Star Wars: Is the Emperor Good or Bad?

[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.