Saga The Jedi's attachment & relationship with the Republic, and being centralized: did it help doom them

The Jedi Order is pretty centralized by the time we get to the Prequel Trilogy:
* It's not like it's a religion, it's an order - only Force sensitives of a certain caliber (and age) allowed, even if others might share their values and want to contribute to their mission.
* There aren't really other "mainstream" orders, there's only the one.
* There isn't really room for knights errant, for do-gooders to just follow the will of the Force. To use a Lord of the Rings reference, it's much more like Saruman, overseeing things from a distance in his tower... contrasted by wandering Gandalf, who helps others in small and great ways, living among the people, and following his instincts to wherever they might lead him.
* Its leadership is centralized by a council that oversees the entire order, decides on and delegates missions, and enforces a code of rules and regulations from the number of apprentices allowed to (presumably) padawan hair styles.

Furthermore, on a separate but related note... not only are the Jedi centralized, and therefore their fate tied together, they're affiliated with and serve the government of the Galactic Republic, represented by the Senate and its Supreme Chancellor:
* They can be called to act as the equivalent of their Navy SEALS and other Special Forces, or their CIA, or their FBI, or their top-down ambassadors to speak with the voice of the Senate and resolve local differences to ensure they comply with the Republic's interests as dictated by the Senate.
* They have jurisdiction that very much feels limited to Republic space, and are trained to not get involved with other matters, like freeing slaves on Tatooine as one example.
* They seem to have an attachment to the Galactic Republic that blinds them - why did they decide to not act as a neutral third-party to negotiate an understanding between the Republic and the Separatist worlds (especially when they still thought Dooku was an idealist and good person, and ties with both the corporations and the Sith were not yet known). There doesn't seem to be a debate amongst the Jedi in the lead-up or start to the Clone Wars... they will serve the Republic, no matter what, it's not even a question among them.

How much were Jedi's centralized nature, and their relationship/attachment to the Republic, contributing factors to the Republic's decline and eventual fall, as well as their own doom?

 

Only people born with the aptitude to one day become Jedi are taken in, yes. Why would they do otherwise? Sharing the values of the Jedi doesn't make one a Jedi either.

Nothing is stopping anyone from doing good and follow the will of the Force. You don't have to be a Jedi for that. But if one is a Jedi or is training to become one, it only makes sense to abide by their ways. It's what makes one a Jedi to begin with.

That's not an accurate comparison. The Jedi are the peacekeepers of the galaxy, and because of that they are working all over its territory, on the field. They are not in any tower overseeing things from a distance. They do have a temple, their headquarters, from where they operate, teach, train and learn.

Yes, that's how an order (or any organization for that matter) operates. There is an hierarchy and their ways and teachings are passed down from the elders to the young.

It's the Galactic Republic that represents most of the galaxy and gives them jurisdiction to act.

Not Republic interests as dictated by the senate, but to end disputes and enforce justice. They are trusted to do that.

Yes, they act where they are allowed to act. They are public servants, not vigilantes.

It's explained in Attack of the Clones. It's even in the opening crawl. There's no attachment to the Republic or blindness cause by it.

Debate about what?

 

@Alexrd - you're describing what was, and I'm asking about those pros and cons of that, as well as what could and should have been. What the Jedi could have been and should have been. What the Jedi ways could have been and should have been. How what the Jedi and their ways actually could have contributed to their decline, and the decline of the Republic.

There are ways they could have been different, which could have avoided some flaws and issues, and I think some of them are tied to their centralization and their ties to the Republic. I think that the Jedi should not have jurisdiction - they shouldn't have police/military/judicial powers, that's being another department within the Republic's bureaucracy. The Senate is corrupt, and even when not mostly corrupt it is still flawed (and limited in territory). The Jedi's methods to "end disputes and enforce justice" are to do so in the interests of the Republic they speak and act for, that they have grown to represent. Going back to the LOTR comparison, was Gandalf a vigilante, just because he wasn't operating as the leader or servant of a great power, like Saruman was? (And no, the AOTC crawl only shows the effects of Jedi being affiliated with the Republic, and how they're overwhelmed at trying to keep the existing galactic order, which the movies makes clear is by keeping those systems within the Republic.) There is no debate on whether the Jedi should side with the Separatists instead, or just step back and stay out of the war... that shows blind attachment to the existing flawed order.

In the Lucas-approved novel for ROTS:






And this describes it well, from a more recent comic. It might not be from one of the movies, but it aligns with what you're saying, and shows the problem with that:




Also, see the three "Tales of the Jedi" episode shorts that focus on Dooku.

Yeah, I tried to be more nuanced by what I meant in the post, can only fit so much in the thread title. But even if it didn't make it inevitable, do you see these two things as contributing factors? Also, not all of the Republic's flaws and corruption were caused by the Sith - they just took advantage of it. The Jedi definitely were able to "keep the peace" for a while, but peace isn't always justice. I think we agree overall.

 

I'm describing and explaining what was, why it was and why it's not something else, while clarifying what it was not and is being (baselessly) assumed it was.

The reality is that the Jedi were just deceived (like many other good people). Their ways didn't help or contribute to their doom.

Of course they could have been different, but then they would be something else entirely. Not Jedi.

No, it's not. They are a body that is trusted to keep peace and justice over a given territory that is freely represented by the people. And they have successfully done that for at least a thousand years.

Where are you getting that their peacekeeping and enforcement of justice is done "in the interests of the Republic"?

Claims and assumptions without any basis.

I already said that there's no equivalence between how the Jedi operate and how Gandalf and Saruman operate. The wizards in TLOTR are angelic powers send to aid and guide the free people of Middle-Earth against Sauron. The Jedi are regular people with a particular talent, trained in a particular philosophy and discipline, that are trusted to bring peace and justice where they are asked. The Republic, a freely organized body represented by a large portion of the people of the galaxy, trusted the Jedi to do that, therefore the Jedi are allowed to act within its territory.

Wrong, that's not it. It shows that the rise of the Separatist movement led to an increase in civil conflict within many Republic systems, which in turn made the Jedi's job as peacekeepers difficult due to their limited numbers. The Jedi's job is not to keep any system within or outside the Republic. But to end conflicts and enforce justice within Republic territories.

That's Matthew Stover, not George Lucas.

Why would there be debate about the Jedi siding with the Separatists? That's neither here nor there. They are public servants. There's nothing stopping the Separatists of asking and giving the Jedi jurisdiction to act within its territories. But that didn't happen. The Separatist movement is about leaving the Republic, and the Jedi have no say in the matter. That's a decision of the people of each system. What was happening is that that decision was bringing internal unrest and conflict within many systems, and the Jedi had their hands full trying to end them due to their limited numbers and escalating conflicts. And that led to the debate around the creation of an army to assist the Jedi.

 

@Alexrd , we've talked about this before... there is a "spectrum" the Jedi could exist within. It's intellectually dishonest and lazy to always say "if they weren't the exact same, then they wouldn't be Jedi."

And the books, shows, and movies that Lucas most closely supported shouldn't just be ignored.

The Jedi can be good people... and have flaws that could have been corrected but instead contributed to their fall.

Also, when you're saying the Jedi are given jurisdiction by the Republic and that the Jedi "are a body that is trusted to keep peace and justice over a given territory that is freely represented by the people"... that's being a department within the Republic's bureaucracy.

In response to your "Where are you getting that their peacekeeping and enforcement of justice is done in the interests of the Republic?" - look at the movies, books, comics, and shows. As I've mentioned so many times, the Clone Wars. The Chancellor sending Jedi to Naboo. The screenshots I posted above. To name a few.

"I already said that there's no equivalence between how the Jedi operate and how Gandalf and Saruman operate." - You said that, and that's false. I'm not talking about their nature and origin story, but in the different approached between the two, and you can see how the Jedi of the PT operated more like Saruman than like Gandalf. If you're bringing vigilantes into this, I think this is a much more accurate comparison.

"The Jedi's job is not to keep any system within or outside the Republic. But to end conflicts and enforce justice within Republic territories." - Don't you the contradiction? If the Republic claims it's their territory, then the Jedi are biased to end conflict by keeping the separatists' systems within the Republic's territory and justice system. And as you've said many times, it's the Republic that gives them jurisdiction to act, in your point of view.

"Why would there be debate about the Jedi siding with the Separatists? That's neither here nor there." - No, that's EXACTLY the point of all this.

"Jedi have no say in the matter. That's a decision of the people of each system." - Except it wasn't, the Jedi went to war, against the decisions of the people in the systems that had declared independence.

"And that led to the debate around the creation of an army to assist the Jedi." - And you're saying the Republic created an army to assist the Jedi... and don't think the Jedi were acting like government agents of the Republic... okay.

I'd like you to actually address the ideas and quotes in the screenshots I shared... I put the effort in, I literally bought the kindle ebook for ROTS for some of those screenshots, to show the exact quotes.

 

Dooku could see the way the republic was going long before he was turned by Palps and joined a separatist cause. He was not a sith I don't think before he killed Yaddle just an idealist.if she hadn't followed him he wouldn't have killed a fellow jedi at that point. That's why that tales of the jedi episode is the best piece of animation in star wars.
The jedi were stooges for the republic, even more so when they didn't have the foresight to know they were fighting for a sith. Was brilliant story telling by Lucas, very subtle. He went out of his way to show the failing of the jedi but when the Acolyte does the same it's a cardinal sin
They are merely superhero soldiers by the time of the clone wars.
I actually think we should have seen more sentient combatants on the separatist side the faceless nature of the droids makes us automatically see them as less than the clones but they are equally cannon fodder

 

No, it's intellectually dishonest to pretend that how we would prefer they act or be is how it's meant to be. Lucas explained many times what the Jedi are, what their role is, why their ways are the way they are. And all of that is validated in the narrative, all the way through Return of the Jedi.

Lucas himself shouldn't be ignored. Adaptations or reinterpretations of his work should be irrelevant when we have him establishing something else in his works and statements.

Yes, all of that is possible. Except their fall had nothing to do with any purported fault on their part.

No, it's being a body that is trusted by the Republic to keep peace and uphold justice when necessary. But Palpatine tried to turn them into what you claim they are when he tried to position himself in the Jedi Council via Anakin.

The Chancellor sent two Jedi to Naboo to satisfy Republic interests? Or to end a cohercive activity by a corporation over a sovereign system? The latter, of course.

No, I can't. Because they don't.

There's no contradiction whatsoever. To end the conflict doesn't mean to dictate anyone's allegiance, but to end hostilities and reach a settlement. In the case where there's civil conflict caused by the debate of wether or not to leave the Republic, the Jedi don't go to make them stay in the Republic, but to put an end to the violence and force them to reach a decision (or compromise) one way or the other.

That's not why the Republic went to war. Go rewatch Attack of the Clones, listen to what Obi-Wan eavesdropped on Geonosis.

They are agents of the Republic, but not in the way you paint them.

I don't consider the works you posted as evidence of anything, other than how those authors see things.

I can post Lucas quotes if you want. I assume you agree that they are more authorative? If not, there's no point in arguing further since we are on two different wave lengths.

Sure, that's possible, but nobody is arguing that. As established in the movies, the Jedi don't have a problem with Dooku's "political idealism" or his Separatist movement in and on itself.

So it's their fault that they didn't have the foresight? The foresight that Lucas took the time to establish was actively being affected by the Sith through the dark side?

"Hard to see the dark side is." - Yoda

"The dark side clouds everything. Impossible to see the future is." - Yoda

"I think it's time to inform the senate that our ability to use the Force has diminished." - Mace Windu

"The dark side of the Force has clouded their vision, my friend." - Dooku

"It’s not that they can’t see the dark side coming, it’s just that the dark side begins to envelop everything. It’s like walking into a fog. The Jedi’s ability to see lessens as the dark side grows." - George Lucas

Isn't it easier to blame them for not watching the movies? That way they would have known that Palpatine is the Sith Lord.

 

Failed I have..... (To bail Organa)
The best Yoda truism. He absolutely failed as did his sect. He knew the power and danger of the dark side was gathering but upheld it's dogma. Yoda is all the better of a character for his failings.
And if only mace windu had trusted Skywalker...the course of galactic history could have been different. Arrogance. Hubris the way of the jedi.. corrupted by Palpatine to become warriors again as opposed to peacekeepers

 

I think it's not even about wish-fulfillment, but just allowing the Jedi to have internal diversity, and be less rigid... which is also the impression of many fans before the prequels. But yes, I definitely agree with the rest of your post. What kind of ways would you like to see them "play around" (in your words) with the Jedi, and what do you think is the core of the Jedi that would or should stay the same?

Note before I forget - a special edition of the ROTS novel is coming out soon, with notes of the Lucas collaboration with Stover on the novel.
https://boards.theforce.net/threads...on-october-2025.50061146/page-2#post-59132736
Anyhow, I'd really like you to respond to the quotes from the novel I shared earlier. As I mentioned, while I had been thinking of getting a used copy or e-book of it for a while (after reading through it years ago), I finally bought the e-book just to show you the specific quotes. I'd really like you to respond to them, even if you think they're only semi-canon. Please respond to them.

Anyhow, on to the rest:

* I'm not about disregarding Lucas, and it's also fair to say he's evolved over time, and sometimes hasn't had the best memory with the inconsistencies. He has mentioned the PT Jedi's flaws (more on this issue than the attachment issue, which is a separate discussion I don't want to bring into this thread). His intention is very important to all this, but it's not the only part of this... the artist and the art are different, and you can judge the art on its own too.

"Except their fall had nothing to do with any purported fault on their part."
I highly disagree with this. Lucas has commented many times on the flaws of the Republic - and, as show, the Jedi were unquestionably loyal to the Republic. Only in ROTS did they begin to show cracks in the relationship, and even then they wanted to stay tied to the Republic. They don't seem to have the imagination to be beyond the Republic, to be more separate and neutral, it's just not brought up at all. But Lucas made clear that the Republic was already flawed before Palpatine took over, and before officially becoming the Empire.

"No, it's being a body that is trusted by the Republic to keep peace and uphold justice when necessary."
Maybe this is more about semantics. But... how can you describe the Jedi's behavior, and not see them as being directed by the Republic? Yes, Palpatine in ROTS was taking it a step further. But they were officially generals of the Republic's army. Before that, they were used like special agents, like when Valorum sending Qui-gon and Obi-wan to Naboo, or Palpatine having Obi-wan and Anakin become Padme's bodyguards. There's also the Jedi's thinking, as said above, about them never even questioning being neutral in the Clone Wars or trying to take the Separatists' side (even in a more reformist way to the negotiations) - again, even when they still thought Dooku was an idealistic good guy, and didn't know the involvement of the megacorporations or the Sith.

"The Chancellor sent two Jedi to Naboo to satisfy Republic interests? Or to end a cohercive activity by a corporation over a sovereign system? The latter, of course."
The key part of this is: "The Chancellor sent." That's what I'm talking about. You don't see him sending anyone to a planet outside of the Republic, like Tatooine seems to be.

"No, I can't. Because they don't."
They do. I won't elaborate on it again, unless you bring up points that make me want to remind you of this comparison. But at least can you acknowledge that this is my point of view, and understand why it is?

"There's no contradiction whatsoever. To end the conflict doesn't mean to dictate anyone's allegiance, but to end hostilities and reach a settlement. In the case where there's civil conflict caused by the debate of wether or not to leave the Republic, the Jedi don't go to make them stay in the Republic, but to put an end to the violence and force them to reach a decision (or compromise) one way or the other."
You just said the Jedi operate under Republic jurisdiction, and, and here is your quote: "to end conflicts and enforce justice within Republic territories." So do they see the Separatist systems as being within Republic territory, and having to conform to Republic's justice system, or not? If they Jedi were actually neutral, they could have tried to come to a settlement by withdrawing from being an instrument of the Senate/Chancellor. But they didn't. There they are, discussing policies within the Chancellor's office, and taking his assignments. There was not yet any war until the Battle of Geonosis. To be clear: I want the Jedi to have actually done what you're saying they did here... but they didn't.

"That's not why the Republic went to war. Go rewatch Attack of the Clones, listen to what Obi-Wan eavesdropped on Geonosis."
I know it well. Even then, it just shows they have an army, and that would force the Republic to recognize their independence and all of their demands. We know the Sith plot, and while the corporations reek, what Obi-wan overheard was simply that the Republic would need to recognize their independence (unless they had their own army, which was just conveniently discovered). They don't yet know of Dooku's fall, and the Republic's response is to send an invading army rather than negotiate over the release of the three prisoners. Obi-wan did not overhear an attack plan of any kind.
Dooku's quote, after saying their droid armies combined would be the finest in the galaxy: "The Republic will agree to any demands we make."

"They are agents of the Republic, but not in the way you paint them."
The whole issue is that they are agents of the Republic. If you acknowledge that, then that's like half of the argument I've been trying to convince you of in this thread so far.

"Sure, that's possible, but nobody is arguing that. As established in the movies, the Jedi don't have a problem with Dooku's "political idealism" or his Separatist movement in and on itself."
That seems to be what you've been arguing. And as I've been arguing, if they truly had no problem, they wouldn't be acting as agents of the Republic. They'd withdraw to show their true neutrality, and be in a stronger position to negotiate any agreement between the two parties. As said above, Obi-wan seems quite biased and concerned when realizing the Separatists would be able to force recognition of their independence.

 

I think Lucas made it clear that the Jedi were getting too involved with the Republic politics which led to their corruption and downfall ultimately. It may not have been the only cause but it definitely was a major one. the Jedi were turning into soldiers and acted like it in the AoTC movie despite Mace saying they were peacekeepers not soldiers.

 

would it have been better if the jedi had never joined the republic and instead tried to be their own entity but maintain good relations with the republic?
my answer would be probably however i would love to hear other opinions
i understand im basically just restating the thread title, i just wanted to put it a bit more bluntly

 

I 100% agree. To make an equivalent to the real world, the Jedi should be less like the FBI and more like Red Cross.

 

Yep, I'd also support that.

For me personally, the alarm bells start ringing from the very beginning, when the opening crawl from The Phantom Menace reads, "...the Chancellor has secretly dispatched two Jedi Knights, the guardians of peace and justice in the galaxy, to settle the conflict."

Such a beautifully straightforward, hidden-in-plain-sight way of describing a big ol' mess of corruption and stagnation, right there.

 

i remember seeing that as a kid and asking my parents "if theyre guardians of peace and justice why do they have to be a secret?" and my parents were like it is not 5 minutes into the movie please do not ask questions like this the whole time

 

The Jedi had to join due to the actions of the Sith, who had no oversight and no one to answer to. The Jedi acting with impunity is a dangerous thing. It was a sign of trust that they wouldn't follow in the footsteps of their enemies.

 

No, they didn't have to join, that line of thinking was Palpatine's trap and a result of the Jedi's attachment to the Republic narrowing their options, making this a contributing factor to their fall.

The Jedi can be separate from the Republic without trying to rule the galaxy, or break laws carelessly. This isn't arguing they should break whatever laws they want, this is saying they shouldn't be the official law enforcement and special agents of the Republic.

 

As Lucas said, everyone is connected together and have to work together. This includes the Jedi. The fault lies with the Republic for turning its back on the people for the sake of convenience. For disbanding the military and relying solely on the Jedi.

 

Lucas seemed to see bring long back the military’s a bad thing. He did think the Galaxy should work in symbiosis, and free of “cancers” like the Sith. The Jedi can work with the Republic for their common goals, but also others, including non-Republic governments, without being a part of any.

 

personally i think the jedi couldve had more authority as a self governing independent system that gave itself its own authority than as a system whose authority was given to it by the republic

 

For me the Jedi Order of the Prequels was perfect the lack of attachment did not represent the fall of the Order you can have relationships but love and marriage are forbidden it was the corruption of the Republic politicians the Jedi should have supervised the Senate more for me the Jedi Order was also a religion and a philosophy they were martial artists all in one the Jedi Order and its teachings were never the problem the Republic was if the Jedi Order were independent it might function better

 

I don't see how the Jedi could've stayed seperate/independent from the Republic.
I can imagine that the GFFA has had various political systems over a number of eras and the Jedi would've had differing roles during those times. But eventually enough of the galaxy came together into a democratic republic and the Jedi would've needed to decide their relationship with that and there's politics in that : do they want to serve the peoples of this Republic?

There's plenty of scope for stories in all that, but eventually I'd say even the Jedi , as a group, would employ democracy for collective decisions.

 

The Jedi can serve the people of the Republic, without being official agents of its government. They can ally with this government, when they align, but not become their special government agents.

Also, the Jedi Order doesn't make decisions democratically, at least in the eras we've explored - from all we know, they're just governed by the Council, and apparently many for life.

(I wish we were shown the GFFA with various political systems... but in both old canon and new canon, it's just been the Galactic Republic for 25,000 years since the discovery of hyperdrives and faster-than-light travel. There's been some periods a Sith Empire took over some part of the galaxy, a few internal conflicts on which planet would be the capital, an early conflict with a human aristocracy in the outer rim that was swiftly defeated/conquered, some time periods they had withdrawn from a region that became kind of lawless before reestablishing itself, a short misunderstanding with some space dragons that was quickly resolved, and a century when human supremacists were elected Chancellors with inquisition/crusade-style policies... but it's all been the Galactic Republic, and it seems the Jedi's role has barely changed.)