A generic question tangentially related to the Star Wars chronology

If people willingly support a dictator, do they deserve to suffer?

 

No more than is absolutely necessary to be able to overthrow the dictator, preferably by internal enemies of the regime. (Instead of external enemies, who usually use the whole "overthrowing the bad dictator" as an excuse, not as a deeply felt moral principle that guides all of their foreign policy.) People who willingly support a dictator - like Tenel Ka - should not have to suffer just because they are misguided more than should people who support corrupt or ineffectual democratic governments.

 

If the suffering is caused by the dictator, why not?

 

Only if they have and condone the full facts about the dictator and the their regime. And only if the suffering is either caused by the dictator or fully nescessary - but then who's to judge whether it's truly nescessary. It also depends whether the people we're talking about are civilians or combatants.

 

This is tricky because of what at "Dictator" is.

People will move mountains for certain leaders because they feel he does things for them...to them, he is not a dictator.

A "dictator" usually represents some form of tyrannical rule by force or fear. People don't usually embrace men who rule through fear...it is only after they are in power that this becomes so.

Hussein, Hitler, Mussolini, Castro were men with revolutionary ideas and a loud voice...either by election or coup d'etat, with massive support from people who don't know the whole truth. Once in power, the "man of the people" becomes "Chief of the State" and in turn the state follows the chief into his tyranny.

Summary: No Dictator is embraced as a dictator (unless you are the Vong), so it's hard to imagine a scenario where people support an obvious dictator with their eyes open.

 

I'm not sure people supporting a dictator would agree that they're suffering.

 

Tying this back into Star Wars, it is obvious that Palpatine fostered unity and order, albeit by force.

He was legally appointed dictator for life by the legislature.

Many of the people likely saw Empire as a means to avoid the horrors of intergalactic war.

I doubt they considered themselves suffering.

 

More over, They don't see Palps as a dictator...not at first...but as a dutiful leader who brings order and peace.

High Price.

 

The problem with Palpatine is hindsight - he was not a man who saved the Old Republic from war, chaos, corruption etc and brought law, order and peace, but a man who personally was responsible for the war and partly by his own actions and through the Sith plan to overthrow the Republic&Jedi responsible for the corruption. The people in 19 BBY thought he was the real deal and thought him to be their saviour; like with Augustus in Rome after years of war people - those who were free in the first place - thought that giving up some freedom in exchange of lasting peace and stability was a good deal. So from their point of view accepting Palpatine as a dictator for life made sense. There appeared to be no alternative except war and chaos. But of course there was. In the real life there may be times when a dictatorship is the best alternative for a short time, when all other choices would cost more lives without bringing peace. But that can happen only in really bad situations.

 

I support Palpatinian order. With spring ready to pilot into summer at any moment here, you won't get respite from miniskirted women. There's none of that bombardment with his bias. Imperialise them!

 

Um, I thought his father did all that, and Il just inherited the position.