PT Did Qui Gon have a plan B??

No it doesn't. The Jedi are selfless and act in the best interests of all. They don't prioritize their actions based on the repayment of personal favors.

As I've said, no, that is false.

No, from an objective perspective, that does not in any way make her more deserving of freedom (of freedom, for Christ's sake!) than the "average person." That's an ethically preposterous statement.

 

Good thing Luke didn't know about the those-who-help-Jedi priority list when he sought Vader's redemption.

 

Kindness for putting her son in risk?

That's odd. What is the definition of kindness DD? (Just asking )

Btw I think we maybe beating a dead horse. I see Shmi as self sacrificing. Qui Gon finally gives Shmi some comfort that he'll look out for Anakin. Shmi let go. That's admirable and Anakin knows it. Later when he ran back to her Shmi still tells him not to look back and to be brave.

MJ

 

I'm focusing more on Padme than on the Jedi Order - but it's a basic principle that debts, moral or physical, should be paid, and that paying can sometimes take priority over "ordinary helping of the population as a whole".

Jar Jar, when his life is saved, feels himself "in debt" (life debt) to Qui-Gon, and spends the rest of the movie trying to repay it.

The fact that Shmi is self-sacrificing, and never expects moral debts to her to be paid back, doesn't change the fact that those debts are incurred.

In roleplaying game terms - Shmi is Good. The average person is Neutral. When helping "people in need" - one should prioritise Good people over Neutral people, all other things being equal.

Apparently, there is a way.
I think Qui-Gon explained why they were on Tatooine and why they needed to get to Coruscant - Shmi comprehends how people will suffer (the people of Naboo) if the party don't get there - and Shmi was willing to endure suffering of her own (watching Anakin take part in yet another highly dangerous Podrace) to prevent that, when she understands what's at stake.

 

Shmi showed kindness in both taking in Qui-Gon, Padme and co and giving them food and water.
Water would be especially valuable on a desert planet.
And she also allowed her only son to race so that these strangers would get the parts they need.
And speaking about the race, how many died in that race?
It had to be a fair few. More than half crashed, at least it seemed to me and some of them had to have died.
So Shmi lets her son take part in a race where the fatality rate is something like 20-30%

And that she does all this and does NOT demand a favor in return makes her act even more worthy of repayment.
If someone says "I'll help you but only if you do this for me." compared with someone that helps without asking or expecting a reward. To me, the second person shows much greater kindness and is more deserving of a favor in return.
And for someone that is on the receiving end of that help to think "Well this person did not ASK for anything in return so even tough I could do something, I am not going to."
That makes this person not very nice.

@The_Phantom_Calamari
Tell me, was Leia more "deserving" of freedom than the other prisoners on the DS?
If yes, do you think Luke was morally and ethically wrong to save only her and not the other prisoners?
Would it be morally better if he did nothing?

Do you think that Han was more deserving of freedom than the other prisoners at Jabba's palace?
If yes, was Luke and co morally and ethically wrong to help Han but not the others?

Do you think the films are trying to argue that Luke and the others are morally bad people for only helping some but not everyone?

You keep making this into an either/or. Padme can help Shmi OR she can help all the slaves.
Why can't she free Shmi, as a personal thank you and because she cares about Anakin and this is his mother here. AND she makes an effort to do something about slavery in general.

But as far as the films tell us, Padme did neither.
She did not help Shmi or help the other slaves.
Why is this morally or ethically better?

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

I would think the Shmi showing her the "true worth" of a slave (e.g. a mother who is willing to sacrifice everything for her son, and a boy who at 9 yrs old is basically the best pilot in the galaxy) would help spur some sort of feeling of repayment to that individual, doing what you can to help. In a politicals there was no way Padme could enforce her wishes on Outer Rim worlds.

 

i haven't read the entire thread, so sorry if this was already debated ad nauseam, but whether or not watto loaded the dice doesn't matter. qui-gon was going to get the boy out of this no matter what, he did cheat, and that is that. yes, it's nothing watto wouldn't have done, but just because the other person is cheating doesn't mean your own cheating doesn't count as cheating. qui-gon seemed to believe in using his powers in small ways to get the result he was looking for. he employed this tactic as well to save jar jar from the gungans. anyway i am not criticizing qui-gon's tactics, just pointing this out.

had anakin lost the pod race, i wouldn't put it past qui-gon to try to manipulate other things along. but as others have said he tries to go with what he perceives as the will of the force, and he wasn't simply guessing regarding anakin and the outcome. he had a strong sense that anakin would win the race.

 

It's Shmi who gets to decide if there's a debt or not. The fact is that they got her son free and let him go with them for a better life. Shmi thanked Qui-Gon. As far as I see, there's no debt.

 

That contradicts virtually every example, including Jar Jar's, where the person who received the help declares a debt owed to their helper.

Shmi may be grateful. But that does not change the fact that she gave up her son so that he could serve, as she perceived he ought to. If it had been alluded to that it was at all possible to free her also, then Shmi would think that it would be at least courteous.

In fact the only barrier in the movie at the time is the fact that the party from Naboo just didn't have the cash on them at that moment to pay for two slaves. It seems never to have occurred to anyone to return and fix that when they were no longer trying to remain incognito and the Naboo crisis was over.

 

Shmi received help too. She got what she wanted:

"Can you help him?"

"Thank you."

Gave up her son?! She allowed her son to decide his own fate:

"Anakin, this path has been placed before you. The choice is yours alone."

 

That is the same as giving up your son. If a person came along and paid someone money to take your nine year old son, no parent would ordinarily describe this as the child's choice. Particularly if the child indicates that they are seriously conflicted about being torn from their mother.

The fact that she is, in these circumstances and knowing that she cannot go with him, allowing Anakin to choose is giving up a lot. It's just that the alternative, which is due solely to the fact that Qui Gon cannot out his hands on the cash at that moment, is that she and Anakin remain together but as slaves.

Stop trying to pretend this is, and the lack of concern shown to Shmi after they financial difficulties experienced by the party on Tatooine are no longer a hindrance, are all tickety-boo, nothing to see here, all perfectly normal.

 

Which is not standard for 9 year olds. She knew what he would choose "It's what I've always dreamed of" - she knew he was too young to meaningfully choose - so, giving him the choice is little different from directly handing him over.

Anakin feels freedom is due her:


"I will come back and free you, Mom. I promise."


So it makes sense that the Jedi telling him "Actually, you can't" after he's inducted into the Order after the Battle of Naboo, would result in a great deal of quiet resentment.

 

Yeah.

"So now that money's no option, and that was the only reason you said that you couldn't buy my mother at the same time as me , we can just hop back to Tatooine and buy her. It is on the way from Naboo to Coruscant, after all. That's how you wound up landing there and running into me and I decided you needed me to help you, even though I was just a slave..... .... Hello? I said we can just stop off at Tatooine on the way back to the Jedi temple. "

 

For a better life. She's thinking about her son and what's best for him. She's being selfless.

And rightfully so. Then again, that's not what happened.

She's giving up being with him over a better life for her son. She's being selfless instead of selfish. She could ask Anakin not to go and remain with her, but she didn't.

Anakin is not a slave anymore and he could stay with her if he chose to.

I'm not pretending anything. You're the one pretending there's an issue here when there isn't or that something is being owed. There isn't. Both parties chose to help when they didn't need to and they both benefited from the help they gave each other.

Huh?! Are you implying that Anakin's choice was meaningless? The whole issue is that it's not meaningless and that he was conflicted about leaving his mother. That was the whole point. It's easier for an adult to leave their parents than it is for a child. It's why Anakin was portrayed at that age to begin with.

No, it isn't. Anakin feels freedom because he's free.

That may be, but he didn't tell the Jedi. He told Shmi. And even if he told the Jedi later on and they said he couldn't, he was still free to leave and go to his mother if he chose to. He didn't. He chose to be a Jedi.

 

I'm saying that Anakin is too young to fully understand the ramifications of his choices - being only 9.

And that Anakin feels slavery is wrong, and that his mother should be free - hence his promise to free her (which it turns out, he can't follow up on, because of the Jedi "nonattachment" doctrine).

As for "remaining with her as a nonslave" - that puts him in a position where Watto can reactivate his implant, and re-enslave him.

 

Are you aware how often you need to contradict yourself, sometimes over the course of a single sentence?

 

That would still be true had he been 16 or 19. Still, he's free to return to his mother if he so chooses.

He can follow up on, but he has to give up on being a Jedi. Realizing that, he made a free choice to remain with the Jedi.

How?!

I'm aware that you didn't bother (or aren't able) to point out said contradiction.

 

Shmi and Anakin both help Qui-Gon & Padme - but in different ways. Anakin by action, Shmi by acquiescence and cooperation.

Anakin gets a big reward - freedom + the option to get away from Tatooine. And a big sacrifice as well - the "hard life" of a Jedi in service to the Republic. In effect - he's not just paying for his freedom in "running the race" but in "serving the Republic" too.

Shmi gets nothing, except as it relates to Anakin - the pleasure of knowing he's not a slave and not on this hazardous planet any more, in danger of being re-enslaved. She herself is in exactly the same state before she met Qui-Gon as after - if not worse, since she now has to deal with being lonely, and the fact that her master is now a lot poorer and more likely to demand extra work from her.

That's not a proper reward.

And the Republic stands to benefit enormously by having a very powerful Force-sensitive serving it. From people (Shmi and Anakin) who owe it nothing - but are willing to give it this enormous benefit anyway.

Shouldn't the Republic, the Jedi, Naboo, etc. be prepared to pay for what they got - out of gratitude?

All Watto has to do is come back to the house, with Shmi and Ani still there, and tell Shmi Anakin is his again, and switch his implant back on with the same device he used to switch it off.

He's nine years old with no money whatsoever. Presumably, he decided to stay with the Jedi because he believed that they would eventually return to Tatooine and free all the slaves.

Not his fault that they didn't explain to him that they would never do this.

 

Either you are pretending it's not an issue, or you truly believe that allowing Anakin to believe that he can return and free his mother, Qui Gon excusing himself from freeing the both at once only because of money, and then not returning with the money to do so when they had ample opportunity is fine.

It's no making a big issue of things if you express any sort of genuine compassion for children and the importance a mother plays in their development and look askance at some of the arguably self serving dogma of the Jedi, no matter how much their intention to serve others expressed or genuinely felt.

The equivalent of this kind of child harvesting in earth cultures has been proven to be less successful at consistently producing stable individuals or communities than their proponents claim. They are rightfully considered archaic, un-evolved and only persist in the name of self serving tradition, rather than on the basis of any empirical evidence.

 

Yes, that's exactly it. It's fine. Qui-Gon should not return to Tatooine and pay to free a slave. Qui-Gon should do what's required of him as a Jedi. Nothing else. Same with Anakin, if he truly wants to be a Jedi.

Also, Qui-Gon didn't excuse himself of anything. He freed Anakin through gambling and he did try to free Shmi too while he was at it. He couldn't. Watto refused to free more than one slave. That's all there is to it.

The Jedi have no self serving dogma. Self serving is the opposite of what the Jedi are about.

And there's nothing in my argument that makes you able to claim anything about me regarding compassion for children or the importance of a parent's role in their upbringing.

There's no 'child harvesting', there's no lack of stable individuals and there's no lack of evolution or self serving tradition on the Jedi's part. The Jedi are about dedicating one's life to selflessness, altruism and law enforcement as opposed to yourself, your needs and desires. That's how it has been for thousands of years. It's a respectable way of life and obviously not for everybody. Nobody forces you to be a Jedi if you don't agree with their ways there's nobody stopping you from leaving.

 

And Anakin's freedom serves both Anakin and Shmi's desires.

It's not up to you to decide. Shmi's only expressed desire is Anakin's freedom. Qui-Gon provided that.

It was Anakin, by being a Jedi, who chose to serve the Republic. The Republic doesn't owe him anything and vice versa.

No, Anakin as a Jedi shouldn't look for payment.

Who said that's possible? Who said the implant wasn't removed? What makes you think Anakin would allow that? That idea is nonsensical.

He and Shmi have the money from the pod.

What's the basis for that assumption?

Not his fault? Why should he assume they would do anything? Why did he stay with the Jedi knowing they would do nothing?

 

Qui Gon tried but he couldn't afford it at the time. A short while later he could afford it but you're saying he's excused from following through with his first attempt the free both of them because he's required to do what he must do as a Jedi. Which in Qui Gon's case is shown to be whatever Qui Gon believes he should be doing. And at one point he believed he should be freeing the boy and mother who sheltered and helped them get to Coruscant.

It also suggests that the Jedi are concerned with meeting with arms an invasion intended to provide the TF with a better deal on.Naboo. But they aren't prepared to do justice for enslaved people who help them, unless that person might fulfill a prophecy.

Why did Qui Gon make a first attempt to free Shmi if it's not what he's supposed to be doing?

 

Even if the first thing Qui-Gon did when he got to Coruscant with Anakin was to take him to a surgeon to have it removed - if Anakin returns to Watto still as a 9 year old - all Watto has to do is to threaten Shmi, to have the leverage to enslave Anakin again.


Regarding "Freeing Anakin rewards Shmi" - the reverse is also true.


And Anakin was not a Jedi when he blew up the Control Ship above Naboo and contributed enormously to Naboo's freedom.

As since - since Padme can't reward him "in goods" for doing so (since he was immediately inducted into the Jedi Order and Jedi take a Vow of Poverty) - she can reward him emotionally - by freeing Shmi (and possibly other Tatooine slaves if she can afford it) and let him know about it.


Doing so would also ensure that he's not in a constant state of uncertainty about Shmi's fate and safety.

 

As a Jedi, he's supposed to be able to let go of those sorts of feelings. Going to extraordinary lengths to cater to Anakin's emotional attachments would completely defeat the purpose of him becoming a Jedi in the first place.

 

No. I'm saying that Qui-Gon should not return to Tatooine and pay for a slave's freedom. Qui-Gon had a chance to bargain the freedom of both but Watto only allowed for the freedom of one of them.

Not really. Qui-Gon is a Jedi and as a Jedi he takes missions that are assigned to him.

He had a chance to do it and he took it, without compromising anything else.

The Jedi have jurisdiction on Republic territory and those that abide under its law. The Jedi have no jurisdiction on Tatooine.

Already explained above. He's already doing what's he's supposed to. But he's stranded and got help from some people. And while he was at it, managed to gamble for their freedom. Watto only allowed to gamble the freedom of one. The end.

That logic doesn't change wether he's 9 or 19. Again, nonsensical.

Shmi being free while Anakin remains a slave is not a reward to Shmi.

That's grasping at straws. He's accepted as a Jedi moments later.

Emotional reward is not the Jedi way either. He should let go, not remain attached. Padmé is free to go free slaves if she feels like it, although I'm not sure why she would put Naboo and the Republic at risk by going to meddle with the Hutts.

His 'constant state of uncertainty' (aka fear) has nothing to do with Shmi being free or not. She's free by the time of AOTC and he's worried about her safety and fate. Even if he knew she was free, that wouldn't change. The key is to let go, not to be pandered.