PT Why didnt Padme save Shmi from Slavery ?

Fair enough - I think we have to accept that this is how it went down and thats what we have to go with.

 

I have never called it a plot hole, character inconsistency maybe.
How Luke acts in TLJ is not a plot hole but I don't think it fits how his character was in the OT and not enough reason is given as to why he is like this.
A Plot Hole is when a piece of the narrative is missing.
Not so here. Padme or the Jedi left Shmi to rot as a slave. I find that behavior a bit odd but it a Plot Hole it is not.

Speaking of Padme and the idea that she will try to work with the senate to do something.
What happened in TPM?
She went to the senate to plead for aid. But the senate did little and wanted to put this matter into a committee.
Did Padme accept that and tried to be "By the book"?
No! She told the senate to smeg off and went back to Naboo to do the job herself.
So would this Padme, when it comes to Shmi or slaves in general, be content with, "I helped put together a committee to look into this."?
In my experience, when a politician says "I will put together a committee" they often say "I will do nothing." with as much apathy as possible.

As to your argument, it falls down in that you assume that slavery is a zero-sum game even down on an individual basis.
Which leads to absurd consequences.
You argue that as soon as Watto sells, Shmi, an innocent person becomes a slave.
That would apply regardless of who Watto sells Shmi to.
So if Watto sells Shmi to someone that does not free her, another innocent has become a slave and now the number of slaves have increased by one.
By that reason alone, if Padme buys and frees Shmi, the number of slaves does not increase.
So by not acting, Padme is allowing more and more innocent people to become slaves.
As soon as Watto or anyone else sells a slave, an new, innocent person becomes a slave.
So not only is your argument flawed in that it says it is a zero-sum game, the number of slaves goes up every time a slave is sold.

Your argument also precludes the following options;
1) Watto buys an existing slave for another slave owner, one that perhaps is retirering and has less need of slaves. Or from a slave owner that has died and the Hutts are selling of his/her property. So no new person becomes a slave. The number of slaves therefore decreases as Shmi is freed.

2) Watto sells Shmi but either does not want and new slave or has not got enough money to buy one. Which is what did happen as far as AotC goes. Watto was in debt after his loss at the race. So he sold Shmi to pay off his debts and it did not look like he got a new one. He himself sits and repairs junk in the front of his shop.
Padme can reasonably know this and so knows that Watto is in need of cash and would not likely be able to get a new slave. So she could figure that Watto would sell Shmi and pretty soon and she could be sold to someone that does not free her and this someone could be Jabba who treats her horribly.
But if she buys her, she can make sure this does not happen.

Sure I can and five years ago, I gave nothing.
But the issue is this;
I don't have enough money by myself to end poverty in the world, my country or my city.
So I can either, acknowledge this and yet give some money that will hopefully make a difference to a few people.
Or say "I can not solve this problem by myself so therefore I will do nothing about it."

If someone does not give to charity, that does not make them bad people.
However if they try to argue that what they do is more moral, then I will disagree.

Making sure that his mother is no longer a slave on a world run by criminals is not "feeding his attachment".
If a child knows that one of their parents is held hostage by a crazed killer, is in a war zone, or otherwise at considerable risk. That child will be afraid, worried and thus would think a lot about that parent.
And almost certainly ask what could be done to help said parent.
If a child has a parent just go missing, that too will cause fear, worry and anxiety.

If a child on the other hand knows their parent is safe, alive and well and lives a good life.
That will cause less fear and worry and thus the child would then have an easier time to let go of that attachment.

Anakin missed his mother, normal for a nine year old in his situation. He also had extra reasons to be worried about her since she was a slave on a world run by gangsters. He knows what could happen to her.
She could be sold to a Hutt, who could all sorts of bad things to her.
Nothing was done and Anakin tried to bury his fear and worry, act like he was not attached while he still was.
He didn't deal with the problem and so his feelings festered and grew worse.

As for what the Jedi should have done if they didn't take him in.
So just send away this boy with an unprecedented level of Force potential?
Knowing that the Sith are back. And what would happen if said Sith got a hold of Anakin?
Could be really bad.
Also there is the prophecy. If the Jedi think that Anakin, and only Anakin can kill the Sith and bring balance, they have to train him. If they do not then the sith can not be defeated and the Force will remain unbalanced forever.

Bye.
Blackboard Monitor

 

It's not just my argument. It's the argument of multiple reputable human rights groups in the real, actual world in which you and I are living. You're free to disagree using whatever logic you can conjure for the purpose of winning an Internet debate about a twenty-year-old Star Wars movie. That's your right. But the fact remains that Padme's actions were reasonable and justifiable by any fair standard, even if you personally would have acted differently. The argument really is over, though of course it will continue on regardless.

But I will say that you are badly misrepresenting the argument and fundamentally misunderstanding the way markets work. You are also assuming that the mere act of facilitating the transfer of a slave from one master to another is a morally neutral action; it could in fact be that a slave was in a comparatively better situation and would suffer from being transferred to a different master. The point is that the entire business of participating in a slave market is full of unforeseen ethical hazards.

 

Why? Why should there have been a big discussion between Anakin and Padme about Shmi in AOTC?

Why do so many believe the Jedi or Padme only should have freed the slaves on Tatooine without the cooperation of the Galactic Senate, the Naboo government, the Tatooine government, the Hutts and Watto? Why do they think it would have been easy? Ending slavery in the U.S. was very difficult. Why would it be so easy in the Star Wars universe? Because it's a fictional story?

 

What's is very clear as stated right in TPM is that Qui-Gon didn't go there to free slaves. The Jedi and Republic know all about it but they have no power out there.

Anakin was a special case and he tried to free Shmi but he couldn't manage it. The idea that Padme should have done something personally just doesn't play with how she works. What isn't highlighted in TPM but is still there is that plenty of people on Naboo died during the invasion. There society needed to be rebuilt as well as reconstructed with the new alliance with the Gungans.

She would work to end slavery everywhere not just try to do something in one particular case for one person just because she knew her.

 

Exactly. Wars tend to leave cities destroyed and lots of people dead so she was very, very busy rebuilding the planet. As mentioned earlier by Iron_Lord, by the time she ceased to be queen, she tried to find Shmi, but she had been freed already. If anything, blame the scripting for Attack of the Clones for not bringing this up.

AEHoward33 raises a good point as well. A society built on slavery is going to have a hell of a time trying to dismantle it. In the United States, they had to fight a civil war over it. Granted, some nations had an easier way to do it but by an large, when a nation seeks to emancipate an entire group of people (slaves or serfs) it’s going to shake the economy and the societal structure. For another example, check out Tsar Alexander II who liberated the serfs around the same time the US was having its civil war (1861, so we were literally just getting started with our war.) The nobility spent sleepless nights tearing their hair out trying to figure all this out while, of course, maintaining their own power. No doubt Alexander II was looking over at America and wondering how he could avoid repeating our colossal screw-up. If anything else, he handled it way better than we did.

And this was just one country. Imagine, then, an entire strip of a galaxy. A galaxy, mind you, that the Republic has no control over. She would basically be asking the Senate to launch a galactic war against the Hutts and other slavers. The Senate couldn’t even decide if they wanted a standing army to protect its own collective rear against impending hostile forces, so...

TL;DR: Everyone in the Outer Rim not a Hutt or any other slaver were screwed. There would be no Space!Moses leading an armada of ships to free them. :[

 

I always simply thought that, just as how Padme was too busy with all her queen's duties in repairing Theed and presumably building treaties with the Gungans, then busy with her senatorial duties representing her own planet, that she didn't really have the presence of mind to look into Shmi-who was on a planet not part of the Republic anyway. I mean after all, she didn't even see Anakin for that long either. I saw it as that she simply had more pressing priorities.

 

Basically, yes, she should have done that. "Galactic War" against the Hutts, AFTER having the clone army? Sounds like a piece of cake to me. But of course that's just speaking from my overly idealistic viewpoint.

 

She would be the most hated senator in the Galactic Republic. Dragging them into a needless war against the Hutts where supplies and lives would be lost. And again, the Hutts would more than likely use bounty hunters to do their fighting so we’d be looking at a protracted guerrilla war covering the entire Outer Rim. This could serve a thread of its own possibly — should Padmé have started a war against the Hutts?

 

Yes she should, and like I said AFTER they had the Clone Army! War???? I don't think so. The Jedi PLUS Clones could have done away easily with slavery AND the Hutts in a matter of days. Come on!!!!! What did the Hutts have against an entire Clone Army PLUS Jedi??? NOTHING! A puny gang of gangsters at the very most. The Republic, especially the Jedi, were lazy and corrupt, period. They could have done away with so many evils in the GFFA easily, and all that without even the Sith to worry about. They were arrogant, ignorant and lazy, PERIOD!
Again, MY very idealistic and optimistic point of view!

 

Why should the Republic get involved on Tatooine when they already have the Clone Wars to deal with? The army and the Jedi were spread thin across the galaxy as is. I hardly see much of a difference with the Republic's actions in regards to the Hutts and the actions of real world nations in regards to China, personally. Not every organization in a fictional work will be completely virtuous and completely rid the galaxy of all evil-doing, just as no real world nation is or does.

 

In TCW movie, didn't the Republic want the Hutt Cartel's resources and support?

 

Exactly. It’s like asking why the United States doesn’t just invade North Korea already and free the obviously oppressed people. Or the UN for that matter. Putting aside the fact that the last time they tried it didn’t end well — what could they do?

People seem to think that all you have to do is bump off the big bad and fly off into the sunset declaring victory for the forces of good. It doesn’t work that way. Even if they somehow managed to topple the Hutts, they have to deal with an entire rim of people not used to living in the Republic nevermind those who benefited from slavery who would be very, very pissed that that their money has basically become kaput. Indeed, as the Sequel Trilogy showed us, destroying the Empire created a vacuum for a new evil to rise. Even if the Republic wins the hypothetical Republic-Hutt War they’d still have to handle the aftermath. What do you do with all these planets? Slaves? People who benefited from that system? You’d have to install garrisons and have Jedi monitor the Outer Rim for any potential resistance.

All of which, of course, takes time, money, and resources.

It’s a sad, sticky situation. Yes, in an ideal universe, the Hutts would be defeated, slaves freed, and the Jedi leads the charge and establish true freedom and security for the entire galaxy.

So getting back to Padmé, I’m sure she tried but it was no use. If Shmi were already freed, well, no point in grabbing her them now would it?

EDIT: They probably don’t even know what’s happening out there. After all, Padmé even says she can’t believe slavery still exists and Shmi has to clarify it to her. Let me reiterate this: a slave woman from an Outer Rim planet has to clarify to a queen from a Core planet that the Republic doesn’t exist ‘out here, we have to survive on our own.’ Yeah, that should tell you something.

 

As I wrote, I may be overly idealistic, so I strongly believe the Republic and their all-powerful Jedi should enforce universally accepted values such as non-slavery. If they don't do that in my eyes they are powerless and useless. They sit in their (ivory) tower, endlessly discuss things and really do nothing. What are the Jedi in the prequels if not powerless slaves to an even more powerless Republic? But as I said, I personally MIGHT possibly be "too idealistic". But that's my point of view and I stand by it.
Personally I would have preferred them to ACT more and debate less.

 

And that might have been the point Lucas was driving to. Anakin as a child thought the Republic was this super awesome, freedom-loving entity and the Jedi were practically immortal demigods punching bad guys in the face before flying off into the twin sunsets.

Then we see how they really are. A Republic bogged down by corruption and infighting; the Jedi spread too thin and bowing only to the whims of an ineffectual Senate. When they’re not doing that, they sit in their Temple contemplating their navals.

 

The reason no one... not Padme, not the Jedi, not anyone.... rescued Shmi is questionable writing. The movies never revisit Shmi's status until her kidnapping and murder.

And it's important to note, Shmi didn't die a slave. She died free. She was living a life much like someone in the American West, in the "pioneer" days, where there were threats and dangers. At the time of her death, her life probably was much like Luke's, in his days on Tatooine.

So, the question is, why didn't someone swoop in and move her to a cushy apartment on Coroscant? We have no clue - the movies are 100% mum on this. Was the offer made and rejected? Did no one think of it?

It's funny to me that we have so many Threads here bashing the Jedi for not being more like Qui-Gonn, asserting that if Qui-Gonn had been alive to train Anakin, all would have been well. Qui-Gonn made it clear he wasn't looking to free slaves, then takes Anakin and leaves Shmi....

 

It's possible, even likely, that the Jedi did get in touch with Shmi. We don't know.

She probably didn't desire to leave. She just wanted Anakin to have the opportunity. One thing is for sure, even though the Jedi didn't know this, we, the audience know that Shmi absolutely would not have been safe in a cushy apartment on Coruscant, considering her son was being groomed to be a Sith apprentice.

Probably...yeah...considering they both lived in the same house on the same farm, except Luke wasn't getting snuggled by Cliegg at night.

 

This next bit, some will have trouble with, I'm sure....

One reason the Jedi were nervous about Anakin was the sense that, at his age - as young as he was! - he had already formed powerful personal connections that left him vulnerable to Dark Side temptations. The "it's all the Jedi's fault" crowd tend to overlook this, and overlook how right this was...

As a result of his mother's murder, Anakin goes on a murderous rampage, slaughtering men, women and children (a Dark Side act Padme excuses and conceals, and that Anakin KNOWS is dangerously Dark Side). If Shmi had been moved to a nice cushy life somewhere else, Sidious could indeed have had her killed. Note too that Anakin's fall is directly tied to his fear of the pain he'd feel if Padme were to die - the "connections thing" yet again.

So, your observation about Shmi not being safe anywhere is spot on.

As to the Clieg thing... yikes. ;^)

 

So true. A Jedi doesn't need to unlearn what they never learned to start with. The problems Anakin faces with attachment the rest of the Jedi will never know and can't fully understand. Anakin is already set apart from the other Jedi because of his exceptional powers, but more alienating is his completely different upbringing. Everyone else was raised by Jedi, probably in a temple, if not the temple on Coruscant.

In a lot of ways the Jedi have more in common with how the Clone Army is raised than they would Anakin.

Those rules were there for a reason. And exceptions were not made to those rules for a reason. Had the Jedi stuck to what worked and not excepted Anakin what would have happened.


As for Padme not saving Shmi...... The Star Wars universe is sometimes very small with any location is just a hyperspace jump and film transition away. Other times it feels huge in the way Earth was huge during the Roman Empire. Getting back to somewhere remote is not easy. Finding someone remote is not easy. It would take time and knowledge.

Then again we have bounty hunter fobs that ping in proximity to somoene.


I think the answer is paradoxically both.

 

The Roman Empire reference is GREAT. One thing I loved about ANH was the sense that the Empire was SO huge, there were backwater planets that barely registered. On Tatooine, you might see a couple of stormtroopers if you went into a city, but otherwise, you might have few direct "governmental" dealings. The same when Vader threatened to leave an imperial garrison at Cloud City.

Hyperspace or not, a galaxy is a huge place!

A bit off topic, but a great point!

 

I don't care about all those legal details at all. SOMEBODY should have done SOMETHING, period. I mean, since when is SW a courtroom drama instead of a space Western? I would much have preferred some real "outlaw" action (Han shooting first???) to all that legal babble. ONE person could not be saved in order to keep the Jedi's "chosen one's" peace of mind and prevented him from turning the Republic into the Empire????? Give me a break!!!! Nobody says Shmi should be given a luxury apartment on Coruscant. For Anakin's peace of mind it would have been enough that she was safe on Tatooine. But NOT ONE of the "wise" Jedi even thought of that??? Again, give me a break!

 

I’m not the first person to bring this up, but you don’t see the problem with the picking one specific slave that’s “worth” saving while letting the rest rot because their kid isn’t the chosen one? And again, Qui-Gon’s situation is a little different. He managed to win Anakin’s freedom essentially for free. There’s no way to do that for every slave in the galaxy and in fact Watto was quite clear that the deal would not apply to more than one slave under any circumstances.

 

Frankly, I'm not a big fan of the "chosen one" concept. But Anakin was the ONE person who could have turned the fate of the entire GALAXY. Just a LITTLE more understanding and help may have changed the whole outcome of the Galactic War!!!! So yes, ONE Jedi or whoever may have foreseen what the PTSD going on inside Anakin may have caused! So yes, the Jedi should have bent the rules SOME to prevent a huge Galactic disaster! Is this really that hard to understand? The Jedi were BLIND and incompetent, PERIOD! Their total failure to see Anakin's internal struggle was what made the Empire happen in the first place!!! Internal insight, compassion and slightly more hindsight may have prevented the Empire from happening!

 

Because Lucas forgot to write a good story somewhere in the 90s?

 

But, given the the Jedi were nervous about Anakin and they knew he had very different experiences from all other Jedi.
He knew his mother and was attached to her.
So did the Jedi never consider that their normal methods might not work here?
That Anakin had a baggage that none of the other Jedi had and some care had to taken to deal with that?
That their "One size fits all" approach might need tweaking?

The Jedi take care that their students don't have any past attachments but Anakin did.
So if they do decide to train him, knowing about this, then would the question arise as to how best to deal with it?

This is very basic understanding of humans. If parent looses and child, a child looses a parent, a person looses a loved one. They will likely feel sad and mourn, grieve and hopefully move on.
If the other person just goes missing, that they don't if they are alive or dead, where they are.
That is in some respects worse.
They are left in limbo, should they mourn and say goodbye even not knowing if the other person is dead?
Should they cling to a fools hope and not move on?

Anakin was left in limbo, his mother was a slave and he had no way to know if she was alright or not.
So he worried, missed her and the fear was always there. And it grew and festered over ten years.
And when she did die, in horrible circumstances, he exploded in rage and death.

And this was a case where acting sooner might have helped. Had he gone to save her 1-2 weeks earlier, she might not have died. Had she not died, then Anakin might have gone on a different path.

I don't hold Anakin as doomed from birth, that no matter what happened around him, he could never let go. He is responsible for his own actions but I just don't think that the Jedi can claim no responsibility.
I think different circumstances might have yielded different results.

As for Sidious sending assassins after her. He didn't in the films so why would he do so now?
Besides, if a person is drowning, would you refuse to help with the reasoning "well this person might die in a car crash five years from now."?

Bye for now.
Blackboard Monitor