Surlethe wrote:Perhaps you'd like to elucidate what's so unreasonable about those assumptions; I simply appeal to the EMperor's knowledge of the Force and human nature to validate them.
As a theory, your assumptions are all well and good. The problem arises when you try and pass it off as proof to counter my argument. Your conclusions are based on unproven assumptions. Since the burden of proof is on you to substantiate your two assumptions, and you have not done so, it is nothing more than another opinion on the matter.
And yet the Emperor is bestowing his implicit approval upon the corruption by simply tolerating it. Do you deny that this is the case?
Of course. Harkov was executed for his crimes in due time, simply not in the timeframe you have proscribed.
Noble Ire wrote:The Emperor gave control of a planet-destroying weapon to a known mass-murder. He is either obscenely incompetent, despite all the evidence that indicates otherwise, or culpable in Alderaan's destruction, even if he did not expressly order it.
The differences between the Ghorman "Massacre" and the destruction of Alderaan are large enough that your persistent "mass-murder" [sic] label is annoyingly inappropriate.
No matter how long you argue this, you cannot change the fact the Emperor was not aware of Tarkin's plan to destroy Alderaan, nor can the Emperor be blamed for the actions of rogue subordinates.
Its response to the Wookiee's defense of their homeworld is utterly disproportionate.
I disagree.
It would have been nice if you clarified that earlier;
I did.
many of your comments throughout this thread have seemed to indicate that you actually approved of Palpatine and his methods. If you acknowledge his depravity, though, I'm confused by your continued defense of his empire. Do you claim that despite his utterly deplorable and ruthless nature, he staffed his personal dominion with decent and altruistic officers, and promoted the development of constructive and beneficent organizations, despite all the evidence to the contrary?
The Emperor Palpatine I, alias Darth Sidious, was unquestionably a morally bankrupt scumbag, but that does not necesitate that his Empire is staffed and administrated by those like him, nor that it is illegal, nor that it is unpopular with the people.
I again quote Captain Thrawn: "
I encounter civilians like you all the time. You believe the Empire is continually plotting to do harm. Let me tell you, your view of the Empire is far too dramatic. The Empire is a government. It keeps billions of beings fed and clothed. Day after day, year after year, on thousands of worlds people live their lives under Imperial rule without ever seeing a stormtrooper or hearing a TIE fighter scream overhead."
Further, the Empire is not the evil organization you seem to wish it to be. Let Admiral Terran Rogriss explain: "
You Rebels remain so very self-righteous. Always speaking of honor, as though you invented the concept. I've spent my whole life in honorable conflict. I've conquered whole worlds to bring civilization to them--literacy and medicine and sanitation and discipline. I've fought the forces of chaos to keep galactic civilization from flying apart. I've only had a few weeks of each year to spend with my children. I've made all these sacrifices...only to be lectured about honor from someone a generation younger than I am. That's reward for you."
Ars Dangor, Imperial Advisor, explains the nature of Imperial government: "
We rule through might and fear—fear of the chaos that would ensue should the Imperial government falter. Who better than the most educated, well-trained, highly civilized élite to lead the lesser beings who know nothing about maintaining culture and organization?"
The Galactic Empire stood for peace and order in a galaxy that offered only corruption and chaos. I recently re-discovered a very old, very long article that deals with this very issue. If you would like, I could post it here.
The Rebellion was not a monolithic organization. Perhaps every combat vessel available to the cells affiliated with Leia Organa and Mon Mothma were assembled at Endor, but it was hardly every single sapient in the galaxy who opposed Palpatine or desired basic civil liberties. There were dozens of other resistance cells scattered across the galaxy of varying size, including Garm Bel Ilbis', which did not participate in the battle.
The difference, however, is that the Rebels gathered at Sullust formed the vast, vast, vast majority of resistance forces, and
all of the Rebellion to Restore the Republic, more commonly called the Rebel Alliance.
And then there were the trillions of citizens who may have been unwilling or unable to take up arms, but still were whole-hearted rebel sympathizers.
"
May have" is the keyword there. Idle speculation is nothing.
If the Rebellion and the ideals it upheld were truly as unpopular as you claim, the NR could never have formed, even with the fragmentation of the Empire.
Because you say so, not because you have proof of it.
Bringing this back to your claim that the Rebellion stood to uphold basic rights in defiance of the Empire, look no further than its Declaration of Rebellion: "
We firmly acknowledge the importance and necessity of the institution of Galactic Government. We accept that all must subjugate themselves to that Government, giving up certain rights and freedoms, in return for peace, prosperity and happiness for all."
Claiming that every Imperial citizen who did not openly rebel was a firm believer in the New Order is like claiming that every German in the Third Reich was a Nazi, or, indeed, that every American alive today is an ultra-conservative Christian.
They may not have been firm believers in the New Order, but they were loyal to the Empire and the ruler of Coruscant.
I still have a hard time believing that most Moffs would have either the desire or ability to completely isolate their sectors from the Imperial Center. The Empire was not a confederacy.
As your persistence in refusing to believe anything clearly shows.
Again, there is no correlation between embezzlement and slavery. The first was not condoned because it hindered the greater empire. The second was permitted because it benefitted the Imperial economy, or at least kept fringe-ward officials well-behaved
Slavery actually had no economic benefit with the availability of droids; a rather "peculiar institution".
You know that's not what I'm saying. You seem to be operating under the assumption that as long as the quality of life of one particular population is high, the quality of life of other populations is irrelevant. I am challenging that belief.
You must understand that I am not arguing that. I believe a government that keeps a huge majority of the population living in luxury is better than one that can do so for no one.