From "New Order" to "Homeworld Security": *NOW* do you people believe me?!

I'd say that sci-fi has always had a way of commenting on current political climate.

 

The NR's politicians did the job they were elected to do; the NR military didn't do the one they were trained for...

How do you figure that? The NR military had a really rough time with the politicians.
1) they wouldn't let the generals do their job (which I see as a problem in most modern wars.)
2) They didn't consider the Vong a threat until it was too late
3) There was too much debate on appeasment of the the Vong (peace gained through appeasment is NOT peace)
4) It semed that the senate weren't interested in preserving the lives of the military.

Plus, dozens of other reasons. Its not the military's fault that they couln't respond to the Vong threat properly. When you're a soldier, you do everything within your power...but you do need support.

 

" Axis of Evil" is a funny term. Why can't it be referenced without labled political motives? If it is a refernce, it's a refernce to a funny term.

 

ThrawnMcEwok:

sometimes, though, it is probably possible to overread.



Brilliant! You have finally said it! Have that quote set in stone and put it on your desk near your computer. That way when your mind starts creating theories that you may think twice before posting them.

--Adm. Nick

 

@ McEwok: How's the Y-Wing?

Now I finally understand the meaning of what you said Too bad I wasn't around when you first came up with that theory. I'd say Luceno is the master of "putting things in the scenery", if you konw what I mean. It's obvious how many references to the EU find their way into his novels, so having further subtext doesn't come as a huge surprise. But I'm not sure if he'd use such prominent expressions to show mere possibilities...

BTW, in which context are these expressions anyway? Hmmm... >synapses firing<... something's crawling back into my memory... I guess it meant finding a place for the remaining Vong. Objectively, it's what they search: a "final solution" for the Vong. But this choice of words reminds us that there is always the possibility of a "dark side" answer to that search, e.g. Alpha Red. Not that they'd use it; but that there will always be the possibilty. And therefore, the ending is even stronger because they choose to do better and do not give the in-universe objective expression an in-universe negative connotation (as it happenend in real life). Smart. But hey, who am I do have it worked out? Anyway, forget what I said in the first paragraph.

@jedimaster203

Of course a soldier needs "support"... but he doesn't need absolute approval to do what he thinks is right. That would be military dictatorship at best, and anarchy/"survival of the fittest" at worst. What bothers me is, as McEwok also pointed out, that the soldiers are dangerous. Dangerous because they do not behave in a professional way. And the observing figures do nothing about it. This in itself might make sense in a novel, if it were to point out that they behave wrongly. Maybe understandably, if something horrific has happened. But the point that sits wrong with me is that the novel does take no further steps to work with the scene - it just sits there. Nobody does anything about it. On the one side, the soldiers who work for peace and preseverance of the non-Vong, on the other the senators who have always been negative characters. Whose side will most of the readers identify with? Given this scene, I can relate to none of these characters, the scene doesn't allow it. As a reader, I'm lost, as the novel isn't interested in my point of view. If I read about junkies in Trainspotting, or a guy with serious problems in a Chuck Palahniuk novel, I always find room for my differing opinion. Not in this case.

@Darth_Mimic:

Generally, yes - SciFi is sometimes the best way to comment on social or political circumstances. That's why SF film was so popular in the USSR - people could talk freely just by changing the scenery. Not that this happened in all the cases... BTW, I read a funny article that concluded how the Japanese Godzilla movies were made as an answer to real life nuclear power. In the beginning, Godzilla is destruction created by nuclear power (-> Hiroshima), but later on, as real life scientists tame nuclear power in power plants, Godzilla helps the Japanese defeat the beasts of nature and outer space... It makes shocking sense...

Star Wars, on the other hand, doesn't work as well as contemporary comment. It harkens back to an earlier era of adventure and not caring about consequences, and then farther back to an era of mythology where you are faced with the consequences. It's not even true SciFi, if you're honest. IMO, any connections to real life are general ones that work because the rise to power "has always worked like that", just like the development of heros.
In the end, coming back to the theme of politics, I'd say it is good at showing how democracy doesn't work, and why we should fight for it. Or something like that.

EH_Pilot:

There's always been the concept of the Emperor's New Order in which non-humans were of lesser value than humans (leading to slave labor, e.g. by Wookies and Mon Calamari), although it's not that firmly rooted in the movies. Actually, I don't know where it came from...? Some Lucas idea that didn't make it to the screen?
In the Prequels, Palpatine u

 

Ha ha, Star Wars has a liberal bent, conservatives can suck it.

 

Wasn't it Ostrander who wrote that one Republic comic that had Palpatine expanding security powers?

Maybe that's because that's how one gets power?

This is just how the real world is and Star Wars is somewhat part of it. What are they supposed to do? Have Palpatine gain power by not gaining power?

Jeez, you guys are reading waaaaaaaaay too much into this.

 

Maybe that's because that's how one gets power?

True. It just seemed to have a few too many similarities to real life.

 

I'm not so certain the above cited example from Destiny's Way is relevant. After all, Destiny's Way came out in Nov. 2003, before the Iraq War, and the final draft would have to have been turned into Del Rey probably sometime in the early Summer of 2003.

 

"The desire for security stands in the way of any great and noble institution"

 

True. It just seemed to have a few too many similarities to real life.

Real life meaning history or meaning current events? 6 weeks after Hitler was elected, he suspended civil liberties and began the process of internment that eventually became concentration camps. Spartan authority under their rather odd political system was upheld in the name of security, and that was (if I'm remembering right) some of the reasoning behind tyranny in Athens.

In actual American history, beyond the obvious and immediate Patriot Act parallels, there's also the Alien and Sedition Acts as well as the Japanese internment camps to draw from.

Loss of liberty in the name of security has happened plenty of times, and the fact that Ostrander chose to use it does not make him a liberal nor a person spreading "liberal messages."

 

True. And I'm not complaining about the story. It just hit a nerve.

 

I beat you to "The New Order" and "final solution" long before you posted a thread on it.

Of course, having 80% of your paternal grandmother's side of the family wiped out tends to make one more susceptible to noticing...

 

Does someone have the passages with "New Order" and "Final Solution" handy?

Nice one, McEwok

 

"If I'm clear on one point, it is this: I want no part of whatever new order is in the making." - Nom Anor, pg 476, TUF.

 

Does someone have the passages with "New Order" and "Final Solution" handy?

Open up The Unifying Force.

Turn to the last "area" break (e.g. a page devoted to the section name of the upcoming chapters).

Look for "The New Order"

fini.

 

Who cares? The references shouldn't bother anyone but die-hard Bush supporters. It is a little creepy, though; as I've noticed the parallels between Palpatine and Bush for awhole; even before the bulk of the Clone Wars novels came out. The Patriot Act, anyone?

I'm not saying Bush is trying to become an Emperor or whatnot, but if a leader with a bit more intelligence and ambition were in his place, it'd be rather easy to create a dictatorship in the U.S. by doing much the same things Bush is doing. Which is basically what Palpatine is doing in the Clone Wars-- use the Seperatist threat to augment his own power by giving himself and his military leaders more power for the purpose of "security".

 

OK, this might be a small detour...

"I'm not so certain the above cited example from Destiny's Way is relevant. After all, Destiny's Way came out in Nov. 2003, before the Iraq War, and the final draft would have to have been turned into Del Rey probably sometime in the early Summer of 2003."

Small correction: The dates were in 2002, with the Iraq War beginning in early 2003.
Bush was already rallying support for the Iraq War in Mid-2002, and Germany had the very special position of being in the huge governmental election campaign. Then-and-Now-Chancellor Schroeder said he wouldn't support an unfounded assault on Iraq, a declaration that's generally under the suspicion of having been a political move to get votes. So, the Anti-German and Anti-French sentiments started back in 2002...
I'm not sure anymore, though, if it really fits with the publication of the novel; but at least there's the possibility. And to me, it's a bit much to be just a coincidence. But maybe I'm imagining things Maybe some conspiring editor at Lucasfilm changed the name after the script was handed in? No, just kidding.


Regarding the final title in TUF, it was fairly obvious that the final chapter would be called "The new order" when the series title established that it was about creating the new Jedi Order. They could have used TNJO as the final chapter title, but that would have looked silly as TNJO had already begun in book 1... Sometimes a new order is just a new order...

And about the LOE references: It might well be that there are possible general explanations for this, but in this time and with the USA as the country of origin and with an author who's a friend/close colleague of Stover (and did you ever hear him getting political...? ), I highly suspect that those two terms (along with the usage in the comics) have a definite connection to contemporary expressions. In other words: If Bush hadn't coined "Axis of Evil" in real life, we wouldn't have the Triangle of Evil.
But maybe it's not so much a parody/criticism as it is a crutch to help readers relate to it... like, "Oh, I know that kind of security measures!" (Then again... who knows them?)

 

Since the Jedi Order was always called the Jedi Order, there is a VAST dfference between a series calling itself "New Jedi Order" as in a new version of the Jedi Order and something referring to itself as The New Order.

Very different things...

 

Well, I think that you guys are reading way to much into it, but I suppose we will not know for sure until the post-NJO series begins.

--Adm. Nick

 

Oops. Brain fart. I did *mean* 2002, believe it or not.

 

I don't mind it when the Expanded Universe authors use terms from the past for storytelling purposes, such as using Nazi phraseology, symbolism, etc... in the depiction of the Empire.

However, what I DO disagree with is when Authors use analogies of current events in their novels, especially those that take on a political connotation. Because past events can be viewed without bias and looked at objectively. Current events are thought of as subjective, therefore the author is inserting his political bias into the novel, depending on HIS / HER slant of the current events.

Hope that makes sense