Are these all of the imperial warlords?

Brent_Bass:

It's all rather open to interpretation, really.

So says those who depend on the warping of canon to fit their own preconceptions of Dark Empire and Thrawn's legitimacy.

 

Well, I don't see how that fits into things. Dark Empire and Thrawn's legitimacy are what they are. It's all pretty clear and has been addressed by LFL through various sources such as the original source (Dark Empire, the Thrawn Trilogy, etc.), reference sources (Dark Empire Sourcebook, Thrawn Trilogy Sourcebook, Dark Empire Handbook, etc.) and general refernece sources (Essential Chronology, Essential Guide to Characters, etc.)

There's only so far one can use the "CPOV" excuse to warp things like the Dark Empire Sourcebook, the Thrawn Trilogy, Dark Empire, et. al. to spin some aspect before it becomes inaccurate or untrue.

 

Thanas:

The only part from which I view Palpy as legitimate is from Episode I to ROTJ, and from the point where the Imperial starfleet swears allegiance to him in DE to his death in Empire's End.

I don't know what I would have done without your view.

Thanas:

Because at that point, the powers of the empire relinquished control over to him. Like they did with Thrawn. Or Pellaeon.

That does not matter. Nation-states are legally defined entities. There was no legal method of succession. The Galactic Empire existed from (presumably) Star Wars: Episode III to Empire's End. The one and only Galactic Emperor reigned and lived until Empire's End.

Ergo, without a legal method of succession, all other usurpers were just that. Thrawn and Isard and (clone?) Pestage simply had more of the Empire's military and civil administration and territory answering to their command than other warlords. Legally, there all usurpers without mandate or right to do so. The opinion of the usurpers or the average citizen as to who was legitimate is irrelevent. Appealing to that is Appealing to Popularity and Authority and is a logical fallacy.

Thanas:

You say that Palpatine survived. But this was unknwon to the galaxy.

Appeals to Popularity and Authority.

The Galactic Emperor's legal reign was continuous.

Thanas:

We have Captain Pellaeon declaring that the emperor is dead (ROTJ),

Appeal to Authority. Pelleaon is neither a coroner, nor is he authorized to indicate any legal succession in the Galactic Empire. Not to mention his order to retreat at Endor was illegal.

Thanas:

and we have Skywalker claiming that the Emperor is dead in Empire's End.

Which proves what exactly?

Thanas:

Both times the emperor is proclaimed to be legally dead. Both times the Moffs hand over power to somebody they beleive in. Now are these people legitimate successors of Palpatine?

No. They have no constitutional mandate to make such decisions. The Moffs under Palpatine were military officers who performed as executors of political and military authority in Imperial sectors who answered to civilian authorities.

I suppose if the CENTCOM and various base commanders around the world of U.S. Armed Forces have the right to overthrow the government, if they reach this desire by popular consent?

Or even the Governors of the 50 States, are they, by popular consent, legitimately empowered to overthrow the government?

Legitimacy and government are legal questions. Your appeals to popularity and atuhority notwithstanding, none of this changes the fact that the legal reign of Palpatine continued over the Galactic Empire until Empire's End.

Functional control of the Empire? Sure, for much of the limbo between Return of the Jedi and Dark Empire, the Galactic Empire's territory and various resources were under the control of illegal and illegitimate usurpers. During that time, the Emperor Palpatine was still and always had been the only legitimate ruler of the Empire.

Thanas:

You might hold the opinion that an empire dies with its ruler. However, most empires survive without him. The case of Octavian and Vestasian is a prime example.

Neither Octavian nor any of his relatives
named Vestasian as their successor. Yet there is no doubt that when he was nominated by the Senate and when the legions swore loyalty to him, he was the legitimate successor.

Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus, and Titus Flavius Vespasianus are a false analogy.

Firstly, the Senate was empowered to recognize the Emperor. Octavianus was given the titles Princeps, Imperator, and Consul for Life by the Senate, as well as being named the famous Augustus.

The Galactic Senate, the Sectorial governments, the Moffs and Grand Moffs, the Imperial Starfleet--none of these entities had the authority the

 

Suppose Palpatine choose to strike off on his own and leave the 'old Empire' behind and create his new Sith, Dark Empire? (essentially abandoning the Imperials outside the Deep Core)

We should probably ask someone well versed in military law if Pellaeon indeed had the authority to order a retreat.

Wouldn't that give whoever's ruling the non Deep Core empire a bit of legitimacy?

 

Just to throw out my .02...

One of the Rebel Alliance's primary stated reasons for fighting the Empire is that "it is not legal".

In that Palpatine engineered the Clone Wars in order to get his military in place, then played his pawns into giving him emergency powers to use said army. He was not legally in control of the Empire because he siezed power through illegal means, then dissolved the Senate and vested power in his appointees.

However, he was the de facto ruler of the galaxy until Endor, after which he didn't rule much of anything until his re-awakening. The number of ships he obtained from a throneworld nobody knew he had was impressive, but he wasn't the de facto ruler of the galaxy again until most of the way through the original Dark Empire (or possibly even his next awakening during Shadow Hand), after the quasi-Imperials wiped each other out over Coruscant.

 

*edited for redundancy--I've said my piece*

 

Didn't Pelleaon order the Deep Core abandoned after the BFC?

 

Well, it appeared a few officers didn't obey him, or more didn't, because Daala later on set up shop there.

 

Yes, Rogue Womp Rat, Pellaeon moved out of the Deep Core and back out to the fortress worlds shortly after Daala's resignation.

 

One of the Rebel Alliance's primary stated reasons for fighting the Empire is that "it is not legal".

The Alliance to Restore the Republic has a tenuous grasp on legal matters, apparently.

 

As I recall, a nation that does not protect or recognize basic human rights isn't considered legal under international law.

Also, were the Star Wars universe to have the United Nations in it, Palpatine's regime would have been illegal as soon as he started committing genocide (was Camaas the first instance?).

 

I wouldn't be sure if the our international law applies in the GFFA.

So if the GFFA carried out Alpha Red, would that make the GFFA an illegal government?

 

lol, no, no the U.N. has no charter in the Star Wars universe. I'm just expressing that it isn't unheard of for a government such as Palpatine's to be viewed as illegal through external sources.

I'd guess that the Alliance viewed the Empire as illegal within to context of the laws of the Old Republic which they were attempting to restore.

 

From the Dark Empire Sourcebook, from a New Republic textfile released to the holonet in the weeks following an Imperial siege of Caprioril, a New Republic Sector Capital.

Why Do We Fight the Empire?

1. Because it is not legal. As a government, it betrays the trust given it as successor to the Old Republic. It is unresponsive to the wishes of the beings it governs. It ignores their needs and oppresses them when they resist its tyranny. As such, it invalidates the purpose of a galactic government they initially installed: to serve the sapient life of the galaxy. There have been no new elections since that of President Palpatine. Emperor Palpatine has no legal authority.

Emphasis was there in the original text. There's more, if you want it.

 

[eye_roll]

The Alliance saying something does not make it true. Appeal to Authority Fallacy, anyone?

The Charter of the Empire was violated by the Rebellion, not the other way around. Palpatine legally amended his position, and the virtue of being a despot does not, in of itself, violate the law.

All in all, that document is a poor-quality collection of lame-brained Rebel propoganda.

The Alliance shouldn't have gone at the legal point; they have much more of a moral pedestal/argument they can mount.

 

Actually, they did that too.

2. Because it is not moral. As a dictatorship without genuine accountability, it uses force to maintain its reign of terror over the citizenry. It levies taxes without fair and due respect for the abilities and needs of its subjects. It inflicts suffering to maintain a war economy without parallel in history. It discriminates against non-Humans. It destroys and wantonly pollutes the worlds that inhabit its sphere of domination. It is an object of hatred and fear to all who live in its sphere of influence.

3. Because it is not socially responsible. As a force of totalitarianism, it suppresses free inquiry and communication. It arbitrarily censors and murders all who do not accept the standards of normality inflicted by the "New Order". It by force tries to erase the sacred diversity that we have been provided with by nature. It has banned or eradicated histories and cultural practices of numerous societies. It has a perverse hunger for conformity.

4. Because it is not tolerant. As a force of conquest, it invades and enslaves civilizations that lie outside its natural sphere for its own greed and lust for power. It maintains a state of permanant war to expant its realm, regardless of political, cultural, or philosophical concerns of those involved. It is a threat to all.

5. Because it must be stopped. As a military entity, it has been defeated in the past, can be defeated presently, and must be so defeated whenever and wherever possible. The Empire has lost its top leaders. The fight against it will continue to ensure the freedom of all who call this galaxy home and who cherish the freedom of the Old Republic. It is the responsibility of all freedom-loving beings to take up arms against the Empire.

We of the New Republic are pledged to end this long night of misery. We are pledged to defeat and destroy the Empire and restore the Republic to the galaxy in fact and name. Those who are currently under the threat of despotism and anarchy know this: the New Republic is commited to justice and peace and we will fight to free you. Join us if you can.

DO NOT ALLOW THE DARKNESS TO RISE AGAIN.

(signed)

Mon Mothma, Chandrila
Princess Leia Organa Solo, Alderaan
Borsk Fey'lya, Kothlis
Admiral Ackbar, Mon Calamari
Jenssar SoBillies, Duro
Sian Tevv, Sullust
Verrinnefra B'thog Indriummsegh, Elom
Doman Beruss, Corellia
Senator Garm Bel Iblis, Corellia
Kerrithrarr, Kashyyyk
Kahr'corvh clan Khim'bar, Honoghr

Take from that what you will, it's propaganda, but I would surmise that it's highly effective propaganda. Both sides had their propaganda engines running full tilt during the war, and both sides had some worthwhile arguments. The Rebels had a real problem with things like Alderaan, Ghorman, etc., while the more virtuous Imperials had a real problem with these left-wing militants blowing up things and killing their men, plus the whole anarchy and disorder thing that rebellions are known to cause.

While I'm sure that certain individuals within the Empire were every bit as nasty as the Rebels made them out to be (Tarkin, Sate Pestage, Krennel, etc.) the average Imperial (Pellaeon, Piett, Veers, Covell) was merely a soldier or sailor doing his job.

Though I've not seen (or don't remember) this Charter of the Empire, where might I find it?

 

Response to the Post made by Lord_Darth_Bob





/I don't know what I would have done without your view. /

******************

Why thank you. Glad I could make your day.


*****************

/That does not matter. Nation-states are legally defined entities. There was no legal method of succession. The Galactic Empire existed from (presumably) Star Wars: Episode III to Empire's End. The one and only Galactic Emperor reigned and lived until Empire's End.

Ergo, without a legal method of succession, all other usurpers were just that. Thrawn and Isard and (clone?) Pestage simply had more of the Empire's military and civil administration and territory answering to their command than other warlords. Legally, there all usurpers without mandate or right to do so. The opinion of the usurpers or the average citizen as to who was legitimate is irrelevent. Appealing to that is Appealing to Popularity and Authority and is a logical fallacy. /

*****************

You are again making the conclusion that Palpatine was the Empire. Which is not true.
The fact that there was ?no legal method of succession?, as you state it, is actually
wrong. See the historical analogy down below.
No mandate could be given. Simply because the Emperor did not hand out a mandate, does not mean no one else can.

******************


/Appeals to Popularity and Authority.

The Galactic Emperor's legal reign was continuous. /
*****************

Actually, you are simply stating something without an argument to back it up.

***********************
/Appeal to Authority. Pelleaon is neither a coroner, nor is he authorized to indicate any legal succession in the Galactic Empire. Not to mention his order to retreat at Endor was illegal. /
*******************

1. The Emperor was declared dead by the rulers of Corusant, presumably after they saw the Death Star blow up. (Remember that propaganda show in one of the X-wing Novels?)
2. If you are saying that the highest officials have no right to declare the Emperor dead under the following conditions a) the vessel he was on blew up b) there was no contact with the Emperor within the next few weeks, and they have evidence that he was on the Death Star, is just plain hilarious. That would be like
?Oh yes, the ship he was on blew up, but we can?t declare him to be dead?
Another historical analogy:

Emperor Valens died in battle, but they could not retrieve his body due to the enemy holding the field. But they saw two things ? his unit being cut off, and that he did not return. They also knew that the Goths were not holding him prisoner.
So they figured he was dead, and the surviving lead officer ordered word to be sent to the capital cities. Soon, a new emperor was named by the soldiers. There you have it?. Same situation here.
*********************
/and we have Skywalker claiming that the Emperor is dead in Empire's End.


Which proves what exactly? /

*********************
Same point as above.

The Goths claimed they had killed the Emperor, the romans believed it.

************************

/No. They have no constitutional mandate to make such decisions. The Moffs under Palpatine were military officers who performed as executors of political and military authority in Imperial sectors who answered to civilian authorities. /
**************
Clearly, you have mistaken something here. It clear that by the time Thranw was chosen, there was no political power in the hands of the civillian authorities. The senate was dissolved in ANH, with Tarkin proclaiming that (translation from german) ??.. the regional governors now receive direct control and free reign over their territories?.? Furthermore, by the time of the fall of coruscant, the moffs were in poiticla power. This means that the political power wielded by the legislative (senate) was merged with the military arm of the executive, i.e. the moffs and governers..
****************


/I suppose if the CENTCOM and various base commanders around the world of U.S. Armed Forces have the right to ove

 

Given Palpatine's actions post Endor, I wonder why he wanted everyone to believe that he was dead?

 

That is one thing that bugs me as well. I mean, at that point the empire still has the strategical superiority, it has a hug enumerical advantage, is still seen as the legitimate rulers to the galaxy....

the only explanation I can find are either
a) He's dumb. Very dumb.
b)the transfer of his mind stressed him too much, or took a very looong time...

Since a cannot qualify, I believe b to be true... unless the speculation that he wasn't really Palpy but a mad clone brainwashed by the likes of Sedriss is true. (But that's just a speculation...)

 

Personally, I prefer to just quietly ignore Dark Empire, on the grounds that it was a load of tossycock. Out of interest, who were the other Grand Admirals apart from Thrawn?

SG

 

On Grand Admirals and others

 

The Rebels had a real problem with things like Alderaan, Ghorman, etc., while the more virtuous Imperials had a real problem with these left-wing militants blowing up things and killing their men, plus the whole anarchy and disorder thing that rebellions are known to cause.

Actually, the Rebels were a Right-Wing organization. Not only were they reactionaries, but the whole blowing things up, creating anarchy and spreading disorder is also typical of right-wing groups, not left-wing organizations. Just wanted to clear that up.



One of the problems here is that it seems like everyone is assuming that there can only be ONE government. Throughout the history of the galaxy, there have always been a large number of independent nation-states and intergalactic governments. While, as far as we know, Palpatine did not use legal means to come to power, and should have been stripped of his authority at the very latest when he dissolved the Senate, he was over time recognized as the leader of a separate, non-Old-Republic nation which constituted a large portion of the Old Republic, and which was rapidly spreading into independent nations around the galaxy. The Rebels didn't see him as legitimate, and so formed their own organization. As soon as they had authority over some area of ground (or, for that matter, space) which did not claim to be subject to the empire, then they were an independent government, with beurocracy, military, and all. Their claim to nationhood was further cemented by the foundation of the Alliance of Free Planets.

After Palpatine's "death" at Endor, the Empire as it was before immediately ceased to be. In the words of Han Solo "After the Battle of Endor, any idiot with a Star Destroyer under his command could create their own Empire" Some of these empires were small (like the one which existed around Kashyyyk) and others were relatively large (like the Empire that Isard controlled at the beginning of her reign) All of these Empires were legitimate, because they were all independent and did not try to overthrow an existing government using the justification that they were the person or people who had a rightful claim to whatever throne or position they were trying to usurp.

Sometimes these mini-empires would band together under a common banner or a single individual, creating larger states or federations. When a group of "loyalist" moffs came together with common goals in mind, then they were taking their own resources and/or nations and forging a new nation-state. They, as well as other independend captains, admirals, and moffs (who could be considered warlords) then banded together to create an even larger nation group under Thrawn. Thrawn was legitimate because he created a new nation, he did not try to take an old one. While many of these warlords might have been illegal under Alliance of Free Planets or Imperial law, they were independent and sovereign over their own domain, and so did not have to answer to any charges of being illegal or illegitimate. The Empire of Pellaeon is not the Empire of Thrawn, Palpatine, or any of the deep core warlords. It is a different and independent nation. Just because all of the hundreds or thousands of warlord states each called themselves Imperial did not mean that they were the successors to the Empire, nor that they had any authority over the defunct and dissolved nation which it once was.

When Palpatine returned from the dead, he was still the legitimate leader over his old Empire, due to the fact that he was not dead and there was no legal provision for authority to pass on to another in the event of his death or disappearance. The problem was that he was not sovereign over any of the warlords who had declared their independence and carved up the galaxy. He held sway over Byss and not much else, and so he needed to convince the independent warlord states to give up their independence and return to his banner. Had Thrawn still been alive at this time in his mini-empire in the outer rim, then he would not have been a subject

 

Actually, the Rebels were a Right-Wing organization. Not only were they reactionaries, but the whole blowing things up, creating anarchy and spreading disorder is also typical of right-wing groups, not left-wing organizations. Just wanted to clear that up.

Actually, their philosophy might be seen as more left wingby some people.

Hippy-ish and airy fairy.

Also, while right wing groups are better known for becoming terrorist organizations because of such infamous organizations as Al Queda, left wing groups are certainly not immune to becoming such loathsome organizations. Look at eco terrorists and what not. They've burned down facilities that belong to big corporations because said corporations are tools of the capitalist agenda that currently rules the world and destroy Mother Earth. They cause millions of dollars worth of damage each year but they don't get as much publicity as an organization like Al Queda.

I daresay that even the unabomber who believed the government wastrampling over the people was aleft winger. Thinkig that one group or another is immune to becoming a terrorist organization is adangerous mistake.

The reason why C boath identified the Rebels as leftists I think is because traditionally the left wing philosophy(at least here inthe US and other Western nations) has always ont he outside promoted personnel freedom , a smaller military, care of the environment while the right wingers are always seen as those who promote a large military, deals for rich and basically consumption, consumption, consumption. The latter describes the Empire more than the former. Also, the philosophy of theEmpire was the most prevailent and widely accepted philosophy by those who mattered, while that of the Rebellion was on the fringe. So more of the left than the right.

 

With respect, but I disagree.


If Washington was nuked tomorrow (god forbid), and the President is (supposed to be) dead, then the surviving political leaders (congressmen) hold the highest authority. If they elect a new president, he/she is the legitimate ruler.

The Empire is different from the US though.

The Emperor designed it sothat legally, the Galactic Empire would no longer exist after his death. The entire Empire was set up for the aggrandizement of his ego. It was not set up for the people.

 

7-7-7

I stand by my (and Clerks) assumption that the Rebels were left wing, non-authoritarian militants, engaged in a civil war with an authoritarian right-wing monarchy. Typically, in all authoritarian structures, right or left, individual rights fall under the heel of the government, the two most extreme examples being Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. Where they primarily differed was in rhetoric, the average citizen's day-to-day life was little different in one than in the other. However, to the best of my knowledge, right-wing regimes don't tend to assign employment to those under their rule, while left-wing ones do. Right-wing authoritarian regimes let the market determine where workers go, regardless of what's best for the workers, while left-wing regimes place workers where the state is best served, regardless of the worker's well being. The Empire really didn't care what the average citizen did, so long as they didn't cause trouble, interrupt the social norm, or take up arms against it. The Rebels are not completely toward the libertarian end of the spectrum (the opposite end of authoritarianism) but they do fall farther that direction than the Empire. However, their stance on individual rights (especially racism) places them several steps farther left than the corporate-favoring, human-biased Empire.

Though on your other point of the mini-Empires being distict, valid offshoots of Palpatine's Empire, I disagree as well. I've often been known to make the analogy of the pre-Endor Empire being a whole body, whose head was cut off when the Death Star exploded. However, the body attempted to grow a new head (Thrawn) while the old head (Palpatine) tore entire limbs away from the old body in a quest to grow a new one. What evetually resulted was two distinct bodies that were not the same as the original, but neither was as strong as before.

The political situation a few years later was different, the left-wing radicals became more moderate, while the formerly authoritarian Empire body mellowed in may respects. Apparently, mass brutality and cruelty dropped off, though conscription went through the roof, at least until Mt. Tantiss was running. Palpatine's head Empire (with arms) went the other direction, using his own citizens to feed his personal life force, essentially setting itself up as a Dark Side theocracy (another type of authoritarian government) rather than a run of the mill right-wing one.