Lit Is the Rebel Alliance a dictatorship in canon?

To be fair, that does tend to be how people in real life react to "government vs insurgency" campaigns in real life, too.

 

When you have thousands of "light siders" trying their damnest to destroy 2 guys. Ask yourself who is evil.

 

When those two guys are manipulating the galaxy into a massive war that kills millions which they will then use to give themselves dictatorial control over the galaxy, I think the Sith can justifiably be labeled as evil. This is even more so when their rise to power involves the slaughter of children, and they plan on maintaining power through the destruction of worlds.

 

What do you think will happen if the Jedi were to have gotten their hands on Sidious and Vader?
It's a dog eat dog galaxy. Star Wars.

 

They would have revealed his plot to the senate. There would have been enough evidence in Palpatine's office, I'm sure; the lightsaber would have been fairly helpful. Either way, the Jedi would have found a way. Then the senate would elect a new Chancellor and everything would continue as normal. Maybe Mace Windu and some others would have faced some sort of legal problems. However, the Jedi were definitely not interested in taking control of the galaxy. There could be some political turmoil in the interim, but nothing compared to the formation of the Empire. For your arguement to stand, you'd have to completely reinterpret the movies beyond what is seen in any of the media, or what George Lucas, or the now the story group, ever intended.

 

My point was Palpatine and Vader would have been executed.

I think I understand now. I read Lost Stars I sort of identified with the Empire, but I guess because it(The Empire was good) wasn't what the story group or George Lucas intended, I was wrong.

I still refuse to identify with the Disney NR.

 

Fair enough, I can see how it might not be everyone's cup of tea. But you might want to watch it again if you think Vader killed any main or side characters. The only people he killed were nameless Rebel Red Shirts.

Ackbar's Fishsticks True, people will justify anything to support their point of view. Though I was more referring to how after thousands of stories of Imperial villainy, and ONE story were the Rebels are portrayed as more morally ambiguous, some how some people pay attention to the one story that supports their views while ignoring the thousands that go against their views.

JediKnight75 Mu once said that nothing the Empire could possibly do, even if it attempted to destroy all life in the universe, would ever justify defecting from it. It's pointless arguing with him. Though I'm about to break my own rule here:

Ah, so morality is determined by numbers. So by your logic, when you have billions of Imperials trying their damndest to destroy a small band of Rebels, obviously the Empire is the evil side, right?

 

Hey, I can admit a mistake when I'm wrong. Please Admiral Thrawn, Don't kill me. I admit my mistake, I promise to learn to correct my error.

If indeed billions of Imperials tried their damnest to destroy a small band of rebels, then the Empire would be evil.

This was not the case.

I'm still not wrong about the evil of surrendering and defection.

 

Well according to Legends Essential Guide to Warfare, the Rebel fleet was 7% the strength of the Imperial Fleet, and it's army was 3.5% of the Imperial Army. But even if you debate those numbers (Lord knows official figures in Star Wars like "25,000 Star Destroyers" or "3 million clone troopers" are often hotly debated), pretty much every single Star Wars story, Legends or Canon, has shown the Rebel Alliance to be vastly outnumbered by the Empire. So it very much IS the case. Meaning by your logic, the Empire is evil.

Even then, I want to stress that though "outnumbered underdog triumphs over the seemingly all powerful enemy" is an important theme in Star Wars, the Empire are not "the bad guys" because they outnumber the opposition, but because of what they do. "The side with the numerical disadvantage is always the morally superior side" is a very, very silly thing to say.

No sarcasm, no malice, I truly, honestly, want to hear your explanation for why breaking a vow is more morally contemptible than participating in the destruction of all life in the universe. "Defection/surrender is never, EVER ok" is a very extreme position and I would like to hear your reasoning.

 

I mean even in Legends the Jedi wouldn't let Xendor peacefully leave and start his own academy. Nor would the Jedi let their members research biological uses of the Force 17,000 years later. They seem to continually block off more "esoteric" or "unnatural" routes of exploration and research of the force.

So one could argue the Jedi are reactionaries halting progress and understanding that would be better for everybody.

#Sith Apologism

# Sorzus Syn was right

# Xendor wasn't treated fairly

 

I think the sticking point there is that both of those examples come from Legends. You can't really just transplant those arguments into canon.

 

Yes I know there Legends material but I was making a point about how one could interpret the supposed "heroes" or "protagonists" in a work as the real villains. As well as arguing in a more specific sense that the Jedi really don't like Alchemy or people exploring the force as it relates to their emotions apparently. But more the former.

 

I get what you're trying to say. But you're using something with no relevance to try and say it.

 

There are plenty of people who say the rebels are terrorists and the empire did nothing wrong, I was using a Legends example to well give a broader example than well the one I just mentioned.

People question the protagonists in a story really being the protagonists a lot even beyond Star Wars

 

True this is a common thing in pop culture/fandom. But most of the time I find to to be really poorly done. (I should clarify I'm mostly addressing this to fan comments, not stories were the author intends the protagonists to be questionable or for there to be no "right" side).

On the one hand I occasionally see something like SF Debris's nuanced look at the Prime Directive in Star Trek, well thought out analyses that show the hero might not be as heroic as the author intended.

On the other hand, most of the time I see poorly thought out dribble like Cracked.com's repetitive "Sauron is the hero of Lord of the Rings!" or "Syndrome is the hero of the Incredibles!" articles that inevitably forget or gloss over the most vile actions of the villain while exaggerating every character flaw of the heroes. It's almost become a game, the same way people on the internet love coming up with dark fan theories no matter how little sense they make.

I don't mind occasionally rexamining the actions of the heroes, making sure they really are being heroic and not just acting on the principle of "I'm the protagonist so I'm always right", but I hate when people exaggerate or make up flaws for the heroes while ignoring the actions of the villain.

 

Well with Sauron people forget there is the whole Legendarium of backstory and Sauron wasn't a nice or even revolutionary figure in the Silmarillion. Things he did-joined Morgoth(throwing in your lot with Satan is atrocity enough), tortured people, led Numenor to its destruction, enslaved a lot of humans at Nurnen, waged near continual war against the elves and caused Luthien and Beren a whole lot of grief.

 

How do we know the Empire is evil?

"It is a period of civil war. Rebel spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the evil Galactic Empire."

It's in the name man.

 

I miss the Dark Greetings, of the legends Empire. ( Also the Mofference on the Moffship)

 

To be fair, "I am one with the Force and the Force is with me" is a pretty decent rendering of Vergere's philosophy into a mantra, and works well with the Taoist philosophical underpinnings of the Force.

 

It is a period of civil war. Rebel spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the Galactic Empire.

fixed

------------------------------------

Taoism doesn't stress the destruction of the dark. It's more of a harmony balance between light and dark. What the Jedi were supposed to be, not what they ended up (obsessed with the Light side of the Force, trying to destroy the dark). Balance.
Vergere is either a liar or didn't know what she was talking about.

------------------------------------------------

JediBatman

One last time for everyone.

What if it were fine to surrender? Then every soldier in the armed Forces will be thinking. Damn it, the enemy is coming. They are mad to fight against us. Hey! Maybe our policies are evil. Damn it I better defect and surrender. Remember that one time I had to arrest that guy when he only bought all of the fertilizers? And they told me to arrest him?! That was totally evil! I better defect! I surrender!"

 

See...those I do not read. I'm a story junkie. And those bore the **** out of me.

I'll look it over... sometime. For now, I'll take your word.

Others have mentioned the ministries, and I've never found you to be intentionally misleading in regards to SW info. You definitely put your own unique spin on that info, lol, but you use that info to support your larger points.

Are those things Canon? Have they been contradicted yet? I never seen mention of those things as Canon.

I've been going by story textual evidence....all of them that have come out so far regardless of medium.

Rogue One did not seem to me to portray the RA as a governing body. So that is a little surprising to me. Doesn't seem to fit the narrative well.

Sent from my Moto X-Wing

 

Stymi

As Jello pointed out, in the NEU the Rebel Alliance is described as basically being a government-in-exile. The structures are obviously fairly new in Rogue One, as evidenced by the nature of the Rebel Council meeting. It's worth noting that Mon Mothma wasn't unable to commit the Alliance to act, but unwilling as she was fearful of breaking up their newly found unity. All of this goes out the window post-Alderaan & Yavin, as the Alliance is fully awakened to the Empire's intentions and starts to act in a uniform manner.

--Adm. Nick

 

The Western version is entirely correct as well, "I am one with God and God is with me."

 

For Vergere the force was one yes but it didn't take sides and was a more encompassing thing than the spirit of a shaman.