It's actually astonishing that the Jabba/Leia scenes in ROTJ didn't cause a scandal, back in 1983
- Thread starter Unimatrix Q
- Start date
But also he serves Palpatine.
Yes, but I don't think it would lead him to object to slavery as an institution or try to end it, because that requires empathy for others. He wouldn't have become Darth Vader if Palpatine hadn't crushed his empathy. His anger and hatred would be for what the slavers had done to him, and to his mother. He wouldn't extend that to anger at the wider institutional injustice. That's the difference between good and evil. It's amazing to me how many people in history have been victimized by brutality and bigotry and oppression and gone on to inflict the same evils on others -- whether it's abuse victims who abuse their own children in turn, or revolutionaries against a brutal dictator who become equally brutal when they take power. Because they don't think of it in terms of wanting to protect others from the same ills, just making sure they're the ones on top. They never want to feel powerless again, but they've been raised to equate power with cruelty and oppression, so they make themselves feel strong by doing to others what was done to them.
Besides, anger and hate are the default mindset for Sith. They're encouraged to hate everyone, even -- perhaps especially -- their own masters. So hating someone doesn't mean a Sith wouldn't still work with them in the name of gaining or retaining power. Vader evidently hated plenty of people he worked with, given how quick he was to strangle them to death. Villains and tyrants don't choose their associates based on liking or approving of them, only on whether they can be useful in gaining power.
It came out before we became a bunch of oversensitive pansies, taking offence at something is almost an achievement nowadays. I once heard someone complain that asking for Black Coffee is racist - I mean WTF?
There's no doubt that the Empire made huge use of slave labor. As Darth Sidious said in the TCW episode "Escape from Kadavo," "Long have Sith empires been built upon the backs of slaves. To carry on this tradition, we will require millions."
On some level Vader may have disagreed with a lot that the Emperor was doing, as well as institutions/structures that were in place to support the Empire's rule, including ongoing slavery. In terms of the Palpatine's larger scale scheming, I can imagine Vader felt kind of stupid when he eventually, inevitably found out that Palpatine/Sidious had been behind the Separatists all along, using them as his pawns while Anakin/Vader had unwittingly played along with the whole thing as a pawn himself, out of blind loyalty in trying to defeat the Separatists and bring peace and order to the galaxy.
But Vader was resigned to his fate as the Emperor's servant. He probably did some mental gymnastics to convince himself that the Emperor was in the right and that the ends justified the means. Even when he found out that Padme was dead, and his whole reason for siding with Palpatine instead of the Jedi in the first place had been to save Padme, he was pretty much stuck in his new job. Where else could he possibly go?
Perhaps Vader had some ideas in the back of his head of how he would change things if Palpatine ever kicked the bucket and left him in charge. But, being "more machine now than man," there wasn't much chance of him ever defeating the extremely powerful Emperor himself. With his limbs chopped off, he didn't have as many midichlorians circulating in his system.
So he would play the long game and see if someday, somehow, some opportunity ever presented itself that would give him the advantage. That possibility came up with Luke. As Vader said, "With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy." And, "You can destroy the Emperor. He has foreseen this. It is your destiny. Join me, and together we can rule the galaxy as father and son." Vader seemed to have given up on such notions by the time of ROTJ.
But if Vader found himself in the big chair with Palpatine out of the way, would he actually have changed anything, or just let things continue to operate the way they already had for years? Perhaps some token gestures. But less control would mean less "order" from his certain point of view. And he doesn't like it when things are out of his control.
Kor
On some level Vader may have disagreed with a lot that the Emperor was doing, as well as institutions/structures that were in place to support the Empire's rule, including ongoing slavery. In terms of the Palpatine's larger scale scheming, I can imagine Vader felt kind of stupid when he eventually, inevitably found out that Palpatine/Sidious had been behind the Separatists all along, using them as his pawns while Anakin/Vader had unwittingly played along with the whole thing as a pawn himself, out of blind loyalty in trying to defeat the Separatists and bring peace and order to the galaxy.
But Vader was resigned to his fate as the Emperor's servant. He probably did some mental gymnastics to convince himself that the Emperor was in the right and that the ends justified the means. Even when he found out that Padme was dead, and his whole reason for siding with Palpatine instead of the Jedi in the first place had been to save Padme, he was pretty much stuck in his new job. Where else could he possibly go?
Perhaps Vader had some ideas in the back of his head of how he would change things if Palpatine ever kicked the bucket and left him in charge. But, being "more machine now than man," there wasn't much chance of him ever defeating the extremely powerful Emperor himself. With his limbs chopped off, he didn't have as many midichlorians circulating in his system.
So he would play the long game and see if someday, somehow, some opportunity ever presented itself that would give him the advantage. That possibility came up with Luke. As Vader said, "With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy." And, "You can destroy the Emperor. He has foreseen this. It is your destiny. Join me, and together we can rule the galaxy as father and son." Vader seemed to have given up on such notions by the time of ROTJ.But if Vader found himself in the big chair with Palpatine out of the way, would he actually have changed anything, or just let things continue to operate the way they already had for years? Perhaps some token gestures. But less control would mean less "order" from his certain point of view. And he doesn't like it when things are out of his control.
Kor
Kor's post raises an interesting question for me: Anakin basically ends the Clone War by decapitating the Separatist Council (or at least whatever portion of it was on Mustafar) and apparently being able to shutdown the droid army himself from there (because poor security protocols? Because Palpatine told him how to??).
But let's say for one reason or another Palpatine hadn't turned Anakin...what was the plan to end the war? It's hard for me to believe the Jedi Council would have signed off on the 'cut off the head' approach...was Kenobi even really supposed to kill Grievous? If the Separatist leadership was all (or mostly) in one place, and the war could be ended by simply attacking that place, versus letting people die by prolonging the war (do we even get a sense of how many civilians were killed in the Clone Wars considering we largely only ever see military actions?), why didn't the Jedi just go after the leadership directly?
Note: I've only seen the films, so if this was addressed in other material, mea culpa.
But let's say for one reason or another Palpatine hadn't turned Anakin...what was the plan to end the war? It's hard for me to believe the Jedi Council would have signed off on the 'cut off the head' approach...was Kenobi even really supposed to kill Grievous? If the Separatist leadership was all (or mostly) in one place, and the war could be ended by simply attacking that place, versus letting people die by prolonging the war (do we even get a sense of how many civilians were killed in the Clone Wars considering we largely only ever see military actions?), why didn't the Jedi just go after the leadership directly?
Note: I've only seen the films, so if this was addressed in other material, mea culpa.
Well, the Jedi did. They killed Dooku, but it didn't stop, which is what led them to seek out Grievous because he was the next step in the leadership and force the hand of Dooku's master, whom they knew was behind the war. But, depending on what you read, the purpose of the war was to trap the Jedi.
But why would the Jedi expect taking Dooku out of the picture to end the war? Or Grievous, for that matter? They may have been the commanders of the Separatist army, but they evidently weren't the operational leaders.
Of course, if they'd been able to take Dooku and/or Grievous alive, they might have been able to take Palpatine down before matters spun entirely out of control.
But would taking Palpatine out of the picture do anything to end the war either, on a functional level? Since you're talking about a droid army, unless you shut them down or change their programming, won't they just keep attacking?
Of course, if they'd been able to take Dooku and/or Grievous alive, they might have been able to take Palpatine down before matters spun entirely out of control.
But would taking Palpatine out of the picture do anything to end the war either, on a functional level? Since you're talking about a droid army, unless you shut them down or change their programming, won't they just keep attacking?
Why wouldn't they? The Jedi didn't have the full picture and Dooku was the face of the Confederacy, in contrast to Palpatine holding the Republic together. So, eliminating Dooku showed that, as you say, the military machine (no pun intended) continued on so Grievous would be a next logical target to undo the military strategic side.
By removing these pieces the Jedi were discovering more information about the Separatists that they didn't know. Also, the Jedi knew that a shutdown command could be used since the Trade Federation had been using droid armies for over ten years.
Are you saying that their intentions were to capture Dooku and/or Grievous alive in order to learn how to shutdown the droid armies, but that they were stymied by their inability to do so?
My point being that Dooku may have been the face of the Confederacy, but they weren't going to stop the droids by taking the face out of the picture, but rather the hands operating the droid armies.
My point being that Dooku may have been the face of the Confederacy, but they weren't going to stop the droids by taking the face out of the picture, but rather the hands operating the droid armies.
Of course the intention was to capture Dooku. Dooku was largely considered the face of the Confederacy, the person who started it as a movement to begin with. So, capturing him would have been intended to answer a lot more questions about the nature of the Confederacy and stopping the war. By capturing Dooku they would hopefully be able to figure out who was running the military and shut it down. With his death, that information was lost. Grievous was the next logical target, who would be able to shut down the droid army, since Grievous was regarded as being more the malevolent aggressor leading the droid armies.
But, this assumes the war was meant to have a conclusion based on the two sides, rather than being all about eliminating the Jedi Order.
Pretty much.
Yup. And they're the heroes. It really casts the OT in a poor light.
I've always enjoyed Luke's summation of the Jedi in TLJ.
It can be argued that the death of Maul in TPM (yeah, I know he comes back, but I don't know the details) and the death of Grievous were unavoidable in the interest of self-defense (though it kind of begs the question of whether there were better options), but Anakin's killing of Dooku becomes especially stupid if it was in everyone's (except Palpatine's) best interests to capture rather than kill him.
It can be argued that the death of Maul in TPM (yeah, I know he comes back, but I don't know the details) and the death of Grievous were unavoidable in the interest of self-defense (though it kind of begs the question of whether there were better options), but Anakin's killing of Dooku becomes especially stupid if it was in everyone's (except Palpatine's) best interests to capture rather than kill him.
Dial it back, please. You are close to trolling, and nobody needs that.
While I won't defend the prequels always this is one point that it obviously about Anakin's fall. He is not in line with the Jedi order because he would rather put himself before others, including a need for revenge, which Palpatine preys upon. Anakin even knows it is not right and Obi-Wan is none the wiser as to why Dooku was killed.
Similar threads
