Bleeding Hearts call Anakin a mass murderer

He used his saver thing to hack them up right? I mean come on thats gotta say something. Using a melee weapon is a pretty intimate way to murder someone. It implies extreme anger. What better way to channel that rage than with a saver? If he had been cool headed and calm he could have picked them off from a distance with his phaser. just my take on it.

 

"he has many folks believing that Anakin's actions were not a slip into darkness but a justifiable reaction to the situation."
No you're missing the point of this argument. We don't disagree that killing the Tuskens was a slip into darkness...we disagree on WHY it was a slip into darkness. I believe it was wrong because he let his emotions get out of control. Way out of control. He acted out of pure anger and hatred. You say it was wrong because he killed a bunch of animals. I don't believe the act of killing them was wrong, merely the pure hatred and emotion he let loose, which a Jedi is supposed to have under control.

 

Indeed I do my learned friend.

 

The rationalization of killing tusken women and children because of the actions of others, and because they "are only animals," is sick. The taking of any innocent life (human, ape, etc.) is senseless.

I believe that animals may be killed for use as sustenance, but I didn't see Anakin making jerky out of the Tuskens to feed the people of Tatooine.

He murdered them plain and simple. The scene beautifully displays him losing his control and subsequent loss to the dark side.

I am sure some of my "liberal commie" comrades out there would agree with me

 

DARTH VADER: "I'd like a tuskenburger value meal to go please. And deathstar-size it please."

 

This debate is going nowhere. Sorry I have to abandon you 0b|-Wan. I agree with you, but I just get sick of arguing the same points over and over. I'm just gonna agree to disagree with the "commie liberals". Besides, I'd rather not get too upset because I might start saying stupid **** that could get me in trouble here.

 

The rationalization of killing tusken women and children because of the actions of others, and because they "are only animals," is sick. The taking of any innocent life (human, ape, etc.) is senseless.

Okay tell me this AGGIE_WAN_KENOBI.

1. One man kills 5 men, 5 women and 5 kids because one of the men killed his mother. How many years in prison do you give him?

2. Another man kills 5 male wolves, 5 female wolves and 5 child wolves because one of the wolves killed his mother. How many years in prison do you give him?

Like it or not there is a clear distinction in how "bad" the above crimes.

I believe that Padme thinks that what Anakin did comes under category 2 - remember everything that she has heard about the Tuskens points to them being animals. Thus I find it believable that she forgives Anakin for what he did because the majority of people could overlook something from category 2, very few could do so from category 1.

 

Anakin's actions must be the result of a reaction to a situation to which we can all relate. Otherwise, the audience will not be capable of forgiving him in ROTJ. But I do suspect that Palpatine will greatly influence Anakin's thinking in Episode III. Anakin's best murders are yet to be seen.

 

foxbatkllr: I agree with you as well. I think this is very important because it also serves to explain why Padme forgives Anakin.

If what he did was the equivalent of killing humans then I would find it very hard to believe that Padme would forgive him.

And we have to remember that everything Padme hears and sees about the Tuskens points to them being animals.

 

"And we have to remember that everything Padme hears and sees about the Tuskens points to them being animals. "

Last time I took biology, I remember something about humans being animals, too. Just like Tuskens.

As for your previous question, I think his actions have more to do with morality than law. IMO, both your questions are wrong. Obviously the first has more of an impact, but nevertheless, both options are immoral.

BTW, what was the original topic we started arguing about

EDIT: Ah thank you so much Jar Jar. You better be careful though, you may get branded as a liberal commie from those who disagree with our similar opinions.

 

So it's right to slaughter the Tuskens because they are animals, forgetting the fact that they while primitives, they have all the same advanced characteristics as any human and as much right to exist as you and I do? Let me say now that your argument holds no water.

Many tuskens may be savage, and I very much agree that those responsible for the crime should be punished, but Anakin killed them all! He tries to justify the fact later by saying "they are LIKE animals", but in his heart he knows that it is not true and that he overeacted. I don't know a kind way to say this so I will be blunt:

I think, and this is my opinion, that George Lucas paralelled Anakin's mass murder to the Nazi holocaust.

They too reasoned that Jews, Gypsies, gays, and the mentally ill/retarded were sub humans and deserved to be seperated from normal society. Eventually this mentality led to the death camps. One day, Anakin will be a leader of the entire galaxy, second only to the Emperor himself. I feel Lucas is setting up in this film a mentality for the future Anakin. A future that is filled with hate, and a part of that hate is genocidal.

But who knows yet?

edit: Fixed my quote so that it matches the movie dialougue.

 

the law, of course, is the final word on morality. [/sarcasm]
if the tuskens are such savages then why did they not kill luke in anh? it looked like they weren't even planning on it. they knocked him out, then dragged him to some level ground and raided his speeder for goods. they're survivors. they're simple, but they're still people.
here's a real life analogy that comes real close:
is it right to kill everyone in the middle east because some people from the middle east demolished the twin towers and everyone inside them?
however you answer that question, you probably answer this one the same way.
i say no. i don't kill bugs unless they're a threat to my health (mosquitos, flies, roaches)

 

2. Another man kills 5 male wolves, 5 female wolves and 5 child wolves because one of the wolves killed his mother. How many years in prison do you give him?

Does a wolf wear clothes? Use tools? Live in tents they constructed? Use some common sense.

If my dog built her own house and started wearing clothes she stitched, or was able to change the oil in the car, I'd probably think twice about smacking her ass, let alone slaughtering a few of her kind.

I guess American settlers were doing us a favor by ridding us of all the native Americans who weren't willing to trade or talk to them. That seems to fit the definition of "animal" being thrown around here.

 

"if the tuskens are such savages then why did they not kill luke in anh? it looked like they weren't even planning on it."

They had to have been planning to bring Luke to their camp like they did with Shmi. If they weren't planning this, why wouldn't they just leave him behind? Do you think they were planning to take him to a hospital or something? Or take him home?

All Tuskens do is kill, attack, abduct, and pillage. That's it. I don't care if they can domesticate animals, or walk/ride single-file. They never attempt to be peaceful with any other humanoids. I'm not saying Anakin should have killed them all, he shouldn't have killed any since he's a Jedi. I just think all of the male Tuskens deserve to die

 

Does a wolf wear clothes? Use tools? Live in tents they constructed? Use some common sense.

I'm talking about how Tuskens are viewed in the PT by the people in the PT.

Tuskens are the looked at as the equivalent of wolves in the PT. This is evident from the words of Lars, the novel, and from their actions.

And that explains why Padme can forgive Anakin as well. They are not viewed as equals, much like wolves are not viewed as equals.

And how do you judge "worth"? Is it simply because they can dress? Because they can wear clothes?

As Qui-Gon said: "The ability to speak does not make you intelligent". The ability to dress does not mean you are not an animal in the SW universe.

 

"i just think all of the male tuskens deserve to die"

well, by that logic, when viewed from an outside intelligent lifeform, all male humans on this planet deserve to die, because if one were to generalize, one would conclude that all humans do is rape, pillage, plunder, kill, maim, destroy, cause to extinction, and all for no good reason.
or, on a smaller scale, look at wolverines or lions, or alligators. they seem to do a whole lot of killing, in fact it's their very nature, but we don't slaughter all of their males just because one of them kills a human.
cats, too, exist to kill, yet people keep them as pets.
what makes humans so much better than animals?
the ability to rationalize does not make you intelligent.

 

I think the point Obi is trying to make is this: Can you murder animals or just humans? And if you look at something as a animal and kill it, did you murder it or slaughter it? I think it is how the Tuskens are perceived. If you see them as human, then Anakin did murder them. If as animals, all he did was slaughter them. It is a very fine line however you look at it.

But what about a trial? Or justice? Isn't that what a Jedi stands for? But by doing what he did, he went against all that he was trained to do and from that he is now plunging into darkness?

 

Ok, there are some pretty off-color analogies being made here:

First of all, that the Tuskens are animals. Of course they are, in the sense that all human beings are animals. But they are sentient. They do have all the prerequisites of cognisant PEOPLE.

That said, what do they do with those abilities? Raid and kill. Is this a generalization? Well, yes. But is it a fair generalization? HELL YES!

Saying the other tuskens should not be held accountable for the crimes of thier bretheren is a nice-sounding argument, but it simply doesn't apply. Saying a Tusken will grow up to be a raider is not like saying a hispanic will grow up to be a drug-dealer. This is because if the Tuskens are anything like the savage tribes of human history they mimic, they bring up thier families with very different moral codes than ours, and secondly, because the latter statement is not only untrue, it is not only true for a vast minority of cases that are statistically indistinguishable from other racial groups. You can be pretty sure those kids are going to grow up to be like thier fathers and mothers, and carry on the old raiding tradition.

However, we have to be 'bigger than that' in terms of dealing with these people. Anakin proved he was not. Forgiveness is not always a better choice-- sometimes it is practically a must.

 

Tuskens are far from animals. They are sub-human but are above beasts. They have a religion, language, culture and know how to use tools and construct homes. They may have deserved what Anakin did to them, but that does not make them animals. For all we know, Tuskens could be primitive humans, no one has ever seen their bodies under their robes and fellow Tuskens can only see each other when having sex!

 

quote:

...oh give me a break. Killing the Tusken puppies is the same as killing the children of Nazis? Get the * out of here. Don't turn this into a holocaust debate. The Tusken Raiders do not represent the Jews.


Its called an ANALOGY, Obi. Look it up. Oh, wait let me guess, you LOVED TPM.

 

I didn't read this long thread but...

If you missed that the Tusken slaughter was flat out morally wrong, then you missed one of the bigger points of the movie and THE ENTIRE SAGA!

 

That people would think the senseless slaughter of Tuskens is justifiable is beyond me. That they would possibly think George Lucas believes what Anakin did was justifiable is equally baffling.

If we keep it within the context of the SW universe, ask yourself if you honestly think Qui-Gon would have done what Anakin did. How about Luke? Leia? Yoda? (Or does Yoda not count because he's an "animal" and not human?)

The answer is a resounding "NO," because it is an evil, destructive, senseless, arrogant act. You need to watch the OT again and pay CLOSE ATTENTION to what OWK and Yoda say about the Force.

 

Exaclty!

When Lars' dad talks about how they're animals even though they walk like men...

that's called racism (our real world equivalent) and Lucas is obviously speaking out against it.

They very fact that the slaughter is his first big step towards the dark side is a slight indication that its a bad thing.

 

I think one of the major flaws in the arguement that the Tuskens are "animals" is that some people seem to feel that because it is the belief of the characters it must be true. This certainly isn't the case.

Based on our limited view of the culture of the non-Tusken Tatooine (that is to say the cities of Mos Espa and Mos Eisley, the moisture farms, the Jawa's and Jabba's fortress) it is clear that slavery is pretty much condoned by the people of the planet. Watto owns slaves. The Lars are perfectly willing to buy a slave (and according to the novel at any rate Klieg only released Shmi because he was in love with her). Jabba certainly has slaves. Now to us slavery is an ambomination no question. But to the good, plain people of Tatooine it is not an issue (that we have seen). I doubt we are supposed to side with the Tatooine's on the issue of slavery now...

What I am saying is that the perceptions of the onscreen characters do not automatically turn out to be correct in our own view. It is perfectly possible to my mind at least that the moisture farmers are like the 16th century Scottish planters in Ulster - good people, hard working and morally upright, but also deeply bigoted racists with no feeling towards the original owners of the land other than contempt and fear. I'll admit I am making two big assumptions (albeit supported to a degree by the novels) here - that the Sand People are aboriginal and that they have been displaced by the moisture farmers - but neither is unreasonable. The Tusken Raiders are living in some of the most hellish conditions possible and they are clearly not fully adapted to it (they wear bandages and heavy clothing to protect themselves from the sun and goggles to protect their eyes) and in consequence they must be considered more desperate than the Native Americans or Gaelic Irish who could at least fall back on habitable terrritory. The Tuskens have rocks and sand. This is by no means an excuse, but I'm certainly prepared to try and understand why they act the way they do instead of screaming savage at them.

Yours

Ross

 

zeekveerko, I guess you've never seen the Star Wars movies. Every single time we see Tusken males they're either stealing something, or shooting at something, or killing someone. We saw the women and children and they're not acting as barbaric as the men. Face it, the Tuskens guys are bad.