PT Analysis of Mace Windu's plan to overthrow Palpatine

They were literally two different situations. Yoda never had Sidious seemingly defenseless at the point of a lightsaber. That's an objective fact.

It was 100% the intention. Lucas even said Anakin was doing the right thing by stopping Mace. The whole scene is set up to directly parallel Anakin's earlier actions with Dooku and Luke's later actions on the second Death Star. It's the last, fatal sin of the old Jedi. Luke restores the Jedi by correcting that sin many years later.

"The Jedi are trained to let go. They're trained from birth," [Lucas] continues. "They're not supposed to form attachments. They can love people - in fact, they should love everybody. They should love their enemies; they should love the Sith." -- The Making of Revenge of the Sith



Notice how Palpatine's red lighstaber is used as the main color element in this scene--the red signifies anger and aggression, and is deliberately juxtaposed with Mace's hateful expression.

This is a motif frequently employed by Lucas in these contexts:

In the film’s most important moment, Luke sees that his rage is making him more machine than man, that he is perilously close to losing his humanity and compassion, that he has to make a choice. “During the final confrontation, when Luke has Vader on the ground, the red lights of the elevator were design elements but were also there specifically,” Lucas would say. “The color goes symbolically into the blood of the father and son, and a move toward hell—because this is where Luke is either going to go to hell or not.” -- The Making of Return of the Jedi



And earlier in ROTS:


At first, the blue of Anakin's lightsaber is the dominant color element in the shot, signifying Anakin's restrained and calm posture towards Dooku. Then Dooku goads him:

"I sense great fear in you, Skywalker. You have hate, you have anger, but you don’t use them."


At this point the action swings around, and the dominant color element becomes the red glow of Dooku's lightsaber, through which we see Anakin glaring with one angry eye.

He then presses his attack, making use of his hate and aggression, and overcomes Dooku, leading to the scenario which mirrors the ones encountered by Mace Windu and Luke, which we have been discussing.

 

Dave Filoni is/was of the opinion that had Mace killed Palpatine, that the Senate likely would have pressed charges against him and he’d turn himself in and trust the process.

He said this is a ForceCast interview years ago while he was still working on TCW.

I disagree, since in the film Ki-Adi and Mace talk about it being necessary to take control of the Senate to ensure a peaceful transition in government.

If the Senate and Courts went after Mace, I can’t see the guy that advocates for taking control of the Senate turning himself in.

I think had Mace killed Palpatine, it would have been seen as a murder. And if the Jedi tried to take control of the Senate, things could have spiraled into a resistance forming against the Jedi.

We have the benefit of knowing the danger Palpatine posed, and knowing that killing him was best for the Galaxy in the long run. But in a democracy full of people that don’t know those facts, and in a government system that doesn’t allow for the Jedi to make that kind of judgement as they serve the Senate (or Palpatine directly by the time of the fight in Palpatine’s office), there likely would have been a big backlash against the Jedi.

By the time of ROTJ, Palpatine has had Alderaan blown up, destroyed Jedha city, brought slavery back, and dissolved the Senate. Public opinion was turning against him.

But during ROTS he was solidly a popular figure that like Abraham Lincoln would be idolized for holding the Republic together through a civil war.

I see Mace killing Palpatine at that point as a no win situation. It just would have made the Jedi appear tyrannical.

As risky as it would have been to try and detain Palpatine, I think that’s ultimately the better solution. Instead Mace abandons the right solution in favor of the quick and easy path, and Samuel Jackson’s performance comes across as someone starting to compromise on their principles in the stress of war.

In real life there are plenty of examples of war crimes being committed against enemies or civilians under the belief that it’s the right call to keep the “good guys” safe.

Early on in the film it’s established that killing a prisoner, no matter how dangerous, is not the Jedi way. And as Obi-Wan stresses later, the Jedi are bound to the Republic/democracy.

Mace twice attempted to arrest Palpatine with the intention of letting the Senate decide what to do with him. But after Palpatine attempting to electrocute him, Mace starts raising his voice in anger and decides he’s going to end Palpatine and all of a sudden starts accusing the Senate and Courts of being corrupt.

He’s breaking a rule and disregarding the Republic’s due process under the pretense that it’s going to save the most lives.

He’s acting on fear of what might happen.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Actually, it was Ki-Adi who had suggested they take control of the Senate. Mace agreed. Yoda had commented that such a move would be dangerous . . . but he also agreed. All three of them agreed that the Jedi should take control of the Senate.

Just because Mace had given in to anger at the last moment, as he contemplated on finally killing Palpatine does not erase Yoda's decision to head for Palpatine's office with the aggressive intent to kill the new Emperor. His emotions may not have been on display, but Yoda was reacting emotionally. Both Jedi Masters were guilty. And Yoda didn't even bother to make any attempt to arrest Palpatine in the first place.

 

I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with killing Palpatine.

Nobody would criticize Vader for killing Palpatine.

It’s a matter of context. When Palpatine tells Luke to strike him down, one could argue that Luke would be committing tyrannicide and that the Galaxy would be better for it. But throughout the saga we are given multiple examples where the point is made that if you kill someone in anger, it will change you for the worse.

Yoda went in to kill Palpatine, that’s true. It was his goal from the start.

Mace went in to arrest Palpatine, but then was goaded into getting angry until he changed his mind, got fearful of what could happen if he was allowed to live and decided instead to kill him.


These next two points are conjecture:

Had Mace killed Palpatine, I think it would have cemented the Jedi as traitors in the mind of the government, and any attempt by the Jedi to seize the Senate I do believe would have been seen as a betrayal of democracy in favor of security and would have led to war.

Had Yoda killed Palpatine, I think the Jedi by that point would have been so jaded by their failure that they would have simply vanished into seclusion. I think Yoda would kill Palpatine to end the Sith, but would then have exited from any political involvement. I think democracy would have been allowed to pick up the pieces in the wake of Palpatine’s death.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yoda murdering Palpatine without informing anyone would have been a betrayal of democracy, just as much as Mace's actions. Both Jedi Masters tried to kill murder Palpatine. And both did it in a way that was wrong. Both of them. The victim being evil is not an excuse for cold-blooded murder. It really isn't. If Yoda and Mace were trying to kill Palpatine in self defense or in the defense of others, they would have an excuse. But Mace had decided to kill Palpatine after arresting him failed. And Palpatine was unarmed at the time. Yoda deliberately went to Palpatine's office to kill him in cold blood. Neither Jedi Master has an excuse. There is a reason why Lucas had Luke refrain from killing Anakin in cold blood at the last minute in "Return of the Jedi".

 

A real world analogy that I can think of is if the police are tipped off to an armed suspect and respond to the call.

In Mace’s case, it would be that the police officer responds to the call, a shootout happens, but ultimately the suspect drops his gun. As the police officer moves in to apprehend the suspect, the suspect reaches for a concealed second weapon. The police officer shoots the suspect and the suspect drops the second gun, but is still alive.

A second police officer shows up on the scene to help arrest the suspect, but the first police officer is angry and doesn’t trust that the suspect is unarmed and wants to kill him.

The first police officer raises his gun to shoot the suspect. The second police officer shoots the first police officer. Then the suspect picks his gun back up and shoots the first police officer until he’s dead.

In this case, the behavior of the first police officer is unacceptable.

In Yoda’s analogy. Police officer responds to a tip of the location of the suspect of a mass shooting after the shooting has already occurred.

The police officer shows up, the suspect shoots at him then tries to run. The police officer blocks his escape and draws his weapon. The suspect draws his weapon again and a shootout commences.

Eventually he police officer loses his gun and has to flee. No backup is coming to help him.

In those real world analogies, I don’t see the officer analogous to Yoda as having done anything wrong.

In the movie Yoda does say they must destroy the Sith, but Palpatine never surrenders to Yoda in the same way he does to Mace. Had Palpatine stopped resisting and pleaded for his life to Yoda, and had Yoda decided to kill him anyway, then yes, I would have seen that as wrong. But Yoda was never in that situation.

Palpatine fought Yoda to the end, while Palpatine stopped resisting Mace once the lightning failed.

In either situation, had Mace or Yoda struck a fatal blow during the fight itself, such a killing would have been lawful, just as Obi-Wan struck Maul, Anakin and Grievous down in self defense.

But Mace striking Palpatine down was comparable to Dooku, with the same argument being made that he’s too dangerous, which was an argument Palpatine made that Anakin insisted was not good enough.

Yoda was never presented with the same situation. If he had been, then his behavior would also have been wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The novelization of ROTS really hammers home that Yoda was free of fear and anger when he went after Darth Sidious:


With reverence, with gratitude, without fear, and without anger, Yoda went forth to war.

 

I don't think we're disagreeing that much. For example, I've always stated that Yoda gives in to hate later on in the duel, out of fear and desperation, and this is why he loses and realizes he has to go into exile:



Again, notice the use of red here, signifying that Yoda's surrender to anger has caused him to fall to a position where the only escape is a crawl through Hell:





(Even Bail's speeder is red.)

Lucas did a similar thing in ESB:





(Red everywhere. Of course, the entire last portion of the film is overwhelmingly red.)

Anyway, all I'm saying is that Yoda didn't arrive at the Emperor's office with killer intent (but then, neither did Mace). He didn't go there to murder him in anger, he only went there to confront him. I will concede that Yoda rushed to face the Emperor without being ready, just as Luke rushed to face Vader--but that's not quite the same thing as being driven primarily by a murderous impulse. All it means is that Yoda--like Luke (and Mace)--was more vulnerable than he should have been to temptation, which proves disastrous for him.

 

When I read that I believe Liam Neeson should be the one reading the audio books, as though he is the grand overseer and speaking on behalf of the whills.

 

Really? Yoda set out to commit murder free of fear and anger? Don't tell me . . . Matthew Stover. Right?

Now I see what the true problem with the Prequel Trilogy is. And part of that problem might be the franchise's fandom. No one wants to see Obi-Wan and/or Yoda screwing up. Because to do so would acknowledge that Obi-Wan's original description of the Jedi in "A New Hope" was at best, an exaggeration by someone longing for some ideal past. Another problem might be Lucas' own reluctance to realize that both Yoda and Obi-Wan were flawed characters who made mistakes.

Exactly, what did Yoda believe would happen if he "confront" Palpatine? I'm curious. I'm sorry, but after nearly fifteen years, my opinion of Yoda's decision to kill or "confront" Palpatine stands. It was a terrible decision by someone who failed to realize that his war was over.

 

Yoda and Obi-Wan were flawed. They stressed the necessity of Luke killing Vader, while Luke chose to love his father and it ended up redeeming him.

But circumstances matter.

Palpatine was not Emperor when Mace went to arrest him, and Order 66 had not happened.

When Yoda went to fight him, Palpatine was Emperor for life and the vast majority of the Jedi were executed for a bogus crime.

Yoda didn’t have any options either than kill Palpatine or let Palpatine win.

Mace had other options.

In one instance Palpatine is consolidating his power but is not yet in complete control and there is a faction in the Senate against him. But in direct response to Anakin and Mace’s decisions, Palpatine was able to scapegoat the Jedi, get sympathy, and create essentially a police state. At that point Yoda was unjustifiably labeled an enemy of the state.

The circumstance was different




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I'm the last person to argue that Obi-Wan and Yoda didn't screw up. Like I said, I think our disagreement is pretty minor.

 

To be fair, Stover is consistently a harsh critic of the PT Jedi Order - it's just that he's not going to portray Yoda as full of fear and anger, either. The flaws Stover tends to highlight are arrogance (and an unwillingness to let the Order change over time).

 

Am I the only person here who thinks Yoda almost won?

 

How were Mace and Yoda not acting out of self-defense? Mace already sensed a plot to destroy the Jedi. With Yoda it's even more obvious, as Sidious had already ordered the death of every single Jedi. Just because Sidious didn't pull out his lightsaber first doesn't mean he's not the aggressor. The Sith had already declared war on the Jedi when Maul first attacked Qui Gon on Tatooine.

 

Well yeah you're basically just straight-up justifying murder here. You're saying it's okay to kill someone who poses no immediate threat to you just because they did something bad, or because you're afraid they'll do something bad in the future if you let them live. Most people at least try to (wrongly) argue that Mace was in immediate fear for his life, but you're not even doing that.

Not sure what else to say or how to respond to such a thing.

 

Darth Sidious is an immediate threat to Yoda and Mace's lives, and everyone they care about.

 

There was nothing wrong with arresting Palpatine as they found out he had orchestrated the war, and there is nothing wrong with killing in self defense.

I would think that the sense of right and wrong in Star Wars wouldn’t be any different than in real life.

And there are rules to how one defends themselves. For instance, guns may be used in self defense and the general rule is shoot until the threat stops.

If someone comes at you with a weapon and you pull your gun out and he immediately turns to run away, you cannot just start shooting him in the back.

If he keeps coming after you and you do shoot him and he falls to the ground, you can’t walk up and execute him.

If after the first shot he still is coming after you, you can shoot again and again until the threat is over and then you must stop.

My wife watches a lot of those murder mystery shows where someone claims they were acting in self defense, but they get arrested for murder when investigators see that the victim has a bullet wound in the head at point blank (execution shot) or they have bullet wounds in their back (they turned to run).

In the case of Mace, he wasn’t wrong to try and arrest Palpatine. And when Palpatine comes flying over the table and kills three Jedi, Mace has the right to defend himself, with lethal force if need be. But when Palpatine is on the ground saying he’s too weak and Anakin is there willing to help arrest him, Mace can’t just kill him. It’s not self defense at that point, it’s preemptively killing someone under fear of some future risk they may pose.

Mace isn’t even consistent.

“In the name of the Senate of the Galactic Republic, you’re under arrest Chancellor... The Senate will decide your fate.”

“Not yet (you are not the Senate).”

“You are under arrest, my Lord.”

“I’m going to end this! He has control of the Senate and the courts; he’s too dangerous to be left alive!”

Mace does a complete turn. Mace had full intention to arrest him and trusted the Senate, then all of a sudden he’s has contempt for the Senate and discredits their authority so that he can kill him.

If a police officer gets in a shoot out and the criminal eventually throws down his weapon and puts his hands up, the cop can’t just execute him because he might have another weapon or he might resist arrest.

With Yoda there ARE exceptional circumstances. Yoda is wrongfully accused of a crime and he and his fellow Jedi are actively being hunted down and executed without due process. Trying to arrest him is like trying to arrest Hitler at the height of his power and handing him over to the SS for trial. It’s not going to happen. Your options are kill him or let him commit his crimes.

There are exceptional circumstances where people are wanted dead or alive, and I believe that line was crossed after Order 66 and after Palpatine declared himself Emperor.

I won’t argue that Yoda did anything wrong.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

No, he is not (as far as they perceive) an immediate threat, because Mace and Anakin are standing there having a conversation about whether he should be arrested or not, with Mace arguing that he should be summarily executed, because he will use his power over the Senate and the Courts to his own ends.

If he were perceived to be an immediate threat, they would not be having that conversation--nor would they likely be having any conversation. They would be defending themselves from imminent attack.

 

I would say the Hitler analogy is closer to Mace's situation than the police officer analogy.

With police officer analogy, most criminals after dropping their weapon and holding both hands up are no longer capable of attack. Yes there's a possibility of a hidden weapon (which the criminal would have to reach for before using), but the police officer can continue to hold onto their own weapon, thus still be in more control of the situation than the criminal. Mace doesn't have the luxury of being in control if he handed Sidious over to the Senate and Senate votes in favour of Sidious.

With the Hitler analogy, the main difference is that this is before Hitler has actually committed most of those atrocities, but he is already in power and you know what he is just about to do. Mace wasn't just guessing that Sidious *might* have a plan to kill all the Jedi. He literally sensed it through the Force. And Sidious clearly does have the resources to do such a thing. So it's kind of like if a present day person, knowing what Hitler has done, goes back in time to when he is just starting to commit those atrocities and tries to kill him.

Sidious was an active threat to them. Just because he wasn't physically holding a lightsaber at that exact moment doesn't mean he wasn't in the process of killing them.

Metaphorically speaking, Sidious was pointing a lightsaber one foot away from Mace's body. If Mace waits until the lightsaber is one inch away from his body before taking action, it would be too late. Yes we know the result is that his action made things worse, but that was only because he misjudged the movement of Sidious's lightsaber and accidentally moved his own throat even closer to it. At least he tried. He had a better chance of survival that way than being a sitting duck.

 

If Mace had said right from the start that Palpatine would need to die to protect the Republic, then I probably wouldn’t be critical of Mace. Instead, we have a guy that has full faith in the Senate to decide what to do with Palpatine. Even after Saesee, Agen and Kit were killed and after fighting Palpatine, Mace is prepared to arrest him and is in control of his emotions.

When Palpatine uses lightning, all of a sudden Mace is angry and yelling and saying that the Senate can’t be trusted to prosecute Palpatine, claiming that Palpatine controls the Senate and that Palpatine’s too dangerous.

A mere few minutes earlier, Mace denied Palpatine’s claim that he controlled the Senate.

Since 2005 nobody has presented me with a convincing argument as to what changed before and after Palpatine’s lightning to make Mace all of a sudden think that the Senate is corrupt.

Mace’s demeanor is one of anger and justifying killing Palpatine by claiming the Senate can’t be trusted, when a few seconds earlier his tone was calmer and glue did trust the Senate.

The counter argument has always been that he could use lightning again and it’s too risky because a Sith can never be unarmed, yet Dooku proves otherwise, and that earlier scene with Dooku is meant to show how the argument of someone needing to die for being too dangerous is not a valid argument for a Jedi.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It seems to me that it was the combination of Sidious's political and physical power that made Mace decide that he couldn't afford to take the risk of letting Sidious live any longer. With the physical part, both Mace and Anakin just saw it together, so there's no point stating the obvious.

Dooku's situation is entirely different. Dooku's Force lightning was much weaker than Sidious's to begin with (Obi easily absorbed it with his lightsaber in AOTC), plus he lost both hands. He also doesn't control the Senate and the courts. The "too dangerous to be kept alive" argument makes no sense there.

 

As far as I'm concerned, both Yoda and Mace Windu were guilty of the attempted murder of Palpatine. The latter's moral compass did not give them an excuse. None of the excuses I have read on this board is acceptable to me.

 

When Mace said the Jedi would need to take control of the senate, it was because they still thought that there was a secret Sith hidden in the Republic. Now that he knows the Sith Lord is Palpatine (and in this scenario Palpatine is dead), that's no longer the case so I can see Mace trusting the legal process.

Mace Windu went to arrest Palpatine. Palpatine resisted arrest and killed three people. At the time that Mace Windu went for the final strike, Palpatine was still capable of inflicting great bodily harm or death (force lightning and force choke) so Mace was justified in trying to kill him.

 

The situation made it easier for Palpatine to call it a coup, that’s for sure.