Lit Is the Rebel Alliance a dictatorship in canon?

Also, I thought I was the one who said they were a government in exile not Jello who maintains they weren't.

 

They weren't a government in exile because Mon Mothma, or Bail, or whoever, didn't vote against Palpatine. They could have abstained or maybe walked out. They voted for him to become Emperor.
Any legitimacy that they would have had to be a government in exile disappeared the moment they voted for Emperor Palpatine.

 

All but Bail were part of the Petition of 2000.

Which to me is confusing because it's clear George Lucas didn't pay attention to the EU as that would mean every Senator, INCLUDING the Separatists were voting against Palps.

 

They can't even keep their own novelization sync with the movies.
*face Palm*

 

Novelizations are usually written during the early stages of a movies production off of unfinished material. That's why there are discrepancies. Word of God is that the movie takes precedence on anything that's disputed.

 

It's a bad idea to novelize a movie.
Movie adaption of a book is fine though.

 

Why? That seems like an arbitrary standard.

 

It just is.
It can't be explained.
But look at the quality/history of novels from films and films to novels and you may understand.

 

I generally don't like Zombie games.

I just found a Zombie game I really like.

It's pointless and needlessly closeminded to say that an entire subsection of anything can't be good.

 

And it's not just the movie telling us that the Empire is bad either, their actions back this up. The "Kick The Dog" trope may be a bit of a cliche, but it exists for a reason, and in A New Hope alone the Empire kicks many metaphorical dogs.

comradepitrovsky DarthInvictus Charlemagne19 Taosim, Western Religion, to me Chirrut's "I am one with the Force and the Force is with me" mantra is about one thing: Faith. He is reaffirming his faith in the Force. I see it as being no different from Obi-wan telling Luke "The Force will be with you." and Luke's faith in the Force is what lead to him turning off his targeting computer and destroying the Death Star.

You're avoiding the question. The specific example was "What if the Empire tried to destroy all life in the universe?" (A bit over the top, I know, but this is a Sci Fi work were planet killers are common, and some Sith like Kreia or Dark Empire Palpatine have arguably had omnicidal motives). You reaffirmed that nothing, nothing, ever justified surrendering and defection in your mind. I asked you why you thought those were greater evils than destroying all life in the universe. And in response you . . . rambled about someone defecting because they arrested a guy for buying fertilizer? What does that have to do with anything? We're not talking about someone surrendering because they saw a spooky shadow or defecting because their boss was slightly mean to them, we are talking about the destruction of worlds and/or the universe.

Most people would say that while killing is bad, sometimes it's acceptable, such as in self defense. Surrender is usually seen as bad, but what if surrender would save more lives? Defecting is seen as bad, but what if the people you're "betraying" are planning to do something unspeakable? "Only a Sith deals in absolutes!" I'm sorry if it seems like I'm beating a dead horse, I'll stop bringing it up after this, but I deeply, truly, want to know your reasoning. Why do you think that surrendering or defecting can never, ever be possibly justified, even if the alternative is destroying the universe?

 

Okay.

What if, the universe needed to be destroyed to start a new big bang or a new god or whatever you believe in? This is the only answer I can give you if you insist on using "what if the goal your superior to do is to destroy the universe?"

following:

If one signed up for the armed forces, it is not a joke. It is a promise to defend whatever that armed forces stand for. You can't just say everyone, defect when you think the armed force you are serving is evil! Follow your own conscience! One your conscience told you to serve. Two why do you think there are military laws regarding awol, treason? You get rightly executed for surrendering or defecting. Three. You know what would save even more life? Disband all military forces. If someone comes in and says you are now going to live in such and such a way, say "yes sir! Jah jawohl I am indeed a baka". See? Live saved.
Where did serving and no surrender in battle get connected with personal self defense?

I am seriously not avoiding the question. I am saying if one were a member of a military, you can't seek all those excuses for situations where you are allowed to surrender/defect. If you do, you know the first thing you would do when the battle got tough? You would defect and surrender. You saved yourself and your family, but guess who else got killed? And which language are you planning to teach your children?

Is this still on topic for this thread?

 

Since we were also talking about novelizations, Chirrut's mantra, and the meaning of the opening crawl, I felt it was relevant (it deals with morality after all). But I can tell we will never convince each other, so in the interest of wrapping things up I will say two things and then never bring this up again: The right thing is not always the legal thing, and although there are different military laws regarding treason, there are also laws about how "just following orders" is not a valid defense, ie some things are inexcusable.

 

agreed for wrapping up.

 

And the most nonsensical post of the day award goes to Darth Grumpy Cat!

Sent from my Moto X-Wing

 

Picks up award. Thank you academy.

Thank you. I would like to thank -- fanfare to tell Mu to get off stage.

And Another-- Audio shuts off. Deathtroopers get Mu and he is forcibly taken off stage.

 

According to the Visual Encyclopedia, Bail was canonically part of the Petition

 

Regarding the Petition of 2000, and the small size of the Senate - maybe many of the signers were not Senators, but people lower in the chain - representatives, planetary governors, etc.

That allows the Petition to work without invoking the possibility of Separatist senators signing it.

 

The novelizations trump lesser sources, though. There, Mon Mothma says Bail has to play the role of a die-hard Palpatinist until they can get some traction against him.

A lot of fans had issues with the A-Canon, B-Canon, and C-Canon tree Lucasfilm set up but it was something they took seriously.

Sort of like Starkiller.

 

Palpatine even Dark Empire I'd argue isn't omnicidal he has a god complex yes but he doesn't want to kill everything just bend it to his will.

Vitiate on the other hand is omnicidal.

Also the Legends tier system was somewhat difficult to explain to the uninitiated I admit but it worked and was elegant as a system.

 

Since the novelization is no longer canon, I'd assume that Bail being a member of the Petition is accurate.

 

Given the Revenge of the Sith novelization was overseen by Lucas, I'm not so sure.

 

Problem is - it's scenes that either were deleted from the movie, or had dialogue entirely introduced by Stover.

Just as Anakin's lines on Mustafar to the Separatists "The resemblance is deceptive" "I am your reward- you don't find me handsome" and so on, are presumed to be Legends until proven otherwise, so Padme's words to Bail "You stayed off that list for good reason" may not be part of the newcanon either:


Bail couldn't hear Padme over the din, but he could read her lips.
So this is how liberty dies, she was saying to herself. With cheering, and applause.
"We can't let this happen!" Bail lurched to his feet. "I have to get to my pod—we can still enter a motion—"
"No." Her hand seized his arm with astonishing strength, and for the first time since he'd arrived, she looked straight into his eyes. "No, Bail, you can't enter a motion. You can't. Fang Zar has already been arrested, and Tundra Dowmeia, and it won't be long until the entire Delegation of the Two Thousand are declared enemies of the state. You stayed off that list for good reason; don't add your name by what you do today."
"But I can't just stand by and watch—"
"You're right. You can't just watch. You have to vote for him."
"What?"
"Bail, it's the only way. It's the only hope you have of remaining in a position to do anyone any good. Vote for Palpatine. Vote for the Empire. Make Mon Mothma vote for him too. Be good little Senators. Mind your manners and keep your heads down. And keep doing... all those things we can't talk about. All those things I can't know. Promise me, Bail."
"Padme, what you're talking about—what we're not talking about—it could take twenty years! Are you under suspicion? What are you going to do?"
"Don't worry about me," she said distantly. "I don't know I'll live that long."

 

That logic is stupid.

 

It's the logic of survival - surviving long enough while still under the Emperor's eyes, to get a rebellion off the ground.

 

Thing is Bail is a pretty moral guy I don't think he'd want to hand his signature to things he considers objectionable even if it benefits him and his cause in the long run.