Saga The ethics of using clones

I feel like the Jedi should have had more to say about this. Maybe they do in Clone Wars, which I'm just starting, but I don't remember it being addressed at all in the mainline films. Breeding a genetically-modified class of people to serve as soldiers seems incredibly messed up.

 

If I remember right, Sifo-Dyas commissioned the creation of the clone army for the Republic in secret. When the Jedi found out about this and the army's existence, the Republic decided to formally organize the use of the clone troopers into the army because they were on the verge of a civil war and needed to bolster their numbers. The Jedi decided to accept becoming generals for this new army and to take part in overseeing the training of recruit to make sure the clones weren't treated as simply a product.

 

It is incredibly messed up. Forcing people to fight in a war and NOT giving them any other choice is repulsive. Even if some Clones wanted to fight, none were given a choice. The fact that the Jedi and Republic went along with it is disgraceful.

 

it is explored to a much greater extent in the series

 

Completely unethical, totally morally wrong, the perfect example of how thoroughly the Republic and Jedi had morally deteriorated towards the end. Even if Palpatine hadn't been there to push the Republic over the ledge, it would have likely collapsed or at the very least completely perverted itself beyond recognition within another century.

 

Yeah, it's basically a child slave army (don't forget the clones were actually 10-13 years old during the Clone Wars.)

 

Cloning in and of itself, is not wrong or evil. The technological and medical advances that have come from it have proven the worth of cloning. We've seen advances in life saving procedures due to being able to clone various organs and body parts. This is not a bad thing. Cloning an entire person, however, falls into a bit of a grey area. Cloning a person and giving them free will would not be wrong, but as a direct creation of an individual, how free is the clone's free will? The cloned individual, whether a copy of someone, or an unique creation, would still be influenced by the biases of the creator, which is where it falls into the grey area, as we then start crossing into the moral and ethical questions and ramifications.

As the clones are portrayed in the movies, would fall into the category of being wrong or evil. There is no grey area here to consider. Specifically bred and raised for one sole purpose, void of any free will, is both morally and ethically wrong. Add to it the inhibitor chips implanted in their brains, and it goes beyond just the lack of free will and into full on indoctrination. For me, the clone army was based on, and meant to emulate to a degree, the US draft. The US draft was dropped due to being morally and ethically wrong. American men drafted into military service with no choice but to serve or be branded a criminal. And once drafted, in nearly all cases, the individuals were not given a choice of a field or profession within the military.

 

Yeah, I agree that cloning itself is just as morally neutral as any other kind of reproduction (something that other works of fiction often forget). It’s the purpose, being bred to be sold as part of an army, that’s so wrong.

 

I confess, I have a very odd outlook on certain story elements, in any work of fiction. That is... at times I put responsibility on the characters, and other times I put responsibility on the authors. And I readily admit, I would have a very hard time giving you a hard and fast, very very precise, set in stone set of rules and evaluations I use in making my decisions.

Basically, if I had to summarize it, I would say that if a character behaves in a way that seems to totally betray his or her established personality or morality, I tend to ascribe that to bad writing or bad creative choices, versus 'blaming the character'. It is tricky, no question, because it is entirely possible for people to change, to make bad choices, and so forth (or, for bad people to make good choices, etc). However, if a character does X "out of the blue", with no groundwork being laid, I think it is legit to question the choices of the author. Similarly, if a character does something, or an event happens, and you can pretty much see that the author needed that to happen, often because they had painted themselves into a corner, I tend to (again) put that on the author.

I think GL needed a way for the Emperor to take over at the blink of an eye, to stage a remarkable, mostly bloodless coup (apart from the deaths of the Jedi!), versus, for example, after a long civil war. For whatever reason, he wanted Palpatine to become dictator/emperor "in a day". The easiest, simplest way to do that, to not have to explain why so many freedom loving people, so many worlds, just accepted his sudden seizing of power (although yes, we do eventually get the Rebellion) was to give him an overwhelming military that could turn its allegiance on a dime - frankly, as if they were a bunch of robots. Having already given the Separatists a droid army, he went the "robotic clone" route.

This was, no offense, a BIZARRE choice. A cloned human is a human. The clone army is a slave army. They were genetically manipulated, yes, but they are essentially human. They are certainly "human" in the same way that the intelligent "alien" races in SW are human (yes, I realize - even the "humans" in SW are "aliens" in that no one in the saga is from Earth!). It is so strange that this issue gets no real screen time, that I don't think it is was intended to be a major moral point. What I mean is, if this is supposed to be a major sin of the Jedi, or the Republic, I think they would have had someone - Padme, Bail Organa, SOMEONE - raise very serious objections, based on this specific point. That we never get this suggests to me either that it didn't occur to the creative team (unlikely?) or that they just didn't want to deal with it. IMHO.

 

I agree that Lucas did not intend for the creation of the clones to be a moral sticking point, or to be looked at with any moral narrative. I understand it's meant to be a plot device to advance the story, but like with a few other things in the prequels, Lucas glossed over any moral implications of his choice to include these things in his story. I cannot say one way or the other if there was intent to gloss over these things, but it feels as if Lucas was hoping people wouldn't pay attention to the morality of these things, especially when you consider he gives more weight and credence to the scene telling everyone smoking is bad for you, than he did in addressing any sort of morality in other scenes.

 

They have as much say in it as any other political decision by the senate, i.e: they have no say at all. They have no say on the creation of the clones or how they are going to be used.

The clones belong to the Republic, not to the Jedi. They are under the senate's Chancellor's jurisdiction. They, just like the Jedi, are sent to the battlefronts in service.

As for wether or not Lucas intended to address the ethics and morals of it, he does it in more subliminal ways. The slow pans over the factory-like production of clones does that to the viewer. The mirrors with the lifeless droid factories are there. And if one has seen THX 1138, the implications are even more obvious.

If anything, he explores the clones humanity and individuality in the TV series, something that due to lack of time is only hinted at in ROTS. Humanity and individuality fostered by the Jedi, who served alongside them in the frontlines across the galaxy.

 

I'm only just getting into TCW, but from a movie saga viewpoint it is harsh. I also like it and wish it had been clones on both sides of the conflict. Smashing up droids all the time must get boring.