StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Were they right to try and overthrow palpatine?
(From a moral standpoint. NOT a legal one!)

Well, considering the RA/NR is directly responsible for far more deaths than the Empire, and that it really has no qualms about using WMD itself, I really can't say either faction is better than the other morally. While the New Republic was a little more generous with the civil liberties, it was so rife with corruption it really made little difference in the long run. I guess it comes down to leadership. The people in the highest tiers of Imperial power were usually at best amoral and at worst the human manifestation of evil. While many New Republic leaders claimed to have the galaxy's best interests in mind, they were really only in it for themselves (as shown in their cowardly retreat from Coruscant). Some, like Fey'Lya and Viqi Shesh would stop at nothing (including their own laws) to get what they wanted. Even the Skywalker/Solos were not above circumventing the Republic's laws to get what they wanted/needed.

No. The Empire certainly wasn't perfect, but the New Republic isn't any better. And they certainly don't have the moral high ground. Especially when you consider the vastly reformed Empire under Grand Admiral Pellaeon

Er, what were Palpatine's long-term goals, anyway? Did he just want to rule the galaxy unopposed? Or was there something he wanted to do with the galaxy as soon as those pesky Rebels were eliminated?

While Palpatine himself was an evil man, and his grand designs for the universe were quite evil, the Rebel Alliance as a whole was unaware of these facts, especially the latter. The Alliance is filled with a) those who used to be in power and wish to be once more, b) those who for whatever reason have experienced the giving end of an Imperial Smackdown, and c) knee-jerk reactionaries who don't like the infringement of any rights, no matter what the reason.

It strikes me that life for the average citizen was better during the Empire than before or after: there is first and foremost security, security from the pirates, gangsters, and corporate thugs who plagued the Republican era, and security from the alien invaders and petty warlords that plague the New Republican era. Security threats posed by the Rebels are in spite of, and not because of, the Empire. Other than that benefit, there are no major differences for life as an Imperial citizen versus life as a Republican citizen.

Lets Empire Builts Detah Stars clearly intending to regualrly vape entirle worlds for no other reason to stop other worlds standing up for basic rights.

The empire supported slavery, suppresion of other races, sexism and all sorts of immoral things. They tried to commit genocide more than once (caamas, the jedi etc.)

How can the RA be wrong?

Uraniun235 wrote:Er, what were Palpatine's long-term goals, anyway? Did he just want to rule the galaxy unopposed? Or was there something he wanted to do with the galaxy as soon as those pesky Rebels were eliminated?

He wanted to eventually create a ruling class of Dark Jedi, with himself as immortal master, and they would feed off of the essenses of an entire galaxy of slaves. Sounds like a bunch of "thousand year reich" bluffing, but if anybody could pull it off, it'd be Palpatine. And here's the asskicker: he already had a working model on Byss, with billions of clueless slaves living in harmony.

Even that state of affairs, while crappy, is kind of like the prospect of being a battery for the machines in the Matrix. It wouldn't be all that bad, considering you wouldn't know what was going on.

Crazedwraith wrote:Lets Empire Builts Detah Stars clearly intending to regualrly vape entirle worlds for no other reason to stop other worlds standing up for basic rights.

Which basic rights would these be?

The empire supported slavery,

Not their strongest point, I agree. But at least it wasn't of humans.

suppresion of other races,

Aside from the few slave species, the Empire didn't institutionalize speciesism.

sexism

Proof? Just because some Imperials are sexist does not mean that the Empire condones sexism.

They tried to commit genocide more than once (caamas, the jedi etc.)

The Jedi were a serious threat to the stability of the regime, and besides, they aren't a race. That's like saying that the USA is trying to commit genocide on terrorists.

Was the Rebellion right to overthrow the Empire? Absolutely.

Where the Rebellion blew it was AFTER the Empire was gone, when they replaced it with the utterly worthless New Republic government. In its desperation to be as "un-Imperial" as possible, the New Republic was an utter failure--if not for a few Jedi and an enormous amount of good luck, the NR would have collapsed within a few decades even without external threats like the Empire. It could not guarantee protection for its citizens, it could not prevent various internal squabbles from degenerating to the brink of open warfare at the drop of a hat, and ultimately when a real external threat DID show up, the New Republic ceased to function then finally shattered.

In other words, while getting rid of the Empire was probably the right thing to do, the Rebel Alliance should have done a MUCH better job setting up a replacement government. As things are in the EU, it almost sounds like the Imperial Remnant is a more effective government than the New Republic, aside from the last remaining old-line Imperial Moffs.

Crazedwraith wrote:Lets Empire Builts Detah Stars clearly intending to regualrly vape entirle worlds for no other reason to stop other worlds standing up for basic rights.

The empire supported slavery, suppresion of other races, sexism and all sorts of immoral things. They tried to commit genocide more than once (caamas, the jedi etc.)

How can the RA be wrong?

Slavery, suppression of other races, hmm, sounds like the use of droids to me. I firmly expect to see Publius spring out of the woodwork as I bring this up, but I fail to see how producing Sentient Beings, and then conditioning them(what we would call brainwashing in an organic species) to obey their rightful masters is any less immoral than the enslavement of biologicals. Genocide, right, what the NR attempted to perpetrate on the YV.
Sexism, the main complaint of which is by Admiral Daala, who slept her way into a position of authority, and has an abysmal track record.
There is no moral high ground here.

consequences wrote:Slavery, suppression of other races, hmm, sounds like the use of droids to me. I firmly expect to see Publius spring out of the woodwork as I bring this up, but I fail to see how producing Sentient Beings, and then conditioning them(what we would call brainwashing in an organic species) to obey their rightful masters is any less immoral than the enslavement of biologicals.

No, the Empire used slave labor in some cases, too. Both Chewbacca and Admiral Ackbar were at one point slaves to the Empire.

And I thought Publius was in favor of droid labor? I'll have to look up those debates again.

Genocide, right, what the NR attempted to perpetrate on the YV.

You mean what the NR should have perpetrated on the YV.

I think I should bring up the point that we don't exactly know how much of the EU is composed of NR propaganda. The notion that Palpatine was a rabid racist kind of conflicts with canon, where he sees Maul as a worthy apprentice and surrounds himself with non-human cronies. In fact, the only instance of this racist attitude I can think of is the stormie who referred to Chewbacca as a "thing". Note that this could be because of his supposed prisoner status, or that Wookie gender differences are not readily apparent. Also, the stormies on Tatooine had a fairly trustworthy contact in that Kubaz spy. I suppose you could argue the racist/sexist things by pointing out that the Imperial military is composed almost entirely of human males. But humans are also the most abundant species in the galaxy. As mentioned above, "Admiral" Daala, the incompetent officer that fucked her way to power (some power ), is the only one known to bitch about sexism in the Navy. There are other instances of females in the military who are both successful and worthy of that success. Also let's not forget that the Empire was ruled by a female Regent for some time.

I like how few people stuck to the goddamn question from the poll.

"Were the Rebels right: did Palpy need to go, or were the Imperials good guys?"

I think this is quite obvious. Palpatine was a sadistic theocrat who planned to reduce the majority of the Imperial citizenry to either slaves (if you weren't human), or the equivalent of Oceanian proles (if you were).

consequences wrote:Slavery, suppression of other races, hmm, sounds like the use of droids to me. I firmly expect to see Publius spring out of the woodwork as I bring this up, but I fail to see how producing Sentient Beings, and then conditioning them(what we would call brainwashing in an organic species) to obey their rightful masters is any less immoral than the enslavement of biologicals. Genocide, right, what the NR attempted to perpetrate on the YV.

Blah blah blah. They enslaved non-humans. Period. Anything else is bullshit.

consequences wrote:Sexism, the main complaint of which is by Admiral Daala, who slept her way into a position of authority, and has an abysmal track record.
There is no moral high ground here.

The fact that the only flag officer known in the Empire to be a woman was not recognized by the Imperial Navy and only by Grand Moff Tarkin's starfleet and due to the fact she slept with him is a point against the Empire, not for it, idiot. The Empire was sexist. But that's one of the least important strikes against it.

Lazy Raptor wrote:Well, considering the RA/NR is directly responsible for far more deaths than the Empire, and that it really has no qualms about using WMD itself, I really can't say either faction is better than the other morally. While the New Republic was a little more generous with the civil liberties, it was so rife with corruption it really made little difference in the long run. I guess it comes down to leadership. The people in the highest tiers of Imperial power were usually at best amoral and at worst the human manifestation of evil. While many New Republic leaders claimed to have the galaxy's best interests in mind, they were really only in it for themselves (as shown in their cowardly retreat from Coruscant). Some, like Fey'Lya and Viqi Shesh would stop at nothing (including their own laws) to get what they wanted. Even the Skywalker/Solos were not above circumventing the Republic's laws to get what they wanted/needed.

No. The Empire certainly wasn't perfect, but the New Republic isn't any better. And they certainly don't have the moral high ground. Especially when you consider the vastly reformed Empire under Grand Admiral Pellaeon

False dilemma falacy. We do not need to prove that the New Republic was better, only that the Empire is not good. And there is *more* than adequate proof that it deserved to be overthrown. Does the whiskey rebellion that occured during the U.S.'s time under the Articles of Confederation mean that the entire revolution was not justified?

While Palpatine himself was an evil man, and his grand designs for the universe were quite evil, the Rebel Alliance as a whole was unaware of these facts, especially the latter. The Alliance is filled with a) those who used to be in power and wish to be once more, b) those who for whatever reason have experienced the giving end of an Imperial Smackdown, and c) knee-jerk reactionaries who don't like the infringement of any rights, no matter what the reason.

I think the excessive use of force against Alderaan would have clued them in. The Tarkin Doctrine itself is an assault upon reasonable government.

It strikes me that life for the average citizen was better during the Empire than before or after: there is first and foremost security, security from the pirates, gangsters, and corporate thugs who plagued the Republican era, and security from the alien invaders and petty warlords that plague the New Republican era. Security threats posed by the Rebels are in spite of, and not because of, the Empire. Other than that benefit, there are no major differences for life as an Imperial citizen versus life as a Republican citizen.

Oooh! Aaaah! Security! *wank wank wank* Soviet Russia provided security too. There's a reason Benjamin Franklin said "Those who would sacrifice essential liberty for some temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Strange that Jabba the Hutt is still around under the Empire. Or how Palpatine is perfectly aware of Xizor and the Black Sun organization, yet does nothing to stop it.

And I have yet to hear any proof that the Empire, a known dictatorship, did not utilize techniques such as secret police, censorship, and political "disappearances", which have been mentioned in the EU and have yet to be refuted by anything but cries of "WAAAHH! Rebel propaganda!"

I think I should bring up the point that we don't exactly know how much of the EU is composed of NR propaganda.

Wow, speak of the devil.

Not their strongest point, I agree. But at least it wasn't of humans.

Um, so? You do realize how utterly racist and callous that sounds right? At least the U.S. during its early years didn't enslave white people.

Kerneth wrote:Was the Rebellion right to overthrow the Empire? Absolutely.

Where the Rebellion blew it was AFTER the Empire was gone, when they replaced it with the utterly worthless New Republic government. In its desperation to be as "un-Imperial" as possible, the New Republic was an utter failure--if not for a few Jedi and an enormous amount of good luck, the NR would have collapsed within a few decades even without external threats like the Empire. It could not guarantee protection for its citizens, it could not prevent various internal squabbles from degenerating to the brink of open warfare at the drop of a hat, and ultimately when a real external threat DID show up, the New Republic ceased to function then finally shattered.

In other words, while getting rid of the Empire was probably the right thing to do, the Rebel Alliance should have done a MUCH better job setting up a replacement government. As things are in the EU, it almost sounds like the Imperial Remnant is a more effective government than the New Republic, aside from the last remaining old-line Imperial Moffs.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:I like how few people stuck to the goddamn question from the poll.

"Were the Rebels right: did Palpy need to go, or were the Imperials good guys?"

I think this is quite obvious. Palpatine was a sadistic theocrat who planned to reduce the majority of the Imperial citizenry to either slaves (if you weren't human), or the equivalent of Oceanian proles (if you were).

*taps nose*

The Prime Necromancer wrote:False dilemma falacy. We do not need to prove that the New Republic was better, only that the Empire is not good. And there is *more* than adequate proof that it deserved to be overthrown. Does the whiskey rebellion that occured during the U.S.'s time under the Articles of Confederation mean that the entire revolution was not justified?

No. When deposing a regime, considerations as to what to replace that regime WITH are paramount. Since we're directly comparing the RA/NR to the GE/IR the New Republic is completely questionable. If not, the default alternative is anarchy. So you don't like the government? Let's turn it over to pirates and organized crime. The question was not: "Did the Empire need reform?" It was quite clearly asking if the Rebel Alliance was right in DESTROYING that government and replacing it with something WORSE.

Lazy Raptor wrote:No. When deposing a regime, considerations as to what to replace that regime WITH are paramount. Since we're directly comparing the RA/NR to the GE/IR the New Republic is completely questionable. If not, the default alternative is anarchy. So you don't like the government? Let's turn it over to pirates and organized crime. The question was not: "Did the Empire need reform?" It was quite clearly asking if the Rebel Alliance was right in DESTROYING that government and replacing it with something WORSE.

You're being an idiot. That is not the question. The question is whether Palpatine should've been overthrown, and thus was the Alliance right to do so?

Anything else is beyond the scope of the stated question and is introducing intentional red herrings to derail the argument.

IMPORTANT NOTE: For "Rebel propoganda" wankers, I'll introduce you to a small tidbit: in real history we generally do not disregard data and less we have demonstrable evidence suggesting obfuscation of the truth by regimes and whatnot. An epistemological concept called credulence says that all evidence is taken at face value unless you have a good reason to outright reject it. Outright rejection is considered the last resort in analysis, and is not fair.

Lazy Raptor wrote:

The Prime Necromancer wrote:False dilemma falacy. We do not need to prove that the New Republic was better, only that the Empire is not good. And there is *more* than adequate proof that it deserved to be overthrown. Does the whiskey rebellion that occured during the U.S.'s time under the Articles of Confederation mean that the entire revolution was not justified?

No. When deposing a regime, considerations as to what to replace that regime WITH are paramount. Since we're directly comparing the RA/NR to the GE/IR the New Republic is completely questionable. If not, the default alternative is anarchy. So you don't like the government? Let's turn it over to pirates and organized crime. The question was not: "Did the Empire need reform?" It was quite clearly asking if the Rebel Alliance was right in DESTROYING that government and replacing it with something WORSE.

How exactly do you go about "reforming" the Empire, when the leaders have *no* accountability to the people, and the only way to show your displeasure is armed revolt?

And the question was not "Is the New Republic better than the Empire", or even "Was the *Old* Republic better than the Empire". The question was, are the Rebels justified in their attempt to replace the Empire, and they most certainly *were*. The Articles of Confederation that were instituted after the American Revolution were a failure. Does this mean that the Revolution was not justified? Answer the question.

Since I've already been arguing this very topic in another thread, anyone who wishes to seriously debate this point would be advised to repond to my points from that thread in this one. I will then respond here.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:You're being an idiot. That is not the question. The question is whether Palpatine should've been overthrown, and thus was the Alliance right to do so?

NO. The question SPECIFICALLY asks:

a) Yes, Palpatine needed to go.

OR

b) No, the Imperials are the good guys.

It's blatantly obvious from the wording of the question that it intends to compare the GE/IR to the RA/NR on a moral level.

Lazy Raptor wrote:NO. The question SPECIFICALLY asks:

a) Yes, Palpatine needed to go.

OR

b) No, the Imperials are the good guys.

In other words, dipshit, it is precisely dealing with the Galactic Civil War only up to but not including the point that Palpatine is destroyed at Endor, after which point option a) becomes meaningless. Thank you, come again.

Lazy Raptor wrote:It's blatantly obvious from the wording of the question that it intends to compare the GE/IR to the RA/NR on a moral level.

No, the question specifically refers to the Alliance to Restore the Republic and their efforts against the Galactic Emperor, Palpatine. And besides; the Rebel Alliance is not the same entity as the New Republic, and the Galactic Empire is definitely not the same entity as the Imperial Remnant. Get a clue, buddy.

Conceded.

To just throwing out Palpatine, then yeah, I would think the Universe would be better off without him.

I suppose what this poll really needs is a third option, marked something like:
"Yeah, Palpatine needed to go, but then the RA should self-destruct as well, so as to protect the galaxy from their hopeless 'innocence.'"

Realistically, however, it is at best a very narrow win. Proper revolutions also have proper plans for dealing with the aftermath. The RA doesn't have that.

Suppose Bush makes himself the Dictator of the US. We decide that he needs to be overthrown. But suppose the guy that's actively leading the fight to replace him will replace his government with one that commits genocide on atheists. Suddenly Bush comes off looking better by comparison. Kinda makes it hard to click on the Poll option that says "Get Bush off" when you know the Alternative.

The New Republic is the Rebel Alliance's plan of a replacement. And seeing it, Palpatine's Empire comes off looking better in comparison.

Primus wrote:For "Rebel propoganda" wankers, I'll introduce you to a small tidbit: in real history we generally do not disregard data and less we have demonstrable evidence suggesting obfuscation of the truth by regimes and whatnot. An epistemological concept called credulence says that all evidence is taken at face value unless you have a good reason to outright reject it. Outright rejection is considered the last resort in analysis, and is not fair.

The Rebels do obfuscate data. Look at how effectively they covered up the Endor Holocaust (thank God for ROTJ.) They can't even admit Alderaan had a fucking shield (thank God for ANH.) If they were so confident blowing up Alderaan was wrong, they would hardly have to conceal that part - all it does is reduce their credibility when somebody analyzes film (or in their universe, even DER readings) of the incident. They can't even confess to true lengths of fucking vehicles (they've seen Executors many times, they SHOULD have corrected any false Intel data of its length by now.) With that kind of accuracy and honesty, we are taking their data because we have no choice, and perhaps because the Imperial data may be worse.

I don't think anybody says we should ignore it. But we could look for selective quoting of data.

Primus wrote:Blah blah blah. They enslaved non-humans. Period. Anything else is bullshit.

I think the point is more like it is a little hypocritical to slam the Empire too hard for allowing slavery when the New Republic (and the Rebel Alliance before it) also had slaves of a sort. Pot, kettle, black.

About racism in general, the Rebel Alliance could not conceal all signs of it at a more subtle level. Unless you really think that the Mon Cals could never have replaced a few interfaces on their new-build ships (their cruisers are being pumped out at at least one every six months) for instance. And that was in a time when cooperation of all species is the most important to them.

The Rebel Alliance also engages in species-segregated training, and apparently with multiple PT standards (see RASB). They had their official excuse (different physical abilities,) but the scenario applies to a lesser extent to male-female on Earth as well, and AFAIK, most thought Integrated Training would be better. Anyway...

Other examples this stuff would be concealed, only to be revealed in the New Republic. But you say we can't use it, even though the NR will be the time when true colors tend to be revealed without the as-immediate stress of needing to work together.

Primus wrote:The fact that the only flag officer known in the Empire to be a woman was not recognized by the Imperial Navy and only by Grand Moff Tarkin's starfleet and due to the fact she slept with him is a point against the Empire, not for it, idiot. The Empire was sexist. But that's one of the least important strikes against it.

We don't know that many flag officers in the Empire in general. One case is not necessarily symptomatic of the whole.

AFAIK, we only saw a couple of female senior female officers (Daala and Vaarscha.) But their case is hardly helped by the fact in BOTH cases, both officers were clearly shown to be at best mediocre. So no one is really sure whether their lack of success is due to their mediocrity (competition gets intense up high) or really a case of sexism in action.

As for sexist militaries in general, I have a hard time finding militaries on our planet that are completely non-sexist. It is a fairly recent phenomena that women were allowed on warships in the US, and even today (as of my most recent knowledge of the data,) various combat branches are closed to them. If we let the RA get wind of this in the Empire, they'd call this discrimination. It is, but does this level of sexism mean the US is bad?

The Empire had to go, sooner or later. But the New Republic could've used a bit more strength and cohesion itself.

I'll be the first to admit the NR is fucking incompetant. :cries: Why'd the EU authors have to urinate on GL's idealistic ending? Why can't the good guys win and do better?

Come on, canonically, the Rebels were rather prudent, competent, and fair. They were efficient and practical. They weren't making massive speeches about all kinds of shit. They blew up the Death Stars to defend themselves and supporters from annhiliation. They killed Palpatine because he was a despot.

Someone should write an EU Infinities about what if the cadre of Imperials who sought mediation and reconciliation with the Rebels after Endor but before Isard had succeeded (they wanted to recall all the member worlds, rewrite the Imperial Charter, reconvene the Imperial Senate, and install Palpatine's niece as a figurehead Empress in a constitutional monarchy presiding over a reunified, democratic Empire--how perfect would that be?)

Yes they were right, read the DE source book. Palpy needed to go.

My changes to the Imperial system would've been:

Give the Imperial Senate real power over the central government; presided over by a Supreme Chancellor or President of the Senate. Have the Emperor/Empress be a figurehead, nothing more. Can COMPNOR.

Have the Moffs reduced to simply sector-level military commanders subordinate to the local Sectorial Senate and its own Chancellor.

Retain Grand Moff Governors over troubled regions, but with a fixed term of service--don't let them languish and suck up too much power.

Reform the Jedi Order, and give them a few special moderation powers under the Judiciary, but keep them out of the government.

Remove the excess forces stationed at each Sector Group existing nearly entirely to suppress any unruly worlds--no need to oppress our own citizenry.