Does the dark side destroy itself? (not just its users)

[Davey]

I read about this in the book "I, Jedi" by Michael A. Stackpole and he addressed this a bit, but didn't really expand on it.

I'll repost what I can remember; if the force is an energy field perpetuated by all living things, and some people (the force sensitive) are able to 'manipulate' it at will, what is the dark side? The dark side seems to center on, judging by what the Sith said in KOTOR (the original) victory, strength and power, and using the force in anger. The Sith not only seem bent on taking over, but also on destroying everything that gets in their way. Corran Horn said the dark side was 'self-destructive.'

Which brings me to this question. The Sith destroy life. They destroy planets, and kill billions, if not trillions of innocent people seemingly just for the sake of it. If the force is perpetuated by all living things, are they actually damaging their own power by weakening the force through the act of killing stuff?

Also, when Luke and Han Solo were retaking Dathomir from the Warlord Z (spelling? What's his name?), Luke brought up a point about that it wasn't just the people on Dathomir that was important that the Warlord's doomsday device threatened, but everything down to the worms, snakes and lizards.

Ultimately Corran is right, all the dark side users seem to meet a bad end sooner or later. But does that mean the dark side destroys the force itself, and not just its users? In short does that mean that if a Sith lord would grow weaker and weaker if he continued to kill and destroy life?

This also brings in another question. Obi-Wan said that the force 'binds the galaxy together.' If said Sith lord managed to kill enough beings, would that mean the galaxy would be destroyed if enough life was destroyed, and would this occur before this Sith lord managed to kill that many people?

Or am I missing something? This is a question that's baffled me for a while.

[Darth Raptor]

I'm pretty sure the fundamental force of gravitation is what holds the SW galaxy together, not the Force. However, it's not inconceivable that most of the biotic life in that galaxy has evolved with the Force and become dependent on it somehow, with degrees varying by type and biosphere. So would the Force cease to exist, some forms of life would be adversely affected. The effects might range from minor inconvenience in the case of humans to total annihilation in species that have evolved to depend heavily on the Force. The destruction of the Force could set in motion a pan-galactic mass extinction event as biospheres everywhere collapse, so what Obi-Wan said could still be true in the metaphorical sense.

Regarding your other point, yes. If one makes the assumption that the Dark Side and its agents are fundamentally destructive in nature and if biotic life (which we assume to generate the Force) is extinguished, then the Force itself will be destroyed. The real question being *is* the Dark Side predisposed toward indiscriminate destruction as opposed to say, domination? As an organization, the Galactic Empire was in effect an agency of the Dark Side, but its apparent aim was to dominate the galaxy, not eradicate all life. So that's debatable.

[Guardsman Bass]

If you are going to go off of EU books, then I think the "raw" Dark Side is more like what it was described in Shatterpoint: animalistic and predatory, not truly nihilistic.

[Noble Ire]

If you are going to go off of EU books, then I think the "raw" Dark Side is more like what it was described in Shatterpoint: animalistic and predatory, not truly nihilistic.

Indeed. It could even be argued that the Dark Side is as much a force for control and order as the Light; it simply has different methods and effects. Many of the most powerful Sith, Darth Revan, Darth Vader, and Emperor Palpatine among them, worked to forge empires out of the Galaxy, dominions formed by violence but fundamentally ordered. Of course, there are many notable exceptions like Nihilus and Traya (and Palpatine Reborn), but I would argue that they represent an extreme aspect of the Dark Side that does not necessarily define it. After all, one can see such an extreme in the Light as well, specifically in the tendency towards apathy found in its more monastic adherents. I suspect that ultimately Light and Dark are better compared by their manifestations in those who use them rather than their basic essence; rather than life and death, order and chaos, I think of them as sword and olive branch, different means to the same end.

[Darth Fanboy]

I read about this in the book "I, Jedi" by Michael A. Stackpole and he addressed this a bit, but didn't really expand on it.

Easy answer, Stackpole sucks hard at writing for the Force and Force Sensitive Characters. That whole book was just a nice little insert for Gary Stu..er.rrr....Corran Horn to get a lead role and nothing more. As Guardsman Bass said, Shatterpoint has very good descriptions of the Dark Side.

One of my favorite lines regarding Palpatine came from Darth Vader in a Star Wars Tales short. "My master prefers to possess rather than to destroy." To me, that encompasses the nature of the Dark Side very well. It's about control over one's self, and then obtaining more power so that one can control more.

The Sith never sought out to speciically mass extermine anyone save for those who were threats, such as the Jedi. Palpatine didn't work so hard to become Emperor so that he could kill all of the citizens in his Empire.

[PainRack]

One of my favorite lines regarding Palpatine came from Darth Vader in a Star Wars Tales short. "My master prefers to possess rather than to destroy." To me, that encompasses the nature of the Dark Side very well. It's about control over one's self, and then obtaining more power so that one can control more.

The Sith never sought out to speciically mass extermine anyone save for those who were threats, such as the Jedi. Palpatine didn't work so hard to become Emperor so that he could kill all of the citizens in his Empire.

Err... shouldn't that be others? Sith=control over others, Jedi=control over self.

[18-Till-I-Die]

The Dark Side has nothing to do with "control". The entire point, which is hammered home so blatantly in the movie it's impossible to dismiss, is to have access to the Dark Side your self control has to go down the toilet. Your inhabitions have to be obliterated and "unlocked" and other such stuff, but of course inhibitions are good things. The inhibition not to rape, murder and pillage is INCREDIBLY important to any functional society.

The Dark Side is to the Force what sociopaths are to modern humanity, it's a creepy, dark, predatory abomination that turns the most simple human concepts on it's head. Instead of self control you have to lose control, instead of self sacrifice you have to steal and kill, and so on.

The best description of the Dark Side i ever heard was when someone i know compared it to one of those people with a disease that makes them constantly eat till they burst, so you have to strap them down so they dont kill themselves. If the Dark Side were allowed to continue un-challenged then it would just devour everything in the galaxy (this was Palps' original plan, to in effect create some kind of Galaxia hive mind) until there is nothing left then it'd "die" too. It's like a magical soul eating parasite that slowly kills it's host.


Conversely the Light Side is basically...the exact oposite of this.

Star Wars isnt a story where there is much of that new age "gray area" crap, as much as everyone would like to tap dance around it using cod philosophy the reality is that we have NEVER seen a good Sith (i mean look at Palpatine, he was practically a caricature, like the heda of Hitler sewn onto the body of Skeletor) and i personally cannot recall a single instance in the movies or what part of the EU i've seen that even implies that the Dark Side is anything but pure, raw malevolence.

[Illuminatus Primus]

If you are going to go off of EU books, then I think the "raw" Dark Side is more like what it was described in Shatterpoint: animalistic and predatory, not truly nihilistic.

Indeed. It could even be argued that the Dark Side is as much a force for control and order as the Light; it simply has different methods and effects. Many of the most powerful Sith, Darth Revan, Darth Vader, and Emperor Palpatine among them, worked to forge empires out of the Galaxy, dominions formed by violence but fundamentally ordered. Of course, there are many notable exceptions like Nihilus and Traya (and Palpatine Reborn), but I would argue that they represent an extreme aspect of the Dark Side that does not necessarily define it. After all, one can see such an extreme in the Light as well, specifically in the tendency towards apathy found in its more monastic adherents. I suspect that ultimately Light and Dark are better compared by their manifestations in those who use them rather than their basic essence; rather than life and death, order and chaos, I think of them as sword and olive branch, different means to the same end.

What was so different about Palpatine's reincarnation's political program. You act like his previous incarnations had some enlightened authoritarianism in mind.

[Knife]

Which brings me to this question. The Sith destroy life. They destroy planets, and kill billions, if not trillions of innocent people seemingly just for the sake of it. If the force is perpetuated by all living things, are they actually damaging their own power by weakening the force through the act of killing stuff?

This only works if you view the Force as an energy field that people tap to do stuff. The so called Living Force. However, it's strongly implied in the movies and some EU that the Force is also a god like analouge where it binds the galaxy together and in all essense is Fate.

Viewed in this light, (no pun intended) the dark side is 'change'. All the darksiders are raging against the machine to change it. Sure, to benifit themselves, but change no the less. The PT has shown that constant light side dominance leads eventually to corruption and stagnation, not necessarily bliss. So change is needed, enter darksiders.

Change itself is usually violent and harsh but on the flip side, ignorace is bliss. So the light and dark side of the Force just seem to be a ying/yang thing that is necessary for stability in the galaxy rather than just a positive/negitive polarity of some bio energy.

[TC Pilot]

What was so different about Palpatine's reincarnation's political program. You act like his previous incarnations had some enlightened authoritarianism in mind.

The Dark Empire is fundamentally different than the glorious First Empire. That their supreme leader is geneticly identical is as far as the similarities go. HIM the Emperor derived a meritocratic, paternalistic authoritarian oligarchy from the failed Old Republic. The Dark Empire, by contrast, is a radical theocracy bent on universal conquest and the imposition of the god-emperor's will on the inhabitants of the galaxy on a personal level.

The Emperor of Ep. VI was content with his Empire as-is, as far as my reading of the novelization goes, albiet it's arguable he did plan to forge the Dark Empire from the start.

As for the original question, no, I do not believe the Dark Side is self-destructive. The ROTS novelization gives the impression of a creeping, satanic force of darkness. Sure, overuse of the Dark Side causes destruction, and the Dark Side manifests self-destructive tendencies, but overuse of the Force in general is lethal (see Dorsk 81, Anakin Solo in SbS, Jacen in TUF, Luke in Swarm War).

[Darth Fanboy]

Err... shouldn't that be others? Sith=control over others, Jedi=control over self.

I'm not even talking about the Jedi. Sith have to learn to control their selves first, harnessing their fear and anger. And once they can do that, they seek to impose their power over others.

[Darth Fanboy]

The Dark Side has nothing to do with "control". The entire point, which is hammered home so blatantly in the movie it's impossible to dismiss, is to have access to the Dark Side your self control has to go down the toilet.

Then why is it that every Dark Side user we see in the movies isn't running around killing and maiming everything in sight? Why is it that The goal of every noteworthy Dark Sider we see in Star Wars is to rule over others?

Your inhabitions have to be obliterated and "unlocked" and other such stuff, but of course inhibitions are good things. The inhibition not to rape, murder and pillage is INCREDIBLY important to any functional society.

I repeat, then why don't we see Sith in the films and EU running around murdering and killing without rhyme or reason? (Hint: because they are too busy trying to control others and impost their will upon them.)

The Dark Side is to the Force what sociopaths are to modern humanity, it's a creepy, dark, predatory abomination that turns the most simple human concepts on it's head. Instead of self control you have to lose control, instead of self sacrifice you have to steal and kill, and so on.

The best description of the Dark Side i ever heard was when someone i know compared it to one of those people with a disease that makes them constantly eat till they burst, so you have to strap them down so they dont kill themselves. If the Dark Side were allowed to continue un-challenged then it would just devour everything in the galaxy (this was Palps' original plan, to in effect create some kind of Galaxia hive mind) until there is nothing left then it'd "die" too. It's like a magical soul eating parasite that slowly kills it's host.

Lord Kaan, Palpatine/Palpatine Reborn, and Dolph/Kueller all succumbed to horrible physical problems because of their use of the Dark Side of the Force, and although all were willing to kill, there was still a larger purpose behind their killing. Domination of the galaxy. Even Irek Ismaren as Nyax, retarded simpleton as he was (not to mention shitty character), did not kill everything in sight for the sake of killing. Even with his weak intellect he dominated and sought to control the wills of the beings around him.

Conversely the Light Side is basically...the exact oposite of this.

Star Wars isnt a story where there is much of that new age "gray area" crap, as much as everyone would like to tap dance around it using cod philosophy the reality is that we have NEVER seen a good Sith (i mean look at Palpatine, he was practically a caricature, like the heda of Hitler sewn onto the body of Skeletor) and i personally cannot recall a single instance in the movies or what part of the EU i've seen that even implies that the Dark Side is anything but pure, raw malevolence.

I agree on you with all of this, but to say that the Dark Side of the Force is all about losing inhibition and just simply running amok is way off. The Light Side is about living in harmony with others, and the Dark Side is about controlling others, whether it be through death, slavery, or sheer terror.

[Havok]

The Dark Side has nothing to do with "control". The entire point, which is hammered home so blatantly in the movie it's impossible to dismiss, is to have access to the Dark Side your self control has to go down the toilet.

You don't know the power of the Dark Side. I MUST OBEY my MASTER."

[Knife]

You don't know the power of the Dark Side. I MUST OBEY my MASTER."

And yet Palpatine killed his Master in his sleep.

[Havok]

You don't know the power of the Dark Side. I MUST OBEY my MASTER."

And yet Palpatine killed his Master in his sleep.

Which is part of how the Sith ORDER works. Just OBEYING the rules.

[Noble Ire]

What was so different about Palpatine's reincarnation's political program. You act like his previous incarnations had some enlightened authoritarianism in mind.

Not at all. I was simply referencing the whole "the Reborn Emperor wanted to eat all life in the universe" concept. I would agree that his motivations before and after "death", at least those that we see explicitly, are more or less the same.