Project: "EU-fic"

[Darth Hoth]

I think we should also give some credence to the senior ranking figures of the Imperial Army and Intelligence during the Thrawn Trilogy era.

Intelligence at least, certainly.

As for the Spaarti cloning facility on Wayland, should we also interpret "units" to be legions of stormtroopers?

That does appear a somewhat practical scale. What say you, Illuminatus? Others?

I've toyed with the idea of making the Katana Fleet to be a Separatist stash of prototype World Devastators. Would that work?

THe problem there would be that they do not arbitrarily shut down just because the Rebels kill x number of Grand Admirals and Dark Jedi. Plus, then they are no surprise in DE.

Edit: Perhaps we could have former Imperials or disgruntled alien species defect to Thrawn's forces during his campaign? It would go a long way in explaining how Thrawn was able to practically reverse the course of the war while being hamstringed by Palpatine and the Ruling Circle.

I am fully behind this. Were you thinking of any specific world?

[Admiral Felire]

Darth Hoth

On racism and sexism, yeah I agree. The galaxy would probably like things that are steady and last from generation to generation without problem, and nobilty does aid that. So yeah. Its just to me beleiving that their society is ossified and that they thing wmen are like aliens or inferior, it just doesn't make sense. Especially when one considers that technology allows women to do everything like men.

So yeah, I agree with you.

I have no problem with COMPNOR trying to implement an institutional bias but then I also think that it should be ignored in some places, fields and postiions of authority. Palpatine, for example, never personally had problems with working with aliens or women, so the capable people he surrounds himself with (or appoints) should be both men, women, and aliens. In probably equal measure.

About the Chiss, honestly, the more I think about it the more I absolutely love it. The placement of them in a nearby small galaxy solves so many problems I think.

About the galactic war, that is fine as well. In fact having them fall into civil war and strife could provide a lesson "This is what would have happened to the Galactic Republic if Palpatine had never come into the picture."

On your point about GR/GE and NR government and instituions, I agree, I agree completely. And I think that is a very important point that we need to remember as we move along on this.

As to the astrographic point, I created a sort of brief synopsis that I posted both in this thread in the Fanfic thread. I figure that they sum things up without having to look at Publius' great works but highly detailed, complex and sometimes overwhelming works.

As to your final point, yeah. I honestly think that before we can have Thrawn appear and disrupt the galaxy six years after Endor we need to know what happens between Endor and then. The history, the war, the collapse, the barbarism, the etc. It needs to be fleshed out and fixed so that when we work on Thrawn's time we understand exactly what he has.

--

As to the rise of the Empire and all that, shouldn't we just assume that in general all that happens in movies should remain the same. And and by that I mean both the Origonal Trilogy and Prequal Trilogy. Its the expanded universe (both post and pre core) that we are tyring to change.

To that assumption, at least for me, comes with the point that the rise of the Empire is pretty much the same as we saw it. I don't think any change is needed there.

--

Darth Hoth, your point about the New Republic Government is a great one. I like how you have the ideas for its organization and implentation. I also like how you want them to try and do it all on their own, ignoring 25,000 years or so of political instutitons (which not even the Galactic Empire ignored) but then realizing that they really cannot. Same with noble houses that supported the Empire, corporations that supported the empire, and all that. Things that nomatter what need to be included for any galactic government to actually exist.

One of the things that I really oppose is the balkanisation of the galaxy into a thousand thousand mini empires, federations, republics and alliances. The galaxy has a history of 25,000 years of government, then Empire and then it all goes to hell, true, but I think that the majority of people unconsciously want some sort of galactic government for some standardization. But that is just me.

Your points about the Katana Fleet, while good, bring about the point of the fact that we don't know his other assets. And we won't until we work out the timeline that is reached up to then.

As a note about your problem with political astrogation, why couldn't the word Cluster be synomenous with Sector or Oversector. That is, another word meaning the same thing. So the Hapes Cluster is actually the Hapes Sector?

Rank charts and all that are very important, very important.

Darth Raptor

The point you have about naming the galaxy is a good one. I figure that they would name it kinda like we named Earth, you know its the name of the dirt we walk on. They don't have to name their galaxy something like Milky Way, they could called it Home or Prime or something else (I'm not actually suggesting those two but I am using them as a basis for normal sounding names.)

History. Well, I understand the idea of a prequel reboot, I just don't see any reason why we should ignore the movies as if they never happened.

But that said the basic history is Time of the Galactic Republic/Rise of Palpatine and Clone Wars/Galactic Empire/Endor and current

Illuminatus Primus

I am appropaching Pellaeon from the point of view of what he did in the books, both in the Thrawn Trilogy and later on. I am approaching this from how Zahn wrote it and not some sort of military analysis. To me setting, plot and story sometimes trumps certain real life organizaions.

I also have no problem with a person, through patronage, connections or just power having more authority than his rank would actually technically allow. That because he was in the right place and the right time that he can exercise power, whehter its entire legal or not doesn't matter, than he should be able to.

Okay so Pellaeon is Capatain of Chimera, Captain of the Flet, Personal Aid. That is fine. That grants him a lot of defacto power and authority without him actually being able to say that he is second in command in a way. His authority is based on Thrawn's closeness and not his personal rank. Okay, that is fine.

It might be a primtivie or misguided choice by Zahn, but it is the one he made from a narrative and story telling point and I think that is very important to keep. It presents us with the point of who Pellaeon is, who Thrawn is, and it allows Pellaeon to be there, to learn things, to be lectured and to understand Thawn. And all that is needed, because Pellaeon is not just a one-off character he appears in dozens of books and becoems a major character.

Now I am not saying is offically the Second in Command, what I am saying is that in many ways he acts like it. This action is not of a legal backing, but that matters little, because he is capable of doing it and his position near Thrawn allows for it.

I've read all of Publius' essays and I wrote what I did so that we could have a single conscience abbreviation of the basics he writes up without all his citations, endnotes and political speak. It was supposed to provide a basic looka t something in a simple way for us to go "oh, that makes sense, okay I think we will use it. Well, not x, lets talk about that."

I have read all of Publius stuff, I love them, they are amazing and should be included, but they are long winded and not something one usually uses when one wants a brief - I need some information - thing.

Hence my post.

I think what I wrote fits atop the current structure without much problem or changing of most things. It allows for thr fity systems, it allows for th hundreds or thousands of systems, it allows for everything in between. It enalbes true polticial thought and explanations of why some sectors actually only have eighteen planets and ten military ships, they are subsectors in a sector where other locations are more important.

The Imperial sourcebook states taht orgionally it was fifty words, but that now sectors have grown far and beyond that.

It says this: Origionally a cluster of star systems with approximately 50 inhabited plaents, the definitaiton of a sector became vagye and the average sector grew in size during the latter days of the Republic. Now unimaginably large sectors contain vast number sof inhabited worlds with no regard to limiting factors." -Page 10 of Imperial Sourcebook.

OVersectors/priority sectors being different units of the same level is an interpretation, as I did not get that at all. To me they were the same.

At the same time I have no problem adopting the idea of them being different things. That oversectors are actually real territories inhabiting multiple sectors in their entirty, while prority sectors are special divsions that might have a system in this sector and three in another, etc.

According to my rpg sources, the Intergalactic Banking Clan survives all collapses of government (Republic to Empire to Republic) because they hold the wealth of the governments. Thus they are never attacked, invaded or whatever and they are supported. Its in the rpg Coruscant and the Core Worlds, I think.

Knowing exactly where every star is, and the makeup of its worlds and directly visiting their are I think two different things. I think that while, yeah, the galaxy knows where every star is they might not decide to visit some areas that often.

I don't think they should be all part of the Outer Rim. I think they should be, at varying places Outer Rim, Unknown Regions and Wild Space. If such things can occur in the main galaxy then they can be muiltiple things in other galaxies.

Astrogation of the galaxy, poltiical organizastion and all that are very imporatant things that the masses in this project need to figure out I think before one can move forward.

Wild Space is an official term on various maps of the galaxy in various books. Its not something of WEG. I think the best placement for it is systems that exist within the space between the galaxies as well as some rare territories within the galaxies themselves. For example, before Palptaine colonized the Deep Core, it could technically be conmsidered Wild Space.

Imperial Overlord

I like this point actually. I think him using it to make it so that others don't trully look into how he does what he does to be an interesting thing. Plus, I think he wanted to be different, unique and alien and so he made his abilities seem based on something that others cannot really copy.

Pelranius

I agree with units being legions. I think ti works very well.

[Admiral Felire]

I don't know if its been said. But the Rebel Alliance was not a big organization. And in fact, from various canon sources it was also not a threat to Imperial rule while Palpatine was alive. That means it was not a billion man army with thousands upon thousands of warships and huge levels of polticial support. I turn to Publius for actual references that back that all up. In addition, it had very few capital ships and I doubt it was able to get Imperial Star Destroyers (and all their crews) to defect. Which means they wouldn't have that many such things.

I post this because somebody mentioned that they felt that the Rebels used Imperial equipment, and I get that on the lower scale, but not on the scale of starships, well, at least not Imperial Star Destroyer-like ships.

Of course, once Endor happens all the normal rules are different and rewritten.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Hoth:

Thank you. However, I don't want to domineer this. It seems the handling of the Thrawn Campaign is an issue of contention and concern. Let's make this our first focus. What do you think of it Hoth? Anyone else?

As for actual suggestions from me, I think we should emphasise the political side of the war, pointing to how tentative the New Republic's hold over many worlds would be, perhaps even them having to hold down planets by force or else they would defect to the Empire. The NR from Zahn's books is just one big happy fairytale with evil Imperials having to oppress their way through prosperous and content little worlds, and really, that is completely unrealistic, given the timeframe and the extent of local and popular support for Palpatine and the Imperial state (if not always its functionaries). (I suppose one could partly blame this on warlords and rogue successor states giving the Empire a bad name, but that cannot be all of it.) This also ties in with the idea that Thrawn's war hardly appears to be a total one, with planetary bombardments almost unheard of and the laws of war by and large being followed; both sides attempt to appear to be fighting "honourably" in order to score political points.

This is a great idea. I think that this kind of thing is definitely deemphasized. Of course I would like to stress that along the way we strive uphold the fairy tale/high fantasy flavor and tone of the series. That IS Star Wars, after all. But yes, definitely some Imperially-leaning worlds might be convinced after poor field showing by the New Republic and the seeming sidelining of the selfish and petty court rule by the Emperor's Ruling Circle in favor of a brilliant, decisive, dashing, fighting-from-the-front shogun.

The galaxy does have some pretty ossified cultural structures (e.g., privileged nobility, enslavement of stupid species), so social progress is not necessarily beyond ours by orders of magnitude. I imagine that with technology being more or less stagnant and the economy being one of quasi-equilibrium (Some weird form of mercantilism? The various "guilds" that pop up every once in a while spring to mind), social mobility is drastically reduced as well. However, that is no excuse for being openly racist towards women, as though they were not human.

This is one of the things I'm going to address in my post in the Fanfics thread. But basically I'm keeping with several fundamental assertions, that the Republic is the state manifestation of the "long-term stable" state of the galactic civilization. The civilization has ceased with the broad, geometric growth/expansion/development that it previously had (and that our society still endures). Its institutions in one form or another have persisted for unbelievably long periods of time. Pressures and trends in the short term (hundreds of years) may swing back and forth but I think of society as the further it deviates from the median line, the harder pressures of equilibrium push it back. Much of the society seems to live in very Brave New World lite esque societies, where social democratic institutions provide most of what the citizenry requires, and most live a life of what is provided for them and available. Consequently, the ruling or ambitious class is mostly made of those who simply weren't content with what was provided and wanted more and to transcend common society. I think on the everyday level there's probably a decent helping of Tall Poppy Syndrome. As a result, the ruling class has a pretty cut-throat culture of whether newcomers can really take it and basically determined by the question "how badly do you want it?" To say nothing of the fact that in a long-term equilibrium society, all gains, relationships, and transactions are essentially zero-sum games (if everyone got richer, GDP would grow geometrically over time). So it becomes very dog-eat-dog. Successful individuals might found self-motivating and selecting families akin to traditional aristocracy, where they immense their children in training and education and grooming for future talent in this culture. Rinse wash and repeat over a hundred thousand years, and you have something very much like ancient aristocracy or absurdly self-motivated and capable meritocrats.

Given High Human Culture, I think there should be a noticeable institutional bias, even if it is only fuelled by COMPNOR activists and their highly placed friends. This is not saying that aliens should not serve or be accepted as equals in some locales (perhaps a Sector with a particularly liberal governor/local administration?), but that they would overall find their service more difficult, promotion slower, &c. Conversely, in some heavily COMPNOR-influenced Sectors, aliens might be second-class citizens who individually aspire to reach the rank of "Honorary Human". On a galactic scale, uniform policies on this topic would appear difficult to enforce in every locale.

But aliens also serve as Senators and members of Palpatine's greater inner circle (most notably Thrawn, but others as well). Clearly being nonhuman is an institutionalized impediment the way that overt opposition to Palpatine is.

Yes, and to me it fits better with their canon portrayal; they are very insular, and a physical measure setting them apart does make sense, even if it is easily defeated by "modern" technology. Still, the main point would be that the areas that are isolated are so because they themselves want it, not because they are arbitrarily off-limits.

I think the only way to have them cut-off for such a long period (70,000 years or whatever) is to have them be in dim stars in the depths of the galactic halo. Their knowledge of and isolationist avoidance of the main society would be substantiated by their cultural xenophobia and prohibition against foreign policy interventionism.

Illuminatus has some ideas, and personally I think there can be plenty of drama in simply having the New Republic collapse spectacularly under its own incompetence (aided perhaps by lesser foreign invasions).

The concept I basically have (developed with considerable influence from and in discussions with, Publius) is a character who tries to duplicate Palpatine's rise to power from behind the curtain through proxies and pasties and figureheads, while attempting to seduce one of Skywalker's most gifted students, and perhaps using limited alien invaders (Vong analogues) and/or internal opposition movements as a spark for a war (similar to how the somewhat covert droid army build-up is used as a flashpoint in Lucas' Clone War by the Sith) that would precipitate the conflict. The attempt would be foiled by new heroes and the political and social maturation of the New Republic in general and the Heroes of the Saga in particular (basically, they accept the fact that Palpatine was a bastard, and maybe he would've done what they know needs to be done, but just because he would've done it doesn't make it wrong - basically they get over Palpatine and prevent a relapse).

Here, I am using history as a model, specifically das Reich for the OR/Empire and the Soviet Union for the NR. The first government takes over an existing apparatus in peacetime (more or less, in the Empire's case) and gradually subverts it to its own ends, while the RA/NR is a violent revolutionary movement by an armed minority which attempts to produce a "clean slate" to build its utopia on. However, it quickly finds this unfeasible, and promptly turns to various hypocritical justifications for incorporating elements of the old government, only to purge them again when it has the power to do so.

Fair enough, but I think we're starting to edge into "willful subversion" of the original version as opposed to reinterpreting it and making it intelligent. Alliance to Restore the Republic is demonstrably a self-appointed, minority-backed, violent and subversive revolutionary political movement. However, they really do mean well, and they avoid abuse. I think their implemented policies should be an eclectic mess of dull restorationism of the pre-Palpatine Republic institutions (fundamentally the Neo-Republicans are counterrevolutionary reactionaries) and complete elimination and restructuring in some areas where Palpatine's influence or reform was dubbed too extensive or where he created new apparatuses from whole cloth - this I imagine they'd treat like your model and try, at least, to throw the baby out with the bath water. I do expect they will inevitably be forced to stick with extant institutions probably quite grudgingly and after embarrassing mishaps. Like I said, their ability to arrive at a synthesis of Palpatine's reforms and the pre-Palpatinic Republic would be the major political theme of the NJO replacement in my concept. The Imperials are actually the revolutionaries.

More or less everyone on the board does, I think, with ample justification. . . One could almost take the message of SW to be that democracy does not work, at times.

Unfortunately. As we get really into the technical and realism issues, we shouldn't forget style and tone; the "feel" of the series and meta-themes that permeate the entire saga. These philosophical concepts should be defined, explored, and the plot and conflicts should be evocative of them.

You mean instead of jumping right onto the Thrawn Campaign? I might perhaps agree with that. What do you think, Illuminatus? Should we put Thrawn on hold till we have fleshed out the background?

I was just going to use him as the source of my first fluff attempt, I am certainly not trying to carve in stone yet, just get the juices flowing and give us some actual material to start working with.

Certainly. The same might be true for the Nagai, e.g. the New Republic considers them primitive barbarians and uses them as mercenaries for particularly hard or dirty jobs, like the Bolsheviks did with Chinese or the Latvian Riflemen in the Russian Civil War. Alternatively, they are just privateers and yet another minor headache to some Sector or sub-Sector official.

This is fair enough. I do think the brief campaigning by the Alliance of Free Planets in the Marvel arc and in their relief mission to Bakura and against the Ssi-ruuk is actually good. It gives them a break from the Empire while their developing a post-Palpatine policy and while the Empire is preoccupied with near collapse, and definitely locally and to a much lesser extent pan-galactically, bolsters their credibility for fighting off the opportunistic barbarian attacks while the Empire was impotent to respond.

What do you think of my take on the Chiss, by the way?

Great, except for it being ensconced in a satellite galaxy. For the most part I think they should be considered part of Outer Rim jurisdiction (which I envision as "everything not in/beyond the other regions belongs to you" for the most part). The Outer Rim is clearly lawless and huge, given the relative independence and leeway granted the governors assigned to it at every level.

I personally, would take the idea of "heroes on both sides" and "gray as opposed to black and white" that Lucas promised and actually do it, instead of simplicity he gave us. My Empire would be significantly older, and the PT heroes collaborate with Palpatine and his program (some more enthusiastically than others - cough - Anakin - cough -). The Jedi Purge and Palpatine's openly despotic Throne would come in Episode III when they realized they'd screwed up and had buyers' remorse. I take the fact of the OT's treatment as a combination of the utter information and cultural domination by Palpatine's revivalist movement. In the eyes of almost all, it literally swept everything aside and Old Republic was a quaint and ancient institution of the past. That, and the fact that the institutions of the galaxy are so old and ossified that their culture has become romanticized and quasi-traditional/aristocratic. Obi-Wan's pomp would be because the Jedi literally romanticized themselves as the knight-saviors of the galaxy and the stewards of the Republic.

So, that is your take on the PT? I find much to agree with there. So, would you put the Clone Wars back in the 40s to 50s BBY as Zahn had it, or even further?

Yeah, I would make it a combination of the pre-Lucas conception of the Clone Wars (with helpings from early scripts) and the actual conception. I would "stretch" the timeline, such that the political and social and military history would take place over a longer time and earlier (in other words, disturbances and storm clouds in the distance like the Stark War would take place before Anakin's birth and maybe even Obi-Wan's, with the Clone Wars being an actual series of near-continuous conflicts (y'know, because they are called WARS) which are fought against clones (y'know, because they're called the CLONE WARS) and which were very destructive and traumatic (more so for the most part, than the civil wars) taking place around the traditional date (not ending in 19 BBY) and not the popcorn fest without any real people's involvement that Lucas gave us. I would have Palpatine's behind the scene's manipulations last for longer, and have him in power longer before Episode III (which would contain in broad terms most of the same events). I would have the Empire significantly older, and with the main characters collaborating with and supporting Palpatine, only to realize later they screwed up (this being actual moral ambiguity, instead of where Lucas had everyone but Anakin the Idiot get it and array against him before he's actually started to do illegal things and be bereft of real moral responsibility for his rise).

I would actually like to see them try abolishing the old government, only to fail spectacularly and be forced to revert to it as chaos sets in. That fits better with their idealistic image. At the same time, there could be swings in the treatment of former Imperials depending on politics (e.g., if Fey'lya's populist/alien supremacist faction gains the upper hand, their situation grows worse).

Yeah, I agree. They do seem very well behaved, and as I said, I give the benefit of a doubt to the way they are supposed to be portrayed. Which means the rebels behave themselves and conduct themselves with legal process and consistency, and the bad times really are bad apples, screw ups in management, or a loss of control like the White Terror committed at the Imperial Palace after its securing in the Battle of Coruscant (crimes of omission and error, not comission and malice).

This touches on the subject of how former Imperial citizens are treated overall. Do we retain EU portrayals of plundering, wealth redistribution and vindictive show trials? I personally would like to elaborate a little on this, as it is implied rather than stated in the extant canon. e.g., have a Nuremberg-style trial for people like Bevel Lemelisk, where the Rebels get to motivate why it is criminal to build superweapons but not to use them (as Kyp Durron did).

I agree. Flesh it out and at least give them factions who debate it with real reasons, and have real opinions, and have them have a real policy against him (basically, I think Durron wasn't tried as a war criminal because he didn't commit war crimes; he only wantonly destroyed property and carried out vigilante attacks against the Empire; think about it, Carida a civilian site? the Deep Core military sites? a barren star cluster?).

Right, and the immaturities and weaknesses of the Palpatinic Era galactic society in general and the New Republic in particular would be the focus of my idea of a NJO-replacement arc.

As I see it, Palpatine's centralisation, while foremost a vessel for his own ascendancy, was also in a way a last-ditch attempt to fix what was wrong with the old government. The Old Republic was clearly falling apart even before the Clone Wars, and the Empire would be the clamp-down reaction on its fracturing and non-functioning. The centralisations this imposed would, in turn, be a majorincentive for members of the old elite to support the Rebels, as they were much looser on control; thus, the New Republic would be well-intentioned but actually stripping away the last measures that might have saved the overall OR structure and speeding up its descent into anarchy.

I think this deserves by fleshing out and use, and definitely should be applied. I agree.

If we are to retain the Katana Fleet plot device as anything but a propaganda show, we would probably need to scale up both she ships and the numbers included in that force.

Its difficult because as a plot device, its obviously quite contrived, militarily naive, and stupid. The best move would probably be to make the fleet and resources lost much more impressive and its psychological and propoganda value much greater (maybe up the ante surrounding Thrawn's mystique by having the fleet lost behind New Republic lines, and he successfully managed to extricate a prize armada with real - if merely tactical level - war value and with mythological status, and did so with the collaboration of Imperial sympathizers in the Republic or corrupt political appointees of say Fey'lya's faction?) while also deemphasizing its importance to the overall campaign and the plot of Thrawn's return (instead of a major advantage, just have it be a particular spectacular coup in an overall strategy of acquiring stopgap military materiel from unconventional sources).

On the issue of the ersatz ISD, I can see your point. I thought it appropriate because of the name, relatively close to common design, streamlined function as a dedicated fleet warship &c; to me, it appeared a good analogue of a "Victory" ship (as per WWII, not the ISD), or a cheap, easy-to-build yet more powerful replacement for the ordinary Imperial-class, which is more suited for peacekeeping and multitasking. But if Saxton's scaling is accurate, then it is too small; I had forgotten to check it for size.

I'm glad you agree. I'm thinking that there should be something which stands in for the ISD and Tector in a true battleline, we can start by calling them impressive fast battleships or other fluff, and emphasize their superiority to old Republic models (the Victory/Venator analogues of the Clone Wars, and the even old Dreadnaught analogues). I'd also talk about brand new, even more massive battleships (evocative of the Executor-class era build-up, post-Yavin).

I'm afraid I was constrained by canon. The Imperial Sourcebook states explicitly regions contain anywhere from single digits to upwards of thousands of sectors. Some kind of "region" must have 5-10 sectors, and some other kind must have 2000+ sectors. I chose the former as "lesser regions" and the latter as "galactic regions" with "greater regions" for canonical cases which are clearly intermediate, like the Koornacht Cluster, the Hapan Cluster or the Transitory Mists it is part of, and the Bright Jewel Cluster.

The official material is problematic because it is inconsistent and notably confuse the terms on various occasions. This is why Publius had to build such an elaborate system of regional administration in TNOiP to house all the various interpretations. I would actually prefer if we could narrow down the band a bit. As I imagined the EU, Regions were the major bands of worlds, such as Core, Colonies &c. Below them were the Oversectors, segments of space within these Regions (e.g., Bright Jewel Oversector), and the bottom line would be Sectors.

Except the oversectors were established after the Empire, leaving a big hole between the galactic region and the sector in the Republic era. Not to mention the Imperial Sourcebook provides us with a strongly implied case for multi-tiered regions, given we have the "thousands" sector regions and "several" sectors regions. Furthermore, we know the oversector/priority sector is an alternative to the regions from the same source book, and one cutting across old boundries and jurisdictions - the Imperial Center Oversector (also called Sector Zero, strongly implying Priority Sectors and Oversectors are different names for the same thing, more polylingualism probably) contains worlds in the Colonies as well as Core Worlds.

There were also "Priority Sectors" (Death Star Technical Manual, if I recall correctly), which could vary in size; these would be the areas delegated various plenpotentiaries by the Imperial Throne, and which could be anything from a few to vastly many Sectors.

Except the Imperial Sourcebook directly identifies Priority Sectors with Oversectors and assigns both a Grand Moff under a new scheme.

The Imperial Sourcebook treats "Region" not as a measure dependent on size or a group of measures, but by some other arbitrary criteria, such as being under the control of a single political entity. This could be dismissed as a mistake by the in-universe author - it is not as though there are not plenty of those already.

Except the Imperial Sourcebook openly states that regions may contain anywhere from a handful to thousands of sectors. It seems to me the easiest way to harmonize that system (which must be capable of standing on its own at least superficially in the Old Republic because oversectors/priority sectors do not exist yet) is that there are more than one kind of region. We openly know this because of cases like Hutt Space and the Bright Jewel Cluster (which was a supra-sectorial governorate general, but located in the Outer Rim, a region in of itself).

Here's how the system works. There are hundreds of billions of star systems, maybe near a trillion stars counting the entire galactic disk, bulge, halo, globular clusters, satellite galaxies, and over gravitationally bound entities like galactic remnants (from collision events). There are billions of worlds. There are around 50 million discrete political entities with a direct relationship to the Imperial State (I imagine there are probably around a hundred million give or take at this level of organization and political complexity; remember that the member worlds may have their own colonies, protectorates, trust mandates, etc.) Around 1 million of those discrete political entities are fully-enfranchised, federated member states. There are probably on the order of 20 thousand sectors, based on the 50 worlds per sector estimate (the Chommell Sector, a Mid Rim and sparsely populated one, has fewer members than 50 in it, which would push the estimate up, but I'm using simple division as a benchmark here). There are probably around a thousand or so of the lowest class of region (we can name it what you want, my suggestion and the one in The New Order in Power is the Lesser Region). There are probably a hundred or so mid-level regions (The New Order in Power calls these the Greater Regions). The highest level of region, basically indisputed are the seven confimed ones, the Deep Core, the Core Worlds, the Colonies, the Inner Rim, the Expansion Region, the Mid Rim, and the Outer Rim (The New Order in Power calls these the Galactic Regions). We know there are supra-sectorial units below the "galactic region" threshold in the case of the Governorate General of the Bright Jewel Cluster. That's not in dispute. Nor is the fact there are some regions with only a few sectors. The multi-classed region scheme I support as the best way to organize this.

Anyway, the Empire reorganizes the sectors into oversectors and priority sectors, which appear to be different names for the same things and sometimes used interchangably. I suspect they also come in varying classes and may be layered atop one another themselves (for monstrosities like the Oversector Outer to things like the Bright Jewel Oversector; presumably the latter was a subset of the former). We can add and modify terminology, but I'd prefer to keep The New Order in Power as our canon where not impossible and I'd prefer to keep terminology consistent with canonical use where possible.

There also the proconsulates of the Privy Councillors, which The New Order in Power terms "Special Areas" and their administrators "Rectors" (although this seems to be more of a supervisory role that piggy-backs off of and is layered atop of existing administrations like a particular grouping of sectors; the Moffs there may be expected to furnish reports too and respond to coordination by the Rector; a kind of 'governing czar' for a particular locality).

The Hapes Cluster or the Koornacht Cluster are described as having double-digit numbers of major worlds in all canon; they would qualify for Sectors at best if size was the sole criterion. I presume we are going to upgrade them if they are supposed to be credible, but the existant EU calling them "Regions" clearly does not intend this to mean that they have many Sectors within them.

The Koornacht Cluster is clearly supposed to be its own locale, I'd make it a minor region is only so the New Republic's fixation with it and the crisis is not totally stupid (governments losing confidence over military action in a single sector or less? this wouldn't even reach the Imperial Senate, but been decided by the local Grand Moff and just handled). The Bright Jewel Cluster is indisputable; it is accorded a governor general and later made an Oversector.

For the Invids, I would say that they were trouble for some local, inadequately manned authority that called for Federal help, e.g. the Sector Rangers; I do not think the NR should expend forces on hunting them for extended periods on its own initiative.

Fair enough.

Agreed. Also, stuff like rank charts for the various organisations and militaries, which is important if we do not want to fill the hierarchy with the kind of haphazard shit that the EU did. (I am not saying that we must throw out stupidities such as "Systems Admiral" or "Captain-Administrator", but they should be made to make sense - e.g., a lot of the more obscure "ranks" should really be appointments or positions.)

Right, I don't know if you kept up with The New Order in Power, but these things were partially touched in the last three chapters, The College of Moffs, The State Services of the Imperium, and the Armed Forces of the Imperium. Some of the rank structures and names are places where I might be comfortable deviating from canon if only because their usage of real world terminology is incorrect and incoherent (for example, grand general is stupid; grand admiral has an army equivalent and it is field marshal general).

Was Zahn being completely ignorant of real militaries, or did he just not give a damn? Does anyone know? Either way, I agree.

He's just ignorant. Remember in the Hand of Thrawn, Pelleaon has a MAJOR as a subordinate aboard ship.

To clarify: I am not saying that the Imperial Remnant was the legitimate Imperial government, merely that they pretended to be and were recognised as such.

I agree absolutely.

I did not mean to say that its implementation would be complete or uniform throughout Imperial space; of course, there will be large variations. Nevertheless, I cannot dismiss it as minor and of little consequence as you appear to do; its proponent Sate Pestage was the de facto ruler of the Empire while Palpatine was devoting his time to his magery, after all, and this would be reflected in appointments, policy and the relative importance of COMPNOR. Of which the last mentioned to the best of my knowledge was not insignificant, with it having widespread lobbying power, youth corps and its own political police. In addition, the Imperial Military appears more afflicted with political and COMPNOR interference than most, given that it has two separate corps of commissars (Political Reliability Observers and CompForce Observers, respectively) monitoring it, in addition to ISB sleepers. Many senior officers were apparently also in favour of New Order policies such as High Human Culture; perhaps this was the result of a politicised Academy, or perhaps cronyism and the rapid promotion of the ideologically correct.

I agree. Like I said, I think political and thoughtcrime gets in trouble basically everywhere and is well fully institutionalized. Nonhuman discrimination is institutionalized on a haphazard and inconsistent basis (indisputable, some areas are relatively safe from it - the Heirarchy and the Armed Forces of the Imperium, in particular, while other places are rife with it, but even there it exists in constitutionally distinct forms, from the opportunistic bondage and "domestication" of alien species, to things similar to black codes and pre-1960s Southern U.S. segregation, to South African apartheid, to Stalinistic outright careless or non-ideological speciocide, to Nazistic ideological speciocide (in the case of that Himmler-analogue grand admiral).

[Admiral Felire]

Here is a question. There is the main galaxy and then there are how many satellite galaxies. Are we looking in terms of four or six or ninteen twenty or even things like thirty or forty.

By the way, with the Outbound Flight Project. They traveled out of the main galaxy and were passing through the Chiss Galaxy when Thrawn's forces intercepted them and destroyed them. The point is that they made it out of the main galaxy but not out of the known cluster.

In addition, there is some fluff that supports the idea that the Chiss are actually a human sub-species from thousands or tens of thosuands of years ago. I like that idea.

Another idea is that we could also have the Sith be in another galaxy. Taht would solve the problem of their empire expanding hugely and yet never coming in contact with the Galactic Republic. That is until an accident from a scout ship.

Here is another question, this about fall. One of the biggest problems I have with the EU is that Palpatine dies and then almsot immeidately law and order disappears. That cannot possibly be true. Imperial law is still going to survive, though nothing but sheer inertia maybe, for at least a year afterward. This means that Coruscant will remain a loyal imperial territory and plaents would have parades two days after Endor.

Legal orders will probably still be transmitted normally and followed routinely. Sectors will function as normal. And mobile forces will do exactly what they always did.

Interesting idea here, Pellaeon's illegal retreat could have been a cause of wardlordism. Not him, he and his ship remained bound by the Empire but some of the squadrons at Endor become the first Warlords.

[Darth Hoth]

This is a great idea. I think that this kind of thing is definitely deemphasized. Of course I would like to stress that along the way we strive uphold the fairy tale/high fantasy flavor and tone of the series. That IS Star Wars, after all. But yes, definitely some Imperially-leaning worlds might be convinced after poor field showing by the New Republic and the seeming sidelining of the selfish and petty court rule by the Emperor's Ruling Circle in favor of a brilliant, decisive, dashing, fighting-from-the-front shogun.

There are "magicky" things in SW to be sure, both thematic and more obvious in-universe. I am merely approaching politics from the systematic/realistic angle.

This is one of the things I'm going to address in my post in the Fanfics thread. But basically I'm keeping with several fundamental assertions, that the Republic is the state manifestation of the "long-term stable" state of the galactic civilization. The civilization has ceased with the broad, geometric growth/expansion/development that it previously had (and that our society still endures). Its institutions in one form or another have persisted for unbelievably long periods of time. Pressures and trends in the short term (hundreds of years) may swing back and forth but I think of society as the further it deviates from the median line, the harder pressures of equilibrium push it back. Much of the society seems to live in very Brave New World lite esque societies, where social democratic institutions provide most of what the citizenry requires, and most live a life of what is provided for them and available. Consequently, the ruling or ambitious class is mostly made of those who simply weren't content with what was provided and wanted more and to transcend common society. I think on the everyday level there's probably a decent helping of Tall Poppy Syndrome. As a result, the ruling class has a pretty cut-throat culture of whether newcomers can really take it and basically determined by the question "how badly do you want it?" To say nothing of the fact that in a long-term equilibrium society, all gains, relationships, and transactions are essentially zero-sum games (if everyone got richer, GDP would grow geometrically over time). So it becomes very dog-eat-dog. Successful individuals might found self-motivating and selecting families akin to traditional aristocracy, where they immense their children in training and education and grooming for future talent in this culture. Rinse wash and repeat over a hundred thousand years, and you have something very much like ancient aristocracy or absurdly self-motivated and capable meritocrats.

I like where this is going. The Outer Rim deviates from your average society model, of course, but it is in a way exceptional.

But aliens also serve as Senators and members of Palpatine's greater inner circle (most notably Thrawn, but others as well). Clearly being nonhuman is an institutionalized impediment the way that overt opposition to Palpatine is.

Just me being dumb, I guess, but what do you mean to say here? That the impediment is not very large? If so, I still do not agree. Certainly, the Emperor can appoint whoever he likes for any given position, just as (to use a not entirely proper analogy, given the differing degrees of racism/speciesism) Hitler could and did approve of individual Jews or half-Jews in his administration (such as Marshall Milch in the Luftwaffe). I am not saying that speciesism completely permeats the Empire, but it clearly is a factor. I could also work with the idea that COMPNOR and other elements get more power and become more extreme over time, so that the bias might not be noticed at first, but grow incrementally greater with time as the Imperial State evolves.

I think the only way to have them cut-off for such a long period (70,000 years or whatever) is to have them be in dim stars in the depths of the galactic halo. Their knowledge of and isolationist avoidance of the main society would be substantiated by their cultural xenophobia and prohibition against foreign policy interventionism.

Well, all right. It does not really matter to me where they are; of greater importance is wat they are.

The concept I basically have (developed with considerable influence from and in discussions with, Publius) is a character who tries to duplicate Palpatine's rise to power from behind the curtain through proxies and pasties and figureheads, while attempting to seduce one of Skywalker's most gifted students, and perhaps using limited alien invaders (Vong analogues) and/or internal opposition movements as a spark for a war (similar to how the somewhat covert droid army build-up is used as a flashpoint in Lucas' Clone War by the Sith) that would precipitate the conflict. The attempt would be foiled by new heroes and the political and social maturation of the New Republic in general and the Heroes of the Saga in particular (basically, they accept the fact that Palpatine was a bastard, and maybe he would've done what they know needs to be done, but just because he would've done it doesn't make it wrong - basically they get over Palpatine and prevent a relapse).

So, basically redoing the prequels but having the "good guys" win? Needless to say, that is very different from what I imagined, though I guess it does stay closer to the optimistic underpinnings of the original saga. My vision was a period of upheaval, with recession, (relatively minor) foreign invasions, civil wars and various ills. My point was the fundamental opposite of yours: There is no one to unite the galaxy - not idealists like Leia, not pragmatists like (arguably) Thrawn, not schemers like Palpatine, but no one at all. At that point, galactic government continues its downward plunge till it is virtually non-existent. Independent polities (precisely which I do not know; one might perhaps even include an Imperial Remnant and a similarly sized New Republic Remnant jabbering at each other in the Rim as background for them) would rise, with a Balkanisation of the galaxy leading to hardship but ultimately the rebirth of the expansionist and idealistic spirit that might have formed the Old Republic, a sort of new beginning. My thematic point is that the Republic of the prequel era (to say nothing of the epic failure that was the NR) was dying, and that it was perhaps time to move on to something new. Depending on how one view it, that new thing might have been the Empire, once, but it clearly is not by that point; the Empire as such would, in the longer run, perhaps only be remembered as a part of the last struggle of the corrupted Republic (incidentally meaning that the NR was right all along - something completely new was needed, they just could not provide it).

Fair enough, but I think we're starting to edge into "willful subversion" of the original version as opposed to reinterpreting it and making it intelligent. Alliance to Restore the Republic is demonstrably a self-appointed, minority-backed, violent and subversive revolutionary political movement. However, they really do mean well, and they avoid abuse. I think their implemented policies should be an eclectic mess of dull restorationism of the pre-Palpatine Republic institutions (fundamentally the Neo-Republicans are counterrevolutionary reactionaries) and complete elimination and restructuring in some areas where Palpatine's influence or reform was dubbed too extensive or where he created new apparatuses from whole cloth - this I imagine they'd treat like your model and try, at least, to throw the baby out with the bath water. I do expect they will inevitably be forced to stick with extant institutions probably quite grudgingly and after embarrassing mishaps. Like I said, their ability to arrive at a synthesis of Palpatine's reforms and the pre-Palpatinic Republic would be the major political theme of the NJO replacement in my concept. The Imperials are actually the revolutionaries.

This is probably due in large part my opinion of the NR being formed before the prequels; seeing how leading figures such as Bail Organa or Mon Mothma did participate in the Old Republic, as well as the relative (though from an OOU perspective, coincidental) continuity with the old government, I force myself to revise my opinion somewhat. Still, to me the Rebel Alliance was never really restorative to a large extent; it is very much a fringe movement that draws in idealists, criminals, opportunists, malcontents and, yes, "Rebels" in the strictest sense. I view it as opposing the status quo, as opposed to merely wishing for restoration; whatever the old politicos might wish, the radicalism from below in their organisation makes this something of a necessity. It is also, by and large, a military movement with little actual governance expertise itself, barring a few "Old Guard" leaders who might soon be phased out anyway.

I do not view the Rebels (or the NR) as "evil" in any strict sense for this radicalism (though some elements arguably are - chiefly, the ones Fey'lya is typically used to represent in Bantam/Del Rey); they are idealists, not totalitarians. However, the fact remains that they do constitute and armed minority which attempts to force a policy upon the galaxy that the majority actually does not want.

Unfortunately. As we get really into the technical and realism issues, we shouldn't forget style and tone; the "feel" of the series and meta-themes that permeate the entire saga. These philosophical concepts should be defined, explored, and the plot and conflicts should be evocative of them.

Full agreement.

I was just going to use him as the source of my first fluff attempt, I am certainly not trying to carve in stone yet, just get the juices flowing and give us some actual material to start working with.

All right; I guess I went too much by Felire's interpretation.

This is fair enough. I do think the brief campaigning by the Alliance of Free Planets in the Marvel arc and in their relief mission to Bakura and against the Ssi-ruuk is actually good. It gives them a break from the Empire while their developing a post-Palpatine policy and while the Empire is preoccupied with near collapse, and definitely locally and to a much lesser extent pan-galactically, bolsters their credibility for fighting off the opportunistic barbarian attacks while the Empire was impotent to respond.

I would actually suggest scaling that invasion up a little to enhance this effect; by no means should they be a galactic threat - probably not even Sectorial, on the whole - but a single planet would hardly ever be taken seriously in the grand state of affairs.

Great, except for it being ensconced in a satellite galaxy. For the most part I think they should be considered part of Outer Rim jurisdiction (which I envision as "everything not in/beyond the other regions belongs to you" for the most part). The Outer Rim is clearly lawless and huge, given the relative independence and leeway granted the governors assigned to it at every level.

Fine, then.

Yeah, I would make it a combination of the pre-Lucas conception of the Clone Wars (with helpings from early scripts) and the actual conception. I would "stretch" the timeline, such that the political and social and military history would take place over a longer time and earlier (in other words, disturbances and storm clouds in the distance like the Stark War would take place before Anakin's birth and maybe even Obi-Wan's, with the Clone Wars being an actual series of near-continuous conflicts (y'know, because they are called WARS) which are fought against clones (y'know, because they're called the CLONE WARS) and which were very destructive and traumatic (more so for the most part, than the civil wars) taking place around the traditional date (not ending in 19 BBY) and not the popcorn fest without any real people's involvement that Lucas gave us. I would have Palpatine's behind the scene's manipulations last for longer, and have him in power longer before Episode III (which would contain in broad terms most of the same events). I would have the Empire significantly older, and with the main characters collaborating with and supporting Palpatine, only to realize later they screwed up (this being actual moral ambiguity, instead of where Lucas had everyone but Anakin the Idiot get it and array against him before he's actually started to do illegal things and be bereft of real moral responsibility for his rise).

Overall agreement there. I noticed in an earlier thread that you were upset with Lucas's inane retconning of the CW not making any sense for the name or theme , and I cannot disagree on that part.

Myself, my pre-prequel vision of the Clone Wars was not so much one big war as a number of linked, confused and overall devastating conflicts (more akin to, say, the Thirty Years War than a galactic WWII) with, of course, clones employed by the enemy. I also imagined them to have a much greater impact on daily life in the galaxy, a bit akin to 40k - not all the way to Grim Hopeless Carnage Forever, but enough to etch itself into the public conscience in a way that Lucas's relatively minor conflict logically would not. One might, for example, have conscription or a war economy in at least part of the Republic; this might be unrealistic given the economics involved, but provides such strong thematic underpinnings that it might be worthy of inclusion anyway. Palpatine's aspect as a strong war leader would also be underlined.

As for the Jedi, I would not take them as, say, generals of any given army as a group, but rather a general pro-Republic faction in and of themselves. For example, Ben's rank would not be given because he was a Jedi, but because he was actually General Kenobi. Overall, I would also heavily de-emphasise the cloistered side of the Order in favour of the interventionist/military/feudal side (hence why they were called Jedi Knights). If I recall correctly, you had similar ideas.

Yeah, I agree. They do seem very well behaved, and as I said, I give the benefit of a doubt to the way they are supposed to be portrayed. Which means the rebels behave themselves and conduct themselves with legal process and consistency, and the bad times really are bad apples, screw ups in management, or a loss of control like the White Terror committed at the Imperial Palace after its securing in the Battle of Coruscant (crimes of omission and error, not comission and malice).

I would not be averse to including the occasional diehard who knowingly and wilfully lets the ends justify the means (e.g., a policymaker equivalent of Elscol Loro); I think their image and the theme could take that. They would still be rare, but it is not realistic for their kind of organisation (armed subversives/extremists) to do entirely without them.

I agree. Flesh it out and at least give them factions who debate it with real reasons, and have real opinions, and have them have a real policy against him (basically, I think Durron wasn't tried as a war criminal because he didn't commit war crimes; he only wantonly destroyed property and carried out vigilante attacks against the Empire; think about it, Carida a civilian site? the Deep Core military sites? a barren star cluster?).

The moral of some is rulings is still strange, to say the least. But that is what I would like to explore; both attempt to fix glaring moral errors (not so much changing facts as how they are perceived) and looking at relative moral perspectives. For example, I happen to believe that Lemelisk's execution was a gross misconduct of justice, especially given that others of similar background were let ofdf scots-free. A posited trial story should, while giving justification, perhaps also attempt to show that there is indeed a "revolutionary" side to the Rebellion/NR.

I think this deserves by fleshing out and use, and definitely should be applied. I agree.

Glad you do.

Its difficult because as a plot device, its obviously quite contrived, militarily naive, and stupid. The best move would probably be to make the fleet and resources lost much more impressive and its psychological and propoganda value much greater (maybe up the ante surrounding Thrawn's mystique by having the fleet lost behind New Republic lines, and he successfully managed to extricate a prize armada with real - if merely tactical level - war value and with mythological status, and did so with the collaboration of Imperial sympathizers in the Republic or corrupt political appointees of say Fey'lya's faction?) while also deemphasizing its importance to the overall campaign and the plot of Thrawn's return (instead of a major advantage, just have it be a particular spectacular coup in an overall strategy of acquiring stopgap military materiel from unconventional sources).

Basically my take on it.

I'm glad you agree. I'm thinking that there should be something which stands in for the ISD and Tector in a true battleline, we can start by calling them impressive fast battleships or other fluff, and emphasize their superiority to old Republic models (the Victory/Venator analogues of the Clone Wars, and the even old Dreadnaught analogues). I'd also talk about brand new, even more massive battleships (evocative of the Executor-class era build-up, post-Yavin).

And the Sovereign-class. . .

Except the oversectors were established after the Empire, leaving a big hole between the galactic region and the sector in the Republic era. Not to mention the Imperial Sourcebook provides us with a strongly implied case for multi-tiered regions, given we have the "thousands" sector regions and "several" sectors regions. Furthermore, we know the oversector/priority sector is an alternative to the regions from the same source book, and one cutting across old boundries and jurisdictions - the Imperial Center Oversector (also called Sector Zero, strongly implying Priority Sectors and Oversectors are different names for the same thing, more polylingualism probably) contains worlds in the Colonies as well as Core Worlds.

(. . . )

Except the Imperial Sourcebook directly identifies Priority Sectors with Oversectors and assigns both a Grand Moff under a new scheme.

(. . . )

Except the Imperial Sourcebook openly states that regions may contain anywhere from a handful to thousands of sectors. It seems to me the easiest way to harmonize that system (which must be capable of standing on its own at least superficially in the Old Republic because oversectors/priority sectors do not exist yet) is that there are more than one kind of region. We openly know this because of cases like Hutt Space and the Bright Jewel Cluster (which was a supra-sectorial governorate general, but located in the Outer Rim, a region in of itself).

Here's how the system works. There are hundreds of billions of star systems, maybe near a trillion stars counting the entire galactic disk, bulge, halo, globular clusters, satellite galaxies, and over gravitationally bound entities like galactic remnants (from collision events). There are billions of worlds. There are around 50 million discrete political entities with a direct relationship to the Imperial State (I imagine there are probably around a hundred million give or take at this level of organization and political complexity; remember that the member worlds may have their own colonies, protectorates, trust mandates, etc.) Around 1 million of those discrete political entities are fully-enfranchised, federated member states. There are probably on the order of 20 thousand sectors, based on the 50 worlds per sector estimate (the Chommell Sector, a Mid Rim and sparsely populated one, has fewer members than 50 in it, which would push the estimate up, but I'm using simple division as a benchmark here). There are probably around a thousand or so of the lowest class of region (we can name it what you want, my suggestion and the one in The New Order in Power is the Lesser Region). There are probably a hundred or so mid-level regions (The New Order in Power calls these the Greater Regions). The highest level of region, basically indisputed are the seven confimed ones, the Deep Core, the Core Worlds, the Colonies, the Inner Rim, the Expansion Region, the Mid Rim, and the Outer Rim (The New Order in Power calls these the Galactic Regions). We know there are supra-sectorial units below the "galactic region" threshold in the case of the Governorate General of the Bright Jewel Cluster. That's not in dispute. Nor is the fact there are some regions with only a few sectors. The multi-classed region scheme I support as the best way to organize this.

Anyway, the Empire reorganizes the sectors into oversectors and priority sectors, which appear to be different names for the same things and sometimes used interchangably. I suspect they also come in varying classes and may be layered atop one another themselves (for monstrosities like the Oversector Outer to things like the Bright Jewel Oversector; presumably the latter was a subset of the former). We can add and modify terminology, but I'd prefer to keep The New Order in Power as our canon where not impossible and I'd prefer to keep terminology consistent with canonical use where possible.

There also the proconsulates of the Privy Councillors, which The New Order in Power terms "Special Areas" and their administrators "Rectors" (although this seems to be more of a supervisory role that piggy-backs off of and is layered atop of existing administrations like a particular grouping of sectors; the Moffs there may be expected to furnish reports too and respond to coordination by the Rector; a kind of 'governing czar' for a particular locality).

All right, then; I am not very familiar with the sourcebook, having read only quotes and excerpts from it. Have it your way, it does make better sense. The issue is not really that important to me, I am merely being simplicistic.

On one particular point, though, I would disagree: the conflation of "Oversector" and "Priority Sector". Could you post a quote on precisely what the book says there? I am not doubting you, merely curious and looking for alternate interpretations of the source material.

The Koornacht Cluster is clearly supposed to be its own locale, I'd make it a minor region is only so the New Republic's fixation with it and the crisis is not totally stupid (governments losing confidence over military action in a single sector or less? this wouldn't even reach the Imperial Senate, but been decided by the local Grand Moff and just handled).

In the ret-con, all right. That makes sense.

The Bright Jewel Cluster is indisputable; it is accorded a governor general and later made an Oversector.

And so it is.

Incidentally, what is your idea for the Hapes Cluster? To me, if there is one non-Unknown Regions polity that is accorded vastly too much influence in the EU for its actual size and importance, that is it.

Right, I don't know if you kept up with The New Order in Power, but these things were partially touched in the last three chapters, The College of Moffs, The State Services of the Imperium, and the Armed Forces of the Imperium. Some of the rank structures and names are places where I might be comfortable deviating from canon if only because their usage of real world terminology is incorrect and incoherent (for example, grand general is stupid; grand admiral has an army equivalent and it is field marshal general).

Well, military terminology must not necessarily be entirely correlating with the real world; there, I would consider logic and internal consistency more important - e.g., in that particular example, one might take it to be that "Marshall" has fallen out of favour for being outmoded or perhaps having strange connotations. (Of course, the existance of "Surface Marshalls" shoots this down; I was merely speaking figuratively). But yes, Publius does a good job of it (The Armed Forces was actually my favourite in the series, though I do disagree with it on a few issues). I still believe that full charts &c. would be a great help.

He's just ignorant. Remember in the Hand of Thrawn, Pelleaon has a MAJOR as a subordinate aboard ship.

I must have repressed that one. . . Then again, it is hardly worse than things such as Baron Fel's chain of promotion. So at least he could console himself with not being the only ignoramus.

I agree. Like I said, I think political and thoughtcrime gets in trouble basically everywhere and is well fully institutionalized. Nonhuman discrimination is institutionalized on a haphazard and inconsistent basis (indisputable, some areas are relatively safe from it - the Heirarchy and the Armed Forces of the Imperium, in particular, while other places are rife with it, but even there it exists in constitutionally distinct forms, from the opportunistic bondage and "domestication" of alien species, to things similar to black codes and pre-1960s Southern U.S. segregation, to South African apartheid, to Stalinistic outright careless or non-ideological speciocide, to Nazistic ideological speciocide (in the case of that Himmler-analogue grand admiral).

That is essentially my take on it - it is not really actual policy, but various powerful groups push for it, and, say, having alien friends might not be PC (or "mutual" in TNOiP lingo).

[Pelranius]

Edit: Perhaps we could have former Imperials or disgruntled alien species defect to Thrawn's forces during his campaign? It would go a long way in explaining how Thrawn was able to practically reverse the course of the war while being hamstringed by Palpatine and the Ruling Circle.

I am fully behind this. Were you thinking of any specific world?

I was thinking of maybe Separatist aligned species like the Diamala and Sullustans who would have gotten a raw deal once Mon Mothma starting shunting them off to the side when the NR has finished using them.

The ex Imperials would include people like Grand Admiral Grant, Baron Ulric Tagge who would view the increasing partisanship of the NR with alarm while places like Kuat and Balmorra would resent the redistribution of government spending towards Rebellion supporters like Mon Calamari.

[Illuminatus Primus]

There are "magicky" things in SW to be sure, both thematic and more obvious in-universe. I am merely approaching politics from the systematic/realistic angle.

Fair, but as I will elaborate later, I think its important to service the "fundamental idea" of SW thematically and spiritually. The basic concept of SW is that of an ancient unitary society (the galactic civilization; the transcendent body politic is called the Galactic Union by The New Order in Power) in an isolated system (the galaxy and its satellites) in static equilibrium (more or less unaltered over most of 25,000 years) and governed under a federal system (the various incarnations of the Galactic Republic, briefly the Galactic Empire, and then the New Republic).

I like where this is going. The Outer Rim deviates from your average society model, of course, but it is in a way exceptional.

Equilibrium doesn't mean some places won't be poorer and less settled than others. Equilibrium does not mean uniformity. In a static technological base, regions where it is expensive to move goods and services and to govern won't change. These are fundamental characteristics.

Just me being dumb, I guess, but what do you mean to say here? That the impediment is not very large? If so, I still do not agree. Certainly, the Emperor can appoint whoever he likes for any given position, just as (to use a not entirely proper analogy, given the differing degrees of racism/speciesism) Hitler could and did approve of individual Jews or half-Jews in his administration (such as Marshall Milch in the Luftwaffe). I am not saying that speciesism completely permeats the Empire, but it clearly is a factor. I could also work with the idea that COMPNOR and other elements get more power and become more extreme over time, so that the bias might not be noticed at first, but grow incrementally greater with time as the Imperial State evolves.

Yes but I think its much less severe than the Third Reich; the Galactic Empire, even after the dissolution of the Imperial Senate, and even the centralization under Pestage and Isard was never a one-party state, and unlike Nazism, racist ideology was never the cornerstone of New Order political philosophy.

Well, all right. It does not really matter to me where they are; of greater importance is wat they are.

Good, I hope that's settled then.

So, basically redoing the prequels but having the "good guys" win? Needless to say, that is very different from what I imagined, though I guess it does stay closer to the optimistic underpinnings of the original saga. My vision was a period of upheaval, with recession, (relatively minor) foreign invasions, civil wars and various ills. My point was the fundamental opposite of yours: There is no one to unite the galaxy - not idealists like Leia, not pragmatists like (arguably) Thrawn, not schemers like Palpatine, but no one at all. At that point, galactic government continues its downward plunge till it is virtually non-existent. Independent polities (precisely which I do not know; one might perhaps even include an Imperial Remnant and a similarly sized New Republic Remnant jabbering at each other in the Rim as background for them) would rise, with a Balkanisation of the galaxy leading to hardship but ultimately the rebirth of the expansionist and idealistic spirit that might have formed the Old Republic, a sort of new beginning. My thematic point is that the Republic of the prequel era (to say nothing of the epic failure that was the NR) was dying, and that it was perhaps time to move on to something new. Depending on how one view it, that new thing might have been the Empire, once, but it clearly is not by that point; the Empire as such would, in the longer run, perhaps only be remembered as a part of the last struggle of the corrupted Republic (incidentally meaning that the NR was right all along - something completely new was needed, they just could not provide it).

I disagree. A balkanized galaxy isn't Star Wars, and some NJO-replacement arc should not render the struggles of the heroes of the trilogies' arcs moot. The fundamental philosophy of STAR WARS is the fundamental importance of individual people making key decisions. Having the last arc end so open-endedly and anticlimactically makes for convincing fictional historiography, but ultimately overshadows the film's gravitas and is hostile to their fundamental thematic assertions. The old Republic was troubled, but making the Clone Wars about how they were going to die anyway misses a great point. The value of that era is much greater and the decisions of the characters much more tragic if they could have at least turned a corner for the better or for reform as oppose to making the wrong decision. The moral should be that people making decisions and with great ability (Palpatine and Anakin) can make or break great societies, and also make things better (Luke Skywalker). STAR WARS doesn't hold the conceits of impersonal historical trends and movements; it is a drama and high fantasy revolving around the importance of individuals in the right time and place; it firmly plants its feet in the place of arguing for Great Men. Our arc should sum up and conclude the loose ends and unresolved problems of the era, not swallow up the heroes' sacrifices and the theme of the saga in quasi-redemptive self-destruction.

This is probably due in large part my opinion of the NR being formed before the prequels; seeing how leading figures such as Bail Organa or Mon Mothma did participate in the Old Republic, as well as the relative (though from an OOU perspective, coincidental) continuity with the old government, I force myself to revise my opinion somewhat.

The Big Three of the Alliance to Restore the Republic (pretty hard to argue with the name), were all Imperial Senators who tried to work to limit the power and changes under Palpatine until hounded into exile. Furthermore, the Declaration of the Rebellion and their other ideological documents are explicit with nostalgia and restorationist rhetoric. I strongly disagree. The canon states these things.

Still, to me the Rebel Alliance was never really restorative to a large extent; it is very much a fringe movement that draws in idealists, criminals, opportunists, malcontents and, yes, "Rebels" in the strictest sense. I view it as opposing the status quo, as opposed to merely wishing for restoration; whatever the old politicos might wish, the radicalism from below in their organisation makes this something of a necessity.

I agree that maybe there are a lot of low-level radicals and such who joined the ARR as the only umbrella for pan-galactic opposition. But as I said, the benefit of a doubt principle leads us to believe that other than the overt counter-specieism and particularism of the Fey'lya types and their opportunistism and apparent enthusiasm for illiberal or procedural democracy, what you describe simply does not manifest itself. Nor am I surprised, because SW is a culture of Great Men and personalities; impersonal historical forces and such are not the tipping points they are in our culture and society.

The fact is that the government set up the Neo-Republicans mimics the Old Republic in most of its meaningful constitutional characteristics, aside from a much more front-and-center military complex. The fact is that they end up setting up a war dictatorship by a political-military junta; the Inner Council is basically the Neo-Republican movement's Politburo, and it ends up dominating government until the Imperial Emancipation. I agree that the differences between intent and war realities should be explored intentfully, and what ended up happening due to compromises along the way, pressures, unforeseen influential individuals, and so forth is worth exploring. However, to be blunt, I think the question is more like, how are the New Republicans not restorationists and counterrevolutionary reactionaries? I can't think of a single instance of opposition to the pre-Palpatine Republic, they tend to blame him personally for everything and pretend like all was sunshine before him. My NJO-concept would be about them coming to grips with a mature reality.

It is also, by and large, a military movement with little actual governance expertise itself, barring a few "Old Guard" leaders who might soon be phased out anyway.

But aren't phased out. That's the facts. I think you're confusing your personal hatred for the original timeline's contrivedly incompetent and naive Rebels with what we're talking about doing, and looking to subvert them to make a lesson about their original portrayal. I'm looking to give them the benefit of a doubt like they're actually trying and sincere - like I said high fantasy and fairy tale, and that means a degree of perhaps unrealistic idealism. The fact is Mothma managed to keep the reins of the movement, and actually, I believe the ruling class is a combination of old Senatorial elites (the Big Three in particular) and second-generation political exiles (personified by Ackbar and Fey'lya).

I do not view the Rebels (or the NR) as "evil" in any strict sense for this radicalism (though some elements arguably are - chiefly, the ones Fey'lya is typically used to represent in Bantam/Del Rey); they are idealists, not totalitarians. However, the fact remains that they do constitute and armed minority which attempts to force a policy upon the galaxy that the majority actually does not want.

Perhaps. The Galactic Empire had generally broad public support institutionally, and the Galactic Emperor had very deep public support universally. However, the actual ruling class and public face of management had an increasingly negative reputation and this snowballed very highly after the the Emperor's apparent death. Many went along with the Empire because it was what Palpatine recommended. Now does Joe Public have the same feelings for Sate Pestage? A Chekist queen like Ysanne Isard? A bunch of court bigwigs assholes in the Emperor's Ruling Circle? I doubt it. Without Palpatine I'm willing to say the public and elites increasingly wanted a change - the Great Power and old Senatorial elites wanted somesort of reaction back to their old system of traditional power; the new elites wanted to preserve a modified system to protect their perogatives, and Joe Public liked the Emperor but don't like his fanatics tapping their phones, taking people in the night, and conducting litmus tests for purity. And as the Empire repeatedly fails its extra chances, the New Republic is granted a chance - a very qualified, ambivalent, and highly conditional chance, that is.

I would actually suggest scaling that invasion up a little to enhance this effect; by no means should they be a galactic threat - probably not even Sectorial, on the whole - but a single planet would hardly ever be taken seriously in the grand state of affairs.

I agree.

Overall agreement there. I noticed in an earlier thread that you were upset with Lucas's inane retconning of the CW not making any sense for the name or theme , and I cannot disagree on that part.

Glad, too.

Myself, my pre-prequel vision of the Clone Wars was not so much one big war as a number of linked, confused and overall devastating conflicts (more akin to, say, the Thirty Years War than a galactic WWII) with, of course, clones employed by the enemy.

Actually, I agree. I think it should be mostly something between World War I and the Thirty Years War (more Thirty Years than WW1), and then Palpatine takes helm of and rights the ship, and turns it into a noble crusade to save the galaxy once and for all a la World War II. I also think they should remain The Conflict of the era, overshadow the intensity of the later civil wars and the NJO-conflict arc. It may flare up to periods of Clone Wars-esque intensity, but never stays as bad as it was. There should be good reason why Palpatine's was a secular demigod that everyone was willing give an Empire as a lifetime achievement award.

I also imagined them to have a much greater impact on daily life in the galaxy, a bit akin to 40k - not all the way to Grim Hopeless Carnage Forever, but enough to etch itself into the public conscience in a way that Lucas's relatively minor conflict logically would not.

I agree wholeheartedly. Since Palpatine is behind the scenes, I'd have a lot of fundamental productive capacity of the galaxy unharmed (unlike World War II), but a lot of trudging pointless death (a la World War I and the Thirty Year War) that doesn't go anywhere, and a lot of civilian horrors, even eventually in the Core Worlds.

One might, for example, have conscription or a war economy in at least part of the Republic; this might be unrealistic given the economics involved, but provides such strong thematic underpinnings that it might be worthy of inclusion anyway. Palpatine's aspect as a strong war leader would also be underlined.

Agree completely.

As for the Jedi, I would not take them as, say, generals of any given army as a group, but rather a general pro-Republic faction in and of themselves. For example, Ben's rank would not be given because he was a Jedi, but because he was actually General Kenobi. Overall, I would also heavily de-emphasise the cloistered side of the Order in favour of the interventionist/military/feudal side (hence why they were called Jedi Knights). If I recall correctly, you had similar ideas.

Completely agree. The Jedi should be a noble knighthood order, that rights wrongs and affiliated with the Republic (often working with Republic Judicials, I like the Horn and Halcyon dynamic as a model). They're philosophical monastic side, their role in representing the Force users and other paranormals to the Republic institutions, and their peacekeeper blue hat roles may exist, but on the DISTANT sidelines. These are Jedi KNIGHTS first and foremost. They'd support and aid the Republic in general, and some Jedi would elect to join the military of their own initiative. General Kenobi and his apprentice would fight in the war as officers on their own merits and alongside General Bail Organa.

I would not be averse to including the occasional diehard who knowingly and wilfully lets the ends justify the means (e.g., a policymaker equivalent of Elscol Loro); I think their image and the theme could take that. They would still be rare, but it is not realistic for their kind of organisation (armed subversives/extremists) to do entirely without them.

Its a galaxy, its hard to have every person on the payroll running things and with responsibility to not be an asshole. Of course this goes both ways, and sometimes the Neo-Republicans will be dragging the Empire over the coals unfairly for what really was just some fucking asshole who got a uniform and a hat.

The moral of some is rulings is still strange, to say the least. But that is what I would like to explore; both attempt to fix glaring moral errors (not so much changing facts as how they are perceived) and looking at relative moral perspectives. For example, I happen to believe that Lemelisk's execution was a gross misconduct of justice, especially given that others of similar background were let ofdf scots-free. A posited trial story should, while giving justification, perhaps also attempt to show that there is indeed a "revolutionary" side to the Rebellion/NR.

Well, I hate Lemilisk's execution because its stupid and a miscarriage of justice. I'd retcon it out. You have read The New Order in Power, I definitely like how the structure and relationships of the Empire make it hard to pin some of the ruling class for actual crimes. The Neo-Republicans would be the awkward position of knowing someone was a war criminal but being unable to successfully prosecute them according to genuine rule of law. There should be vigilantes in the New Republic's midst. There should be loud debates. I think Lemelisk is way too late for this, but maybe Teshik was summarily executed by a banana military tribunal under the direction of a popular officer, and Mothma faces a tough choice - alienate the working class of the movement and lose talent and fire and/or court martial him or betrayal genuine ideals of fair government and rule of law.

And the Sovereign-class. . .

Heh heh heh.

All right, then; I am not very familiar with the sourcebook, having read only quotes and excerpts from it. Have it your way, it does make better sense. The issue is not really that important to me, I am merely being simplicistic.

Alright.

On one particular point, though, I would disagree: the conflation of "Oversector" and "Priority Sector". Could you post a quote on precisely what the book says there? I am not doubting you, merely curious and looking for alternate interpretations of the source material.

I don't have the quote. What happens is Tarkin sends a memoranda to Dangor suggesting the creation of an Oversector and everything, Dangor replies back appointing him and calling them Priority Sectors. Yet we see both in use and sometimes implied refering to the same thing (i.e., Imperial Center Oversector is also called [Priority?] Sector Zero). It should be in the College of Moffs chapter of TNOiP in the endnotes for the paragraph on Tarkin and Oversectors in the Grand Moff section.

Incidentally, what is your idea for the Hapes Cluster? To me, if there is one non-Unknown Regions polity that is accorded vastly too much influence in the EU for its actual size and importance, that is it.

I don't mind if it is bigger but I agree its too influential. The best way to handle these awkward problems in my opinion is approach the issue from both sides, i.e., de-emphasize its relative importance compared to the original timeline and simultaneously increase its relative scale.

Well, military terminology must not necessarily be entirely correlating with the real world; there, I would consider logic and internal consistency more important - e.g., in that particular example, one might take it to be that "Marshall" has fallen out of favour for being outmoded or perhaps having strange connotations. (Of course, the existance of "Surface Marshalls" shoots this down; I was merely speaking figuratively). But yes, Publius does a good job of it (The Armed Forces was actually my favourite in the series, though I do disagree with it on a few issues). I still believe that full charts &c. would be a great help.

I'm fine with real world terminology if its consistent. Otherwise just make up your own terminology. The trick is consistency, clarity, and coherency. Things should mean what they really mean.

I'd make the Army equivalent of Grand Admiral to be Surface Marshal General. Why not? High General? Ugh. What's wrong with Colonel General? High Admiral? What's wrong with Admiral General? Or Fleet Admiral?

I must have repressed that one. . . Then again, it is hardly worse than things such as Baron Fel's chain of promotion. So at least he could console himself with not being the only ignoramus.

Another thing that irks me; naval aviators will be NAVAL AVIATORS. An aviator will be a captain, not a colonel. Also, thanks for bringing up Baron Fel, because I can't wait to detail the Peerage of the Empire. The Empire is a tad dull fascist and statist and its a bit Napoleonic, low on the pomp and overt monarchism, but it is an Empire, and this is high fantasy.

That is essentially my take on it - it is not really actual policy, but various powerful groups push for it, and, say, having alien friends might not be PC (or "mutual" in TNOiP lingo).

Good idea. I like that.

[Admiral Felire]

I agree on Fundamentalist Idea of Starwars, Equilibrium, the non-starwars nature of balkanisation, Imperial support.

Honestly, for me, the Chiss thing is not settled. For me I think the idea of multiple galaxies works and having the Chiss be in one of them also works. It would allow for them to speak of 'galactic threats' which from their experience would be what affects their minor galaxy. It would also cause problems because of the change in thinging between small areas and huge.

And really, because of the size of the known territories, it cannot be that hard for a sector or region or star system to be lost or forgotten for a while.

I also don't think we should cover the Clone WArs at all. I dislike the concept that a lot of you seem to have about randomly cahnging the prequels. Thsi was never about changing the movies, it was about changing the novels, comics and such that go beyond and during and before the movies. To me the movies are canon and non-changeable, otherwise then we should change various things from the movies that don't make any sense, and we do not have any plans on doing that.

By the way, it is completely possible for a nation that is geographically small to have a lot of political power. They won't have a lot of military power, but political is different.

For ranks, I always thought Grand General, as its similar to Grand Admiral. Though I personally have no problem with Surface Marshal General. I also have no problem with High General, its sounds fine for me.

By the way, I was wondering Illuminatus Primus if you had any thoughts, comments and points about the previous threads in this page.

[Imperial Overlord]

Some one should PM the honoured and respect Publius and inform him of this project before it gets too much further. It is only proper if we intend to be making use of his work.

[montypython]

I'll post a full rank table on the fluff page in fanfics for quick reference along with real life rank equivalents as a quick reference for discussion help.

[Darth Raptor]

After catching up with the discussion all I have to add is that I have no objections to the general consensus.

Felire, the prequel reboot is actually a side project to be done later. If you're not interested in that, don't worry. It's not really integral to the revised EU and total NJO reboot. No more than it is to the official post-RotJ canon, anyhow.

[Admiral Felire]

Darth Raptor

About the prequel reboot, yeah, that is what I thought and then a couple of people started making plans on the modfiication of history and how things were organized back then. While I don't oppose that sort of project, and think that it could be done very well, I just don't think its really that necessary.

The main problem that I do see happening is when we start using back references and revealing the past in the present. Its fine if that doesnt change, but if this project and that project are supposed to be able to work together than their might be a problem if they decide to make the Empire exist for a hundred years (which I would totally approve of, mind you) and we choose to use the twenty or so years.

We are trying to organize everything and make it all fit into a single harmonious whole.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Honestly, for me, the Chiss thing is not settled. For me I think the idea of multiple galaxies works and having the Chiss be in one of them also works.

Why? These galaxies are quite small and diminutive and if they are in contact with and known by the civilization, the Chiss should not have remained hidden. TC Pilot explained the problem in detail. Do you have a substantive reply to this real concern?

It would allow for them to speak of 'galactic threats' which from their experience would be what affects their minor galaxy. It would also cause problems because of the change in thinging between small areas and huge.

How does this not work for a constellation of powers nestled in the dark reaches of the halo? And using something like the Magellenic Clouds and having them refer to "galactic threats" is simply weasel-wording, its semantical dodging. Furthermore, I can't think of any reference to the Chiss during the era we're working on where they are qualified as part of a quote "galactic" unquote threat or crisis, perhaps you could show me what you're talking about?

And really, because of the size of the known territories, it cannot be that hard for a sector or region or star system to be lost or forgotten for a while.

I disagree. Its huge, but if they're capable of running a civil service that reaches down to the sector and below level - and they do - they will notice a real, in-contact sector being lost.

I also don't think we should cover the Clone WArs at all. I dislike the concept that a lot of you seem to have about randomly cahnging the prequels. Thsi was never about changing the movies, it was about changing the novels, comics and such that go beyond and during and before the movies. To me the movies are canon and non-changeable, otherwise then we should change various things from the movies that don't make any sense, and we do not have any plans on doing that.

I'm afraid we've resolved to do something with them, if not for awhile.

By the way, it is completely possible for a nation that is geographically small to have a lot of political power. They won't have a lot of military power, but political is different.

I'm unsure of what you mean. Could you provide an example? An argument for how this can happen? What are you referring to?

For ranks, I always thought Grand General, as its similar to Grand Admiral. Though I personally have no problem with Surface Marshal General. I also have no problem with High General, its sounds fine for me.

How a term superficially sounds to one is not the standard by which this project aspires to accuracy and clarity. It may seem pedantic to you, but matters of military science, political science, economics, etc., etc. matter.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Darth Raptor

About the prequel reboot, yeah, that is what I thought and then a couple of people started making plans on the modfiication of history and how things were organized back then. While I don't oppose that sort of project, and think that it could be done very well, I just don't think its really that necessary.

The main problem that I do see happening is when we start using back references and revealing the past in the present. Its fine if that doesnt change, but if this project and that project are supposed to be able to work together than their might be a problem if they decide to make the Empire exist for a hundred years (which I would totally approve of, mind you) and we choose to use the twenty or so years.

We are trying to organize everything and make it all fit into a single harmonious whole.

Any prequel project would necessarily be constrained by the OT and events of the post-ROTJ EU.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Trying to move this back on topic and as a organizational/recruiting/coordinating tool, I wish Hoth would be available for a chat or newsgroup, but I'm afraid without it the project will run aground. Let's agree upon a format for both/either and someone as a secretary or something to keep logs of the discussions. We also need to recruit some more help.

Also, let's have a role-call, all who're aboard right now and want to be part of the discussions, newsgroups, and chats, and are going to participate (even if time-to-time) sound in.

[Darth Raptor]

I'm in. My schedule is weird, but flexible. Real-time correspondence won't be a problem if I can plan around it in advance.

[Noble Ire]

I'd like to be involved, as I said. Some of the others involved are probably far more knowledgeable of the canon and have more time at their disposal, but I still would like to have imput on discussions, and perhaps write from time to time.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I obviously am in. My school and work schedule will heat up but like Raptor, I'm flexible. We need to have an organizational running thread or log where participants can negotiate semi-regular discussions and wildcard ones, and then see when the are going to occur after its posted, and plan accordingly.

I'm glad to have you with us, Raptor, Ire. Your fanfics impress me.

[Darth Hoth]

As I said, my schedule is somewhat erratic; I have been lucky and had a lot of time the past few days, but that might change. However, if we agree on times beforehand, I should be able to participate in real-time discussions on at least some occasions. Regardless, I remain on board with the project.

[Admiral Felire]

About the Chiss, you just decided it on your own. Just like you did about galactic organization and poltiical organization. Now, the differences is that I agree with you on astrographic and political organization, but not the Chiss.

If the Chiss are in the rim of the main galaxy then they are in no way going to remain independent. But if they are nestled within the scope of a nearby galaxy than chances are they can remain invisible for much longer time.

I repeat, like the Sith. I think it would work for them being in another border galaxy as well.

I am not going through all my books, but I think it was in Survivor's Quest, which is occuring as far as I'm concerned (though not unchanged, that is, afterall, the point of this attempt). They speak about how they have been fighting and protecting the galaxy against threats of monstrous proportions. Well, that makes a lot more sense if one considers what they are doing as protecting their mini galaxy, rather than the main galaxy.

About the Clone Wars, I don't care whether you choose to do something with them. All I am stating is that I don't think it should be in this project and that if you do something then its not to throw them out and rewrite it all from scratch. That wasn't the point of this project, it was to take the stories that don't make sense and try to bring them all in line.

Politics is about skill and dialog, its about debate and personality. It also is about the size of the fleet one has, I'm not debating that, but it is also about how majestic, mighty and adept the person representing the nation is. It also depends on the contacts that the person can make.

In starwars, take Palpatine as a Senator for Naboo. A small time planet that does not have much resoruces or whatnot. But, through polticial contacts, he made Naboo a major force. It was based on his personal ability more than it was on any intrinsic awesomeness of Naboo. That is what I am talking about.

If their is a great deal of thought that planet x, combine y, sector z is really important - despite its actual size or industrial output - then trying to get them into the deal would make sense.

Accuracy and clarity is only one thing. Politics is another and poltiical titles and all that need to also sound mighty, powerful and to make sense. If we are keeping Grand Admiral then having Grand General makes sense from a unity standpoint. If we have other titles with 'High' in it, then it also makes sense to have High General or High Admiral. Sometimes poltiics comes before logic and that is okay in my estimation.

Because really, it makes no less military sense to have a Surface Marshal then it does to have a High Marshal or whatever, the people in the universe won't consider it to be unlogical.

Discussion of how things are going to be organized is a point of this thread. So I do not feel that anything we have discucsed has been off topic. Because of that, I will continue to use this thread to present my ideas, thoughts, concepts of organization and all that. At least until we create another general page, which we do not have.

Sector Populations

I also want to make note that according to page 10 of the Imperial Sourcebook, sectors do not always have fifty worlds. They orgionally did, but they do not any longer. This is important. A sector can have fifty, and then the sector next door can have 500. I posted in my post above the source that supports this.

Membership

As of right now I'm in. But I also reserve the right to back out if I choose to due to time constraints or irrevocable differences in opinion.

[Darth Hoth]

Fair, but as I will elaborate later, I think its important to service the "fundamental idea" of SW thematically and spiritually. The basic concept of SW is that of an ancient unitary society (the galactic civilization; the transcendent body politic is called the Galactic Union by The New Order in Power) in an isolated system (the galaxy and its satellites) in static equilibrium (more or less unaltered over most of 25,000 years) and governed under a federal system (the various incarnations of the Galactic Republic, briefly the Galactic Empire, and then the New Republic).

That is how it stands for most of the time, yes, but there are notable exceptions when various anti-Republic/Empire forces grow strong.

Equilibrium doesn't mean some places won't be poorer and less settled than others. Equilibrium does not mean uniformity. In a static technological base, regions where it is expensive to move goods and services and to govern won't change. These are fundamental characteristics.

Of course; I meant merely to comment (though it was perhaps unnecessary) that your model for a contented planetary society based on social security and heavy direction of the economy would not describe the outer territories, appropriate though it is for the older, more stable and mature polities.

Yes but I think its much less severe than the Third Reich; the Galactic Empire, even after the dissolution of the Imperial Senate, and even the centralization under Pestage and Isard was never a one-party state, and unlike Nazism, racist ideology was never the cornerstone of New Order political philosophy.

We basically agreed on this in the last post, I think; there should be no formal policy of speciesism on the Imperial level (individual Regions or Sectors might be another matter), though lobby groups such as COMPNOR or powerful individuals such as Sate Pestage might push for it and implement it on an irregular basis.

I disagree. A balkanized galaxy isn't Star Wars, and some NJO-replacement arc should not render the struggles of the heroes of the trilogies' arcs moot. The fundamental philosophy of STAR WARS is the fundamental importance of individual people making key decisions. Having the last arc end so open-endedly and anticlimactically makes for convincing fictional historiography, but ultimately overshadows the film's gravitas and is hostile to their fundamental thematic assertions. The old Republic was troubled, but making the Clone Wars about how they were going to die anyway misses a great point. The value of that era is much greater and the decisions of the characters much more tragic if they could have at least turned a corner for the better or for reform as oppose to making the wrong decision. The moral should be that people making decisions and with great ability (Palpatine and Anakin) can make or break great societies, and also make things better (Luke Skywalker). STAR WARS doesn't hold the conceits of impersonal historical trends and movements; it is a drama and high fantasy revolving around the importance of individuals in the right time and place; it firmly plants its feet in the place of arguing for Great Men. Our arc should sum up and conclude the loose ends and unresolved problems of the era, not swallow up the heroes' sacrifices and the theme of the saga in quasi-redemptive self-destruction.

Then we are at odds. I can agree that it might overshadow the films, but most of the worthwhile parts of the EU do that already (Dark Empire is the best example, but the Black Fleet books or even TTT can also be held to do this, though they are often decried for minimalism). The point there is that if one ignores the Death Star (which, as you once noted, most authors {very likely including Lucas} do not understand the implications of), the films are among the most minimalist stories in the saga. We are going to overshadow them in terms of scale and consequencesno matter how we do this, unless we take the KJA approach. Arguably, the same could be said of resolutions; DE effectively renders everything between it and RotJ null and void if one looks strictly to the book/comic sources, for example. Yet I do not feel that this cheapens those stories, nor does Palpatine's return sabotage the ending of RotJ more than the continued struggle in general did.

As for the underlying themes and morals, my take is that of the dissolving Republic. Palpatine's Empire was merely the last phase of the struggle to keep the old Republican structure alive, and the attempt to form a New Republic its death throes. The Old Republic had grown so big, and yet weakened, that only Palpatine's despotism could hold it together (and perhaps not even that for very much longer). What Palpatine did, for his own gain, was to cling to something - the galactic government - that should have been left to die instead of being painfully reanimated at great expense. The actions of Luke and others then freed the galaxy from this tyranny, and thus allowed the natural course of events to progress - towards the collapse of a government that had rotted from within and grown alien to its people. So their actions were not insignificant after all, but an important part of the progress towards something new and fresh.

The Big Three of the Alliance to Restore the Republic (pretty hard to argue with the name), were all Imperial Senators who tried to work to limit the power and changes under Palpatine until hounded into exile. Furthermore, the Declaration of the Rebellion and their other ideological documents are explicit with nostalgia and restorationist rhetoric. I strongly disagree. The canon states these things.

Yes, but the same canon assumes that the Republic they wish to restore is a quasi-mythical thing of the past. They might be nostalgic for the ideals of the fairytale Republic of the Journal of the Whills, but they are not thinking of a polity that they themselves served in - that is merely what it looks like now after Lucas's unjustified ret-cons, which we agreed to undo anyway. Was Mussolini a Roman restorationist because he supported the ideal and trappings of the Roman Empire?

I agree that maybe there are a lot of low-level radicals and such who joined the ARR as the only umbrella for pan-galactic opposition. But as I said, the benefit of a doubt principle leads us to believe that other than the overt counter-specieism and particularism of the Fey'lya types and their opportunistism and apparent enthusiasm for illiberal or procedural democracy, what you describe simply does not manifest itself. Nor am I surprised, because SW is a culture of Great Men and personalities; impersonal historical forces and such are not the tipping points they are in our culture and society.

That is patently unrealistic and something that has continually grated me as I have read the EU. I assumed that we were going to fix such things. A movement of their kind simply cannot ignore grassroot radicalism. I would expect at least some tweaking here, perspective if nothing else. Or, on the contrary, we could portray the disappointment of the various radicals as they find out that they have been cynically used and discarded by reactionary dinosaurs who merely wanted to set back the clock. But we should not ignore this conflict.

The fact is that the government set up the Neo-Republicans mimics the Old Republic in most of its meaningful constitutional characteristics, aside from a much more front-and-center military complex. The fact is that they end up setting up a war dictatorship by a political-military junta; the Inner Council is basically the Neo-Republican movement's Politburo, and it ends up dominating government until the Imperial Emancipation. I agree that the differences between intent and war realities should be explored intentfully, and what ended up happening due to compromises along the way, pressures, unforeseen influential individuals, and so forth is worth exploring.

Agreed.

However, to be blunt, I think the question is more like, how are the New Republicans not restorationists and counterrevolutionary reactionaries? I can't think of a single instance of opposition to the pre-Palpatine Republic, they tend to blame him personally for everything and pretend like all was sunshine before him. My NJO-concept would be about them coming to grips with a mature reality.

As I see it, we have two alternatives: Either we continue to portray the Old Republic as a shadowy, glorious past, the fairytale land it was to canon before Lucas showed it to be a galactic-scale version of our UN with a few democratic trappings. This is the approach that I might use, with people idealising it because they do not know/care about how bad it actually was.

Or, we can have the Rebels know full well what the GR was like and still support it all the way. But this begs the question why they would knowingly embrace such an obviously flawed system of government. The logical conclusion then becomes that they are simply representatives of the powerful worlds that thrived in the quasi-anarchical last stages of the Republic and profited from it lack of checks on their power (that allowed, say, the blockade of Naboo; if the Trade Federation performed such actions, the Core Worlds surely had abuses of their own). This fits: Mon Mothma is from Chandrila, Bel Iblis from Corellia and Bail Organa from Alderaan, all powerful Core Worlds who might resent Imperial interference in their affairs, taxation to build up less prosperous locales, &c.

Effectively, this turns the Rebellion from an idealistic grassroot movement into a cynical attempt by Core politicians to regain their old privileges, or to be precise justifies how some fringe debaters have been attempting to portray the Rebels as a great evil. Which is why I am opposed to it. I simply cannot view as good a movement that wishes to reimpose upon the galaxy the "rule by the strong", "every man for himself" system that was the prequel era Republic. And the Rebellion should be the "good guys" (though often idealistic, misguided, or radical), since as you say, SW at the core is fantasy.

(Note 1: You might remember an earlier post by me where I suggested that powerful guilds or Core Worlds might sponsor the Alliance to regain the power that the Empire had limited; I thought this a good idea, but the Rebels should only ever be pawns for these "evil megacorporation"-style interests, not knowingly and willingly aiding them as informed Republic-worshipping implies.)

(Note 2: Of course, this might change depending on whether we make the Galactic Republic a saner government in PrequelFic.)

But aren't phased out. That's the facts. I think you're confusing your personal hatred for the original timeline's contrivedly incompetent and naive Rebels with what we're talking about doing, and looking to subvert them to make a lesson about their original portrayal. I'm looking to give them the benefit of a doubt like they're actually trying and sincere - like I said high fantasy and fairy tale, and that means a degree of perhaps unrealistic idealism. The fact is Mothma managed to keep the reins of the movement, and actually, I believe the ruling class is a combination of old Senatorial elites (the Big Three in particular) and second-generation political exiles (personified by Ackbar and Fey'lya).

I made my case above as far as the thematic point goes. As for the actual rulership, though, I believe you are overstating the importance of the Old Guard. Mothma was practically their only representative; Bail Organa was dead, with his successor Leia being very much the naïve young idealist-radical, and Bel Iblis appears to have lost most of his political influence fairly quickly.

Perhaps. The Galactic Empire had generally broad public support institutionally, and the Galactic Emperor had very deep public support universally. However, the actual ruling class and public face of management had an increasingly negative reputation and this snowballed very highly after the the Emperor's apparent death. Many went along with the Empire because it was what Palpatine recommended. Now does Joe Public have the same feelings for Sate Pestage? A Chekist queen like Ysanne Isard? A bunch of court bigwigs assholes in the Emperor's Ruling Circle? I doubt it. Without Palpatine I'm willing to say the public and elites increasingly wanted a change - the Great Power and old Senatorial elites wanted somesort of reaction back to their old system of traditional power; the new elites wanted to preserve a modified system to protect their perogatives, and Joe Public liked the Emperor but don't like his fanatics tapping their phones, taking people in the night, and conducting litmus tests for purity. And as the Empire repeatedly fails its extra chances, the New Republic is granted a chance - a very qualified, ambivalent, and highly conditional chance, that is.

You make a convincing case here; I had not thought through all the implications, or how much of the support for the Empire that was tied to Palpatine personally. All right, I agree.

Actually, I agree. I think it should be mostly something between World War I and the Thirty Years War (more Thirty Years than WW1), and then Palpatine takes helm of and rights the ship, and turns it into a noble crusade to save the galaxy once and for all a la World War II. I also think they should remain The Conflict of the era, overshadow the intensity of the later civil wars and the NJO-conflict arc. It may flare up to periods of Clone Wars-esque intensity, but never stays as bad as it was. There should be good reason why Palpatine's was a secular demigod that everyone was willing give an Empire as a lifetime achievement award.

Agreed. If possible, I would also like to tone down Palpatine's involvement a little. He should be playing both ends towards the middle, but not everything that happens should be his personal brainchild like the films/prequel EU put it. That kind of planning and control is a bit unrealistic even for the most power Sith Lord ever. And while we are on the topic of Palpatine, I would take away a little of the importance vested in his Sithness; his cool and scientific study of the Dark Side does not mesh well with Sithian fanaticism, and he always came through to me as opportunist first and believer second. He could still be Dark Lord, but his focus on ideology should be de-emphasised.

I agree wholeheartedly. Since Palpatine is behind the scenes, I'd have a lot of fundamental productive capacity of the galaxy unharmed (unlike World War II), but a lot of trudging pointless death (a la World War I and the Thirty Year War) that doesn't go anywhere, and a lot of civilian horrors, even eventually in the Core Worlds.

Full agreement.

Completely agree. The Jedi should be a noble knighthood order, that rights wrongs and affiliated with the Republic (often working with Republic Judicials, I like the Horn and Halcyon dynamic as a model). They're philosophical monastic side, their role in representing the Force users and other paranormals to the Republic institutions, and their peacekeeper blue hat roles may exist, but on the DISTANT sidelines. These are Jedi KNIGHTS first and foremost. They'd support and aid the Republic in general, and some Jedi would elect to join the military of their own initiative. General Kenobi and his apprentice would fight in the war as officers on their own merits and alongside General Bail Organa.

I know you hate Jedi vs Sith, but if one ignores the pseudo-archaic bullshit in tactics and technology, the trappings of knightly nobility there are actually closer to how I imagine the Jedi than the prequels or TotJ comics. It is not quite it, of course; the Jedi should have religious/mystic aspects as well (a bit Templarish, perhaps), and they could liaise with the government and do police/emissary work; but I would rather see them as a society of individuals than a uniform monastic body, one with chivalric traditions and formalia.

Its a galaxy, its hard to have every person on the payroll running things and with responsibility to not be an asshole. Of course this goes both ways, and sometimes the Neo-Republicans will be dragging the Empire over the coals unfairly for what really was just some fucking asshole who got a uniform and a hat.

Agreed in full there; I was actually going a step further and suggesting that there might be shady individuals higher up, perhaps having a little influence on policymaking. This would primarily be in the beginning, when the radicals might be stronger - they would perhaps be akin to the faction that supported Kyp Durron blowing up Imperial worlds on his own.

Well, I hate Lemilisk's execution because its stupid and a miscarriage of justice. I'd retcon it out. You have read The New Order in Power, I definitely like how the structure and relationships of the Empire make it hard to pin some of the ruling class for actual crimes. The Neo-Republicans would be the awkward position of knowing someone was a war criminal but being unable to successfully prosecute them according to genuine rule of law. There should be vigilantes in the New Republic's midst. There should be loud debates. I think Lemelisk is way too late for this, but maybe Teshik was summarily executed by a banana military tribunal under the direction of a popular officer, and Mothma faces a tough choice - alienate the working class of the movement and lose talent and fire and/or court martial him or betrayal genuine ideals of fair government and rule of law.

Good idea there. I would disagree on Lemelisk, though, as that is a quite central point, which definitely deserves to be explored. How can they make that ruling? Perhaps it is the powerful "Remember Alderaan (And Hang The Builders Of The Death Star)" lobby that Leia thinks about in Children of the Jedi that manages to press through his execution? Or perhaps he is convicted of something else? And how do people react to this?

I don't have the quote. What happens is Tarkin sends a memoranda to Dangor suggesting the creation of an Oversector and everything, Dangor replies back appointing him and calling them Priority Sectors. Yet we see both in use and sometimes implied refering to the same thing (i.e., Imperial Center Oversector is also called [Priority?] Sector Zero). It should be in the College of Moffs chapter of TNOiP in the endnotes for the paragraph on Tarkin and Oversectors in the Grand Moff section.

I shall check that, then.

I don't mind if it is bigger but I agree its too influential. The best way to handle these awkward problems in my opinion is approach the issue from both sides, i.e., de-emphasize its relative importance compared to the original timeline and simultaneously increase its relative scale.

No arguments; I had similar thoughts.

I'm fine with real world terminology if its consistent. Otherwise just make up your own terminology. The trick is consistency, clarity, and coherency. Things should mean what they really mean.

I'd make the Army equivalent of Grand Admiral to be Surface Marshal General. Why not? High General? Ugh. What's wrong with Colonel General? High Admiral? What's wrong with Admiral General? Or Fleet Admiral?

I personally have no real problem either way. It depends on personal taste and how close to existant canon one wishes to stick. Odd names for recognised ranks are no major trouble; it is when it grows counter-intuitive that it bothers me. (Commodores above Admirals in the chain of command? Ugh.)

Another thing that irks me; naval aviators will be NAVAL AVIATORS. An aviator will be a captain, not a colonel. Also, thanks for bringing up Baron Fel, because I can't wait to detail the Peerage of the Empire. The Empire is a tad dull fascist and statist and its a bit Napoleonic, low on the pomp and overt monarchism, but it is an Empire, and this is high fantasy.

Well, the Rebels at least do appear to have had a specific fighter arm; I do not remember whether the Empire did. But yes, in Fel's case he clearly is a naval aviator.

As for the nobility: That shall be interesting. The problem there would be that we have so little to work with.

[Illuminatus Primus]

That is how it stands for most of the time, yes, but there are notable exceptions when various anti-Republic/Empire forces grow strong.

Hence "various incarnations", but yes.

Of course; I meant merely to comment (though it was perhaps unnecessary) that your model for a contented planetary society based on social security and heavy direction of the economy would not describe the outer territories, appropriate though it is for the older, more stable and mature polities.

Certainly.

We basically agreed on this in the last post, I think; there should be no formal policy of speciesism on the Imperial level (individual Regions or Sectors might be another matter), though lobby groups such as COMPNOR or powerful individuals such as Sate Pestage might push for it and implement it on an irregular basis.

Then we're on the same page.

I disagree. A balkanized galaxy isn't Star Wars, and some NJO-replacement arc should not render the struggles of the heroes of the trilogies' arcs moot. The fundamental philosophy of STAR WARS is the fundamental importance of individual people making key decisions. Having the last arc end so open-endedly and anticlimactically makes for convincing fictional historiography, but ultimately overshadows the film's gravitas and is hostile to their fundamental thematic assertions. The old Republic was troubled, but making the Clone Wars about how they were going to die anyway misses a great point. The value of that era is much greater and the decisions of the characters much more tragic if they could have at least turned a corner for the better or for reform as oppose to making the wrong decision. The moral should be that people making decisions and with great ability (Palpatine and Anakin) can make or break great societies, and also make things better (Luke Skywalker). STAR WARS doesn't hold the conceits of impersonal historical trends and movements; it is a drama and high fantasy revolving around the importance of individuals in the right time and place; it firmly plants its feet in the place of arguing for Great Men. Our arc should sum up and conclude the loose ends and unresolved problems of the era, not swallow up the heroes' sacrifices and the theme of the saga in quasi-redemptive self-destruction.

Then we are at odds. I can agree that it might overshadow the films, but most of the worthwhile parts of the EU do that already (Dark Empire is the best example, but the Black Fleet books or even TTT can also be held to do this, though they are often decried for minimalism). The point there is that if one ignores the Death Star (which, as you once noted, most authors {very likely including Lucas} do not understand the implications of), the films are among the most minimalist stories in the saga.

We're talking about the import of the events, and the huge value of the little guy who has a special role in history. Even if the TTT or DE overshadows the films (I hardly think so, since they help wrap up loose ends - how does the Empire finally die? what becomes of Luke's brush with the dark side? how does the dust settle in the galaxy? and I also think they set the stage for more things, what becomes of the other underlings of the evil Emperor? What becomes of the New Republic? What about the new Jedi Order?

The whole period we're talking about replacing is about the growth of a new world order; that's even what they called the original arc. The New Jedi Order. To me, completely rendering the sacrifices of the heroes to save the galaxy and restore it from the spectre of evil moot because the damn was screwed anyway is completely going against the Saga's grand sweep.

We are going to overshadow them in terms of scale and consequencesno matter how we do this, unless we take the KJA approach.

No amount of ships will conflict with the Death Star - and of course I'm not talking about the physical scale of the universe. We're not going to go and bring back Palpatine again and kill Luke Skywalker. We're not going to destroy galactic unity for all times - and at the heroes' feet, as well!

Arguably, the same could be said of resolutions; DE effectively renders everything between it and RotJ null and void if one looks strictly to the book/comic sources, for example.

This sentence to me betrays its own personal bias and selectivism. Furthermore, why are you using the superficial worst aspects of the era we have taken it upon ourselves to rehabilitate because of how bad it is as a justification for a blank cheque to do the same kind of things?

Yet I do not feel that this cheapens those stories, nor does Palpatine's return sabotage the ending of RotJ more than the continued struggle in general did.

Yes, but that's not the -fundamental- idea of Star Wars, which is romantic notions of the Great Man and the power of the choice between good and evil, right and wrong, selfishness and selflessness.

As for the underlying themes and morals, my take is that of the dissolving Republic. Palpatine's Empire was merely the last phase of the struggle to keep the old Republican structure alive, and the attempt to form a New Republic its death throes. The Old Republic had grown so big, and yet weakened, that only Palpatine's despotism could hold it together (and perhaps not even that for very much longer). What Palpatine did, for his own gain, was to cling to something - the galactic government - that should have been left to die instead of being painfully reanimated at great expense. The actions of Luke and others then freed the galaxy from this tyranny, and thus allowed the natural course of events to progress - towards the collapse of a government that had rotted from within and grown alien to its people. So their actions were not insignificant after all, but an important part of the progress towards something new and fresh.

I defy you to watch the six films and have them convincingly be about how democracy and unity is bad and that Palpatine was just an opportunist. The Clone War was not even an organic event, but a stage show? The lesson of Star Wars is a REPUDIATION of modernist and postmodernist impersonal trends of history, in favor of the crucial choices made by people for bad or good (the choice of Palpatine to do bad, the choice of the elder Skywalker for bad, the choice of the younger to do good, the choice of Windu to do wrong). The lesson of ROTJ is that Luke put his love and trust in his father, Darth Vader, and that's what really made the difference in wrecking the Empire. The lesson of TPM is that Amidala made a choice to trust Palpatine and betray one of her "strongest supporters" in Chancellor Valorum, and sealed her fate. The lesson of ROTS is that Anakin betrayed his obligation and charge in favor of illicit love and power, and sealed the fate of the Jedi and ultimately his own family and happiness.

The idea that the galactic order - one that stood for 25,000 years, the one Obi-Wan knowingly and nobly mused was guarded and stewarded by the Jedi just as long - is just fucked and needs to die is not Star Wars. The idea is that people make the right or wrong choices, and this means history for all of us. Was the Old Republic corrupt? Sure. But it should not be portrayed or made about impersonal forces of history and trend - even if that's more realistic. The essential truth of Star Wars is the setting I first listed - which should be retained - and the essential theme I just said, which is one of choice and the importance of Great Men.

Furthermore, I have a concept for galactic war and a Second Empire, but let's give the Heroes of the Films a break, and let their New Republic outlive their lifetime and then some, and then much later you can have a Tales of the Jedi esque story that makes a break maybe. But let good win the Palpatinic Era. I think its the least we owe the original saga.

Yes, but the same canon assumes that the Republic they wish to restore is a quasi-mythical thing of the past. They might be nostalgic for the ideals of the fairytale Republic of the Journal of the Whills, but they are not thinking of a polity that they themselves served in - that is merely what it looks like now after Lucas's unjustified ret-cons, which we agreed to undo anyway. Was Mussolini a Roman restorationist because he supported the ideal and trappings of the Roman Empire?

I think Mussolini had no real ideology with Classical Rome other than vague Italian chauvenism and romanticism. That's hardly the same thing as calling his movement the Party to Restore the Roman Empire as opposed to the Italian Fascist Party or the Band of Combat. I am not with you in this idea of the Republic as a horrible institution as shown by Lucas, itself a relic we can replace. We're reforming the Jedi. Palpatine's role should be extremely underscored. Its not about historical trends, the Republic may have been on some of its harder times, but it was his choice to do evil, and the wrong decisions and inaction of others which doomed it. I want the Republic to be troubled but noble, so we'll mourn its loss, just like rehabilitating the Jedi. We should mourn them, not feel like we did in the PT (well they were so shitty and stupid...). Furthermore, your description of them at most extreme makes them benign Nazis; they still aren't "all new" Bolshevik analogues.

That is patently unrealistic and something that has continually grated me as I have read the EU. I assumed that we were going to fix such things. A movement of their kind simply cannot ignore grassroot radicalism. I would expect at least some tweaking here, perspective if nothing else. Or, on the contrary, we could portray the disappointment of the various radicals as they find out that they have been cynically used and discarded by reactionary dinosaurs who merely wanted to set back the clock. But we should not ignore this conflict.

I said we can use it. You yourself didn't want to change "as much as possible". Which means we give them the benefit of a doubt, that means changing such that Mothma isn't such an idiot or a hypocrite, and her fellows aren't trying to resurrect a terrible regime. Give their essential presumption the benefit of a doubt.

Furthermore, I think you overextend the analogy to genuinely modern institutions and states. Ideology gets a lot of credit in our culture, because we're still ultimately in the throws of the a great modern upheaval and progression that started in the Industrial Revolution and the formation of the modern international community of sovereign nation-states. Therefore existential questions of where we're going, how we're getting there, and what we should do are responded to by enormous and broad concepts of ideological theory which can be as impersonal and pseudoscientific as it gets (Marxism being the apotheosis of this tendency). However, common institutions and a continuous concept of a commonweal have dominated galactic history for several times the age of agriculture (much less the age of states or writing) in our own world. The Republic may have gone through rough times and periodic violent fits, but these are akin to earthquakes and geology (brief shocks in an otherwise glacial phenomena), but the idea of the Republic and the commonweal must be more robust than even the Germans' transcendental idea of the Reich, more enduring than any institution - including the Roman Catholic Church, ecumenical conceptions of Christianity in general, Chinese dynastic concepts of the state, even ideas like organized religion in the most general of sense, even agriculture and writing. Consequently, I think politics of Star Wars revolve much more around action and personalities than theories. It must be essentially unthinkable that the transcendent body politic and the idea of union be assailed, given the most radical thing anyone managed to do it was the Empire (and it took the Titan of Titans, Palpatine, to do it).

As I see it, we have two alternatives: Either we continue to portray the Old Republic as a shadowy, glorious past, the fairytale land it was to canon before Lucas showed it to be a galactic-scale version of our UN with a few democratic trappings. This is the approach that I might use, with people idealising it because they do not know/care about how bad it actually was.

What if it really wasn't that bad, but everyone stopped giving a shit? What if key individuals' choices doomed it. It may be trite and fairy talish, "but the moment we stop believing in democracy is the moment we lose it." Why not have a decent Republic, especially for much of its history and awhile before the immediate prequel era? I think you're ignoring the possibility to really prove new ground here, and make our own Republic. Should it have flaws? Sure, everything does. They don't have to be systemic and endemic. Should it have rough times? Sure, everything does. They don't have to universal and its own fault. This is a major trope of the monomyth, the classical era before the dark age, or "before the dark times, before the Empire."

Or, we can have the Rebels know full well what the GR was like and still support it all the way. But this begs the question why they would knowingly embrace such an obviously flawed system of government. The logical conclusion then becomes that they are simply representatives of the powerful worlds that thrived in the quasi-anarchical last stages of the Republic and profited from it lack of checks on their power (that allowed, say, the blockade of Naboo; if the Trade Federation performed such actions, the Core Worlds surely had abuses of their own). This fits: Mon Mothma is from Chandrila, Bel Iblis from Corellia and Bail Organa from Alderaan, all powerful Core Worlds who might resent Imperial interference in their affairs, taxation to build up less prosperous locales, &c.

Effectively, this turns the Rebellion from an idealistic grassroot movement into a cynical attempt by Core politicians to regain their old privileges, or to be precise justifies how some fringe debaters have been attempting to portray the Rebels as a great evil. Which is why I am opposed to it. I simply cannot view as good a movement that wishes to reimpose upon the galaxy the "rule by the strong", "every man for himself" system that was the prequel era Republic. And the Rebellion should be the "good guys" (though often idealistic, misguided, or radical), since as you say, SW at the core is fantasy.

(Note 1: You might remember an earlier post by me where I suggested that powerful guilds or Core Worlds might sponsor the Alliance to regain the power that the Empire had limited; I thought this a good idea, but the Rebels should only ever be pawns for these "evil megacorporation"-style interests, not knowingly and willingly aiding them as informed Republic-worshipping implies.)

(Note 2: Of course, this might change depending on whether we make the Galactic Republic a saner government in PrequelFic.)

See above. When you respond I think we'll be able to systematically deal with these issues.

I made my case above as far as the thematic point goes. As for the actual rulership, though, I believe you are overstating the importance of the Old Guard. Mothma was practically their only representative; Bail Organa was dead, with his successor Leia being very much the naïve young idealist-radical, and Bel Iblis appears to have lost most of his political influence fairly quickly.

Then Mothma is a war dictator with the help of a largely compliant Leia and second-generation followers like Fey'lya and Ackbar. But that doesn't mean it has to be a bad war dictatorate, or that it must last.

You make a convincing case here; I had not thought through all the implications, or how much of the support for the Empire that was tied to Palpatine personally. All right, I agree.

Palpatine was beloved. Much of the Empire...wasn't.

Agreed. If possible, I would also like to tone down Palpatine's involvement a little. He should be playing both ends towards the middle, but not everything that happens should be his personal brainchild like the films/prequel EU put it. That kind of planning and control is a bit unrealistic even for the most power Sith Lord ever.

Fair enough, I think his concept as a mastermind and a genius should not be taken away, but I think it should be more of the Publius-described subtlety and deviousness than hamfisted Lucas obviousness. He should be THE Great Man and Genius of the Ages. Really, I love sticking with the premise that he and Skywalkers are the only beings of their kind, because it emphasizes why he was such a narcissist and so important, and why Anakin and later Luke were so important to him. An artist needs an audience.

And while we are on the topic of Palpatine, I would take away a little of the importance vested in his Sithness; his cool and scientific study of the Dark Side does not mesh well with Sithian fanaticism, and he always came through to me as opportunist first and believer second. He could still be Dark Lord, but his focus on ideology should be de-emphasised.

We can make the Sith - especially the Banite or whatever Ordinal Sith - whatever we want. I like them as the cult of uebermenschen and darkness that Palpatine defines. I like to believe that he and the Sith were made for each other, and he would have made something similar had he not found them. I think Sithian ideology perfectly complements his final designs and complements his overt political ideology. I disagree, he is an opportunist, but he drives events - he is an actor, a mastermind, a Titan of History.

I know you hate Jedi vs Sith, but if one ignores the pseudo-archaic bullshit in tactics and technology, the trappings of knightly nobility there are actually closer to how I imagine the Jedi than the prequels or TotJ comics. It is not quite it, of course; the Jedi should have religious/mystic aspects as well (a bit Templarish, perhaps), and they could liaise with the government and do police/emissary work; but I would rather see them as a society of individuals than a uniform monastic body, one with chivalric traditions and formalia.

I agree. We can discard ancient Sith stuff while we're at it. Basically I see us rewinding to when there was just the pre-Prequel and pre-Ancient EU, just mostly the OT and Bantam arc and so forth, and building around and fixing that.

Agreed in full there; I was actually going a step further and suggesting that there might be shady individuals higher up, perhaps having a little influence on policymaking. This would primarily be in the beginning, when the radicals might be stronger - they would perhaps be akin to the faction that supported Kyp Durron blowing up Imperial worlds on his own.

Agreed.

Good idea there. I would disagree on Lemelisk, though, as that is a quite central point, which definitely deserves to be explored. How can they make that ruling? Perhaps it is the powerful "Remember Alderaan (And Hang The Builders Of The Death Star)" lobby that Leia thinks about in Children of the Jedi that manages to press through his execution? Or perhaps he is convicted of something else? And how do people react to this?

Worth studying. Of course I wouldn't be surprised if he was executed for utilizing slave labor and overseeing mass death in that capacity.

Well, the Rebels at least do appear to have had a specific fighter arm; I do not remember whether the Empire did. But yes, in Fel's case he clearly is a naval aviator.

As for the nobility: That shall be interesting. The problem there would be that we have so little to work with.

We'll make it work.

[Darth Hoth]

Hence "various incarnations", but yes.

I meant to allude to the brief periods where there is no single strong government.

We're talking about the import of the events, and the huge value of the little guy who has a special role in history. Even if the TTT or DE overshadows the films (I hardly think so, since they help wrap up loose ends - how does the Empire finally die? what becomes of Luke's brush with the dark side? how does the dust settle in the galaxy? and I also think they set the stage for more things, what becomes of the other underlings of the evil Emperor? What becomes of the New Republic? What about the new Jedi Order?

The thematic underpinnings of the saga, according to Lucas, had less to do with historical happenings and more with the personal history of one (or if you are generous, two) individuals. The whole galactic conflict was basically background to him, or so he says.

The whole period we're talking about replacing is about the growth of a new world order; that's even what they called the original arc. The New Jedi Order. To me, completely rendering the sacrifices of the heroes to save the galaxy and restore it from the spectre of evil moot because the damn was screwed anyway is completely going against the Saga's grand sweep.

To me, it could also be about a new beginning. But I did not address the PrequelFic point; see below.

No amount of ships will conflict with the Death Star - and of course I'm not talking about the physical scale of the universe. We're not going to go and bring back Palpatine again and kill Luke Skywalker. We're not going to destroy galactic unity for all times - and at the heroes' feet, as well!

This sentence to me betrays its own personal bias and selectivism. Furthermore, why are you using the superficial worst aspects of the era we have taken it upon ourselves to rehabilitate because of how bad it is as a justification for a blank cheque to do the same kind of things?

I generalised, but that is basically what it does - the New Republic is suddenly the "Alliance" again, in deed and name, with Palpatine holding the upper hand and them being back to rebelling. The sourcebooks &c do partially retcon this, but that was how it stood initially. As for your point, it was not supposed to be a justification in and of itself, but an example. To me, sub-stories within the grand scope of things can have their own validity. You also ignored how the Skywalkers' part in Palpatine's destruction would play a role in the grand scheme of things, but in another direction.

I defy you to watch the six films and have them convincingly be about how democracy and unity is bad and that Palpatine was just an opportunist. The Clone War was not even an organic event, but a stage show? The lesson of Star Wars is a REPUDIATION of modernist and postmodernist impersonal trends of history, in favor of the crucial choices made by people for bad or good (the choice of Palpatine to do bad, the choice of the elder Skywalker for bad, the choice of the younger to do good, the choice of Windu to do wrong). The lesson of ROTJ is that Luke put his love and trust in his father, Darth Vader, and that's what really made the difference in wrecking the Empire. The lesson of TPM is that Amidala made a choice to trust Palpatine and betray one of her "strongest supporters" in Chancellor Valorum, and sealed her fate. The lesson of ROTS is that Anakin betrayed his obligation and charge in favor of illicit love and power, and sealed the fate of the Jedi and ultimately his own family and happiness.

Palpatine's role was to be sure not merely opportunistic, but neither was he the root cause for the Republic's corruption - that had begun and progressed without his interference, though he doubtlessly aided it. I think we can safely agree that Palpatine was a manipulative mastermind, but ultimately the decline of the Republic was due to impersonal factors. Palpatine attempted to rectify this by strengthening and centralising it after he seized power - if nothing else for the fact that his rule would die with it. If this necessitated tight control, perhaps Tarkinist rule by fear, to maintain, then so be it. But in the end, he worked against fate, which through the Skywalkers struck him down and let the government die.

As for the first sentence, I would never say that they were shown to be bad bad as concepts. Rather, I am going by the Journal of the Whills depiction of the Republic as being in its dying stages, and Palpatine's rule a mere continuation of it. It had simply outlasted itself, like a mighty tree rotting from within and toppling, making room for younger and healthier saplings.

VERY IMPORTANT NOTE: These are interpretations of the existant filmic canon; if we redo the prequels to show a saner Republic, I agree with your points. But the Republic as it stood in the canon films was clearly beyond redemption, no matter what anyone did. They could only choose between bad and worse.

The idea that the galactic order - one that stood for 25,000 years, the one Obi-Wan knowingly and nobly mused was guarded and stewarded by the Jedi just as long - is just fucked and needs to die is not Star Wars. The idea is that people make the right or wrong choices, and this means history for all of us. Was the Old Republic corrupt? Sure. But it should not be portrayed or made about impersonal forces of history and trend - even if that's more realistic. The essential truth of Star Wars is the setting I first listed - which should be retained - and the essential theme I just said, which is one of choice and the importance of Great Men.

See above.

Furthermore, I have a concept for galactic war and a Second Empire, but let's give the Heroes of the Films a break, and let their New Republic outlive their lifetime and then some, and then much later you can have a Tales of the Jedi esque story that makes a break maybe. But let good win the Palpatinic Era. I think its the least we owe the original saga.

Sounds interesting. And yes, I do like the idea of letting some time pass. That everything of importance should happen in one generation is a little irksome.

I think Mussolini had no real ideology with Classical Rome other than vague Italian chauvenism and romanticism. That's hardly the same thing as calling his movement the Party to Restore the Roman Empire as opposed to the Italian Fascist Party or the Band of Combat. I am not with you in this idea of the Republic as a horrible institution as shown by Lucas, itself a relic we can replace. We're reforming the Jedi. Palpatine's role should be extremely underscored. Its not about historical trends, the Republic may have been on some of its harder times, but it was his choice to do evil, and the wrong decisions and inaction of others which doomed it. I want the Republic to be troubled but noble, so we'll mourn its loss, just like rehabilitating the Jedi. We should mourn them, not feel like we did in the PT (well they were so shitty and stupid...).

Apparently I underestimated the amount of change you had in mind for PrequelFic; I somewhat unimaginatively assumed that we would continue to show the Republic as being incompetent and "evil by omission". Assuming a competent and somewhat likable Republic, I see your point.

Furthermore, your description of them at most extreme makes them benign Nazis; they still aren't "all new" Bolshevik analogues.

I imagined that they would be vaguely supportive of the supposed spirit of a purported Old Republic while hateful of Palpatinian institutions. So, they would be historically motivated but still radical reformers.

I said we can use it. You yourself didn't want to change "as much as possible". Which means we give them the benefit of a doubt, that means changing such that Mothma isn't such an idiot or a hypocrite, and her fellows aren't trying to resurrect a terrible regime.

As per above: If we change the Galactic Republic, that could change the radical reformer theme of the Rebels.

See above. When you respond I think we'll be able to systematically deal with these issues.

Assuming a reasonably healthy Republic by necessity throws out my thematic underpinnings for a dying old government. I am not entirely sure how this meshes with core assumptions (e.g., that the Journal of the Whills is roughly correct), but if we do that, I could agree with your idea. The question is how true to the message of the original saga that such an idea would be.

Fair enough, I think his concept as a mastermind and a genius should not be taken away, but I think it should be more of the Publius-described subtlety and deviousness than hamfisted Lucas obviousness. He should be THE Great Man and Genius of the Ages. Really, I love sticking with the premise that he and Skywalkers are the only beings of their kind, because it emphasizes why he was such a narcissist and so important, and why Anakin and later Luke were so important to him. An artist needs an audience.

To be honest, I never liked the idea that Anakin Skywalker was the sum total of the meaning of the SW universe at all. I mean, they do say it, but it feels inappropriate - he is frankly not of such character as to warrant such status. The old Vader portrayal of him simply being the Emperor's henchman - strongest, most trusted, and most iconic, yes, but still only one servant of many - always resounded better with me. I do agree with much of what you are saying here, that there are some very special individuals - Palpatine in particular - but I would de-emphasise such things as "The Prophecy".

We can make the Sith - especially the Banite or whatever Ordinal Sith - whatever we want. I like them as the cult of uebermenschen and darkness that Palpatine defines. I like to believe that he and the Sith were made for each other, and he would have made something similar had he not found them. I think Sithian ideology perfectly complements his final designs and complements his overt political ideology. I disagree, he is an opportunist, but he drives events - he is an actor, a mastermind, a Titan of History.

I am not aiming to trivialise him, just to make him a little more reasonable - his influence should not be the sole steering wheel of the galaxy. He should still have to work within the system as a manipulator, not a scriptwriter for galactic society.

As for the Sith, might one then make them more like him instead of the other way around? Like, they might originally have been scientists and scholars who attempted to study the Force scientifically and therefore came into conflict with the more conservative and esoteric Jedi?

I agree. We can discard ancient Sith stuff while we're at it. Basically I see us rewinding to when there was just the pre-Prequel and pre-Ancient EU, just mostly the OT and Bantam arc and so forth, and building around and fixing that.

What part of the Sith history are you talking about more exactly? The Sith Empire? Revan's holdings? Bane and the Brotherhood?

Worth studying. Of course I wouldn't be surprised if he was executed for utilizing slave labor and overseeing mass death in that capacity.

Is there any mention on what happened to Umak Leth in any sourcebook, or is he just assumed to have died on Byss? He should definitely stand trial like that. I wonder, though - could he pull a Speer?

[Illuminatus Primus]

Heh, sorry, I think I added something before you could apply, real brief though.