Why is Palpatine and the Empire so evil as to

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2003-01-06 03:44am

I find the destruction of Alderaan apalling due to its indescriminate collateral damage in comparison to the objective, the disproportionate response for the rather limited treason, the actual reason for the attack (to affect Leia), and the conscious knowledge by the commanding officer that this was no military target. And it was a loyal world at peacetime while dealing with comparitively insignificant terrorists.

You made the point better than I could, in fewer words, I congratulate you.

Jason von Evil · Post by **Jason von Evil** » 2003-01-06 09:10am

Hmm...now why would a sith master and all around evil emperor destroy and BDZ planets with abandon? Oh that's right, he's a sith and they're evil, plus like Thrawn said, the Empire had legitimate ownership of the galaxy and all the trillions of people in it.

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2003-01-06 09:21am

Kurgan wrote:Well you know what? My point doesn't hedge on the notion that the US or the Allies were not guilty of evil during war either.

So what are you saying, that the Empire is actually just as evil as the United States, and that it should have been less?

I agree with the first half of that statement, but the second part is just silly.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-01-06 05:10pm

The U.S. didn't come to power and then rapidly and abruptly send social progress backward and strip a massive block of civilization of rights (aliens in SW).

But the Dark Empire Sourcebook and the Dark Side Sourcebook paint a far grimer picture of what Palpatine was going to do.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2003-01-07 04:42am

The US (or any of her allies) has yet to blow up a planet, or kill a billion people.

Let me restate what I said, to hopefully make it more understandable:

You think that if make me admit real governments have in the past killed civilians in war (ie: the US in WW2) then I will be faced with a conundrum... either I admit that the US is evil, or that the Empire is not.

However, I can still judge the actions of the US as evil, and still condemn the Empire, even if those actions aren't remotely comparable, so it's no problem. ; )

Better?

Or, I could say:

Two wrongs don't make a right. End doesn't necessarily justify the means. Evil is as evil does. Better?

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2003-01-07 04:45am

Oops, sorry for the typos (wishes again for 'edit' function) : P

That was addressing those who point out that killing civilians is something not unique to the Empire...

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2003-01-07 02:24pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:The U.S. didn't come to power and then rapidly and abruptly send social progress backward and strip a massive block of civilization of rights (aliens in SW).

But the Dark Empire Sourcebook and the Dark Side Sourcebook paint a far grimer picture of what Palpatine was going to do.

I thought we were talking about the use of weapons of mass destruction, like atomic bombs and Death Stars.

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2003-01-07 02:29pm

What I'm saying is that, while you think that nobody can use the U.S. as an example, when they vaporized a whole city with millions (or thousands, whatever) of inhabitants in Hiroshima, because you don't condone it and still think it's evil, you argue that the Empire would be too evil to do the exact same thing.

It's just a matter of scale. The U.S. is a country, with several cities, as is Japan. The U.S. decides to make two whole cities disappear in a big bang (as a demonstration). The Empire is a galactic civilization, with millions of worlds. They decide to blow up one (as a demonstration). I'm sure that during the middle ages when wars were fought with swords and arrows, the concept of blowing up an entire city with a giant fireball would have seemed immensely evil.

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2003-01-07 03:32pm

in summary, I would say the empire has committed evil acts, but is not evil in an of itself. it provides stability.

Post by **Kuja** » 2003-01-07 04:04pm

Why is Palpatine and the Empire so evil as to blow up planets with a Death Star and BDZ the homes of probably millions.

BECAUSE THEY ARE! DON'T QEUSTION AUTHORITY! WHAT, DO YOU THINK THEY'RE ALL ABOUT RAINBOWS AND SUNSHINE?!

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2003-01-07 07:05pm

We're not talking about whether or not the Empire is breaking the law or not (their own laws.. apparently they aren't). But that makes no difference. We're discussing the morality of their decisions (hence the term "evil" which is a moral judgement).

Legal does not always equal moral or ethical.

Now I will argue my reasoning as to why the events are not so similar as they might appear:

Also, it can be argued that their actions were BAD for society. Despite the effect: killing a few alleged terrorists (without trial or evidence being presented I might add, but their laws are different from our's) and scaring the rest of the civilized galaxy...

They still encouraged (and failed to stop) the rest of the rebellion from happening. Its almost completely obvious that the creation and use of the Death Star only promoted the idea that a rebellion was necessary, and galvanized those who already had a dislike of the Empire and its methods. So in a sense, the Empire brought this upon themselves... since we know that the Death Star existed as a concept BEFORE the Empire took power, not something that was whipped up in a hurry because of the evil Rebels suddenly attacking the government.

What I'm saying is that, while you think that nobody can use the U.S. as an example, when they vaporized a whole city with millions (or thousands, whatever) of inhabitants in Hiroshima, because you don't condone it and still think it's evil, you argue that the Empire would be too evil to do the exact same thing.

It's just a matter of scale. The U.S. is a country, with several cities, as is Japan. The U.S. decides to make two whole cities disappear in a big bang (as a demonstration). The Empire is a galactic civilization, with millions of worlds. They decide to blow up one (as a demonstration). I'm sure that during the middle ages when wars were fought with swords and arrows, the concept of blowing up an entire city with a giant fireball would have seemed immensely evil.

Scaling it down sounds like a plausible argument for relativism (and therefore dismissal) at first, but here is where it falls:

There are billions of people in our world right now. So therefore, it doesn't matter one lick, if I kill one (or a dozen) people right now. After all, there are billions more, and thousands die every minute from accidents, disease, old age, etc. So therefore, murder is okay.

Then you have chaos, because if everybody thinks that way, lots of people die (but again, you could try to argue good comes from it... more resources for everyone else).

It's ludicrious because murder is murder. Murdering billions is more evil than murdering millions, which is more evil than murdering thousands.

So:

USA: Murders thousands < Empire Murders Billions/Trillions (?)

?!

Was Alderaan a military target? Both Leia and Tarkin seemed to feel it was not.

The USA's action is still evil (murdering thousands of civilians), their excuse being that it ended the war, made other countries afraid to mess with them (well not really... Cold War 'nuff said) and that it was the lesser of two evils. Apologists for the nuking of Japan would have to argue that it was a lesser evil, to force Japan's surrender, than to force them to surrender by continuing the war in conventional fashion.

Despite the evilness of the USA's actions, it is utterly different than the (much more evil) actions of the Empire.

The atomic bombings were NOT done to weed out terrorists within US territory. They were done to terrorize the civilian population, in order to crush the will of Japan, so they would be forced to surrender. A comparable scenario would perhaps be if the USA nuked New York, until the entire state was vaporized, in order to wipe out a handfull of known Al-Qaeda operatives that were suspected of hiding out there. Scaled up of course... did all the innocent people deserve to die simply because they lived nearby somebody who may have been guilty?

The people who died in Japan were mostly civilians, not soldiers, or terrorists. It was done for an entirely different reason. The only similarity is that a lot of innocent people were killed. The atom bombings "worked".... Japan stopped attacking, the war ended.

The Death Star incident "didn't work." Sure it stopped whatever supposed terrorists or funding that came out of Alderaan (except princess Leia and whomever else escaped with her), but it made the rest of the galaxy churn out enough rebels to destroy the Death Star, and eventually overthrow the regime.

Clearly the Empire had more options available to it than the US did. The US could have backed off, or had a land invasion of Japan (leading to more casualties on both sides.. though they would have been more military personal proportionally you'd guess). But that's about it...

The Empire could have easily set down a strike team to take out the "terrorists" on Alderaan. They could have blown up an uninhabited moon or something as a demonstration or test of the DS.

They could have ordered and orbital bombardment of key targets (which would have been murderous, but not on the scale of killing everyone on the entire planet and anhilating it).

The Death Star incident puts the other evil actions of the Empire to shame. Though, if we are to believe the EU, they constructed other more vastly destructive terror weapons as well (Sun Crusher, Galaxy Gun), so I'd say they wore out whatever mandate they had, and whatever moral right they had to be in power. Note that these weapons were not contructed to deal with any external threat (as the nuclear weapons of the USSR and US during the cold war were... ie: to use against each other if the other power attacked) but to use against THEIR OWN POPULANCE!

If the US stockpiled nukes to use against its own cities, then maybe they'd be more Empire-like.

Now that we've mentioned stability (I guess many dictatorships and totalitarian regimes have done some good things when they're not oppressing the masses or committing atrocities)...

The Empire is hardly what I'd call stable... they have a full fledged rebellion on their hands (that they seem to have caused), that succeeded.

I suppose now I'll be told that the Empire was "fine" and that the Rebels were just rebelling for no reason. Giving their lives just for the heck of it... rather than because the regime they lived in threatened or oppressed them!

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2003-01-07 07:08pm

Sorry for the big post. ; )

And no, I do think the Empire is capable of blowing up a few cities of mostly civilians to end a war, as the US did in WW2.

We just saw the Empire blow up a whole PLANET for dubious reasons. We know (from the EU) that they've built weapons of even greater mass-murder potential to use against their own population, so frankly, they're capable of anything.

They're without conscience.

Raptor 597 · Post by **Raptor 597** » 2003-01-07 07:57pm

Kurgan wrote:Sorry for the big post. ; )

And no, I do think the Empire is capable of blowing up a few cities of mostly civilians to end a war, as the US did in WW2.

We just saw the Empire blow up a whole PLANET for dubious reasons. We know (from the EU) that they've built weapons of even greater mass-murder potential to use against their own population, so frankly, they're capable of anything.

They're without conscience.

Eh, what aren't you getting? There are quadrillions of people people in the Galaxy. Streching Alderaan as a city is in itself a bit over stretching. it is just a well renowned start system with a normal population. The Earth equilvant too a city is more one person.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2003-01-08 02:40am

Well, even if we grant that, is it not evil to murder one innocent person, just to try to scare people who might be dissidents hiding somewhere within your borders?

Isn't that the very definition of tyranny, rule by fear and the power of life and death over subjects?

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-01-08 04:46pm

Slartibartfast wrote:
Illuminatus Primus wrote:The U.S. didn't come to power and then rapidly and abruptly send social progress backward and strip a massive block of civilization of rights (aliens in SW).

But the Dark Empire Sourcebook and the Dark Side Sourcebook paint a far grimer picture of what Palpatine was going to do.
I thought we were talking about the use of weapons of mass destruction, like atomic bombs and Death Stars.

True; but if you can explain how the firebombing of Tokyo caused so much less damage/suffering then the atomic bombing of Nagasaki, then forget it.

Atomics are just really big bombs w/ residual radioactive affects.

Similarly a BDZ on a deadworld w/ a bunch of military factories would've destroyed the same amount of surface real estate for placing dwelling as the Death Star blowing up a loyal peaceful member world such as Alderaan, but you get the difference.

The crime is not in blowing up the planet itself.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-01-08 04:51pm

Captain Lennox wrote:
Kurgan wrote:Sorry for the big post. ; )

And no, I do think the Empire is capable of blowing up a few cities of mostly civilians to end a war, as the US did in WW2.

We just saw the Empire blow up a whole PLANET for dubious reasons. We know (from the EU) that they've built weapons of even greater mass-murder potential to use against their own population, so frankly, they're capable of anything.

They're without conscience.
Eh, what aren't you getting? There are quadrillions of people people in the Galaxy. Streching Alderaan as a city is in itself a bit over stretching. it is just a well renowned start system with a normal population. The Earth equilvant too a city is more one person.

So? What if Bush found out Osama was in [where Osama's family is from]. We had his brother here who knew where Al-Queda's new central base was.

Does Bush have his brother, the Governor, get control of an ICBM and threaten to nuke that town in order to get Osama's bro to spill it?

Then have Jeb nuke the city anyway just to kill Osama bin Laden?

The burden of proof is on you to show how Alderaan was a Rebel-infested shithole openly supporting when pre-destruction we only know of Bail, Leia, and Winter, all from or associated w/ the Royal Family and only three individuals. For that the legal authorities should have apprehended and interrogated them--which they probably would have gotten more out of. What a mis-use of force, and not condoned by the Emperor either. A planetary shield is an offensive weapons system?

Don't be a dipshit.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2003-01-08 08:19pm

The crime is not in blowing up the planet itself.

Well, I guess not, unless you're an environmentalist. It's just a ball of dirt and water after all. A waste of resources.

No, the real crime is the MASS GENOCIDE committed when the planet is blown up. At LEAST a few billion people died there, because of the Empire's direct actions.