PT Why did anakin skywalker stay on the dark-side after Padme died?

Discussion in 'Prequel Trilogy' started by Lord Tyrannus, Oct 18, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Moderators: Bazinga'd
  1. Lord Tyrannus Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2012
    star 4
    If the rebels never existed, the droids would'nt have been sent to Tattoine with Death star plans as part of the war against the empire, the Lars would never find them, and would live. If the "heroic" rebels never existed, the Lars would've lived. The empire did evil against them too. Both sides were wrong then. That's what I meant. Was the goal of the rebel alliance to defeat the Sith and/or the Empire, or to restore the Republic? Both were their goals, obviously, but what was their main goal? Where does the title "alliance to restore republic" come from? Is it movies or EU? How did the empire affect the average joe living in the galaxy?

  2. WIERD_GREEN_MAN Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2010
    star 4
    So, you think that the Rebel Alliance is evil because one guy died in connection with them? In war, people die. Are you calling the Allied soldiers who liberated the suffering prisoners from the concentration camps because if they hadn't invaded, the departing Nazis would not have gassed many people in a hurry as they left? Yet if the Allies had not come, the prisoners would have all died anyway. It's war. People die in wars. You can't condemn a whole galaxy for one life. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.
    Oh, also? A war's going on. People die in wars.
  3. PiettsHat Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 1, 2011
    star 4
    I would argue it's not the fact that he has powers that they find so troubling (Qui-Gon didn't try to kill Anakin when he discovered he was strong in the Force for instance) so much as it was the fact that Palpatine started a war that killed billions to get power. And, not only that, but he allowed his people's home to be invaded and for them to be starved in order to get the Chancellorship. That, I imagine, played a pretty big role. When Obi-Wan goes to see Padmé, he mentions that Palpatine is the Sith Lord they've been looking for and that he's behind everything, including the war. That's why the Jedi are trying to take him out -- because he's killed people to get power and, by all indications, will continue to do so and needs to be stopped.

    You also have to understand the concept of shades of grey. The Jedi are not perfect, but that does not mean that they should not try to stop the Sith.

    The US government, during WWII, rounded up and imprisoned thousands of Japanese people in camps. That's an evil action to be sure -- imprisoning your own innocent civilians. But that does not mean that they weren't right to go to war against Germany when Germany was attacking other nations and committing genocide.
    Last edited by PiettsHat, Oct 24, 2012
  4. Valairy Scot Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2005
    star 5
    For one thing, if you were not human, you were oppressed and not allowed in any position of power by Sids. Of course, being shut out of power does not have to mean evil, just discriminatory, but then, forcing Sids and humans to work side by side with aliens if they don't want is equally discriminatory.

    So discrimination is maybe good, maybe not. Maybe morally neutral. Hmm...may have to pose this question over in the Senate thread about the 1st Amendment right to discriminate on religious reasons.
  5. Lord Tyrannus Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2012
    star 4
    Billions didn't die in the clone wars. If that's true, how many died in the Galactic civil war, rebels vs empire, in originals? I don't understand the ww2 references. When obi wan told padme that the chancellor was the sith lord they were looking for, did it have anything to do with "we don't like sith. They have different philosophy than we do. We believe in the light side, not using dark powers", or, was it more like, "palpatine is the traitor we're looking for, and he just happens to be a sith lord".

    If Palpatine or someone else was a darkside user/Sith, but was not a traitor to the Republic, what would the Jedi have done with him having a position of power
  6. Lord Tyrannus Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2012
    star 4
    When Padme is in horror and shock and all emotional (like on mustafar) that Anakin turns to the darkside, was it because she learns that he sided with a traitor, or because he now is all "dark and scary, with mysterious superpowers"? Just wondering.
  7. Valairy Scot Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2005
    star 5
    BINGO!

    Grumbled under their breath and sought to replace him in the next election. You know, like the Tea Party with regard to Obama.
    WIERD_GREEN_MAN likes this.
  8. Valairy Scot Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2005
    star 5
    Because if he killed his "family" and the younglings, she thought maybe he'd kill her.

    Or because Obi-Wan mindtricked her into thinking the dark side was evil, when really, it's just a point of view.
  9. PiettsHat Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 1, 2011
    star 4
    It's a galactic-scale war. Of course billions died. Obi-Wan mentions the Sith to Padmé because it's well known that Dooku, the leader of the Separatists, was a Sith Lord and thus Palpatine, as his master, was playing both sides of the conflict.

    As to your second question, what the Jedi would have done if Palpatine was a Sith Lord but not a traitor, I honestly don't know because it's never addressed in the film. We never see any Sith that aren't obsessively after power and willing to crush innocents to get it, so it's difficult to say.

    Regardless, the Jedi and Rebellion had legitimate reasons to oppose Palpatine, given his crimes against the citizens of the Republic and the people of the galaxy.
    Last edited by PiettsHat, Oct 24, 2012
  10. Lord Tyrannus Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2012
    star 4
    How did it affect the average person living on any other planet, in the original trilogy, though? Was it because of the way they treated the non-humans? Were there any hints of that in the films? As for the galactic scale war, I'm not sure about the galaxy's population, but it's probably a few hundred trillion. The people on Tattoine seemed happy in a new hope, but why did they cheer at the end of episode 6? How was the empire cruel to them? Political reasons?

  11. PiettsHat Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 1, 2011
    star 4
    As to discrimination -- it's never made explicit in the films, but note that the Imperial military is composed exclusively of white males while the Rebellion includes aliens, women, and humans of other ethnicities. Thus, it's clear that the Empire has discriminatory policies at least within its military.

    I don't know that you can say the people of Tatooine were "happy" -- the jawas and Owen and Beru were killed when they were innocents. Plus, Luke's friend from Tatooine, Biggs, also joined the Rebellion. I imagine that there was a great deal of curtailment of freedoms, such as freedom of the press but this is not made explicit in the films.

    But regardless, when we open in ANH, we see that the Rebels are trying to destroy the Death Star. Understandable, given the suffering that Palpatine was willing to put the galaxy through during the Clone Wars (not to mention the invasion of Naboo). That and the Empire is headed by a criminal that needs to be taken out of power.
    WIERD_GREEN_MAN likes this.
  12. Valairy Scot Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2005
    star 5
    Mind control. It's like the Tea Party and Texas Board of Education got together and rewrote all the school books to present their point of view - no evolution, truly raped women can't get pregnant, the liberation of women from gender roles screwed up both men and civilization...and if you disagreed, you were ostracized and ridiculed.
  13. Lord Tyrannus Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2012
    star 4
    Does that mean that the empire wasn't discriminatory against the aliens in the galaxy? That the EU info about human oppression over aliens in the galactic empire is false and bogus? What do their discriminatory policies imply? How do you know they have discriminatory policies in the first place? That's just a theory.

    The cheering crowds in ROTJ implied that the people on Tattoine were oppressed. What do you mean by "less freedoms"? Was life for the average joe in the empire really that bad?

    You made a very good point. If Palps made them suffer through the clone wars, what else would a guy like that do to the galaxy, for more power? But, like what, though? If the rebels never existed, thereby meaning they have no chance to defeat or stop him, how many planets would the empire have used the deaths star on? For what reasons?
  14. Valairy Scot Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2005
    star 5
    If everyone had paid tribute to Sids - verbal appreciation, credits, pledged their first born to him - he would never used the Death Star. Why would he want to wipe out those who worshipped at his feet?

    So you're right. Wanting to be free is a disgusting plague against an orderly, peaceful society. The dissenters deserved to die.
    Last edited by Valairy Scot, Oct 24, 2012
  15. WIERD_GREEN_MAN Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2010
    star 4
    NO NO NO NO NO. Part of the Star Wars films' magic is their subtlety and grace. Discrimination is explicitly shown and stated many times in the EU, not just through omission as in the movies, but through proactive discrimination. Even Wookiees were enslaved!
  16. PiettsHat Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 1, 2011
    star 4
    I can't speak to the EU (I haven't read much of it), but given the onscreen evidence, it's clear that the Empire has some discriminatory policies if we look at its military. It would be unreasonable to conclude that the reason we only see white men as Imperial officers is because people of other species/races/genders are unsuited to the job.

    The cheering crowds do imply that people were oppressed. Probably the strongest evidence of this (besides Alderaan's destruction) is the way Anakin treats Lando and Bespin, by blackmailing him and threatening to leave garrisons until Lando's only choice is to tell people to flee.

    I think the Rebels have a very clear indication of "what else" Palpatine would do to the galaxy through the construction of the Death Star. As outlined by Tarkin, he intends to use it to keep people in line through fear and will crush any dissension. Also, it isn't fair to blame the Rebels for the Death Star -- they have a legitimate reason for existing -- to remove a dictator who abused/murdered his people illegally for power. Thus their cause is correct since Palpatine an illegitimate ruler.

    It would be analogous to civil disobedience. People have the right (and some would argue, the duty) to disobey unjust laws. Likewise, people have the right/duty to oust leaders who commit crimes and harm the people for their gain.

    Plus, Palpatine started it. ;)
  17. Valairy Scot Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2005
    star 5
    But PiettsHat: Palps was elected! He was a victim of religious persecution and was perfectly legitimate in his eyes and those of his supporters.
  18. Lord Tyrannus Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2012
    star 4
    What do you mean by discrimination against aliens in the galaxy? Are you using the EU as canon for the films, as part of the film's story, or not? The films do not imply any slavery or anything oppressive or tyrannical done to the non-human species, like the ewoks or mon calamari or wookies. Isn't that just assuming something that the movies never mention, a fan theory?

    Why do you call Vader anakin? When I think of anakin, I think of padme and Mustafar and episode 3. I don't call vader in empire strikes back anakin. It's a cool idea, though. Anakin meets Luke, his son. Anakin skywalker captures han solo and his daughter Leia. It has a nice feel to it.

    What did Anakin want to do with Bespin? I don't understand that plot point in the film.

    How would the empire know of dissension in the planets? Why would they care who agreed with them on stuff or not? How do you know the death star wasn't built as a tool against the rebels, to keep the rebels in line? Just because Palpatine got to power through unjust means doesn't make it right to overthrow him.
  19. PiettsHat Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 1, 2011
    star 4
    Err...I never said anything about slavery. I mentioned the composition of the Imperial military as an indicator of discrimination in the Empire -- only white men can be officers, per the movie.

    Vader is Anakin. Anakin's his name and I just think of him that way. I think of "Darth Vader" more as his Sith title. Plus, I saw the films prequels first, so I got used to calling him Anakin. It's just a preference.

    Anakin threatens to leave behind a garrison of Imperial troops on Bespin when Lando complains that he's breaking the deal. Anakin had previously told him that Leia and Chewie would stay on Bespin with Lando but then decides to take them with him. There's nothing Lando can really do (legally) to protest Anakin breaking his promise. It's an example of the Empire's corruption and oppression -- they promise things to the citizens (in this cae, that Leia and Chewie will stay with Lando) but then use the threat of military force to get what they want regardless of their previous statements. Regular citizens have no recourse and no way to file legitimate complaints.

    The government should serve the people -- a government which does not is illegitimate and thus a government that "does not care" whether the people agree should be fought against. The Death Star clearly wasn't built as a tool against the rebels -- it was built to keep planets in line. "Fear will keep the local systems in line. Fear of this battlestation." That's what Tarkin says. The Empire is, once again, using the threat of military force in order to prevent dissension, to keep people in line. And any attempts to do anything "out of line" are met with violence.

    As to Palpatine -- yes it does, it totally does. Anyone in power through unjust means should be overthrown. Their rule is not legitimate. Plus, people have the right to protect themselves. Given Palpatine's track record in protecting citizens of the Republic, people are right to oppose him.

    Put another way, if a Presidential candidate became president by rigging all of the voting machines, people would certainly have the right to oust him. His leadership isn't legitimate as it was obtained through unjust means.
  20. Valairy Scot Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2005
    star 5
    How would the empire know of dissension in the planets?
    --Spies. Shush.

    Why would they care who agreed with them on stuff or not?
    --Because dictators want to dictate that you agree with them. It's #7 Murphy's Law.


    How do you know the death star wasn't built as a tool against the rebels, to keep the rebels in line?
    --I think it was built to keep dissenters silent - if intimidation didn't work, blast them.

    Just because Palpatine got to power through unjust means doesn't make it right to overthrow him.
    --Why not? It's not more unjust to overthrow someone who used unjust means themselves, is it? Tit for tat? What's good for the goose is good for the gander?
    WIERD_GREEN_MAN likes this.
  21. Lord Tyrannus Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2012
    star 4
    So the death star would have existed and been used on planets, and been built in the prequels, regardless of the existence of the rebels? How do you know?
  22. WIERD_GREEN_MAN Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 16, 2010
    star 4
    The Empire had already begun building the Death Star during RotS, even before the Rebellion had formed. Didn't you watch the movies?
    How old are you?
  23. Valairy Scot Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 16, 2005
    star 5
    I know because I have women's intuition.

    /yeah!
    FARK2005 likes this.
  24. Lord Tyrannus Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2012
    star 4
    I agree. I prefer calling Vader anakin, even in the original movies. They're the same person. Besides, I don't view anakin becoming a new figure/personality/being when put in the robot suit, he's the same person, different physical appearence. It helps the viewers relate to the fact that Luke and Leia are Anakin's children. I like the ring of that a lot. Anakin fights Luke on bespin, anakin captures leia on the death star, anakin duels obi wan on the death star, anakin fought luke over cloud city and talked to lando, albiet still in the samurai robot suit.

    Tarkin said the death star was built to keep the rebels in line, not the people. Something about a means to replace the senate. I'm not sure. What kind of discrimination do you think the empire did to the aliens? What about ewoks? Or how were gungans treated in the OT? Or wookies? Was tarkin referring to rebels when he said that, or was vader/the emperor just a paranoid dictator? Alderaan. Why did they destroy alderaan? How many planets would the empire have used the death star on, if the rebels never existed/lost the war and unable to stop them? Did the Sith have the death star in the 1000 yr ago empire? Did the Jedi know about it?

    Also, Alderaan. If the rebels never existed, would alderaan have survived?
  25. Lord Tyrannus Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 18, 2012
    star 4
    How do you know the emperor didn't forsee the rebellion in advance? Palps said he foresaw the future in the original trilogy. Maybe in ROTS and AOTC he foresaw the rebel alliance with the Force, and had the death star built because of them. Is my theory true or false?

    Besides, the rebels started a war, which was very costly, especially on a galactic scale.
Moderators: Bazinga'd
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.