look at it, at the end of the day he's an evil wanna-be-tyrant. Now, if everything was chaos and broken before his attempt at unifying an empire, then you might have a stronger position. But as Jester pointed out, the Old Republic seemed to work just fine and dandy before. All in all, he's a man on a mission - an evil mission.

That, and as Occhi pointed out... it's all about the chics man... yeah, the chics.

Cheers,

Munk

Yeah, I'm not sure how I did it. She *HATES* horror movies, and any movie with excess or unnecessary blood for that matter, but she loves Star Trek (TNG only - hates the movies) and Star Wars. Too bad she loathes Diablo.... you have absolutely no idea how much.

Regarding your reply, I'll bite: I use your and Jester's analogy of a peaceful galaxy before the Emperor took over to the America's (North and South, that is) and how the Indians survived just fine without the Spaniard and English conquerers of what is now North and South America. Truly, have you ever read the real history books on Columbus? He was a true villain which paved the was for the final showdown at Wounded Knee which all but completely eradicated the native Indians, however he is idolized as a Hero in our day and era, why? Because he helped unite this great nation in which we now live. I fail too see a difference between your analogy and mine except, of course, for our points of view.

Playing Devil's Advocate, yes the galaxy would have been fine without the Emperor, and we really have no idea to the amount of infighting that may or may not have been happening without Palpatines intervention (or cause). Had the Emperor never taken over the galaxy in the first place, the Jedi would have been strong and capable of taking on the Yuuzhan Vong by themselves.

So I suppose it could go both ways. It really just depends on your point of view.

[Munkay]

Yeah, I'm not sure how I did it. She *HATES* horror movies, and any movie with excess or unnecessary blood for that matter, but she loves Star Trek (TNG only - hates the movies) and Star Wars. Too bad she loathes Diablo.... you have absolutely no idea how much.

As they say, you can't win them all...:)

Regarding your reply, I'll bite: I use your and Jester's analogy of a peaceful galaxy before the Emperor took over to the America's (North and South, that is) and how the Indians survived just fine without the Spaniard and English conquerers of what is now North and South America. Truly, have you ever read the real history books on Columbus? He was a true villain which paved the was for the final showdown at Wounded Knee which all but completely eradicated the native Indians, however he is idolized as a Hero in our day and era, why? Because he helped unite this great nation in which we now live. I fail too see a difference between your analogy and mine except, of course, for our points of view.

You are right, It really just depends on your point of view. The sticking point is whether or not you believe in this situation the ends justify the means. The argument for Columbus being a hero (hellish brutality and all) teeters on the belief that this great country 500 years later justifies the horrendous actions that started the ball rolling.

So would the brutal actions of the emperor justify the (projected) ends? Of course you aren't wrong about the ends, there are some silver linings to be pulled from his actions (the protection provided by unification of power, etc).

From a technical standpoint, you have to add into the mix the classic quote "no one sets out to do evil, everyone follows what they believe is best". Throw in a few sleepless nights and 20 pages later, you'll boil it down to a number of smaller questions, a decent grade and a philosophy degree.

But since my philosophy degree is in hand and my college days over, I'm going to concede that it boils down to a number of simple axioms (perhaps the biggest of which I've mentioned, do ends justify the means). If I take one stance on it, and you the other, its a rather moot argument. Of course you could start arguing the nitty gritty of the validity of each others axioms, based on one system vs. another, but that won't get us much closer at the end of the day.

So at the end of the day in the real world, I rely on my gut. And if I honestly look at the emperor and call a spade a spade, he's an evil man with some bad motivations for galactic domination. And although I may see the silver linings to your arguments, it's still a spade to me. Of course, it goes both ways - you may see it entirely different.

Cheers,

Munk

PS. Maybe when I have some more time from work I'll get down to the nitty gritty and argue some specifics for fun. It would be nice to use that piece of paper they handed me at graduation to some use;)

[Kevin]

I'm doing it. I'm invoking Goodwin's Law. OK I guess someone else gets to invoke it after my post. But whatever. :)

The Emperor = Hitler. Sure if you want to be analytical about it Hitler started some public works projects that were great for the country and if the evil rebel alliance hadn't stopped the wonderful axis powers led by Emperor Hitler and Darth Mussolini (or whichever Japanese leader you want to be Vader) his grand vision of a unified Nazi world may have actually gone down in history as a great hero and unifier despite the racial genocide. I'm not going to make all the analogies and comparisons you can find them on the net if you like this is not original thinking by me and I think some of them are pretty obvious.

Most people still think Hitler was evil and many would have thought that even if he had won and if in 2058 (I'm giving it more than 100 years after the war that would have taken a bit longer than it actually did I figure) Earth was ruled by a world government and there was no war it was because Hitler took of the world. I'm not going to bite that the emperor was anything but evil and that his motives were all selfish and evil as well.

But I do agree that history has been too kind to some people in the past as well. Sam Adams by todays standards could easily be painted as bastard of a terrorist if you want to paint that picture. Columbus was pretty much a jerk, the "Christian" missionaries who burned and slaughtered many of the southern american tribes and burned all their history and records weren't what I would call nice people either and I'm not sure the world as a whole is better off for what has come of all that anyway.

The emperor was evil and I don't think anything good really came from him winning anyway and enough people that lived in his universe felt that way and overthrew him because of it and that seemed to make more people happy than sad. That seems to be a pretty good indicator. And yeah I'm not saying that popular belief is always right either but it's a tool that can help, you need other tools to get a better idea but if most of the people living in those conditions really believe something that's usually a pretty good barometer, not always but in general.

[Jester]

Regarding your reply, I'll bite: I use your and Jester's analogy of a peaceful galaxy before the Emperor took over to the America's (North and South, that is) and how the Indians survived just fine without the Spaniard and English conquerers of what is now North and South America. Truly, have you ever read the real history books on Columbus? He was a true villain which paved the was for the final showdown at Wounded Knee which all but completely eradicated the native Indians, however he is idolized as a Hero in our day and era, why? Because he helped unite this great nation in which we now live. I fail too see a difference between your analogy and mine except, of course, for our points of view.

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.

So I suppose it could go both ways. It really just depends on your point of view.

Have you *seen* stormtroopers fight? How on earth are the Emperor's troops going to beat the Yuuzhan Vong? They got beaten by ewoks. These are the single most useless forces known to man, here, now, or even a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.

I say the Old Republic had twice the chance the Empire would have had, easy.

-Jester

[Frag]

They got beaten by ewoks.

Good points for the most part, Jester, but it's obvious you've never played SW:Galaxies. :lol: Dathomer Sisters didn't have anything on some ol' fashioned Yub-Yub ass-kicking. They made those fuzzy little cannibals effing ruthless!!

~Frag :D

[Taem]

I'm doing it. I'm invoking Goodwin's Law. OK I guess someone else gets to invoke it after my post. But whatever. :)

The Emperor = Hitler. Sure if you want to be analytical about it Hitler started some public works projects that were great for the country and if the evil rebel alliance hadn't stopped the wonderful axis powers led by Emperor Hitler and Darth Mussolini (or whichever Japanese leader you want to be Vader) his grand vision of a unified Nazi world may have actually gone down in history as a great hero and unifier despite the racial genocide. I'm not going to make all the analogies and comparisons you can find them on the net if you like this is not original thinking by me and I think some of them are pretty obvious.

Most people still think Hitler was evil and many would have thought that even if he had won and if in 2058 (I'm giving it more than 100 years after the war that would have taken a bit longer than it actually did I figure) Earth was ruled by a world government and there was no war it was because Hitler took of the world. I'm not going to bite that the emperor was anything but evil and that his motives were all selfish and evil as well.

Of course my wife and I have had *this* exact argument before also stemming from our Star Wars argument and my response is as follows: Everything the emperor did, he did to strengthen his grip on his empire, not just senseless killing for sport; 1) He killed the Jedi because he knew they were the only force in the universe capable of stopping him, 2) He orchestrated the death of the trade federation leaders because he knew without their support (which he did not have in the end), he would not have half the galaxy, 3) He OK'd the destruction of Alderion because not only was Alderion most likely sympathetic to the Rebel cause, but it was probable the Rebel base was on that planet also.

Now Hitler was insane, performing acts of senseless killing never before accomplished on this Earth before. He reasoning? A mute religious based one out of the highly symbolic Revelations chapter, but was this really his motivation for conquering the world? His actions dictate the authority of a mad-man without cause or purpose other than wanton destruction and brain washing. I don't see the Emperor altering history laws or performing strange surgeries on peoples brains to see if they could make some sort of super soldiers. Palpatine and Hitler share nothing in common save for their desire to conquer.

[Taem]

Good points for the most part, Jester, but it's obvious you've never played SW:Galaxies. :lol: Dathomer Sisters didn't have anything on some ol' fashioned Yub-Yub ass-kicking. They made those fuzzy little cannibals effing ruthless!!

~Frag :D

Humm, you got me on the whole Ewok thing there Jester. I'm not sure what to say except, perhaps you are right for small arms troops, however against the Death Star and multiple Star Destroyers, the Yuuzhan Vong would never have had a chance.

Also, why did the trade federation decide to utilize the droid army, and the senate the clone army in the first place anyways? Did they not have an army of their own? I guess not, so Palpatine saw their weakness and exploited it by shoving it in their faces; without the Jedi, the republic was weak and useless... With the Emperor, they were unified and strong!

[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.

[Lissa]

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.

Nit, Pizzaro was the one that went into South America and infected the indigenous peoples with Small Pox.

[Jester]

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.

In order for the ends to justfiy the means, you have to say why the ends are beneficial, compared against other alternatives. Now, a 500 year historical counterfactual isn't just going to spring into existence, but what is it about the conquest's "ends" that we're supposed to like so much?

However, if you combine "the ends justify the means" with "it all depends on your point of view", then there is no conquering power, or any act at all, that cannot be justified, because they can't be judged on their means (the ends justify them) or their ends (how you see them depends on one's point of view). So you don't even need the apologetics for the emperor, only a relativism that embraces all conquerors as being perfectly okay, as a wise man once said, "from a certain point of view."

BTW, Cortez did a good job of destroying the South American Indians, not only with weapons, but inadvertently with disease.

I'm well aware of the record of the conquistadores, and the epidemics they brought with them. However, the populations of Mexico, Guatemala, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, Paraguay, and a half-dozen other countries are all heavily weighted either towards indigenous peoples, or to mestizos (mixed). That's still tens of millions of people.

(As per Cortez vs. Pizarro, there were hundreds of conquistadores, some successful, some not, but almost all responsible for inadvertently spreading disease.)

Also, why did the trade federation decide to utilize the droid army, and the senate the clone army in the first place anyways? Did they not have an army of their own? I guess not, so Palpatine saw their weakness and exploited it by shoving it in their faces; without the Jedi, the republic was weak and useless... With the Emperor, they were unified and strong!

The Old Republic deliberately did not operate with an army, since the Jedi were enough to maintain order, and the army itself would have been the greatest threat to the Republic. This assessment turned out to be correct, given what came after they built the clone army. Saying that Palpatine should rule because the Old Republic was unable to resist the insidious threat of Palpatine himself is just Might makes Right, plain and simple.

But even on those grounds, as to whether the empire was weak and useless or unified and strong, ask how long it took a handful of lovable adventurers, an exclamatory squid, a ragtag of alphabet-themed fighters, the cast of "Queer Eye for the Droid Guy", and some teddy bears to bring down his "unified and strong" empire, including two Death Stars and a mammoth fleet of Star Destroyers. At least the Old Republic had the dignity of being beaten by Darth Vader.

-Jester

[Nystul]

At least the Old Republic had the dignity of being beaten by Darth Vader.

As did the empire, ultimately. Perhaps Vader should have been the ruler himself, if might makes right. Good luck trying to serve him with all those mood swings though.

[Hammerskjold]

>Humm, you got me on the whole Ewok thing there Jester. I'm not sure what to say except, perhaps you are right for small arms troops, however against the Death Star and multiple Star Destroyers, the Yuuzhan Vong would never have had a chance.

A Deathstar v.1 had a design flaw that led it to be destroyed by a farmboy with vague notions of 'the force'.
Deathstar v.2 might have had a better chance, too bad it was rushed into production not fully completed.

Star Destroyers seems to be the most sturdy thing out of the arsenal of the Empire, too bad it was staffed by too many yes men commanders. Can't really blame them too much though, since independent thought seems to be heavily discouraged in the Palpatine command structure.

Most of the late Empire's other weapons and weapon system seems to rely more on quantity over quality. eg: AT-AT walkers were destroyed by Ewok engineering involving ropes and logs.

>With the Emperor, they were unified and strong!

You know, you might have a case if you are basing that on their galaxy shown in the prequel time. The Droid army seems to have the numbers, and they were starting to bring in upgraded autonomous combat droids. The Clone army seems to have the edge on marksmanship, tactical ability, and superior intelligence.

Palpatine probably doesn't want too much of the Droid army surviving after his plans though, should it fall into control of someone other than him. The Clone army may have a built in solution to that problem, considering most of them have accelerated growth rate. It certainly wouldn't be surprising if they have a shortened natural lifespan either, discounting combat duties.

After that period however, the new troop recruits of the Empire seems to have only quantity in their favour. Most couldn't hit the broadside of a moisture farm barn half of the time, it was a tactical coup for them imo that they managed to destroy the Skywalker's farm. Too bad in the end that just managed to get Luke into the fight earlier.

[NiteFox]

A Deathstar v.1 had a design flaw that led it to be destroyed by a farmboy with vague notions of 'the force'.
Deathstar v.2 might have had a better chance, too bad it was rushed into production not fully completed.

Or, as Han Solo himself put it:

That's not what the Empire would have done, Commander. What the Empire would have done was build a super-colossal Yuuzhan Vong-killing battle machine. They would have called it the Nova Colossus or the Galaxy Destructor or the Nostril of Palpatine or something equally grandiose. They would have spent billions of credits, employed thousands of contractors and subcontractors, and equipped it with the latest in death-dealing technology. And you know what would have happened? It wouldn't have worked. They'd forget to bolt down a metal plate over an access hatch leading to the main reactors, or some other mistake, and a hotshot enemy pilot would drop a bomb down there and blow the whole thing up. Now that's what the Empire would have done.

:)

[kandrathe]

...
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.

I've a few things to add on this topic. Evil in this case is hindsight being judged with the morality of a 2008 western "civilized" male. What was standard acceptable Christian behavior for Spaniards braving 3 month sea voyages for fame and treasure? It was rare for the typical white male to look at any person of color as a human being, let alone give an adversary any quarter. The notion that the conqueror is not evil, because he leaves a wake of civilization behind him is also flawed. I'm not sure that Mayan, and Aztec civilizations were not equal to our own, and it is only our bigoted myopia and religious zealotry that prevents us from exploring and better understanding them. Your third point from above is that if the outcomes are desirable, whatever evil means used to achieve them are justified and will be forgiven. I don't think that is true. There are times when the evil empire emerges, and it is judged evil by the actions of the empire. I view the systematic extermination of the Jews by the Nazi's as the kind of reprehensible behavior exhibited by "empire". Our worlds recent history is rife with numerous examples of genocide on similar levels. Alderan was a hint at the ruthlessness characteristic of the leadership of the empire.

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.

Palpatine legally took control of the Senate, and it was the peaceful and stabilizing interstellar democratic institution of its time. He then engineered a legal vote to elevate his position to Emperor of the known universe, then dissolve the democratic institution that anointed him. This is a move similar to what most dictators have done politically in many countries, the latest of which is Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. As for Darth Vader's summary execution of incompetent subordinates, it reveals more about the character of the empires leadership. It shows they rule by absolute power held by a few individuals, they have dispensed with any justice system, and they have little value for human life (superiority of those strong with the dark force).

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.

This reminds me of a recent conflict, Afghanistan. Charlie Wilson's war helped to defeat the Soviets, then in the vacuum of power the Taliban asserted rule, and finally the US again decides to depose an unwanted government. Sometimes when as a nation you actually do the right thing, it is the lack of adequate appropriate follow through where you f_k up. I would place Iraq in that situation as well. The Yuuzhan Vong saw the vaccum of power in the fallen empire and moved to exploit the weakness. So it was also to be blamed on the inability of the parts of the empire to re-establish the democratic unity, and central authority they had before the fall of the empire.

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.

Also ruthless, and exemplary of how they valued the lives of the citizens of the empire. It was a move to demonstrate the empires power and "bring others systems" into line. In other words, extort control rather than solicit the willing participation characteristic of a republic.

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.

I was just reflecting recently that the "7 people in a 5 person lifeboat" exercise is much more of a lesson in the psychological differences between those who are willing to toss the 2 overboard, and those who would try to preserve the lives of all seven. But, you might be right in that historians, those pro-empire survivors who smash their moral compasses, would have white washed all the evil to only focus on the benefits derived from the decades of suffering and repression under Palpatine's rule.