Prequels from the Separatists point of veiw(What could have been different)

On one of the deleted scenes in AOTC Padme remarks to Dooku that she would never join his Rebellion and betray the Republic. I found this an ironic choice in wording. Here she was opposed to the way the Republic was headed and agreed with at least a few things the Separatists(minus Dooku)stood for. In fact by ROTS having a group heavily opposing The Republic itself. I know one fundemental belief that greatly divided the two groups was the way they attacked the problem. The Guild and Federation fought it through brut force and The 2000 senators were anti war. saying that they were each rebellions against the "establishment" but the question I have is exactly HOW MUCH was the Seperatists annexation about money and how much was about power. What part of it was about destroying something going in the wrong direction? I guess the eventual OT rebellion fought to remove a dictatorship but let me remind everyone that by time ANH rolled around they had just got to disbanding the Senate. Leia herself being one meant they fought even when it was still a functoning government body or Republic. The Emergancy powers the Chancoller took is what caused the full scale war so both were fighting the same fuctioning body even if for different reasons or motives. So I think it is interesting seeing the PT through the eyes of the Separatists. If anything it gives a fresh way to watch the movies we have seen so many times before. When the Confederacy of Independant systems were meeting deciding what to do about their problem Shu Mai asks if it is considered treason. If it was all about power or greed you would have to think that the person wouldn't worry if they were breaking a law. Also when proceeding with the blockade of Naboo the Trade Federation asks Sidious if the Invasion is legal. Again why would one be so worried? It is obvious that dealing with Sidious they had to know he was shady but they were also not aware they were being used in the way they were. Toward the end of ROTS Nute Gunray says to Vader before he is murdered that he was promised peace. Is this something that a money hungry type person would shout out before their death? I'm not trying to paint them out as the poor helpless good guys I AM however saying that while VERY stupid they were how bad were they really? They built a weapon to use against the Republic as the only means of victory only to have it stolen and eventually more then likely used against them. So look how different things could have turned out had The Delegation of 2000 met to talk and discuss it's issues with the Confederacy of Indepentent Systems. Had they convinced them to simply stop the war and or build the Death Star itself it could have been used against the Emperor and the Republic. I just find this all an interesting way of looking at it.

 

Interesting viewpoints. Yes, the Separatists were greedy and they were stupid to trust Sidious the way they did. However, as far as true evil goes, they were nowhere near as evil as the Sith. The main difference between the Rebellion and the Separatists is that the former were idealistic, and yes, the latter was greedy. Nute Gunray's call for peace at the end can be explained as a way of trying to save his own life and does not require any form of idealism. The Delegation of 2000 and the Rebellion were idealists who were trying to save/restore democracy and the values the Republic had once stood for.
You must remember that the two groups are painted in very different colors, the Rebels being good guys and the Separatists being bad guys. The rather cruel arena executions and Nute Gunray's half sadistic "I want to see her suffer" as well as his clearly displayed thrill when Padmé yells in pain after being clawed by the Nexu offers a rather unambiguous hint that we are not meant to see the Separatist as the good guys. The Rebels would never have arena executions and no Rebel officer would ever be portrayed the way Nute Gunray is here. Star Wars is ultimately a saga about ultimate good and evil, and moral relativism is not an idea that would ever be endorsed. The Rebels are good and the Separatists are evil.
So, while the two groups fought the same body, they did so for very different reasons. However, you are right about one thing. Had the Death Star been in Separatist hands and Sidious hadn't so carefully planned how to get rid of them once they had served their purpose, the superweapon could have been used against the Empire itself, because the Separatist were never (not even Dooku, who was a fellow Sith) in on Sidious' plan to reorganize the Republic into the Empire.

 

The evolution of the Star Wars fandom has been marked with George Lucas' stubborn attempts to take shades of grey out of the picture contrasted with the fandom's equally stubborn resolve to put them back in. Look at how perceptions of the Empire have changed over the years, for instance. Half the canon Rebels have acquired ex-Imperial backgrounds. Not Republic, Imperial. The Conscientious Imperial is now more common than not, and even characters like Thrawn have gotten significantly more....mellow...over the years with their popularity. And heck, look at what Karen Traviss has done for the Stormtroopers. Would you have called that in 1979?

Given that trend, it would not surprise me at all if ex-Confederacy and 'honest Confederates' started to show up over the next ten years. As we can see in TPM, the Republic is staggeringly corrupt. Whether or not the Seps are better is not something we really learn, but planets that joined the Confederate cause willingly would almost certainly have been given local independance, from the structure of a Confederacy. State's Rights and all - when the Planet-State is evil, that can be a bad thing - when it's good, it can be a good thing - but I bet a lot of planets could run themselves better without the Republic and know this. The Trade Federation and planets they conquer is obviously going to run them worse.

Remember, a good number of Confederates are probably the people who saw the Empire coming. Especially after the Mysterious Clone Army showed up. That these people would all morph to Loyal Imperials, or all be killed...well, it doesn't make any sense. Even blowing up Alderaan didn't keep the Alderaan rebels down. I don't care what Matthew Stover says. Ex-Confederates are logical Rebels, and I think the Rebels will realize this (or should) over the years.

Think of the "You sound like a Separatist" accusation. False as it may be, the Separatist propaganda line is -right-.

 

That's not entirely true. From Revenge of the Sith's opening crawl:

"There are heroes on both sides."

Ideally, one would not be a Separatist because, as you've said, its LEADERS were vile and corrupt. However, the "common man", so to speak - all those people from all those disillusioned systems - was almost certainly a good person fed up with the increasing failure of the Republic to function. Things were already crumbling when Palpatine came to power; he merely inflamed the situation to his advantage. Thus, not all Separatists are evil; it's the cause itself that is phoney and is headed by people driven by greed and bloodlust. That's not to ignore the importance and loftiness of the Rebel Alliance, however: Padme and Bail walked a more righteous path because they weren't trying to overthrow the existing democracy but repair and save it. Unfortunately, when it became an Empire, the Alliance had little choice but to take up arms and topple it through force.

 

I think the Separatists are the grey area to the black of the two other groups. The PT itself added all kinds of greys to the saga which before was black and white. I like it because it matured and evolved as I did. When I was young the black vs white, Good vs. Evil was enjoyable and exciting. Now that I am grown and the understanding that things aren't often black and white. a lot more greys and so I could appriciate the PT. I agree about the use of the line. "You sound like a Separatist." It shows the outlook of the opposition or Republic. They lumped them together. I was never trying to be apologetic to the Separatist but clearly show an interesting point of view. Also the new OT Rebellion ended being forced to violence in the end headed by Padmes daughter to overcome the Empire. So the means of attack were the same.

 

Side topic...

When Anakin accuses Padme of sounding like a Separatist, I seem to recall him pointing at her. Am I imagining this? If I'm not, it's a very Vader-ish moment as Vader does the same thing throughout the OT.

 

Ha I'm going to be looking for that now. I was thinking about how much Vaders vocabulary usage and temperment had changed in th OT. He was actually much more calm and laid back in the OT (minus the, "If this is a counseler ship..." thing)Guess I'll have to look Tuesday.

 

I'm just saying, it would have been nice if those shades of grey were actually there <i>in the film</i>, insead of Colosseum-style executions, and leaders who were weasels or vague sterotypes or worse. Heck, I would have settled for seeing Dooku be the great orator he was supposed to be when trying to convert Obi-wan. It would have made the Clone Wars more a tragedy than, well, a bit of a farce.

 

I agree because it is seen in a few statements here and there but I'm sure the average person's perspective had to be slightly more of a noble reasoning about the opposition of the Republic.