StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Havok wrote:IT IS NOT :"WHY DO PEOPLE LIKE THE EMPIRE?" IT IS:"WHY DO PEOPLE DEFEND THEIR OBVIOUSLY EVIL FUCKING ACTIONS?"

Fuck, you people are goddamn stupid.

They think "cool" => "moral".

Havok wrote:We all get that. The question is: 'why do people make excuses for the atrocities the Empire has perpetrated on the galaxy?'.

Because the Imperials are cool.

I look forward to you spazzing out some more.

Nazis are 'cool' to. Do you defend them based on that?

Havok wrote:Nazis are 'cool' to. Do you defend them based on that?

The Nazis aren't cool.

Or just refer back to what I said in my first post. It was the "short answer," i.e. I'm too lazy right now to give an answer with any significant amount of detail, information, or nuance to it.

Edit - unless you ask nicely.

Actually, people will and do defend things that are "cool" with no other real reasons, though they'll rationalize it in hindsight. It's hard to see something as awesome and at the same time decry it's actions; I'd say it requires a degree of doublethink. It's also why people backed the humans in Avatar, what with their awesome gunships and mecha suits; hell, I cheered for them when I first saw it, but when most people left the theater their thoughts were probably "Colonel Quaritch was fucking badass" instead of thinking of the morality involved. People don't want to be placed in the confusing position of cheering for people they know are wrong, so they decide the people they are cheering for are right instead and then rationalize it.

Gramzamber wrote: Because apparently obsessive compulsive wankers like you have to get others to justify everything they say.
Here's a tip: It doesn't matter.
Whether it's senility or arrogance or outright stupidity, Palpatine made mistakes.

You're obviously not even trying to back up your claims or answer any questions. All I am asking is that you give a good reason for your claims, which is apparently too damn difficult for you. This board has debating rules, and if you can't be fucked to followed them then by all means stop posting.

"They" as in "our same band of heroes" propping up the NR 90% of the time.

I repeat, how does that make the NR "criminally incompetent"?

What?

Typo on my part, it should read "different minded factions into the same government."

You are an idiot.
That was not an accusation.

You accused the NR of being criminally incompetent in their handling of the Vong situation! You said they were "criminally incompetent". If that isn't an accusation then what pray tell do you define as an accusation?

You asked why the NR should expect another war.
I pointed out they've had nothing but war for their entire time in power. Gee I wonder why they should think they should be prepared?

The Galactic Civil War officially ended in 19 ABY. For five years the New Republic faced no major external threat. They had no evidence that a powerful enemy was coming, FROM OUTSIDE THE GALAXY NO LESS, said enemy had been gathering intelligence for decades and had been involved in subterfuge across the galaxy by that point.

It was a scenario that was damned near impossible to concieve of until it actually happened,

So all tactical and political incompetence is to be ignored then?

NIce job moving the goalposts, I didn't say they handled everything perfectly. You're deflecting away from your unsupported claim that the NR leadership was criminally incompetent. The New Republic did not handle everything in the best way leading up to the formation of the GFFA, but then again you admitted that Palpatine made mistakes and went so far as to claim he was senile, so how is it that his Empire would have fared better?

How does someone manage to be so stupid and still literate enough to use a keyboard?

I ask that question about you fairly often.

That they're another faction is irrelevant.
That they're extragalactic invaders is irrelevant.
The fact that they almost DESTROYED CORUSCANT is the problem!

You do realize that when the Empire reclaimed Coruscant prior to the events of Dark Empire they nearly accomplished this as well? You place way too much importance on Coruscant, Galactic Civilization does not begin and end on that world.

Previous invasions would cause collateral damage, sure. The Vong intended to, and I have to repeat this again, replace the entire planetary infrastructure with their own shit and kill EVERYONE who didn't evacuate.

What the Vong intended to do with the planet is irrelevant. It doesn't change the fact that while the New Republic lost the planet twice (to the Vong and to the Empire before that), the Empire did in fact lose the world twice as well.

Oh, and it didn't exactly take long for the entire planet to be rebuilt back to its previous standard. But hey you're "OH GOD THEY LOST CORUSCANT WHYYYYYYYYYY" shtick is getting funnier by the post.

The Rebels have uniforms as well, and military ships and fighters and so on. The difference is you can see their faces, unlike the stormtroopers and TIE pilots we see.

Their uniforms, ships and what not don't have the same effect- they're an eclectic mish-mash with no consistent theme, significant regimentation etc- and they lack an awesome theme song. Because the Empire appeals to that part of some people's psyche (including my own) same people are only a hop skip and a jump from deciding that because the like a certain thing, then certain thing must be good. And they'll argue the point.

It really is just that simple, IMO.

The Imperials have cooler gadgets, uniform and music and most importantly: they have some (at least half-)decently written characters. The Rebel/New Republic (minor) characters are mostly sketches, with one sentence personality, nothing to explore throughout the text there, they are papercuts. While for the Imps there are a few real flesh and blood villains. There could have been some promising Rebels (for example Bel Iblis or Lando Carlissian from the movies, maybe even Wedge) but somehow the writers failed to really develop them.

So IMHO: this is the fault of the writers while they were unable to create interesting heroes.

Temujin wrote:Despite how much people in a comfortable society general will talk about certain freedoms (i.e., speech, press, etc.) as if they are the end all be all, many of those same people will often forgo those freedoms when confronted with societal instabilities (i.e., unchecked crime, unrest, starvation) that lead to suffering. If the Empire truly did ensure the existence of a safe and stable society after the Civil War, then they are truly the lesser evil.

Except that the society the Empire had wasn't really all that much better than the one the Old Republic had as far as we can tell from the movies. All that changed is that the oppression got redistributed.

Ryan Thunder wrote:The Empire has big badass starships and troops in full body armour with rayguns.
I'm pretty sure about 90% of it boils down to that, and little else.

That's my theory too.

Iosef Cross wrote:Well, because they were "cool". And being evil is a part of that coolness that they had.

Of course, nobody really wish that their country had an government like the Empire.

Some... do. I would feel sorry for them if they got their way, as long as they got it somewhere at a safe distance from me.

I definitely agree that the Imperials have a "cool" factor. I had fun playing TIE Fighter or roleplaying the Imps, but I never knew that people seriously argued that they were right until I got on the internet forums. I think some fanboys look ]I]way[/i] too deep into certain things (while not even looking at things correctly). Combine that with a desire to look clever by going against the grain and stating an unconventional opinion, and you get people arguing for ridiculous positions. Like the Empire being in the right, despite SW being about as black-and-white as you can get.

I think that back in the ASVS/early SDN days, there was a tendency to view the Empire as this uber macho antithesis of TNG era Trek.
Just read the fan fic from back then-a lot of it seems downright brutal and sadistic. It just seemed so much cooler, bad ass and advanced than wussified Voy/TNG Trek.

I think a lot of that has died down since then (I wouldn't be surprised if 8 years of Bush and the wars had something to do with it) but there was that element of glorification, esp vis a vis Trek vs. Wars fan fics and discussions.

Personally I for one will defend the empire.
Why? Because they brought stability to the galaxy.


We all acknowledge the movies and what happened there. Yes, the Naboo invasion was staged by Palpatine but it was also a show of what can happen within the republic.

Palpatine or not, the fact that the old republic allowed them self to drop to such a level that their absolutely massive government had almost no actual control. And the fact that private corporations could have armies of battle droids and who knows what shows us that they are not exactly the best society out there.

Furthermore, what we see from the EU and games like KOTOR is that slavery, social inequality, crime lords and all other sort of scum absolutely thrived under the republic. And that the republic newer did anything to change that.

A democratic system just is not feasible on a galactic level because of the sheer number of delegates in question and the fact that every one is going to be fallowing his own agenda and putting the good of his planet over the good of the whole.


The empire on the other hand managed, to a degree to change that. Does that excuse the things that they did? Of course not. It does not excuse them any more than the anti smoking laws and free vaccination programs excuse the Nazis for their death camps.


But what it does show is that a strong, centralized government in the galaxy is fundamentally a good idea. Especially compared with the mess that the old republic was. And the even thou the execution of it was massively flawed the galactic empire could have been done better if the leadership was more enlightened.


However, what did the rebels do after they took over? Did they learn the lessons from both systems and create a new one that would be the best of both worlds? No, they established the same mess as the old republic. Good job indeed.

Purple wrote:Personally I for one will defend the empire.
Why? Because they brought stability to the galaxy.

They did? That's news to me. Palpatine's rise to power ended the thousand years of the previous government culminating in the Clone Wars. Then of course we have the Galactic Civil War. War between the Rebellion, Empire, and various Imperial Warlords would last for decades.

When they weren't fighting the Rebels, the Empire was busy bringing about stability by using it's military to pacify populations across the galaxy. The Empire was so arrogant as to try and revoke the "sentient" status from species such as the Mon Calamari.

We all acknowledge the movies and what happened there. Yes, the Naboo invasion was staged by Palpatine but it was also a show of what can happen within the republic.

Yes the Old Republic's bureaucracy was making things very difficult here, but who is really to blame? Qui Gon and Obi Wan were dispatched to investigate the situation and get things sorted out, but there is the little matter of the huge Trade Federation fleet under Gunray's command being vicariously directed by Sidious. The Republic did little to help Naboo, but that doesn't change the fact that it was the Trade Federation who invaded the planet, under the direction fo a Sith Lord who orchestrated the Neimoidians rise to power within that organization so that he could control their droid armies.

Palpatine or not, the fact that the old republic allowed them self to drop to such a level that their absolutely massive government had almost no actual control. And the fact that private corporations could have armies of battle droids and who knows what shows us that they are not exactly the best society out there.

Again you point out the Old Republic's flaws, which we all acknowledge, but you gloss over the Empire's. The Old Republic was hampered by bureaucracy, the court systems were a legal nightmare, corporations within the Republic had lots of battle droids...etc... etc...

Meanwhile the Galactic Empire was DIRECTLY murdering and enslaving nonhumans and humans who didn't cooperate. How is the Old Republic's need for reform worse than the Empire's crimes?

Furthermore, what we see from the EU and games like KOTOR is that slavery, social inequality, crime lords and all other sort of scum absolutely thrived under the republic. And that the republic newer did anything to change that.

I'd like some proof of instances of slavery WITHIN the Republic please, as the examples of Old Republic era slavery I have seen have taken place outside of the Republic's borders. In KOTOR the only place I recall slaves were Hutt controlled systems or Sith planets.

A democratic system just is not feasible on a galactic level because of the sheer number of delegates in question and the fact that every one is going to be fallowing his own agenda and putting the good of his planet over the good of the whole.

Never mind that the Republic existed in some form for 25,000, (1,000 years post Ruusan) and democracy seemed to do rather well while the "stable" Empire under Palpatine lasted about 30 years.

The empire on the other hand managed, to a degree to change that. Does that excuse the things that they did? Of course not. It does not excuse them any more than the anti smoking laws and free vaccination programs excuse the Nazis for their death camps.

And yet in your first sentence you defend them for bringing stability. This has got to be one of the most hypocritical things I have ever read.

But what it does show is that a strong, centralized government in the galaxy is fundamentally a good idea. Especially compared with the mess that the old republic was. And the even thou the execution of it was massively flawed the galactic empire could have been done better if the leadership was more enlightened.

And yet, as previously mentioned, the Empire did not last very long.

However, what did the rebels do after they took over? Did they learn the lessons from both systems and create a new one that would be the best of both worlds? No, they established the same mess as the old republic. Good job indeed.

You do realize that the official name of the Rebel Alliance was "The Alliance to Restore the Republic" yes?

While united for the Galactic Civil War there were a lot of competing interests when the New Republic rose to power which created a different mess when that government was being formed. But part of the problem was that a lot of groups did not want a strong central government, not after what the Empire had done. This was one of the problems that people like Mon Mothma and Leia Organa faced when forming the New Republic.

Again though, the New Republic had some serious issues but they are issues to be expected when founding a government, but I fail to see how "New REpublic was a disorganized mess" is worse than "Empire kills uncounted number of its own citizens"

Darth Fanboy wrote:Again though, the New Republic had some serious issues but they are issues to be expected when founding a government, but I fail to see how "New REpublic was a disorganized mess" is worse than "Empire kills uncounted number of its own citizens"

And I fail to see where you get that from in the first place.
Especially since my post, point by point effectively said that this is not the case.


What I did say is that the empire was fundamentally a better idea than the old republic and that it was just poorly executed. The rebels in turn took a bad idea and executed it worse.

If the empire is evil, the NR is just .


I simply think that a stable and strong government, even if evil is always preferable to an instable and weak one.
Although I admit that I might be biased since I have seen both a competent dictatorship, an incompetent dictatorship and an incompetent democracy in my life time and the last is by far the worst possible system.

And where exactly do you get that the NR is weak and the Empire is not?

The sole opposition group the Empire came up against... The Rebellion... THEY WERE DEFEATED BY.

The New Republic won every conflict that they faced.

So what you are saying is you prefer a mass murdering, genocidal, slaving government that has cool ships and snappy uniforms and that you actually have no thoughts of your own and just parrot what other people say.

Havok wrote:The New Republic won every conflict that they faced.

No, they didn't. The New Republic was actually dissolved twice, once following the resurrected Emperor's offensives in Dark Empire that retook most of the galaxy, and again following the Fall of Coruscant to the Yuuzhan Vong. Assuming you're lumping the Galactic Alliance in with the New Republic (and as such we can disregard the Yuuzhan Vong), their record still doesn't get much better. The GA for all intents and purposes lost the war they fought in LotF (resulting in Daala assuming leadership, hilariously enough), and lost again to Fel's Second Empire.

Of course, even saying the Rebels beat the Empire is a bit misleading, considering how many times the Big 3 had to pull their asses out of the fire, how much the Emperor manipulated the post-Endor collapse, and the fact that it was Darth Vader of all people that killed the Emperor at Endor, not the Rebels.

Military victories in a guerrilla war != political skills in leading a country


The republic, both old and new was weak in the political sense that a decentralized representative democracy on that scale just can not work.
In the republic senate, every senator was equal and hence every senator would pull toward his side. And everything had to be debated, examined, thrown out, reworked and examined again until everyone was satisfied. And with such a huge array of senators nothing could get done within a reasonable time frame.

The Empire on the other hand was a strong government in the sense that it could and would get things done. In terms of efficiency the Empire won hands down.


And the rebels, instead of learning from the past and making a more efficient state ended up being a bunch of block headed guerrillas with what seemed like no plan for what they would do after they actually won. (maybe they did not believe they would)


So once the rebels turned out to be I at least turned toward the empire and thought to my self. They were not that bad. As evil as they were, they at least knew what they were doing (most of the time, some time, from time to time).

Purple wrote:What I did say is that the empire was fundamentally a better idea than the old republic and that it was just poorly executed. The rebels in turn took a bad idea and executed it worse.

I would argue that the basic flaw in the Empire was inherent to its nature, not something that could have been "fixed" by better execution. Anyone taking over the Republic would have had to overthrow the Senate, crush the Jedi, and acquire a great army of loyal forces to back them, as Palpatine did. Under the circumstances, I see no reason to assume that any other galactic emperor would have behaved much better than Palpatine. Or had any more success in enforcing "order" in the galaxy (as Palpatine utterly failed to do, dooming the galaxy to decade after decade of civil war).

I simply think that a stable and strong government, even if evil is always preferable to an instable and weak one.

In what respect was the Old Republic unstable?

Purple wrote:The republic, both old and new was weak in the political sense that a decentralized representative democracy on that scale just can not work.

What evidence do you have for this claim?

In the republic senate, every senator was equal and hence every senator would pull toward his side. And everything had to be debated, examined, thrown out, reworked and examined again until everyone was satisfied. And with such a huge array of senators nothing could get done within a reasonable time frame.

This is not evidence. This is a personal opinion.

The Empire on the other hand was a strong government in the sense that it could and would get things done. In terms of efficiency the Empire won hands down.

What actions did the Empire take that prove that it was efficient? Some dictatorships are incredibly inefficient, so much so that it would be hard to believe how inefficient they are if it weren't true.

Purple wrote:Personally I for one will defend the empire.
Why? Because they brought stability to the galaxy.

Did they really? The Old Republic may have been a weak government, but there wasn't a major shooting war going on. Not until Palpatine showed up, engineered such a war (causing mass death), took over the government, and set up his new regime. And then proceeded to enforce that regime in ways that predictably led to rebellion and dissent because of the brutality of Palpatine's methods. Eventually the rebellion grew out of control- when Palpatine could easily have ended it by compromising on his methods and relaxing his extreme dictatorial rule at any time.

You can't give the Empire credit for ending the Clone Wars and "bringing order," because the Clone Wars were started for the sole purpose of creating the Empire. So on the contrary, the Empire brought chaos to the galaxy before it was even born. The Old Republic was, more or less, orderly; it lasted for many centuries without any large-scale galactic wars. But beginning with Palpatine's scheme to create the Empire, though, wars and chaos continued to sweep the galaxy continuously for over a hundred years afterwards.

I don't see much evidence of order, myself.

Furthermore, what we see from the EU and games like KOTOR is that slavery, social inequality, crime lords and all other sort of scum absolutely thrived under the republic. And that the republic newer did anything to change that.

Nor did the Empire. The Empire continued the practice of slavery among non-humans, continued social inequality by allowing the Rim worlds to languish, and continued to allow crime lords and such scum to thrive. Or did I miss the scene where stormtroopers kick down Jabba the Hutt's door and take him to jail?

A democratic system just is not feasible on a galactic level because of the sheer number of delegates in question and the fact that every one is going to be fallowing his own agenda and putting the good of his planet over the good of the whole.

What evidence do you have for this being true?

But what it does show is that a strong, centralized government in the galaxy is fundamentally a good idea. Especially compared with the mess that the old republic was. And the even thou the execution of it was massively flawed the galactic empire could have been done better if the leadership was more enlightened.

What man power-hungry enough to overthrow the Republic would have been enlightened enough to govern the Empire properly? It took a Sith Lord- a supremely powerful and malevolent member of a religious cult dedicated to the ideal of maximization of one's personal power at all costs- to do it.

Purple wrote:Military victories in a guerrilla war != political skills in leading a country


The republic, both old and new was weak in the political sense that a decentralized representative democracy on that scale just can not work.

Balls. It worked for twenty five thousand years. The entire Galactic Empire and post era is little more than a blip - less than a percent of the Republic's history. That's like looking at Oliver Cromwell and saying "Monarchy in England cannot work"

In the republic senate, every senator was equal and hence every senator would pull toward his side. And everything had to be debated, examined, thrown out, reworked and examined again until everyone was satisfied. And with such a huge array of senators nothing could get done within a reasonable time frame.

And yet, it's presented that were it not for Sith Juju (which became so powerful due to Divine Will of the Force), Valorum's Jedi pair would have brought the Trade Federation to heel in a day. That is a fucking model of efficiency compared to RL union disputes. That's like the Prime Minister sending two Knights of the Garter to settle the British Airways industrial dispute within the day. That's fucking astounding effectiveness.

The Empire on the other hand was a strong government in the sense that it could and would get things done. In terms of efficiency the Empire won hands down.

Most of what it got done seemed to be kicking the shit out of things. There's no reason to assume that say, the Army of Light (1000 years pre-films) couldn't do that just as efficiently. Hell, the peacetime Republic also had vast military forces, it just didn't see a need to build unified trans-galactic war machines.

And the rebels, instead of learning from the past and making a more efficient state ended up being a bunch of block headed guerrillas with what seemed like no plan for what they would do after they actually won. (maybe they did not believe they would)

So once the rebels turned out to be I at least turned toward the empire and thought to my self. They were not that bad. As evil as they were, they at least knew what they were doing (most of the time, some time, from time to time).

You realise that if we include the EU stuff that makes the New Republic into inept cocksuckers, we include the EU stuff that makes the Galactic Empire worse. Who's more foolish, the fool, or the fool he repeatedly outwits until that fool loses the entire galaxy save a thousand systems. They lose literally 99.9% of their territory and they're efficient and badass?

lost my post... will try to retype from memory
dam page expiration

Purple wrote:The republic, both old and new was weak in the political sense that a decentralized representative democracy on that scale just can not work.

It's a bit disingenuous to categorically describe the Old Republic's government, something that lasted for 25 millenia, give or take, as a "decentralized representative democracy." The Old Republic went through several phases of more or less centralized rule, though apparently nothing ever approaching what the Empire attempted. The final days of the Old Republic, in which the state possessed no appreciable armed forces and member polities could and did wage war on one another, is merely the most extreme confederated end of the spectrum. A thousand years prior, the Jedi ran the Republic as military dictators. Furthermore, it's questionable if the Old Republic was even very democratic at all (it's telling that the Empire only modified the governments of 1 in 80 member worlds to any degree to fall in line with the New Order). Quite a few member worlds were monarchies or oligarchies, quite a few of their Senators either appointed (as in the case of Padme), already the rulers of their planets (like the Organas, also hereditary monarchs), or enjoyed authority over vast swathes of territory (Palpatine/Padme, for example, represented the entire Chommel Sector, with dozens of full Republic members and tens of thousands of colonial holdings), to say nothing of the corporate representatives in the Senate, and even the Supreme Chancellor was an appointed official.

The New Republic actually bears little administrative resemblance to the Old Republic, though certainly spiritual resemblance in the form of its confederal tendencies. Indeed, Leia actually muses in, I believe Tyrant's Test, that the New Republic government was specifically designed to prevent another Palpatine from ever rising to power in the same way. Of course, as a consequence, the government on Coruscant was hopelessly bogged down and incapable of acting, but for a group that thinks local governance is best, that's not such a bad thing.

I think there's a certain streak of perverse admiration for fascism in Western, particularly American, society. The imposing uniforms, the cool weapons, the rousing martial music, they all imply strength, security, and order. They imply confidence and conformity, as opposed to the often confusing diversity of real life, full of loudly conflicting opinions.

The public cares much less about democracy than most of us are comfortable admitting. If someone overthrew the American government and declared themselves emperor? I'll bet a decent chunk of the population would go along with it, so long as they agreed with at least the public gist of his policy and there was a strong economy, order in the streets, and some internal or external boogeyman to feel protected from.

Not a large chunk of the population, mind you. Not enough to make such a coup viable. (Though that could always change.) But easily enough to keep us in Imperial apologist internet arguments forever, because it's infinitely easier when we're just talking about the movies. Movies that aren't in the business of realistically portraying the horrors of totalinarianism.

Why would someone argue that hypothetically murdering billions of civilians is justifiable? Because they're a fascist asshole. You know those kinds of people exist, and historically under the right circumstances they can be manipulated do a lot more than talk. You don't think all of them are illiterate swastika-waving neo-Nazi caricatures, do you?

Most of them are seemingly pretty normal and have no real ideology. They just post dipshit arguments on the internet about how the Empire was good, vote Republican, and beat their dog. They'll seem harmless enough until the coup comes. Or forever, if it never does. But they're still assholes.

I think there needs to be a certain degree of disassociation between states and individuals/groups who commit atrocities. Palpatine and his cronies are, without question, unrepentently evil, and they certainly did commit horrible acts (and anyone who says otherwise is, yes, a scummy asshole). But can anyone point to a single country, nation, or state, in reality or, hell, even in SW canon, that did not at some time or another commit massive, horrible atrocities? If every state that commits atrocities is "evil," then they all are.

TC Pilot wrote:I think there needs to be a certain degree of disassociation between states and individuals/groups who commit atrocities. Palpatine and his cronies are, without question, unrepentently evil, and they certainly did commit horrible acts (and anyone who says otherwise is, yes, a scummy asshole). But can anyone point to a single country, nation, or state, in reality or, hell, even in SW canon, that did not at some time or another commit massive, horrible atrocities? If every state that commits atrocities is "evil," then they all are.

Err-yes? Every state that commits atrocities is evil AT THE TIME THEY'RE DOING IT. The question is do they do that as a manner of routine operations and go 'Yeah. So what?' or does the state in question ACKNOWLEDGE those were atrocities and try to make amends?

Purple wrote: And I fail to see where you get that from in the first place.
Especially since my post, point by point effectively said that this is not the case.

Because in a thread wondering why there are so many apologists who think that the Empire was justified in its methods you said:

Purple wrote:"Personally I for one will defend the empire.
Why? Because they brought stability to the galaxy.

Which seems like something one would say if they were going to justify what the Empire did.

What I did say is that the empire was fundamentally a better idea than the old republic and that it was just poorly executed. The rebels in turn took a bad idea and executed it worse.

How is democracy and cooperation a bad idea? If anything the Rebels were the ones who had the better idea and failed in the execution. The Empire, fundamentally, was a racist genocidal war machine bent on nothing but acquiring more power and dominating every being that it could. It was founded by a Sith Lord whose ambition included the conquest of the galaxy and eventually unlocking the secrets to eternal life so that he could rule forever.

If the empire is evil, the NR is just .

Not going to get much argument from me there.

I simply think that a stable and strong government, even if evil is always preferable to an instable and weak one.
Although I admit that I might be biased since I have seen both a competent dictatorship, an incompetent dictatorship and an incompetent democracy in my life time and the last is by far the worst possible system.

I do not know where you are from, but surely no government is worse than the kind that opresses and murders its own people the way the Galactic Empire did.