Piracy and the Alliance Economy

[Publius]

minor nitpick.

She describes the looters as "rebel partisans." Does that mean that they were coruscant resistance forces rather than the official new republic army?

The Neo-Republican forces were already at the Palace before the end of the fighting (both Tantor's and Talor's forces were engaging Imperials on the Palace grounds). If the sack of the Palace was carried out by irregulars, the New Republic's conquering generals cannot be seen but as criminally neglectful rather than merely criminally ineffectual.

[RogueIce]

minor nitpick.

She describes the looters as "rebel partisans." Does that mean that they were coruscant resistance forces rather than the official new republic army?

The Neo-Republican forces were already at the Palace before the end of the fighting (both Tantor's and Talor's forces were engaging Imperials on the Palace grounds). If the sack of the Palace was carried out by irregulars, the New Republic's conquering generals cannot be seen but as criminally neglectful rather than merely criminally ineffectual.

The other option is that, at the time they were indeed Rebels, but after the fact they became mere rebels.

That's why I wonder if they simply shifted their recognition of such groups later on when it was politically expedient to maintain their "clean hands" appearance, but made full use of them beforehand.

[Darth Ruinus]

Ok, I always hated the Rebels anyway, but whats this I hear about the NR being corrupt and stuff? I dont read the EU, so I havent heard of this. But from some of the comments on here, the GE souds like it would have been a better (if slightly) government than the NR?

Im just trying to make sense of this.

[Darksider]

Ok, I always hated the Rebels anyway,

*Bursts in, twin blasters drawn*

This is a thread hijack!


I never understood all the hate on the rebels. I mean, what's wrong with being genuine good guys?

Some of the members of this forum will go to a ridiculous degree to make the empire look good and the rebels bad.

[Darth Ruinus]

Ok, I always hated the Rebels anyway,

*Bursts in, twin blasters drawn*

This is a thread hijack!


I never understood all the hate on the rebels. I mean, what's wrong with being genuine good guys?

Because good is dumb.

Some of the members of this forum will go to a ridiculous degree to make the empire look good and the rebels bad.

No, I am not saying the Empire was good, or that the Rebels are bad. Its just, from what I hear, both the Empire and the Rebels have good and bad sides, like real governments.

[Noble Ire]

Ok, I always hated the Rebels anyway, but whats this I hear about the NR being corrupt and stuff? I dont read the EU, so I havent heard of this. But from some of the comments on here, the GE souds like it would have been a better (if slightly) government than the NR?

Im just trying to make sense of this.

All things considered, the Galactic Empire's administrative and bureaucratic organs were vastly superior to those of the New Republic's; while the former body had the benefit of retaining the tried-and-true, millennia-old governing structure of the Galactic Republic, centralized and regimented by Palpatine, the New Republic was cobbled together from half-baked, sentimental republican ideals and radically disparate interest groups, maintained by ranks of functionaries culled of many experienced Palpatine-loyalists and run primarily by individuals with little experience with galaxy-scale governance. Additionally, its military was, of course, far superior and better able to police and defend its worlds; I am reminded of Yuuzhan Vong infiltrator Nom Anor's assertion that the invaders would have never been able to secure a foothold in a galaxy still controlled by the Galactic Empire.

However, despite its increased efficiency and potency, the Galactic Empire had its own share of corruption; Palpatine was well-known for allowing individual underlings a great deal of leeway as long as they continued to serve his larger interests. On top of that, one must consider that while New Republic corruption resulted in governmental weakness and submission to interest groups, Imperial deviation could lead to slavery, torture, lethally-heedless resource-harvesting, and xenocide. And that's not even accounting for the darker aspects of the agendas of Palpatine and his chief functionaries.

In the end, comparison of the New Republic and the Galactic Empire yields two unpleasant ends of a spectrum: ineffectual governance to the point of virtual irrelevance and anarchy, or oppressive totalitarianism. Neither are particularly appeal prospects, and to assign superior status either is to make a value judgment on the importance of liberty over stability.

[TC Pilot]

I never understood all the hate on the rebels. I mean, what's wrong with being genuine good guys?

Because the Rebellion is a pack of power-hungry radical idealouges and hypocrites, at times criminally incompetent. Not only was their polity completely ineffective and designed to be such (Leia points out in BFC that the New Republic was designed to function clumbsily and inefficiently), but it was forced on a completely unenthusiastic galaxy (their base of support consisted of a handful of planets dwarfed by the Empire). They have no qualms about placing innocent civilians in danger (Tak Base in Dark Forces was located inside a large urban center, the release of convicted violent criminals into Coruscant) and the massacre in the Imperial Palace took place with top leaders like Mon Mothma present. They aggressively oppossed the free election of former Imperials (New Rebellion), yet were themselves never elected to office. Their gross negligence cost countless lives, both military and civilian (Borsk Fey'lya's usurpation of Ackbar's position during Thrawn's early campaigns and the Yuuzhan Vong invasion), and allowed for the fomenting of old rivalries and blood feuds that had been supressed by the New Order (see the near-collapse of the Hand of Thrawn duology).

The New Republic was a house of cards built on top of a pile of rubble.

[Darth Hoth]

To me, the Yuuzhan Vong campaign really did show what they were good for; nations are tested in war, and the New Republic failed spectacularly. First they refused to acknowledge the invasion at all, while member states were under attack, then their response (after the outright threat of a military coup) was to pull back the fleets to the Core and leave the rest of the galaxy undefended. That they were unable to deploy a successful defence is not too much of a surprise, though, considering that their military had been so butchered by the incompetent politicos that by the time of the First Corellian Insurrection, the entire Navy was undergoing repairs and thence inoperable...

And really, the Battle of Coruscant says it all. There was no control over the military, which felt free to fracture and rebel, and the supposed "good guys" (including Luke Skywalker, who was apparently infected by Trioculus's contagious idiocy way back in Jedi Prince without ever really recovering) felt perfectly happy with sacrificing a planet inhabited by trillions in order to avoid feeling guilty for personally shooting down a few hundred small freighters that the Vong used as human shields. How is this moral? The blood of the Coruscanti is on their hands, and that is an atrocity that the Empire would be hard pressed to match.

The New Republic was, at best, idealistically incompetent. At worst, it was an incompetent racist crackpot state ruled by alien supremacists such as Fey'lya.

[Knife]

You shouldn't blame the rebels too much, the NR was just the final gurgling of a galactic society tearing itself apart. After ~30 years of civil war, and who knows how many years of shear corruption and disenfranchment, the NR really just signaled the end. Just take a look at the next incarnation, Federation of Free alliances? See, a bunch of small groups working together for a larger. Not a larger entity.

[Darth Raptor]

Strong, centralized or democratic; pick two.

The SW galaxy is simply too large, too vast and has far too many individual powers with manifold and often incompatible agendas for a galactic republic that's neither a joke nor an empire. It's a noble sentiment to be sure, that a galaxy with millions of worlds, quadrillions of citizens and hundreds of thousands of ancient and distinct cultures could be brought into a federal republic, but not even the Jedi could hold such a union together indefinitely. The resurgent Empire lends itself to the notion that if the galaxy is to be unified, it must place unity above liberty.

[Illuminatus Primus]

That's crap. The Galactic Republic persisted peacefully and successfully and in equilibrium for nearly a thousand generations. I'd more correctly state that by the film era foundation-level rot had fully accumulated and it'll be quite a couple hundred years of relative instability and warring states before equilibrium reasserts itself.

[Ender]

The Empire love and NR hate here is kinda complex. I suspect a lot of it is a result from the roots of the SWvST debate. The rebels were never a viable faction in that so you had to use the Empire (plus they were more iconic wrt ships and most debate starters went from the premise of good vs evil = feddies vs imps). As always appeals to emotion and ad hominem attacks were pretty common on the internet so you had to try and paint the Empire as "not that bad" to deflect those. Further there are a few instances like the destruction of the DS, battle of Endor, etc where you had to play the apologist to defend the actions there. The end result was that you looked at the Empire in a positive light.

On top of that, the vs debate means you tried to analyze things are realistically as possible, and that is where a lot of the good vs evil thing breaks down. Heck, Vader's act of redemption was premeditated cold blooded murder of a beloved head of state - clearly the morality in the movies themselves is a bit fucked.

But more on it, when you look at it realistically, the evil of the GE becomes diluted and the good of the RA tarnished. A government ruling hundreds of quadrillions of people may be intended to be totalitarian, but in effect it will get watered down to the point where there isn't much change in the day to day life. And the poor quality of writing f things like the X-wing novels has the Imperials being overtly evil for the sake of being evil - is it more realistic to treat that as propaganda, or to think they really are mustache twirling incompetent villains? Most of the claims about mysogney and anti-alien bias break down when you look at them - Phil Skyhan or phong (I forget which) did a breakdown here of the characters in Dark Empire and showed how their complaints were bullshit.

Then you have the Rebels. There are plenty of one liners and statements that most people gloss over but when you really question them are rather insidious. Like that the strike team on Endor had a number of suicide bombers in it. Or how at Yavin they were backed by deposed sentaors. Or how they execute captured Imperials for "destruction of property". Or how the fleet at Endor consisted of every rebel in the galaxy - a few hundred thousand led by a group of people upset that they are out o power are a legitimate group to follow against a legitimate government supported by hundreds of quadrillions. And then you have their tactics and realism. Simply put any insurgency that doesn't take off the kid gloves loses. You have to make the people turn away from the established government, and the best way to do that is show that the government is not protecting them and is harming their interests. Attack a food convoy and the Imperials have to buy the local supplies instead of shipping it in. That is less for the locals so now they are going hungry. And you beef up the convoys so that means higher taxes and increased military recruitment. For the story to be plausible and the rebels to win, they have to be nasty.

Then you have the path the EU went down since the prequels. The prequels showed that the reforms of the Empire were necessary. The EU set about proving it.

[Darth Raptor]

That's crap. The Galactic Republic persisted peacefully and successfully and in equilibrium for nearly a thousand generations. I'd more correctly state that by the film era foundation-level rot had fully accumulated and it'll be quite a couple hundred years of relative instability and warring states before equilibrium reasserts itself.

Am I mistaken or was the old Republic a loose, decentralized and less-than-pan-galactic polity? As in something just slightly more relevant than our own United Nations? That's the impression I get, but I freely admit that I don't closely follow pre-Clone Wars history.

[Illuminatus Primus]

That's crap. The Galactic Republic persisted peacefully and successfully and in equilibrium for nearly a thousand generations. I'd more correctly state that by the film era foundation-level rot had fully accumulated and it'll be quite a couple hundred years of relative instability and warring states before equilibrium reasserts itself.

Am I mistaken or was the old Republic a loose, decentralized and less-than-pan-galactic polity? As in something just slightly more relevant than our own United Nations? That's the impression I get, but I freely admit that I don't closely follow pre-Clone Wars history.

Its difficult to well-understand because the sources are poor and inconsistent. I think the best realistic take on the Empire and his failings in Publius' fine works. It is clear the Empire was evil and corrupt and its reforms were merely the lubricant by which Palpatine could attain supreme power and begin the insertion of his true political-eschatological program.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

That's crap. The Galactic Republic persisted peacefully and successfully and in equilibrium for nearly a thousand generations. I'd more correctly state that by the film era foundation-level rot had fully accumulated and it'll be quite a couple hundred years of relative instability and warring states before equilibrium reasserts itself.

Are you sure? There was plenty of tension here and there, and when the Empire came into power, they had the military put out countless bush fires, as per the Hand of Thrawn duology. I seriously doubt the Galactic Republic was particularly free of this sort of tension, or rather, it was so prevalent that Senate policy became irrelevant and ineffectual.

[Illuminatus Primus]

That's crap. The Galactic Republic persisted peacefully and successfully and in equilibrium for nearly a thousand generations. I'd more correctly state that by the film era foundation-level rot had fully accumulated and it'll be quite a couple hundred years of relative instability and warring states before equilibrium reasserts itself.

Are you sure? There was plenty of tension here and there, and when the Empire came into power, they had the military put out countless bush fires, as per the Hand of Thrawn duology. I seriously doubt the Galactic Republic was particularly free of this sort of tension, or rather, it was so prevalent that Senate policy became irrelevant and ineffectual.

Emphasis on 'became.' Do you really think the systemic failure and sclerotic state of The Phantom Menace was the state of affairs continuously for thousands of years?

[Darth Hoth]

The Old Republic was not as militarily incompetent as the New, but in itself pretty bad in this respect for most of its days; one merely has to look at the Great Sith War, where a single star system could challenge its power. This weakness, although not as pronounced, continued through the Mandalorian Wars and onwards.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I would say our sample size is biased in favor of disorder; afterall, the Republic functioning perfectly and there being peace and justice in the Old Republic doesn't make for good stories. Rather, one naturally will find publications set where the faults and failings of the system make for exciting disorder and adventure and heroism. Certainly there is no evidentiary basis for making a judgment on "most" of its days, and certainly the extremely longevity of its continuity is an argument in favor all its own.

[Darth Hoth]

In judging a military, the disorders are reasonably the only time to make samples. A military's peacetime performance says little about its actual abilities against the enemy.

But in the political aspect you are right, of course.

[Illuminatus Primus]

In judging a military, the disorders are reasonably the only time to make samples. A military's peacetime performance says little about its actual abilities against the enemy.

But in the political aspect you are right, of course.

A military lacking genuine major externalities to defend against has little to do except to play police and coup/rebellion suppression. See early Imperial Rome and China. The military is obviously minimalist compared to the relative expenditure of resources by nation-states in the international system today. And I'm not surprised they get rusty after 1000s of years just policing smugglers and the occasional peacekeeping mission. Oh, and war is just politics by other means.

[Darth Ruinus]

I would say our sample size is biased in favor of disorder; afterall, the Republic functioning perfectly and there being peace and justice in the Old Republic doesn't make for good stories. Rather, one naturally will find publications set where the faults and failings of the system make for exciting disorder and adventure and heroism.

That part sounds like a cop out, since its an out of universe explanation.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I would say our sample size is biased in favor of disorder; afterall, the Republic functioning perfectly and there being peace and justice in the Old Republic doesn't make for good stories. Rather, one naturally will find publications set where the faults and failings of the system make for exciting disorder and adventure and heroism.

That part sounds like a cop out, since its an out of universe explanation.

Less than a dozen major crises over ten thousand years is pretty good sample sizes compared to human history, and its general political stability and longevity, wouldn't you say? The point of fact is we cannot make sweeping conclusions either way about the great sweep of galactic history, and its just disingenous to take a handful of data points and generalize them over thousands of years when we would never do that with real history. Science says its okay to say "we don't know." One should qualify "during the near-film era, the Galactic Republic was..." because that's the scope of the evidence. But if you think its unfair my way, than its certainly unfair your way.

[RogueIce]

The biggest problem in defining whether the Galactic Republic worked is just the length of time they were in power, and the fact that, as IP said, we don't know the full history.

Plus, while the GR may have existed for that whole time, we don't really know whether they were more autocratic or more democratic at various points, or even what all they were doing. During the KOTOR era they obviously had a military force of some sort, yet by the time of the Prequels all they had were the Judicials and not a real military force, hence the reason it was created in AOTC. Plus there are the various reformations and such talked about in the EU. But since I'm no expert on the pre-PT part of the EU I don't really have much else I can say on that.

What we can mostly talk about is the failings of the New Republic. That we do have good information on.

As to galactic politics as a whole, I think there needs to be some kind of strong executive, even if you're a nominally democratic system. How many times did the NR get fucked around with until Leia finally grew back her balls and dealt with the situation? I think any galactic government needs something like that, the ability to tell the Senate at some point to just shut the fuck up because this is the way it's going to be.

I think another thing is relative military power and structure. Either you need to severely limit the size and strength you allow your member states home militaries to be, or you just have a sufficently larger central military that it doesn't matter. The biggest problem with the Camaas Crisis was that the various species at odds with each other had the military forces to build up that standoff over Bothawui, but the NRDF didn't have enough ships to spare to go over there and deal with it, while also handling the various other peacekeeping operations ongoing (or the Yaga Minor raid, though that was classified). If the various individual navies were small such that they couldn't have formed that stand-off, or the NRDF was sufficiently large that they could handle everything else and have a significant show of force in the Bothawui system, it probably would not have devolved into a shooting war like it had.

Remember, the initial excuse for the build up was to "protect" Bothawui after some government attacked them (and a stronger executive could have put them in their place after that, rather than the NR's seeming utter lack of ability to address the issue...especially since they had sabatoged NRDF starfighters!). But if the NRDF had stationed some kind of battlegroup in the area they could have just told everyone else to go home, they'd handle security. But either because the NRDF didn't have the forces or the NR itself lacked the political will to allow a commander to do that, we wound up with the situation we had.

And I'm not even going to get into the NJO since I haven't read much of it.

[Darth Ruinus]

Less than a dozen major crises over ten thousand years is pretty good sample sizes compared to human history, and its general political stability and longevity, wouldn't you say? The point of fact is we cannot make sweeping conclusions either way about the great sweep of galactic history, and its just disingenous to take a handful of data points and generalize them over thousands of years when we would never do that with real history. Science says its okay to say "we don't know." One should qualify "during the near-film era, the Galactic Republic was..." because that's the scope of the evidence. But if you think its unfair my way, than its certainly unfair your way.

No, I agree with you there, I was commenting that saying "peace makes boring stories, so they wrote in several wars" is a cop out, since that part is an out of universe explanation.

[Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba]

I like the idea that the Galactic Empire was 'stable'. The Galactic Republic survived as a ruling body in some form or another for thousands of years. The Empire didn't even reach the 3-decade mark before it was overthrown and the galaxy was torn with upheaval. How is that stability?