Saga Did the Jedi lose their way?

"Don't defy the Council on this one, Master, not again."

"If you would just follow the code, you would be on the Council".

Seems like hints that he sometimes does not follow the will of the Council.

 

Yes, it's implied that it isn't the first time they had disagreements, but we see exactly what Obi-Wan is referring to. Qui-Gon makes his case in regards to Anakin, the Council acquiesces. But in the end, any final decision is up to the Council and Qui-Gon respects that.

 

It seems clear to me from Obi-Wan's phrasing that Qui-Gon has in the past gone beyond disagreement and into disobedience.

 

I get the impression that Qui-Gon followed his own path, based on where he believed the Force was leading him. And if that went against the Council's strict interpretation of the Jedi Code, so be it; the Force came before bureaucracy. I also figure the Council, while not endorsing his views, more or less tolerated him and let him run with it, believing his heart was at least in the right place. Rather like the Doctor and the High Council of Time Lords...much of the time.

 

Yes indeed, this is from canon Age of Republic comic book (2019).

 

There's nothing in the movies that suggests that Qui-Gon goes rogue. He's a maverick, he tried to bend the rules, but he still respects and follows the will of the Council (just like the Council respects Qui-Gon).

"The Council doesn't allow me to train you, so I want you to watch me and be mindful."

"The Council will decide Anakin's future. That should be enough for you."

And he does this when it's clear that Anakin and the prophecy is something he feels strongly about. So if he does it on this relatively important issue, it stands to reason that he did the same in less important ones.

 

"Do not defy the Council, not again"

suggests that he has at least once "defied" the Council in the past.

Which may be why he isn't doing so now - the Council have a limited tolerance for roguery and he has already reached that limit.

 

There is is no evidence that they were drafted. Given the evidence we have they chose to be the leaders of the military, despite the fact that they could have taken a non-military role in the conflict. Again, there are more ways to serve the Republic which don’t involve military service, and given the moral complexity of the conflict, I’d argue it was imperative of the Jedi to take a different role in the conflict.

You can treat your slave army nice on an individual basis, but that doesn’t change the fact they are slaves.

At what point does their duty to the state end and their duty to the population actually begin? You can’t just declare loyalty to a state, and then use that as an excuse to keep serving that state evens after its decent into a form of government that is repulsive.

 

One question I have is, why were the Jedi leading the GAR throughout the war? I can understand them commanding it at Geonosis, given that it was an emergency situation to try and defuse the war before it could truly start and there was no time for other concerns. However, we can see later that the GAR has its own officers and command structure, and we may assume that Republic-allied worlds would also have experienced military or security personnel among their citizens who could volunteer to help out. So, the Jedi really weren't needed. They could've turned over their responsibilities as soldiers to these others, returned to being strictly keepers of the peace, and leave campaigning to the army.
It may have been an overwhelming patriotism, which the Jedi are supposed to be above, following the Force above all. Or perhaps Palpatine may have broadly hinted to others that the Jedi, had they relinquished command, would be slackers in the war effort, so the Order was concerned for their reputation and loss of face. Or maybe Harry Knowles was right in thinking the Jedi were hopped up, figuring that by staying in command they could finally fight the Sith in a last battle and wipe them out forever. I'm not sure which applies, but it confuses me.

 

Maybe they saw no other option after they invaded Geonosis and used the clone army only to rescue Obi-Wan, Anakin and Padme? Because that is what factually happened - the Jedi enacted a rescue mission, and by doing so they actively started a war. How would the public and the Senate react? They invaded this planet, saved their friends, used the army, the war has begun, and now they suddenly want to go back to negotiations and "keeping peace," after they failed to keep said peace in the first place? After that, their primary objective was to win the war swiftly by capturing Dooku and Grievous. The only people who actually tried and actively called for negotiations with the Separatists were Padme, Bail Organa, Mon Mothma, and a few other fellow senators from their circle, if I recall correctly.
As Yoda said in The Clone Wars: "No longer certain, that one ever does win a war, I am. For in fighting the battles, the bloodshed, already lost we have."
The moment they gave up their moral principles and committed to fighting, became soldiers, instead of keepers of the peace, negotiators and diplomats - it was over. They played themselves into the corner, and they had no other option, but to fight. The eyes of the Senate were on them, the eyes of the people, and of course the clone army was now unleashed by the Jedi.

 

I believe the Jedi joined the war because they're very good at playing the role of warriors and they knew that their absence would make the war drag on longer, costing more lives on both sides. If it hadn't been for Palp's manipulations and treachery, they'd have led the clones to a quick and (relatively) clean victory.

 

Every organization at some point succumbs to group think and overestimates their vulnerabilities. This happens all the time in the business world. It has happened to religions. It has happened to empires. Sometimes this leads to a defeat so quickly, they have no time to react and right the ship. Other organizations can whether these storms because they have contingency plans in place.

The more I think about this, the more I think the biggest mistake the Jedi made was not having contingency plans. It stands to reason that an organization as old as the Jedi Order would have experienced a few moments in their thousands of years history where they experienced group think and arrogance. Why were there no plans in place to ensure their survival? There was not a designated survivor/group policy? Ninety-nine percent of the Jedi were either at the Jedi Temple or leading their own clone armies on the field of battle?

 

I think it's pretty clear based on Lucas' films alone that the Jedi had lost their way. Adding in the animated series and the ST just makes the point clearer. This isn't to say the Jedi were bad, or that they deserved what happened to them. But they had become arrogant, overly assured of their position as righteous bureaucrats, and had become consumed by the minutia of their own dogma and protocols. I've made this point before, but any organization that feels lit needs to indoctrinate followers from the time they're toddlers, and that an entrant as young as 9 is "too old," probably has something wrong with their ideals. If you have to be that young in order to properly internalize that organization's philosophy and lifestyle, there is something deeply, deeply broken.

This is a point clearly displayed through Anakin: he's a perfectly emotionally well-adjusted child, despite the hardships of his life, and then we flash forward 10 years and he's just a roiling pot of barely constrained emotions, emotions he doesn't understand, cannot process, and is actively told to repress. Contrast this with Luke, who doesn't begin formal training until he's 22, and doesn't suffer the same issues with emotional repression because he's not being fostered within an emotionally unhealthy system.

 

if you count EU and tv shows yes if its only movies no

 

"Having already been granted emergency powers in the face of the growing threat, Chancellor Palpatine used his ironclad grip on the Senate to seize even greater authority, all in the name of security. To address the urgent military needs of the Republic, he enlisted the Jedi Knights as generals to command the Clone Army." - George Lucas

"They got drafted into service, which is exactly what Palpatine wanted." - George Lucas

Think about it. Why would Palpatine plan a war to spread the Jedi thin so that they could be erradicated swiftly if they were not somehow forced to be part of it if the senate demanded it or if the circumstances required it?

How and when did the Jedi chose to be the leaders of the military?

Slaves or not, the army does not belong to the Jedi. The army belongs to the Republic. It's the Republic, through the Chancellor, that chose to use it. Not the Jedi. The Jedi are assigned to lead the army by the same Republic they swore to serve. Palpatine simply took advantage of their duty to the Republic, and the Jedi tried their best within their power to save lives and to end the war as quickly as possible.

Are Jedi supposed to fight wars? No. Anymore that there should be a war. But in this situation of crisis, they did their part in the roles the Republic entrusted them with. That's the premise of Palpatine's plan, that they would be forced into it.

How are they not serving the population? Are you saying that the Jedi didn't make a difference during the war? That they didn't make a difference in the systems of the Republic that got under attack by the separatists? That they didn't make a difference in the lives they saved that would otherwise be lost? The main issue is not that they fought in the war. The issue is that there is a war, which was manufactured by a bad guy in order to gain more power and erradicate his enemies. And that's not the fault of the Jedi.

 

The Jedi was a religious organization. How was it that they were supposed to have a duty to either the state or the population? They should only have a duty to those who associate themselves with their religious belief. The Jedi allowing themselves to serve the Galactic Senate was probably one of their biggest mistakes in the first place.

 

The Jedi are not, and never were, a mere religious organization. And no, their duty is not to those who associate with their beliefs. Their duty is to those that trust them with that responsibility. The Republic trusted the Jedi to be their guardians of peace and justice, and in turn the Jedi serve the people of the Republic through the senate. The senate and the Jedi are but an example of a simbiotic relationship. When greed and corruption brew within the senate, the repercussions, consequences and suffering are felt in all its symbionts: from the senators, the people they represent, to the Jedi.

 

Again, you’re assuming that they can abdicate their moral duty, because of their sworn allegiance to the Republic. This is a “just following orders” defence.

I’d argue by serving a decaying system without question (beyond the intellectual) they are abdicating their duty to the Republic population. I think they would have been better served in a non-military role in the conflict, especially since serving a corrupt system absolutely, it made them complicit in that system.

No, I don’t think that a religious organisation just has a duty to serve those associated with them. They have a duty to wider society, and in so far as it’s just, the state.

 

No, I'm recognizing the fact that there is a crisis and there's a logical reason why they are being assigned to lead the army in the defense of the Republic. And they are not abdicating their moral duty.

The Jedi don't serve a corrupt system absolutely. And why are you assuming that the Republic population is disconnected from the senate and from what's happening in it? That's a false premise. The senate is full of senators that represent the people of the Republic. The problem is in the political arena, not the public servants that are tied to it (Jedi or not).

And let's assume the Jedi refuse to be involved. How do you think the Republic will react? Even if they don't mind (very doubtful), the Sith can always escalate the situation to a point where the Jedi feel compelled to get involved (which was arguably already happening). The goal is to erradicate the Jedi, at any cost. And they will pull as many string as possible to get what they want.

 

Just because it can be justified morally (a lot of things can be justified upon some normative ethnical framework that others wold find objectionable) does not mean that is not morally questionable. You could argue that from a strict utilitarian point of view, that an army of millions of slaves is justifiable if the other option is the collapse of what you perceive to be the most just and fair constitutional framework available. I'd argue from a utilitarian framework, a society which justifies such a thing (I think it's more morally unjustifiable than conscription) undermines the very system which you are sacrificing people to support. Therefore they have abdicated their moral duty by leading a slave army. To add to that it's acknowledged that the Separatists aren't the equivalent of the fascist threats in our world which we may see as a threat such that we can justify sacrificing some principles during the course of the war. This is a war which is known to be orchestrated by the Sith (even though they don't know who is controlling the Republic side) and is morally ambiguous.

It certainly seems that the system is becoming more and more unrepresentative and corrupt, and as the war progresses, I'd argue that the system has withered away, to the point that the Jedi should have acted long ago.

If it's escalated to the point where it's morally justifiable then that's when the Jedi should get involved. I don't think a war between two sides which, for all intents and purposes, are both corrupt and morally dubious, warrants leading a slave army into battle against one or the other.

 

Wouldn't the Jedi have to wait for the Senate to ask for their "help" in this scenario?

Not unless members of a society request their help. Otherwise . . . no. This sounds as if you don't believe in the separation of church and state.

 

The Jedi are the guardians of peace and justice in the Republic. This means they serve the Republic, they are not a completely autonomous religious organization.

 

Society, religion and the state are all separate things. Most religions have a social outlook and play an active role in society. A religion shouldn’t be established or endorsed by a state - that’s all the separation of church and state is.

 

in the EU both Sith and Jedi lose their ways both of them Evolved with Bane creating the Rule of Two and Luke with New Jedi Order
In the movies is not really explained