Colonisation outside the galaxy?

[Darth Hoth]

Its very clear that despite having the technology to do so, the Republic does not practise assembly line production..

Wait, what?

This is in fact true for certain worlds in the Republic, such as the backwater Naboo. However, inferring from such examples that this is the practice of the galaxy at large seems a bit unconsidered.

[Havok]

Its very clear that despite having the technology to do so, the Republic does not practise assembly line production..

Wait, what?

This is in fact true for certain worlds in the Republic, such as the backwater Naboo. However, inferring from such examples that this is the practice of the galaxy at large seems a bit unconsidered.

Since when is Naboo a backwater?

[Darth Hoth]

Wait, what?

This is in fact true for certain worlds in the Republic, such as the backwater Naboo. However, inferring from such examples that this is the practice of the galaxy at large seems a bit unconsidered.

Since when is Naboo a backwater?

The "small planet of Naboo", which can be invaded without serious repercussions, is obviously not among the more important of the galaxy's many worlds, its status as capital of a relatively small and unimportant sector notwithstanding. Its defences as we saw them were practically nonexistent. The Episode I ICS also states that Naboo is a not very industrialised world that imports most of its high technology.

[Havok]

This is in fact true for certain worlds in the Republic, such as the backwater Naboo. However, inferring from such examples that this is the practice of the galaxy at large seems a bit unconsidered.

Since when is Naboo a backwater?

The "small planet of Naboo", which can be invaded without serious repercussions, is obviously not among the more important of the galaxy's many worlds, its status as capital of a relatively small and unimportant sector notwithstanding. Its defences as we saw them were practically nonexistent. The Episode I ICS also states that Naboo is a not very industrialised world that imports most of its high technology.

Those are all conscious choices by the Naboo people that show they value beauty, peace, artistry and harmony with their environment over industrialization and military power. On top of that, they seem to have had quite considerable influence and standing in the Senate and their ships are well known for their craftsmanship on a true backwater like Tattooine.
None of that makes it a "backwater".

[Kuja]

Those are all conscious choices by the Naboo people that show they value beauty, peace, artistry and harmony with their environment over industrialization and military power. On top of that, they seem to have had quite considerable influence and standing in the Senate and their ships are well known for their craftsmanship on a true backwater like Tattooine.None of that makes it a "backwater".

It's also on the Galactic edge, as well as on the very border of what's considered Republic territory. Naboo is almost by definition a backwater compared to worlds like Coruscant, Ralltir, Corellia, Kuat, and Alderaan.

[Darth Hoth]

Those are all conscious choices by the Naboo people that show they value beauty, peace, artistry and harmony with their environment over industrialization and military power. On top of that, they seem to have had quite considerable influence and standing in the Senate and their ships are well known for their craftsmanship on a true backwater like Tattooine.
None of that makes it a "backwater".

Would that be the Nubian design that Watto mentions when he views the hologram of the Royal Starship, itself the single most valuable ship in Naboo's possession? It is not their manufacturing, if I recall correctly, that is well known, but the design they based it on. Anyway, that ship is somewhat exceptional.

A planet removed from the main hyperroutes, more or less without a military and with a mostly pre-industrial economy, clearly cannot be a leading state. I also do not see much evidence for how their world would be more influential than any other; that this might appear so in the films is more the result of Palpatine's behind-the-scenes machinations than anything else.

Pacifism, ecologism or similar ideologies do not necessarily make a world so weak as Naboo is shown to be; Alderaan would be an example of that. If Naboo is deliberately primitive, then it is a reactionary backwater.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Which is completely irreconcilable with the Senator from Naboo being able to speak before a Galactic Senate of barely more than a thousand chairs, given that the Galactic Republic's franchise is in the neighborhood of a million. Being among the privileged thousand is not just remarkable, it means Naboo is in the .1% of the membership.

More in reply later.

[Darth Ruinus]

Which is completely irreconcilable with the Senator from Naboo being able to speak before a Galactic Senate of barely more than a thousand chairs, given that the Galactic Republic's franchise is in the neighborhood of a million. Being among the privileged thousand is not just remarkable, it means Naboo is in the .1% of the membership.

More in reply later.

Wasnt Queen Amidala only able to speak before the GS because Palpatine brought her in?

[Darth Hoth]

Which is completely irreconcilable with the Senator from Naboo being able to speak before a Galactic Senate of barely more than a thousand chairs, given that the Galactic Republic's franchise is in the neighborhood of a million. Being among the privileged thousand is not just remarkable, it means Naboo is in the .1% of the membership.

More in reply later.

I might of course be mistaken, but is it not stated flatly and more than once that Senators of the prequel-era Old Republic represent more than just one world apiece?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Two possibilities; soveriegnty in the Thousand-Year Ruusan Republic had been transferred from the million-odd quasi-soveriegn member states to a thousand-odd quasi-soveriegn sector-states, to which local polities were mere subjects. This does not seem to be reconcilable with the fact that senators are ambassadors, nor is it reconcilable with the fact there must be more than four thousand sectors in the Galactic Empire (the Imperial Sourcebook identifies "regions" which each contain "thousands of sectors"). Even so though, this means that Naboo is the leading polity of its member sector-state (which is much larger in this model than its Imperial counterpart, meaning Naboo in a matter of speaking dominates a small region or oversector-equivalent) and all of its representatives seem to come from Naboo and the sector's capital is located there. This means Naboo still belongs to a thousand-world priviledged club. Or, the Old Republic operated on a day-to-day basis with only a small presidium of the full Galactic Senate (the opinion of one esteemed poster, Publius, as detailed in his great site, which I strongly recommend reading). But in this case, Naboo would still be part of a priviledged club of a thousand senators which has the privilege of operating in the presidium.

[Darth Hoth]

Two possibilities; soveriegnty in the Thousand-Year Ruusan Republic had been transferred from the million-odd quasi-soveriegn member states to a thousand-odd quasi-soveriegn sector-states, to which local polities were mere subjects. This does not seem to be reconcilable with the fact that senators are ambassadors, nor is it reconcilable with the fact there must be more than four thousand sectors in the Galactic Empire (the Imperial Sourcebook identifies "regions" which each contain "thousands of sectors").

Does the possibility by any chance exist that those "regions" mentioned encompass not only the Empire's one million full member worlds, but also the fifty million protectorates et cetera listed? This would reconcile their size with that of the Old Republic sectors. Furthermore, I remember reading that Palpatine and his various successors as Nabooan Senators represented not merely their home planet, but all of the Chommell Sector. This polity, described as sparsely populated, contained thirty-six full member planets and forty thousand minor colonies and dependencies.

Even so though, this means that Naboo is the leading polity of its member sector-state (which is much larger in this model than its Imperial counterpart, meaning Naboo in a matter of speaking dominates a small region or oversector-equivalent) and all of its representatives seem to come from Naboo and the sector's capital is located there. This means Naboo still belongs to a thousand-world priviledged club.

Naboo quite clearly is not intended to be a major world; we see a sparse population and a virtually non-existent military in the films, data supported by the Episode I ICS and other sources which describe Naboo as a poorly industrialised world. If it rules a sector, then that probably says more about that area than the planet itself. Naboo may indeed be a major world by the standards of the Chommell Sector, but it may also still be a backwater by galactic standards. In the Black Fleet trilogy, for example, we see examples of the truly minor worlds of the galaxy, those that cannot afford their own space capacity. Compared to them, even Tatooine would be little short of a metropolis.

[Sabastian Tombs]

Two possibilities; soveriegnty in the Thousand-Year Ruusan Republic had been transferred from the million-odd quasi-soveriegn member states to a thousand-odd quasi-soveriegn sector-states, to which local polities were mere subjects. This does not seem to be reconcilable with the fact that senators are ambassadors, nor is it reconcilable with the fact there must be more than four thousand sectors in the Galactic Empire (the Imperial Sourcebook identifies "regions" which each contain "thousands of sectors").

Does the possibility by any chance exist that those "regions" mentioned encompass not only the Empire's one million full member worlds, but also the fifty million protectorates et cetera listed? This would reconcile their size with that of the Old Republic sectors. Furthermore, I remember reading that Palpatine and his various successors as Nabooan Senators represented not merely their home planet, but all of the Chommell Sector. This polity, described as sparsely populated, contained thirty-six full member planets and forty thousand minor colonies and dependencies.

Even so though, this means that Naboo is the leading polity of its member sector-state (which is much larger in this model than its Imperial counterpart, meaning Naboo in a matter of speaking dominates a small region or oversector-equivalent) and all of its representatives seem to come from Naboo and the sector's capital is located there. This means Naboo still belongs to a thousand-world priviledged club.

Naboo quite clearly is not intended to be a major world; we see a sparse population and a virtually non-existent military in the films, data supported by the Episode I ICS and other sources which describe Naboo as a poorly industrialised world. If it rules a sector, then that probably says more about that area than the planet itself. Naboo may indeed be a major world by the standards of the Chommell Sector, but it may also still be a backwater by galactic standards. In the Black Fleet trilogy, for example, we see examples of the truly minor worlds of the galaxy, those that cannot afford their own space capacity. Compared to them, even Tatooine would be little short of a metropolis.

Maybe Naboo used to be a major world in the past and something happened to lessen it's importance. Sort of what might have happened to Telos if the Sith hadn't attacked. It could still have the old trappings of power from it's days of importance because of inertia.

[QuentinGeorge]

Just thought I'd point out - "Nubian" doesn't refer to Naboo (of which the correct possessive is simply "Naboo") but rather the planet Nubia, which is an industralised Core World.

And Palpatine and Amidala definitely represented the Chommell Sector rather than just Naboo - Palpatine's immediate successor as Senator, Janus Greejatus, hailed from Chommell Minor.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Two possibilities; soveriegnty in the Thousand-Year Ruusan Republic had been transferred from the million-odd quasi-soveriegn member states to a thousand-odd quasi-soveriegn sector-states, to which local polities were mere subjects. This does not seem to be reconcilable with the fact that senators are ambassadors, nor is it reconcilable with the fact there must be more than four thousand sectors in the Galactic Empire (the Imperial Sourcebook identifies "regions" which each contain "thousands of sectors").

Does the possibility by any chance exist that those "regions" mentioned encompass not only the Empire's one million full member worlds, but also the fifty million protectorates et cetera listed? This would reconcile their size with that of the Old Republic sectors.

No it wouldn't; the Chommel Sector contain Naboo and 35 other "full-member worlds" according to AOTC ICS as well as "40,000 dependencies," and that is during the Old Republic era.

Furthermore, I remember reading that Palpatine and his various successors as Nabooan Senators represented not merely their home planet, but all of the Chommell Sector. This polity, described as sparsely populated, contained thirty-six full member planets and forty thousand minor colonies and dependencies.

As I already said, that hardly changes the situation, but rather makes Naboo but one of a thousand worlds lucky enough to host a Senator, either by virtue of being a Sectorial capital or the leading world of a Sector, or by being one of the top one thousand member worlds in its own right.

Naboo quite clearly is not intended to be a major world; we see a sparse population and a virtually non-existent military in the films, data supported by the Episode I ICS and other sources which describe Naboo as a poorly industrialised world. If it rules a sector, then that probably says more about that area than the planet itself. Naboo may indeed be a major world by the standards of the Chommell Sector, but it may also still be a backwater by galactic standards. In the Black Fleet trilogy, for example, we see examples of the truly minor worlds of the galaxy, those that cannot afford their own space capacity. Compared to them, even Tatooine would be little short of a metropolis.

Okay? And this changes the fact that Naboo belongs to a political exclusive club of a thousand senators' seats and worlds-of-origin out of a million-odd total members. If "notable" refers by any definition to a priviledged minority or "greater than average" than Naboo must belong to such a catagory. The facts are explicit, they do not yield to "feelings" and "impressions."

[Darth Hoth]

Have you considered that status might be relative to a particular planet's environment? Naboo represents the Chommell Sector because it is the most prominent of the worlds in that area. It representing the sector in the Senate is dependent on its geographical position, not its relative wealth or strength or notability as measured by some arbitrary standard. The sector is in itself a backwater; Naboo is merely the least backwater-ish of its worlds, which is still not much compared to richer worlds in the Core, Colonies, or Inner Rim. You appear to be basing your claim on the assumption that all sectors are equal in power and prestige, thereby setting a lower limit for what standards a regional capital must measure up to. Yet we have no reason to think that this would be the case. Would Harare in Zimbabwe not be a backwater by most standards? Yet, like Tokyo or Berlin it is a national capital.

[Illuminatus Primus]

It was the dominant political entity one way or another, and was largely able to suppress any centrifugal political tendencies, and force peaceful resolution to any competing social and societal interests for the most part. This is, one way or another, significant political stability for a 25,000 year period. If the Republic did not regulate and manage the galactic community, one wonders what the significance of "for a thousand generations the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the old Republic" really means then. They were knights errant for a tiny corner of the galaxy? Furthermore, extrapolation from the late era to the entire duration of the Republic is misleading; the tendencies observed at the end of the Republic were its failings that led to its decline, presuming them to be the natural course of affairs is disingenuous.

No, but there are other periods of weakness in the Republic's history; the Great Sith War comes to mind, when a single star system can apparently challenge the entire galactic military. Other such times would be during/after Revan's Old Sith Wars - we have Kreia's prophecy that the Republic would slowly decline and die over the millennia - and the Republic Dark Age. This encompasses at least four thousand of the Republic's 25,000-odd years of history, which should be a significant portion, and is the only one we have data to judge reliably on. (Like you, I disregard the details of the Great Hyperspace War as serious evidence.)

Fair enough, but my qualm is more with the 25,000-5,000 BBY era; it is highly unlikely that a fractious competing galaxy of seperate interests and political regimes would maintain the stability required in order to enforce the observed relative economic and population growth stasis.

The best model in my opinion is a Galactic Republic which more or less ecumencially established a political regime over the whole galaxy, maintaining more-or-less sustainable society and representing a sort of "end of history" coming out of the pre-Republic strife following the unification of the galaxy, the era of squabbling empires, and the proliferation of hyperdrive.

In any case, authority appears to be rather loose, and with the relatively low numbers of Jedi posited by films and Expanded Universe alike, they can hardly have had much of an impact on everyday life; they may have decided wars and politics, but few ordinary citizens would ever have met a Jedi in person. Their peacekeeping would rather refer to their military capacity.

Which is not reconcilable with the filmic canon - they are "keepers of the peace; not soldiers." The Jedi clearly are intended to have maintained a general stewardship of galactic civilization for the past thousand generations.

The Republic controlled the Core, the galaxy's crucial regions. Most interstellar travel capacity was based there into the post-Palpatine era; with technology spreading relatively slowly outwards

Which lacks credibility. Faster-than-light travel and political/technological primacy had previously been enjoyed by powers beyond the Core such as the Hutts and Xim. It should not take ten thousand years to explore and trade with the galaxy. Geometric growth should lead to the uniform occupation and maximal sustainable development throught the galaxy by within a thousand years of reliable faster-than-light travel. In fact, generational colonization had reached beyond the Outer Rim to the Unknown Regions long BEFORE hyperdrive was invented - Csillia was colonized by human sleeper ships, the descendents of which evolved into the Chiss.

and hyperspace travel requiring costly and dangerous mapping of reliable routes,

Space is almost entirely empty. The EU model for astronavigation is without credibility. Hyperdrive travel is possible within star systems and from planet to planet within a planetary diameter (ref: Dark Empire), so mass-shadows cannot be destructive across astronomically significant areas.

which would then have to be re-mapped every so often,

Every many thousands of years for significant astronomical drift or change. Again, the claim that the galaxy is so dynamic that navigation would become impossible to risk in societally meaningfully small quantities of time lacks any credibility.

it is not impossible that outwards growth was relatively slow, especially if the original region was rich. Even an Inner Rim world such as Onderon only had very tenacious contact with their neighbours as late as the Exar Kun era. It appears it was only after the Old Sith Wars that the Republic entered its circle of stagnation-decline-resurgence.

As said before, relativistic and generational colonization had reached far beyond the galactic disk before faster-than-light travel had been invented or promulgated at all, and long before the advent of the modern hyperdrive. This is disregarding the fact that the huge number of quasihumans and pseudohumans requires evolutionary spans of time where speciation or quasispeciation or evolution of human mimickry would be possible. The simple fact of the matter is also that useful resources are not concentrated in the true core of a spiral galaxy, but rather in the spiral formations, and while these structures are densest nearest the core and any meaningful destination is at its most convenient from there, there is no insurmountable or absurd barrier to movement out from this area (the Core Worlds) to the surrounding disk.

For the Republic, while I do agree that technological development appears to have stagnated after the Old Sith Wars, possibly with later periods of brief but intense innovation, the evidence that economy did so as well is less clear.

Industrial economies grow exponentially unless somehow halted at a sustainable static level; the galaxy should have grown faster than 15,000 years and certainly there is no evidence or mechanism to generate repeated severe net crashes in economic development necessary to "reset" growth such as the net rate would not explode. I think you have naive conceptions regarding the long-term growth rates of industrial economies (such as ours), to say nothing of one with access to same-day travel, galaxy-wide and having such automation innovations as Von Nuemann construction droids. Our sad, fossil-fuel economy without droids, confined to a single world without economical sublight space travel even to our Moon, displays population and economic and consumption doubling several times in human lifetimes. The GFFA will grow SLOWER? The growth must be rapid until reaching capacity, stopping, and becoming steady-state - and the political institutions reflecting this.

You would have me believe that they are in a state of advancement which while industrial and post-modern, grows at a rate so slow as to lack any credibility without any reasonable mechanism (quite frankly, you're asking me to accept that the civilized peoples, possessed of hyperdrive in the GFFA, take longer to reach the physical limits of their environment than anatomically modern humans did - on foot). I posit that it is more reasonable to suggest that society reached a level of maximal exploitation and development of its environment in the early history of the Republic or even prior to its inception, and then developed into a maximally sustainable society with a flat level of economic development - with room for some booms and busts, but relatively static and steady-state, stewarded by the Republic and Jedi.

I admit this is also somewhat of an appeal to authority, but if this is the only scientifically credible interpretation to the resident astrophysicist in our community of analysts, I am willing to defer to his interpretation.

Posit that airborne troops were landed in the deepest jungles of Africa. They have ARs, GPS, Tamagotchis, and were transported there by airlift. Does this mean that there is infrastructure ready for them to use in this previously unsettled area, or that they are able to construct pre-industrial metal workshops there? In my humble opinion, they would be in trouble if attacked by an enemy that has air supremacy.

And the Sith? Give me a break. Airborne troops would use up their stores of equipment and resources, maybe improvise where possible - but they'd be SLAUGHTERED by the blockading force with access to outside infrastructure long before mutual degredation led to the ad hoc improvisation of Iron Age combat. Not to mention the fact that they'd somehow pick up the ability to weaponsmith what was lifelong careers on the fly? While under fire? They'd retrain themselves? The Sith would be stuck in this issue as well?

And how about the fact that in your scenario, the airborne troops would START OUT fighting with real weapons and their stores, whereas Jedi vs. Sith has retardation in combat from the outset?

On the whole, Sith technology on Ruusan appears superior to that of the Jedi: swoop bikes, fighters, Kaan's presumed air force, the fleet that maintains the blockade et cetera. However, I do agree that it is hard to explain the ground troops' lack of weapons and tactics of reasonably modern grade. The primitive mercenaries theory is probably the best I can produce. Of course, there is also the possibility that the comic cannot be taken at face value.

Which is obviously the superior interpretation.

[Darth Hoth]

Fair enough, but my qualm is more with the 25,000-5,000 BBY era; it is highly unlikely that a fractious competing galaxy of seperate interests and political regimes would maintain the stability required in order to enforce the observed relative economic and population growth stasis.

The best model in my opinion is a Galactic Republic which more or less ecumencially established a political regime over the whole galaxy, maintaining more-or-less sustainable society and representing a sort of "end of history" coming out of the pre-Republic strife following the unification of the galaxy, the era of squabbling empires, and the proliferation of hyperdrive.

In my humble opinion, we should seek for another explanation, since such a theory is not supported by canon.

Which is not reconcilable with the filmic canon - they are "keepers of the peace; not soldiers." The Jedi clearly are intended to have maintained a general stewardship of galactic civilization for the past thousand generations.

Again in my humble opinion, a subjective quote by Mace Windu would not be the best evidence; the man appears to be rather a fanatic when it comes to the Jedi. We also should not rule out the possibility that he is referring to the post-Ruusan Order only. In any case, what does "keeping of the peace" imply? Are the Jedi some sort of police force? Their numbers are clearly too small for this in a galaxy of millions of worlds and quintillions of citizens. Or, on the contrary, the words could be interpreted to say that the Jedi are a peacekeeping force, sent to suppress local rebellions or weed out malcontents when disputes on a small scale have already reached the stage of open conflict. In effect, they would be the Republic's rapid response team, acting till sufficient military force can be amassed from mundane sources.

It should not take ten thousand years to explore and trade with the galaxy. Geometric growth should lead to the uniform occupation and maximal sustainable development throught the galaxy by within a thousand years of reliable faster-than-light travel.

You are assuming that there would be incentive for rapid growth geometrically outwards from the Core, in spite of the fact that these areas relatively close to the galactic centre are the most resource-rich locations in the galaxy. Why would colonisation over great distances occur when abundant resources were available much closer to you, and thereby extractable with less effort and at less cost ?

In fact, generational colonization had reached beyond the Outer Rim to the Unknown Regions long BEFORE hyperdrive was invented - Csillia was colonized by human sleeper ships, the descendents of which evolved into the Chiss.

I am not aware of any more examples to that effect. Are we from this one case supposed to infer that such colonisation was commonplace? Or was it simply one anomalous happening? What possible incentive could there even be to form such colonies when you could not trade, or even communicate, with them? I doubt there were many such expeditions.

Space is almost entirely empty. The EU model for astronavigation is without credibility. Hyperdrive travel is possible within star systems and from planet to planet within a planetary diameter (ref: Dark Empire), so mass-shadows cannot be destructive across astronomically significant areas.

How do we then reconcile this with the mechanisms that the Expanded Universe appears to operate under? Is there some other, unknown, factor that impairs hyperspace travel besides gravity wells? If travel is as easy as you posit, why would hyperlanes and hubs hold such great importance?

Every many thousands of years for significant astronomical drift or change. Again, the claim that the galaxy is so dynamic that navigation would become impossible to risk in societally meaningfully small quantities of time lacks any credibility.

Once again, this appears to contradict canon as I know it. Although what you say does make sense.

As said before, relativistic and generational colonization had reached far beyond the galactic disk before faster-than-light travel had been invented or promulgated at all, and long before the advent of the modern hyperdrive.

And as stated, was most likely very rare in such times.

This is disregarding the fact that the huge number of quasihumans and pseudohumans requires evolutionary spans of time where speciation or quasispeciation or evolution of human mimickry would be possible.

Or, of course, they could also be the result of intentional ecological or genetic tampering of some kind by outside agencies. I may be mistaken, but is it not in fact implied that the Rakata manipulated the galaxy's inhabitants after such a fashion?

Industrial economies grow exponentially unless somehow halted at a sustainable static level; the galaxy should have grown faster than 15,000 years and certainly there is no evidence or mechanism to generate repeated severe net crashes in economic development necessary to "reset" growth such as the net rate would not explode. I think you have naive conceptions regarding the long-term growth rates of industrial economies (such as ours), to say nothing of one with access to same-day travel, galaxy-wide and having such automation innovations as Von Nuemann construction droids. Our sad, fossil-fuel economy without droids, confined to a single world without economical sublight space travel even to our Moon, displays population and economic and consumption doubling several times in human lifetimes. The GFFA will grow SLOWER? The growth must be rapid until reaching capacity, stopping, and becoming steady-state - and the political institutions reflecting this.

You would have me believe that they are in a state of advancement which while industrial and post-modern, grows at a rate so slow as to lack any credibility without any reasonable mechanism (quite frankly, you're asking me to accept that the civilized peoples, possessed of hyperdrive in the GFFA, take longer to reach the physical limits of their environment than anatomically modern humans did - on foot). I posit that it is more reasonable to suggest that society reached a level of maximal exploitation and development of its environment in the early history of the Republic or even prior to its inception, and then developed into a maximally sustainable society with a flat level of economic development - with room for some booms and busts, but relatively static and steady-state, stewarded by the Republic and Jedi.

I admit this is also somewhat of an appeal to authority, but if this is the only scientifically credible interpretation to the resident astrophysicist in our community of analysts, I am willing to defer to his interpretation.

Upon renewed examination of the topic, I am prepared to concede the point that the economy most likely did stagnate, more or less, at least from the Old Sith Wars and onwards. I am still not quite convinced as to earlier times, when hyperdrive was slower, the Galactic Core and the other inner areas not as settled, and there was room for both expansion and depression.

In addition, many of the galaxy's citizens appear to subsist on lower living standards than what their highly advanced technology would imply; the poverty of large segments of the population may thus in itself be an inhibitor on economic growth, since there may not always be a market for everything that can be produced. This may of course be a consequence of the Republic economic control that you posit, but it may also be a result of other social factors. Apparently, in some locales even illiteracy was relatively common, suggesting low standards of education.

And the Sith? Give me a break. Airborne troops would use up their stores of equipment and resources, maybe improvise where possible - but they'd be SLAUGHTERED by the blockading force with access to outside infrastructure long before mutual degredation led to the ad hoc improvisation of Iron Age combat. Not to mention the fact that they'd somehow pick up the ability to weaponsmith what was lifelong careers on the fly? While under fire? They'd retrain themselves? The Sith would be stuck in this issue as well?

And how about the fact that in your scenario, the airborne troops would START OUT fighting with real weapons and their stores, whereas Jedi vs. Sith has retardation in combat from the outset?

If you are referring to Lord Valenthyne Farfalla's expeditionary force, it is heavily implied in the comic that the polity he represents (and, presumably, draws his Knights from) is relatively primitive and has only recently joined the Republic, explaining his soldiers' primitivity.

However, after reading Darth Bane: Path of Destruction, something I had not yet done when I posted my last argument in this particular discussion, I agree that the comic cannot be taken at face value; quite clearly, the novel ret-cons its primitive combat conditions. Point conceded.

[PainRack]

Its very clear that despite having the technology to do so, the Republic does not practise assembly line production..

Wait, what?

Yes. ITW Episode 1 clearly states this when it praises how Queen Amidala ship was handcraft and made, as opposed to the assembly factory lines of the Galactic Empire later, and its state that this is the current fashion of the Old Republic. If not the minor worlds, then certainly that enjoyed by the elites.

Considering we SEE assembly line production on Geonosis, by the CIS, which were seceding from the GR, and to think that the galaxies demands can be kept up with by, what, hand assembled items? Really? C'mon.

Right. Comparing the era of TPM to a relatively more chaotic galaxy a decade later, ignoring that the ITW quote clearly states that the Galactic Empire changes this and the Clone Wars would logically be one of the key factors in this change ............................

Which is completely irreconcilable with the Senator from Naboo being able to speak before a Galactic Senate of barely more than a thousand chairs, given that the Galactic Republic's franchise is in the neighborhood of a million. Being among the privileged thousand is not just remarkable, it means Naboo is in the .1% of the membership.

Yet, if the planet Naboo was important enough to warrant galactic importance, the Trade Federation wouldn't have dared to attack Naboo for risk of galactic repercussions. Her ability to put forth Naboo case in the Galactic Senate is more Palpatine manipulations, in particular, his "close" ties with Naboo, also the local sector capital.

Which is not reconcilable with the filmic canon - they are "keepers of the peace; not soldiers." The Jedi clearly are intended to have maintained a general stewardship of galactic civilization for the past thousand generations.

IP, since when does "keepers of the peace" equals to having effective representation on every single world? There is no evidence to suggest that the majority of people haven't met a Jedi in real life. The EU also states that the Jedi are part of Judicals, the actual police force of the Galactic Republic.

Space is almost entirely empty. The EU model for astronavigation is without credibility. Hyperdrive travel is possible within star systems and from planet to planet within a planetary diameter (ref: Dark Empire), so mass-shadows cannot be destructive across astronomically significant areas.

ROTJ novelisation also establishes that the precision of hyperspace travel dictates the ability to move large fleets into combat. While the model is broken, the larger limits certainly appear to be in place.

Every many thousands of years for significant astronomical drift or change. Again, the claim that the galaxy is so dynamic that navigation would become impossible to risk in societally meaningfully small quantities of time lacks any credibility.

Why not politics and wave after wave of settlement and abandonment?Such remapping would be more accurately called a census more than anything, and is supported by Before the Storm.

Humans have done the same before, the Chiss are evidence that this is occuring in the SWU. Indeed, the Unknown Region were named that simply because nobody knew the current status of settlements and political alignment in that region.

[Darth Hoth]

Its very clear that despite having the technology to do so, the Republic does not practise assembly line production..

Wait, what?

Yes. ITW Episode 1 clearly states this when it praises how Queen Amidala ship was handcraft and made, as opposed to the assembly factory lines of the Galactic Empire later, and its state that this is the current fashion of the Old Republic. If not the minor worlds, then certainly that enjoyed by the elites.

Considering we SEE assembly line production on Geonosis, by the CIS, which were seceding from the GR, and to think that the galaxies demands can be kept up with by, what, hand assembled items? Really? C'mon.

Right. Comparing the era of TPM to a relatively more chaotic galaxy a decade later, ignoring that the ITW quote clearly states that the Galactic Empire changes this and the Clone Wars would logically be one of the key factors in this change ............................

So that handcraft policy really is not exclusively Nabooan, but spread in the galaxy at large? Interesting, I had no idea. But still, I would argue that Naboo would be fairly unique in handcrafting its interceptor fighters and similar standard items. On other, more populous or industrialised, worlds, such items would probably be more akin to luxury goods.

[Illuminatus Primus]

In my humble opinion, we should seek for another explanation, since such a theory is not supported by canon.

Such as? So far all I see are appeals to ignorance - that there "must" be some mechanism by which to repeatedly crash the economy and RADICALLY roll back development - and we're talking about a scale of collapse much more dramatic than that of the Classical Age to the Dark Age. Why would this happen? War and disease in human history have never definitively stopped, much less drastically rolled back development and growth worldwide. The only time this occurred was during population genetic bottlenecks due to worldwide ecological natural disasters - a scenario incompatible with societies stretching over galactic regions. Another cause - the major cause of the collapse of classical societies - is an overextension of resource limits and exhaustion. This cannot be reconciled with later growth and the regions earlier inhabited still being rich.

The options are adhere to canon no matter what, or to come up with a SoD interpretation consistent with knowledge at the high school level.

Again in my humble opinion, a subjective quote by Mace Windu would not be the best evidence; the man appears to be rather a fanatic when it comes to the Jedi. We also should not rule out the possibility that he is referring to the post-Ruusan Order only. In any case, what does "keeping of the peace" imply? Are the Jedi some sort of police force? Their numbers are clearly too small for this in a galaxy of millions of worlds and quintillions of citizens. Or, on the contrary, the words could be interpreted to say that the Jedi are a peacekeeping force, sent to suppress local rebellions or weed out malcontents when disputes on a small scale have already reached the stage of open conflict. In effect, they would be the Republic's rapid response team, acting till sufficient military force can be amassed from mundane sources.

If you expect me to believe Windu's statements taken together with Kenobi's, indicate stewardship of a state which predominately existed a small area of the galaxy for the vast majority of that period, I am sorry to disappoint. The intent of the canon is more important than the Expanded Universe, especially when its claims are predicated on scientific/economic/social absurdities like FTL societies spreading slower relative to their full environment than Cro-Magnons by foot, that the galaxy is hard to navigate because space is thick, and that 20th century technological advancement must be the norm, so several thousand years ago wars were fought by people decked out in Bronze Age outfits and dueling with swords and building pyramids with slave labor...oh, but they are spacefaring too.

You are assuming that there would be incentive for rapid growth geometrically outwards from the Core, in spite of the fact that these areas relatively close to the galactic centre are the most resource-rich locations in the galaxy. Why would colonisation over great distances occur when abundant resources were available much closer to you, and thereby extractable with less effort and at less cost ?

Because some people own the resources next door, and no one owns them across that ocean. No one who matters, anyway. British and French colonization of North America was based on imperial oneupmanship, demands for luxury and exotic goods, and religious motives. You're telling me the resource hunger of post-industrial, Von Nuemann-machine-using societies will not exceed those pressures? They will just ignore virgin worlds next door? What kind of humanity are you familiar with?

Maybe this would be credible it there were IMMENSE economic barriers such as those preventing long-term Viking colonization, or pre-Colombian Eurasian expansion to the New World in general, or expansion by our industrial civilization into space. But your model is not consistent with astronomy. Resource concentration gradually and incrementally decreases as you move out, it does not definitely stop. And if the "there is enough here" logic really played out, how come the Core is as rich and resource-filled as ever in the "modern" SW era? Why would costs then suddenly have risen and made resources available just over the line increase all of a sudden after 10-15 thousand years?

I am not aware of any more examples to that effect. Are we from this one case supposed to infer that such colonisation was commonplace? Or was it simply one anomalous happening? What possible incentive could there even be to form such colonies when you could not trade, or even communicate, with them? I doubt there were many such expeditions.

This is like claiming that if the Spaniards could send the Santa Maria to America, they might have just sent it one way and never sent another ship that far for two hundred centuries. The incentive is simply human impulse to expand, and also to relieve population constraints in the long-term. And despite all your counterarguments, it did occur. Relativistic colonization has been occurring galaxywide since before the first hyperdrive, yet hyperdrive civilization will be completely insular and limited despite the drive to reunite lost colonies and will remain more insular for over two hundred centuries?

One does not make such expeditions and travel destinations without the general capability to do so and without somesort of proven success. That they reached to Csilla beyond the Outer Rim for a colony suggests their SETI and previous colonization attempts indicated you needed to go far out for virgin land. The idea that they simply poured resources into a trans-galactic relativistic sojourn on a lark without having done it before or never again and it being limited amongst twenty or so million intelligent species, is absurd.

How do we then reconcile this with the mechanisms that the Expanded Universe appears to operate under? Is there some other, unknown, factor that impairs hyperspace travel besides gravity wells? If travel is as easy as you posit, why would hyperlanes and hubs hold such great importance?

We take a look. Does Star Wars seem for most basic purposes to exist in a generally astronomically sensible setting? Does space look like space? Does gravity exist? Thermodynamics? Yes? Then space is space and we use what we know.

We do not assume that SW space is somehow trillions of times denser than our and any known galaxy. Anywho, I penned an essay on astrography and SW before. That is an early draft of a longer and more developed essay. I suggest you take a look. I do try to rationalize the "concept" of hyperlanes in its barest sense.

Once again, this appears to contradict canon as I know it. Although what you say does make sense.

Does gravity and light work? Does the galaxy in the films (AOTC) look like a real galaxy? Then real rules apply.

And as stated, was most likely very rare in such times.

No, it is incorrect. I suggest you look at the literature on relativistic travel, space colonization, and Dr. Saxton's own words on realistic expansion and development. These issues have been covered before.

Or, of course, they could also be the result of intentional ecological or genetic tampering of some kind by outside agencies. I may be mistaken, but is it not in fact implied that the Rakata manipulated the galaxy's inhabitants after such a fashion?

Assuming direct manipulation is a violation of Occam's Razor, you're substituting an intentful, more complex mechanism to describe something which can be explained mundanely. Why should we assume all cases were done quickly and on the fly by forcibly eugenics? Not to mention this is quite antiethical and radical compared to the depiction of mainstream human society and the Republic in SW. The Rakata cannot explain the vast majority of issues.

Upon renewed examination of the topic, I am prepared to concede the point that the economy most likely did stagnate, more or less, at least from the Old Sith Wars and onwards. I am still not quite convinced as to earlier times, when hyperdrive was slower, the Galactic Core and the other inner areas not as settled, and there was room for both expansion and depression.

Radical depression? Sharp demarcation of exploration and development in light of earlier, pre-FTL greater extension of exploration and development? Without mechanisms for such radical depression? With hyperdrive having always been capable of traveling across the entire galaxy in at least a year? (Hutt Space and Xim's Empire were large states relative to the galaxy, and unified political entites require at least months-duration travel to remain stable - and that was before "modern" hyperdrive and "unification", presumably another quantum leap in economic and technological incentive for unity)

In addition, many of the galaxy's citizens appear to subsist on lower living standards than what their highly advanced technology would imply; the poverty of large segments of the population may thus in itself be an inhibitor on economic growth, since there may not always be a market for everything that can be produced. This may of course be a consequence of the Republic economic control that you posit, but it may also be a result of other social factors. Apparently, in some locales even illiteracy was relatively common, suggesting low standards of education.

And you're suggesting they are incapable of treating literacy as a barrier to galactic development if necessary and in demand for growth in thousands of years? The galaxy is more backward then the Soviet Union? Growth, in my view of history, only definitively stops (much less rolls back) if it cannot continue or if it has been forcibly rolled back by some kind of disaster. Since the latter case has not been attributed and is probably totally unrealistic, I go with the former, which at least is observed in the late history of the Republic.

If you are referring to Lord Valenthyne Farfalla's expeditionary force, it is heavily implied in the comic that the polity he represents (and, presumably, draws his Knights from) is relatively primitive and has only recently joined the Republic, explaining his soldiers' primitivity.

The CIA can air drop modern explosives, trainees, and guns to third world nomads and villagers in order to fight its proxy wars; the Jedi and the Republic should be able to do at least as well. They have their own replicators (duplicators), for Christ's sake. Feed some basic elements in there, crank up the portable fusion generator these guys have laying around in place of belt-feeds for crew-served weapons, and spit-out Sten guns before crossbows.

However, after reading Darth Bane: Path of Destruction, something I had not yet done when I posted my last argument in this particular discussion, I agree that the comic cannot be taken at face value; quite clearly, the novel ret-cons its primitive combat conditions. Point conceded.

Thank you.

[Havok]

Considering we SEE assembly line production on Geonosis, by the CIS, which were seceding from the GR, and to think that the galaxies demands can be kept up with by, what, hand assembled items? Really? C'mon.

Right. Comparing the era of TPM to a relatively more chaotic galaxy a decade later, ignoring that the ITW quote clearly states that the Galactic Empire changes this and the Clone Wars would logically be one of the key factors in this change ............................

See, this is one of those times where common sense has to override what you read in the EU. Similar to the 3 million clones. Chevrolet, ONE division of GM, wouldn't even be able to provide the cars it makes in ONE YEAR with out an assembly line. And it is only supplying to a relative few countries on ONE planet with multiple competitors.

Do you really expect anyone to believe that the ENTIRE galaxy operates this way? Hand crafting all their vehicles and droids and apliances? Or how about clothing? Items that the population of the galaxy will run through so fast that it would be out of them in DAYS... Soap. Processed foods. These are all assembly line items. I mean really, are you fucking high?

[Darth Hoth]

If you expect me to believe Windu's statements taken together with Kenobi's, indicate stewardship of a state which predominately existed a small area of the galaxy for the vast majority of that period, I am sorry to disappoint.

The statement does not, to me, indicate that the Republic has necessary controlled the entire galaxy for millennia; your interpretation there appears to be somewhat contrived. Furthermore, even if that were so you can attribute it to hyperbole, simple ignorance or any number of other things. Mace Windu is, as stated, not the most objective source, and he certainly is not omniscient.

The intent of the canon is more important than the Expanded Universe,

Is author intent now canon? That is not how I remember it.

especially when its claims are predicated on scientific/economic/social absurdities like FTL societies spreading slower relative to their full environment than Cro-Magnons by foot, that the galaxy is hard to navigate because space is thick, and that 20th century technological advancement must be the norm, so several thousand years ago wars were fought by people decked out in Bronze Age outfits and dueling with swords and building pyramids with slave labor...oh, but they are spacefaring too.

Am I on the record as arguing for the "retardfest" comic in this thread? Or are you trying to discredit the entire Expanded Universe history by pointing to its most obviously flawed examples, that are not even part of this discussion?

Because some people own the resources next door, and no one owns them across that ocean. No one who matters, anyway. British and French colonization of North America was based on imperial oneupmanship, demands for luxury and exotic goods, and religious motives. You're telling me the resource hunger of post-industrial, Von Nuemann-machine-using societies will not exceed those pressures? They will just ignore virgin worlds next door? What kind of humanity are you familiar with?

The Outer Rim, et cetera, are almost barren compared to the densely situated star systems of the Core and assorted inner regions. Your analogy would be more appropriate if the Europeans had launched vast expeditions to conquer areas akin to Jamaica or Cuba without there being an American continent proper. There are more resources available nearby than there would be further out. Now, I am not saying that the Republic et al might not want to claim key mining worlds or trade hubs, but what possible use could they have for every minor outpost we see in the galaxy? You may also be aware that during our planet's traditional age of imperialism, most colonies were run at a net loss.

This is like claiming that if the Spaniards could send the Santa Maria to America, they might have just sent it one way and never sent another ship that far for two hundred centuries. The incentive is simply human impulse to expand, and also to relieve population constraints in the long-term. And despite all your counterarguments, it did occur. Relativistic colonization has been occurring galaxywide since before the first hyperdrive, yet hyperdrive civilization will be completely insular and limited despite the drive to reunite lost colonies and will remain more insular for over two hundred centuries?

Once again, the analogy is false, since the Santa Maria was not a "sleeper ship" that was sent beyond all possible contact. The Spaniards were expecting to find a trade centre within shipping distance, and to profit from the discovery of a new trade route. If the ships had just sailed off and vanished, then the incentive for new travels would arguably be less. Whereas there can be no possible incentive, other than perhaps pure prestige or some inscrutable religious cause, to send ships off to nowhere. If travel times are so long that you need "sleeper ships", there most likely will not be any trade with whatever "colony" they may establish.

One does not make such expeditions and travel destinations without the general capability to do so and without somesort of proven success. That they reached to Csilla beyond the Outer Rim for a colony suggests their SETI and previous colonization attempts indicated you needed to go far out for virgin land. The idea that they simply poured resources into a trans-galactic relativistic sojourn on a lark without having done it before or never again and it being limited amongst twenty or so million intelligent species, is absurd.

Once again, what could possibly be the economic incentive to build a colony so far away that you can hardly communicate, much less trade? That is a wasted investment.

We take a look. Does Star Wars seem for most basic purposes to exist in a generally astronomically sensible setting? Does space look like space? Does gravity exist? Thermodynamics? Yes? Then space is space and we use what we know.

We do not assume that SW space is somehow trillions of times denser than our and any known galaxy. Anywho, I penned an essay on astrography and SW before. That is an early draft of a longer and more developed essay. I suggest you take a look. I do try to rationalize the "concept" of hyperlanes in its barest sense.

Does gravity and light work? Does the galaxy in the films (AOTC) look like a real galaxy? Then real rules apply.

I shall read your text, then.

Assuming direct manipulation is a violation of Occam's Razor, you're substituting an intentful, more complex mechanism to describe something which can be explained mundanely. Why should we assume all cases were done quickly and on the fly by forcibly eugenics? Not to mention this is quite antiethical and radical compared to the depiction of mainstream human society and the Republic in SW. The Rakata cannot explain the vast majority of issues.

No, I am trying to substitute a mechanism that canonically makes sense. Such speciation would require millions of years at the very least, and I find it hard to imagine that interstellar travel has been present in the galaxy that long. Furthermore, why can the Rakata not explain it? They controlled the known galaxy.

And you're suggesting they are incapable of treating literacy as a barrier to galactic development if necessary and in demand for growth in thousands of years? The galaxy is more backward then the Soviet Union? Growth, in my view of history, only definitively stops (much less rolls back) if it cannot continue or if it has been forcibly rolled back by some kind of disaster. Since the latter case has not been attributed and is probably totally unrealistic, I go with the former, which at least is observed in the late history of the Republic.

I accept the possibility. But there may also be other factors affecting the galactic economy, such as low levels of education and, consequently, buying power, limiting overall growth for fear of overproduction and depression. And yes, many parts of the Republic do appear quite backward.

The CIA can air drop modern explosives, trainees, and guns to third world nomads and villagers in order to fight its proxy wars; the Jedi and the Republic should be able to do at least as well. They have their own replicators (duplicators), for Christ's sake. Feed some basic elements in there, crank up the portable fusion generator these guys have laying around in place of belt-feeds for crew-served weapons, and spit-out Sten guns before crossbows.

Assuming that they want such technology. There may be cultural inhibitions against it among the Equines, for all we know. In any case, we are in agreement that at least part of the comic is obviously in error, in that it is contradicted by a newer source.

Thank you.

You are welcome.

[PainRack]

See, this is one of those times where common sense has to override what you read in the EU. Similar to the 3 million clones. Chevrolet, ONE division of GM, wouldn't even be able to provide the cars it makes in ONE YEAR with out an assembly line. And it is only supplying to a relative few countries on ONE planet with multiple competitors.

Do you really expect anyone to believe that the ENTIRE galaxy operates this way? Hand crafting all their vehicles and droids and apliances? Or how about clothing? Items that the population of the galaxy will run through so fast that it would be out of them in DAYS... Soap. Processed foods. These are all assembly line items. I mean really, are you fucking high?

The Galactic Republic has access to an virtually unlimited labour force that requires miminal resources to maintain itself. Its called droids. There isn't anything to prevent basic consumer goods from being crafted by droids, with higher end items being made by sentient beings with droids providing manual labour.
And its the picture we get. We seen droids doing the manual work in terms of mining, we seen droids providing medical care, droids are virtually the slave labour pool that human civilisations on earth could only dream of.
Remember, I'm simply saying that the Galactic Republic isn't an industrial type economy based on its methods. Not based on its technology.

Such as? So far all I see are appeals to ignorance - that there "must" be some mechanism by which to repeatedly crash the economy and RADICALLY roll back development - and we're talking about a scale of collapse much more dramatic than that of the Classical Age to the Dark Age. Why would this happen? War and disease in human history have never definitively stopped, much less drastically rolled back development and growth worldwide. The only time this occurred was during population genetic bottlenecks due to worldwide ecological natural disasters - a scenario incompatible with societies stretching over galactic regions. Another cause - the major cause of the collapse of classical societies - is an overextension of resource limits and exhaustion. This cannot be reconciled with later growth and the regions earlier inhabited still being rich.

Again, nitpick. You're comparing the effects on our planetary scale, not the galactic scale of the SWU. You can't keep switching between comparing effects on our own one planet scale and then using the entire galaxy as an example. In a galaxy where the destruction of an entire planet would not be noticed, entire planets could be treated as nothing more than mere villages in our planetary context. So, this place became a ghost town? So be it, set up shop in the next big city or in the next frontier town. Replace place/town/city with planet and sector.

And of course, your alternative is HARDLY better. You're postulating that the Republic had forcibly halted all economic, technological and social growth via unknown forces and mechanisms, this despite various EU literature telling us that the Republic grew and shrank in various conflicts, the Republic was more prosperous than ever in Palpatine era and no, I can't tell you how the Republic stopped all major colonisation and exploration projects. This despite the fact we knew that exploration projects were still ongoing, that new colonies were still being set up in the Empire and Republic era and that there are still relatively empty worlds out there the Republic could colonise.

The parameter here is limited social/political change and no revolutionary technological advancement. Any model of the Galactic Republic must show that there was no widespread social/political changes.

If you expect me to believe Windu's statements taken together with Kenobi's, indicate stewardship of a state which predominately existed a small area of the galaxy for the vast majority of that period, I am sorry to disappoint. The intent of the canon is more important than the Expanded Universe, especially when its claims are predicated on scientific/economic/social absurdities like FTL societies spreading slower relative to their full environment than Cro-Magnons by foot, that the galaxy is hard to navigate because space is thick, and that 20th century technological advancement must be the norm, so several thousand years ago wars were fought by people decked out in Bronze Age outfits and dueling with swords and building pyramids with slave labor...oh, but they are spacefaring too.

Hoth is speculating that the Core worlds form the economic and political bulk of the Galactic Republic, and that technological advancement isn't even. I'm speculating that individual worlds of the Galactic Republic may be abandoned and recolonised, that the economy will grow and decrease due to changes in access to resources, and the technological level of a given politiy is due more to access to resource levels, with poorer worlds becoming more technological backward in comparison as industry bypass them and changes in technological fashion sweep them by.
No one is remotely suggesting your picture.

Because some people own the resources next door, and no one owns them across that ocean. No one who matters, anyway. British and French colonization of North America was based on imperial oneupmanship, demands for luxury and exotic goods, and religious motives. You're telling me the resource hunger of post-industrial, Von Nuemann-machine-using societies will not exceed those pressures? They will just ignore virgin worlds next door? What kind of humanity are you familiar with?

Because expansion into those regions of space would had met with opposition from equally well armed and equipped opponents? You might as well ask why the USA has never annexed mexico, despite the US enjoying infinitely superior military and political power.

[Illuminatus Primus]

The statement does not, to me, indicate that the Republic has necessary controlled the entire galaxy for millennia; your interpretation there appears to be somewhat contrived. Furthermore, even if that were so you can attribute it to hyperbole, simple ignorance or any number of other things. Mace Windu is, as stated, not the most objective source, and he certainly is not omniscient.

Windu's and Kenobi's statements are admittedly, a side-issue. I merely brought them up to illuminate the idea that the typical movie-goer is not going to hear them and assume, "oh, the Jedi were a ace-in-the-hole/deus-ex-machina-in-the-backpocket for the Republic, not knights errant and peacemakers, and that Republic, yeah it was a small fraction of the galaxy and even known space for almost all of that time."

The intent of the canon is more important than the Expanded Universe,

Is author intent now canon? That is not how I remember it.

Its a tool which can constrain the reasonable interpretation of the EU; the EU bends to suit the canon, not the other way around. If the EU forces an irrational or counterintuitive analysis of the filmic canon, it should be examined.

Admittedly, this issue is a side-issue, and more indicative of why I approach the EU, especially where it is ridiculous and does not "expand" on the richness or coherency or plausibility of the saga, but rather detracts it. According to Cerasi's foggy window, the entire saga is viewed through a window which can be measured in accuracy and reason and credibility only with reference and closeness to the films, which are sacrosanct. In this way, EU greatly chronologically removed and scientifically implausible may be more like the analysts' version of courtroom "circumstantial evidence" than definitive on its own sake.

More importantly, are you conceding what you clipped away? Or do you choose to simply clip my post into its weakest fragments and dismiss its entirety on those grounds?

Moreover, my first point speaks to the central issue of the debate. By what realistic or comprehensible circumstance with a more EU friendly interpretation of the early Republic's history be understood. You have not addressed my examples of its implausibility.

especially when its claims are predicated on scientific/economic/social absurdities like FTL societies spreading slower relative to their full environment than Cro-Magnons by foot, that the galaxy is hard to navigate because space is thick, and that 20th century technological advancement must be the norm, so several thousand years ago wars were fought by people decked out in Bronze Age outfits and dueling with swords and building pyramids with slave labor...oh, but they are spacefaring too.

Am I on the record as arguing for the "retardfest" comic in this thread? Or are you trying to discredit the entire Expanded Universe history by pointing to its most obviously flawed examples, that are not even part of this discussion?

Do you intend to strawman me? The specifics of the early Republic history in the EU specifically are what I call into question. The plausibility of a delayed expansionism over hundreds of centuries with advanced technological advancement (capable of launching relativistic generational ships) and adept faster-than-light travel (required for the integrity of the Xim empire and Hutt space) available before the modern hyperdrive. The early history is portrayed by comics showing primitive cultures incomparable with spacefaring societies.

My point about Cro-Magnons is perfectly acceptable. What did anatomically modern humans have going for them in the arctic tundra of Siberia and then the Beringia land bridge that the savannas, forests, and jungles of Eurasia and Africa lacked?

I do not see the issue in reinterpreting some specific EU history which must already be so: the pie-wedge Unknown Regions is totally irreconcilable with filmic canon, EU sources, and astronomy. Their model for expansion and limitation is dead-wrong and has been consistently.

The Outer Rim, et cetera, are almost barren compared to the densely situated star systems of the Core and assorted inner regions. Your analogy would be more appropriate if the Europeans had launched vast expeditions to conquer areas akin to Jamaica or Cuba without there being an American continent proper. There are more resources available nearby than there would be further out. Now, I am not saying that the Republic et al might not want to claim key mining worlds or trade hubs, but what possible use could they have for every minor outpost we see in the galaxy? You may also be aware that during our planet's traditional age of imperialism, most colonies were run at a net loss.

Your refutation is incoherent. Your last comment admits that colonization may proceed, even fervently, at an economic loss; therefore your requirement that their must be clear and objective economic incentives for expansion is unfounded. By your own statement. And you still miss my point. Granted that resources (which gradually thin from densest area of the spiral just outside of the bulge to the thinnest edges of the arms) are richer in the Core, yet why suddenly after ten or fifteen thousand years did ecumenical expansion become favorable?

This is like claiming that if the Spaniards could send the Santa Maria to America, they might have just sent it one way and never sent another ship that far for two hundred centuries. The incentive is simply human impulse to expand, and also to relieve population constraints in the long-term. And despite all your counterarguments, it did occur. Relativistic colonization has been occurring galaxywide since before the first hyperdrive, yet hyperdrive civilization will be completely insular and limited despite the drive to reunite lost colonies and will remain more insular for over two hundred centuries?

Once again, the analogy is false, since the Santa Maria was not a "sleeper ship" that was sent beyond all possible contact. The Spaniards were expecting to find a trade centre within shipping distance, and to profit from the discovery of a new trade route. If the ships had just sailed off and vanished, then the incentive for new travels would arguably be less. Whereas there can be no possible incentive, other than perhaps pure prestige or some inscrutable religious cause, to send ships off to nowhere. If travel times are so long that you need "sleeper ships", there most likely will not be any trade with whatever "colony" they may establish.

Yet you admit that the economically unreasonable did occur. You admit real-world colonization may proceed fervently and intensely against economic incentive. So why must my argument be burdened by false dilemmas when you yourself admit that some cases in the canon itself (Csilla colonists) and real world history (European colonialism), that they do not apply. The spread of humans and human-derivatives prior to hyperdrive speaks of the fact this was not an isolated incident (Corellian humans vs. Coruscanti humans - the latter of which subspeciated into the Taungs or proto-Mandalorians, which used sleeper colonization to leave Coruscant and found Mandalore).

I can show that clearly they did see some need to dedicate immense resources and social-political will into long-duration flights with low probability of return; your reply is to state that they should not do so. They do, so the need exists and showing it does in the real world makes it quite plausible that the need existed priorly, and persisted, and Csilla was not a freak-lark case. Rarely do societies invest such resources in such large ventures according to no reason at all. If a reason existed - which it clearly did - it probably persisted.

Once again, what could possibly be the economic incentive to build a colony so far away that you can hardly communicate, much less trade? That is a wasted investment.

Yet they did it. And it was done in other examples as shown. Are you going to respond to these examples by saying "they ought not to"?

No, I am trying to substitute a mechanism that canonically makes sense. Such speciation would require millions of years at the very least, and I find it hard to imagine that interstellar travel has been present in the galaxy that long. Furthermore, why can the Rakata not explain it? They controlled the known galaxy.

They have 500 colony worlds and they are not shown to have speciated human derivatives to my knowledge, and certainly not most of the observed cases. The Sith, a near-human species, predated their arrival, for example.

Pointing out that the Rakata did adapt species is citation; extending this to explain all near-humans and to dismiss the time requirements of evolution is conjecture and may be submitted before Occam's Razor.

I accept the possibility. But there may also be other factors affecting the galactic economy, such as low levels of education and, consequently, buying power, limiting overall growth for fear of overproduction and depression. And yes, many parts of the Republic do appear quite backward.

These are humans; their social political and economic behaviors in a rational, science-based discussion should not deviate radically from humans as we observe them. Your requirement is such. We know how humans act in a zero-sum political environment (non-unified, political fragments, sovereign states, net growth economy) - we have around five millennia of written history and thirty thousand years of physical anthropology to go by. At least my model can account for bizarre circumstances in that it depicts society as it has never existed - a net equilibrium, steady-state form.

Anyway, literacy is not a credible explanation for your model of a post-industrial, space-faring, technological society in large part composed of normal human beings in a galaxy without physical barriers and the pressures of political and economic competition growing so slowly and intermittently for over ten thousand years.

[Darth Hoth]

Windu's and Kenobi's statements are admittedly, a side-issue. I merely brought them up to illuminate the idea that the typical movie-goer is not going to hear them and assume, "oh, the Jedi were a ace-in-the-hole/deus-ex-machina-in-the-backpocket for the Republic, not knights errant and peacemakers, and that Republic, yeah it was a small fraction of the galaxy and even known space for almost all of that time."

The typical movie-goer is most likely not very interested in the history of the galaxy at all; he is either a young fanboy who wants to see something look kewl or a more disinterested guy who sees it because everyone else has.

Its a tool which can constrain the reasonable interpretation of the EU; the EU bends to suit the canon, not the other way around. If the EU forces an irrational or counterintuitive analysis of the filmic canon, it should be examined.

Admittedly, this issue is a side-issue, and more indicative of why I approach the EU, especially where it is ridiculous and does not "expand" on the richness or coherency or plausibility of the saga, but rather detracts it. According to Cerasi's foggy window, the entire saga is viewed through a window which can be measured in accuracy and reason and credibility only with reference and closeness to the films, which are sacrosanct. In this way, EU greatly chronologically removed and scientifically implausible may be more like the analysts' version of courtroom "circumstantial evidence" than definitive on its own sake.

To a certain degree, we are in agreement; I hold that outright unworkable objects or events should be disregarded, if not those that are purely silly. However, to me an author's intentions off screen, as opposed to on-screen film evidence, does not constitute canon.

More importantly, are you conceding what you clipped away? Or do you choose to simply clip my post into its weakest fragments and dismiss its entirety on those grounds?

I clipped the post apart in order to comment appropriately on each specific section when it brought up new aspects. I cannot see that I weakened your argument, since I kept your supporting examples and merely commented on them separately. The main issue in your post, in my humble opinion, was the fact that author intent would equal canon.

Moreover, my first point speaks to the central issue of the debate. By what realistic or comprehensible circumstance with a more EU friendly interpretation of the early Republic's history be understood. You have not addressed my examples of its implausibility.

Do you intend to strawman me? The specifics of the early Republic history in the EU specifically are what I call into question. The plausibility of a delayed expansionism over hundreds of centuries with advanced technological advancement (capable of launching relativistic generational ships) and adept faster-than-light travel (required for the integrity of the Xim empire and Hutt space) available before the modern hyperdrive. The early history is portrayed by comics showing primitive cultures incomparable with spacefaring societies.

Fair enough, I misread you. My apologies.

My point about Cro-Magnons is perfectly acceptable. What did anatomically modern humans have going for them in the arctic tundra of Siberia and then the Beringia land bridge that the savannas, forests, and jungles of Eurasia and Africa lacked?

Are we assuming that migration to America was a conscious process? In any case, were there unclaimed resources greater than those reasonably available at a nearer location to be found there? The answer would likely be yes, but is this true for the galaxy as well, expanding outwards from the Core?

I do not see the issue in reinterpreting some specific EU history which must already be so: the pie-wedge Unknown Regions is totally irreconcilable with filmic canon, EU sources, and astronomy. Their model for expansion and limitation is dead-wrong and has been consistently.

As always, I am wary of large reinterpretations. Specific issues I can grant must be addressed if and when they appear, but large-scale historical happenings should not be disregarded if they can possibly be reconciled.

Your refutation is incoherent. Your last comment admits that colonization may proceed, even fervently, at an economic loss; therefore your requirement that their must be clear and objective economic incentives for expansion is unfounded. By your own statement.

No, I am trying to point out a flaw in your argument. You argue that there must be great economic incentive to colonise in the galaxy. I posit that this is not necessarily so, bringing up arguments as to why such colonisation would not necessarily make economic sense. You then note my example that the classical imperialist powers colonised without economic incentive. While this is true, you should look at the circumstances. Imperialism of the mid to late 19th century was a result of Great Power competition; by acquiring colonies, the powers would gain prestige (and, in some cases, military advantages) ahead of their rivals. But by your position, the Republic would already be the major galactic government in control of the economy by the time that colonisation reached its largest extent, and we see no evidence of other aggressive imperialist factions spurring such competition (neither the Hutts, Tion Hegemony nor any other of the early Republic's competitors were aggressive colonial powers).

And you still miss my point. Granted that resources (which gradually thin from densest area of the spiral just outside of the bulge to the thinnest edges of the arms) are richer in the Core, yet why suddenly after ten or fifteen thousand years did ecumenical expansion become favorable?

A gradual process, resulting in the slow stripping of the Core of natural resources?

Yet you admit that the economically unreasonable did occur. You admit real-world colonization may proceed fervently and intensely against economic incentive. So why must my argument be burdened by false dilemmas when you yourself admit that some cases in the canon itself (Csilla colonists) and real world history (European colonialism), that they do not apply. The spread of humans and human-derivatives prior to hyperdrive speaks of the fact this was not an isolated incident (Corellian humans vs. Coruscanti humans - the latter of which subspeciated into the Taungs or proto-Mandalorians, which used sleeper colonization to leave Coruscant and found Mandalore).

First point addressed above. I furthermore still fail to see how Csilla proves that such colonisation was common. I am not aware of how early humanity was present on Corellia. The Taung example does seem to support your view; do we know what specific circumstances prompted such radical emigration?

I can show that clearly they did see some need to dedicate immense resources and social-political will into long-duration flights with low probability of return; your reply is to state that they should not do so. They do, so the need exists and showing it does in the real world makes it quite plausible that the need existed priorly, and persisted, and Csilla was not a freak-lark case. Rarely do societies invest such resources in such large ventures according to no reason at all. If a reason existed - which it clearly did - it probably persisted.

Yet they did it. And it was done in other examples as shown. Are you going to respond to these examples by saying "they ought not to"?

You argue that there is some unknown reason that a people would support such obviously economically unhealthy programmes without visible gains whatsoever. The only explanation I could posit would be some form of religious commitment to such, and in order to be successful in the relatively short term (which is what most economies are the most concerned with) a society would not be able to indulge in such on a large scale or for long periods. A single planet's resources (or at best, a system's without hyperdrive) would not be able to sustain massive colonisation.

They have 500 colony worlds and they are not shown to have speciated human derivatives to my knowledge, and certainly not most of the observed cases. The Sith, a near-human species, predated their arrival, for example.

Pointing out that the Rakata did adapt species is citation; extending this to explain all near-humans and to dismiss the time requirements of evolution is conjecture and may be submitted before Occam's Razor.

Is it really more reasonable to suggest that interstellar travel has existed for millions of years? Furthermore, many of the near-human/humanoid "augmentations" do not make evolutionary sense. What would be the point for a Devaronian to grow horns, for example, or the Sith their chin-tusks? How does this increase survival value? I suppose that it could all be attributed to random mutation within an isolated population, but this would require prodigious amounts of time to produce the great variety of species we see in the galaxy today, especially since most such mutations would be distasteful to the general human populace when first they appeared.

These are humans; their social political and economic behaviors in a rational, science-based discussion should not deviate radically from humans as we observe them. Your requirement is such. We know how humans act in a zero-sum political environment (non-unified, political fragments, sovereign states, net growth economy) - we have around five millennia of written history and thirty thousand years of physical anthropology to go by. At least my model can account for bizarre circumstances in that it depicts society as it has never existed - a net equilibrium, steady-state form.

I shall confess that my model depends on extrapolation from the era of history that is recorded.

Anyway, literacy is not a credible explanation for your model of a post-industrial, space-faring, technological society in large part composed of normal human beings in a galaxy without physical barriers and the pressures of political and economic competition growing so slowly and intermittently for over ten thousand years.

A society in which the majority of the people, ill educated and poorly paid, is artificially kept down by some form of pseudo-feudal elite, clearly would inhibit economical development. We see evidence that this situation does indeed appear to persist on worlds such as Eiattu VI, and this in the era of the Galactic Civil War, when the Empire's unifying and progressive efforts have been affecting the galaxy for quite some time. On poorer worlds such as Tatooine, the economy appears likewise inhibited, and we know the "hive worlds" of the galaxy have large disprivileged underclasses. Reasonably, in a society with replicators, portable fusion generators and whatnots, such widespread poverty would not exist.