8 minutes ago, Archlyte said:The tension between the ideal and their personalities is interesting to me, not a problem.
It is also the simple result of the Jedi being nothing more than mortal, nondivine beings. The whole "But they're not PERFECT, so they can't exist or deserve no respect!" thing makes me mad. Would you rather have NO galactic peacekeeping order? The Jedi do the best they can. Who can do more than that?
Sorry, LG rant over.
1 hour ago, Mindless Philosopher said:It is also the simple result of the Jedi being nothing more than mortal, nondivine beings. The whole "But they're not PERFECT, so they can't exist or deserve no respect!" thing makes me mad. Would you rather have NO galactic peacekeeping order? The Jedi do the best they can. Who can do more than that?
Sorry, LG rant over.
Yes! Man I feel like this is so important what you said. I wish there was a Super Like button.
I still need to sit down and watch all the prequel movies again but there is this trope or urban legend that the Jedi deserved what they got with Order 66. Did I just not see something in those movies? Are there Jedi doing things like taking bribes or killing people for fun? The republic had become corrupt according to the lore but wasn't that mainly Palpatine's machinations at work? Was it really the whole republic or just a few bad apples? I feel like this idea has been perpetuated by people who are uncomfortable with the Jedi code and ideals as some sort of an explanation as to why the Jedi need to go. Thank you MP
2 hours ago, Archlyte said:I still need to sit down and watch all the prequel movies again but there is this trope or urban legend that the Jedi deserved what they got with Order 66. Did I just not see something in those movies? Are there Jedi doing things like taking bribes or killing people for fun? The republic had become corrupt according to the lore but wasn't that mainly Palpatine's machinations at work?
For me at least, it's not so much that they deserved it, but rather they brought it upon themselves by failing to live up to the values they espoused. The Order had decayed before Palpatine became supreme chancellor, and we see a lot of this in Anakin's character development throughout the prequels.
As a kid on Tatooine, Anakin believed the Jedi were like superheroes, helping people around the Galaxy, laws and regulations be damned. He believed wholeheartedly that Qui-Gon was on Tatooine to free slaves, because that was his idea of what a Jedi should be. The Council, however, had no intentions of doing so, because it would be against the law and cause unnecessary chaos. As Anakin grew up, he came to realize that the Jedi Council's top priority was not really "GOOD," but "ORDER," as is the nature of the Light Side. GOOD and ORDER often align in Star Wars, but not always, as Anakin's slavery demonstrates. In fact, it could be argued that in the OT, the Rebels represent CHAOS, but as Rogue One shows, CHAOS isn't always GOOD either.
It is precisely because the Jedi Order obsessed over ORDER while claiming to uphold GOOD that Anakin eventually became disillusioned with the Jedi and allied with Palpatine.
22 hours ago, Nivrap said:For me at least, it's not so much that they deserved it, but rather they brought it upon themselves by failing to live up to the values they espoused. The Order had decayed before Palpatine became supreme chancellor, and we see a lot of this in Anakin's character development throughout the prequels.
As a kid on Tatooine, Anakin believed the Jedi were like superheroes, helping people around the Galaxy, laws and regulations be damned. He believed wholeheartedly that Qui-Gon was on Tatooine to free slaves, because that was his idea of what a Jedi should be. The Council, however, had no intentions of doing so, because it would be against the law and cause unnecessary chaos. As Anakin grew up, he came to realize that the Jedi Council's top priority was not really "GOOD," but "ORDER," as is the nature of the Light Side. GOOD and ORDER often align in Star Wars, but not always, as Anakin's slavery demonstrates. In fact, it could be argued that in the OT, the Rebels represent CHAOS, but as Rogue One shows, CHAOS isn't always GOOD either.
It is precisely because the Jedi Order obsessed over ORDER while claiming to uphold GOOD that Anakin eventually became disillusioned with the Jedi and allied with Palpatine.
I don't know that the movies really support this hypothesis though Nivrap. Where is this information coming from because to be honest we don't get to see much of anything going on except for the foreground characters. I think people are filling in the blanks here with stuff they like based on how they perceive the precepts of the Jedi order. Well I know I couldn't live up to that code so no one could. Confirmation bias at work here I think. I don't believe the Jedi failed so much as they were defeated. The Sith goal was to get revenge and be dominant again, the Jedi had to be defeated for this to happen, but defeat does not automatically mean the Jedi were corrupt/stupid/incompetent. Their foe was brilliant and aptly used the Dark Side and cunning to his benefit. If anything maybe they were guilty of being ignorant of the dark power that was threatening them, but again that is more about Palpatine than them. To have won the Jedi would have had to have been paranoid.
On 10/12/2017 at 11:56 AM, Archlyte said:Yes! Man I feel like this is so important what you said. I wish there was a Super Like button.
I still need to sit down and watch all the prequel movies again but there is this trope or urban legend that the Jedi deserved what they got with Order 66. Did I just not see something in those movies? Are there Jedi doing things like taking bribes or killing people for fun? The republic had become corrupt according to the lore but wasn't that mainly Palpatine's machinations at work? Was it really the whole republic or just a few bad apples? I feel like this idea has been perpetuated by people who are uncomfortable with the Jedi code and ideals as some sort of an explanation as to why the Jedi need to go. Thank you MP
Yeah, based on the movies, it was, at least partially, due to Palp's machinations. People decry the Jedi for leading the clone army, but they seem to forget that Palp put that in motion. He basically pushed them into a corner, where the only way they could save themselves, and protect the people they felt obligated to do so, was to pick up that gun laying there on the ground (a gun he secretly left there specifically for that purpose). Then, when the cornered person shoots in defense of innocent people, others are somehow pointing the finger at him, and accusing him of being violent and corrupt. It makes no real sense to me.
The Jedi might not have been perfect, but they were hardly a terrible organization that was bent on galactic domination or anything. They were press ganged into the war by politics (politics being actively manipulated by Palpatine), and their general belief in protecting the innocent. And when you have billions of droids in a galaxy spanning droid army, invading systems and occupying planets that had done nothing to do them, you don't just sit there and let them deal with it. That's not a "good" choice, and it's definitely not a better choice than trying to defend the people who were caught in the crossfire.
31 minutes ago, Archlyte said:I don't know that the movies really support this hypothesis though Nivrap. Where is this information coming from because to be honest we don't get to see much of anything going on except for the foreground characters. I think people are filling in the blanks here with stuff they like based on how they perceive the precepts of the Jedi order. Well I know I couldn't live up to that code so no one could. Confirmation bias at work here I think. I don't believe the Jedi failed so much as they were defeated. The Sith goal was to get revenge and be dominant again, the Jedi had to be defeated for this to happen, but defeat does not automatically mean the Jedi were corrupt/stupid/incompetent. Their foe was brilliant and aptly used the Dark Side and cunning to his benefit. If anything maybe they were guilty of being ignorant of the dark power that was threatening them, but again that is more about Palpatine than them. To have won the Jedi would have had to have been paranoid.
Not to mention that Tatooine was in Hutt Cartel space, which I believe is
outside the Republic control
right? I might not be correct, but I was under the impression that Hutt space was it's own "sovereign" territory. So saying that the Jedi are bad and corrupt because they didn't free all the slaves while they were stranded on Tatooine, is like blaming two Army soldiers who are stuck in North Korea, and are just trying to get home, for not liberating the entire country while they were there.
1. It's beyond the scope of what they could do.
2. It's outside their legal sphere of authority.
3. It's just WAY more complicated than that. The only way to stop slavery on that scale, would be open conflict, which is what people try and say is why the Jedi were bad/corrupt. So they can't win for losing here.
6 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:Not to mention that Tatooine was in Hutt Cartel space, which I believe is outside the Republic control right? I might not be correct, but I was under the impression that Hutt space was it's own "sovereign" territory. So saying that the Jedi are bad and corrupt because they didn't free all the slaves while they were stranded on Tatooine, is like blaming two Army soldiers who are stuck in North Korea, and are just trying to get home, for not liberating the entire country while they were there.
1. It's beyond the scope of what they could do.2. It's outside their legal sphere of authority.
3. It's just WAY more complicated than that. The only way to stop slavery on that scale, would be open conflict, which is what people try and say is why the Jedi were bad/corrupt. So they can't win for losing here.
Nah, Tatooine was part of the Republic. In Eeisode 1, Padmé starts to comment that on the Republic anti-slavery laws when Shmi Skywalker cuts her off, saying that the Republic doesn't exist out there. Why would Padmé, who is a well-educated politician, bring up Republic anti-slavery laws if Tatooine wasn't in the Republic? And Shmi doesn't say that Tatooine is outside the Republic, she says it's outside the Republic's reach. Big difference.
So, yes, the Jedi were allowing slavery to exist on a Republic world.
3 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:Nah, Tatooine was part of the Republic. In Eeisode 1, Padmé starts to comment that on the Republic anti-slavery laws when Shmi Skywalker cuts her off, saying that the Republic doesn't exist out there. Why would Padmé, who is a well-educated politician, bring up Republic anti-slavery laws if Tatooine wasn't in the Republic? And Shmi doesn't say that Tatooine is outside the Republic, she says it's outside the Republic's reach. Big difference.
So, yes, the Jedi were allowing slavery to exist on a Republic world.
Why would Padme, a teenager who had barely been in office on her one little planet, be familiar with the entirety of Republic reach? It sounds very much like something a naive, clueless young person would say.
And you used two different phrases for what Shmi said, both of which imply that it is indeed outside the Republic's sphere of influence.
Just now, KungFuFerret said:Why would Padme, a teenager who had barely been in office on her one little planet, be familiar with the entirety of Republic reach? It sounds very much like something a naive, clueless young person would say.
And you used two different phrases for what Shmi said, both of which imply that it is indeed outside the Republic's sphere of influence.
There's naive, and then there's not knowing whether you're inside the Republic or not, when that is of vital importance to your survival, and would surely have been at least discussed among the group.
39 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:Nah, Tatooine was part of the Republic. In Eeisode 1, Padmé starts to comment that on the Republic anti-slavery laws when Shmi Skywalker cuts her off, saying that the Republic doesn't exist out there. Why would Padmé, who is a well-educated politician, bring up Republic anti-slavery laws if Tatooine wasn't in the Republic? And Shmi doesn't say that Tatooine is outside the Republic, she says it's outside the Republic's reach. Big difference.
So, yes, the Jedi were allowing slavery to exist on a Republic world.
34 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:Why would Padme, a teenager who had barely been in office on her one little planet, be familiar with the entirety of Republic reach? It sounds very much like something a naive, clueless young person would say.
And you used two different phrases for what Shmi said, both of which imply that it is indeed outside the Republic's sphere of influence.
31 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:There's naive, and then there's not knowing whether you're inside the Republic or not, when that is of vital importance to your survival, and would surely have been at least discussed among the group.
Stan, KunfuFerret is correct here. Tatooine was not a Republic world. It was a part of Hutt Space. This was clearely stated by QuiGon before they even landed on Tatooine. Padme was being naive, believing that the Republic had influence out that far, when it didn't.
4 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:
This was clearely stated by QuiGon before they even landed on Tatooine.
No, it's not. He says the Hutts control it. In the same exchange they also mention the Trade Federation controlling worlds, and the TF is very much part of the Republic. So a particular group controlling a world doesn't mean it's outside the Republic.
3 minutes ago, Stan Fresh said:No, it's not. He says the Hutts control it. In the same exchange they also mention the Trade Federation controlling worlds, and the TF is very much part of the Republic. So a particular group controlling a world doesn't mean it's outside the Republic.
Yes, it is. Tattoine was a Hutt-controlled world outside of Republic jurisdiction. "Controlled by the Hutts" equates to being a part of Hutt Space. The Hutts governed Tatooine. They ruled it . It was under their domain, not the Republic's. The Trade Federation has members in the Senate. The Hutts do not. The Hutts have their own territory which is sovereign territory outside of Reprublic space. Hutt Controlled worlds were not part of the Republic. They were subject to Hutt laws, not Republic laws.
49 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:Yes, it is. Tattoine was a Hutt-controlled world outside of Republic jurisdiction. "Controlled by the Hutts" equates to being a part of Hutt Space. The Hutts governed Tatooine. They ruled it . It was under their domain, not the Republic's. The Trade Federation has members in the Senate. The Hutts do not. The Hutts have their own territory which is sovereign territory outside of Reprublic space. Hutt Controlled worlds were not part of the Republic. They were subject to Hutt laws, not Republic laws.
Not true. Tatooine is incredibly close to Naboo, which is a Republic planet, so distance is not the problem. The Hutts rule Tatooine like the Mafia owned Chicago. The law can't reach them, and Tatooine is so worthless that the Republic doesn't care to govern it. It's like that planet in the Obi-Wan and Anakin comics; it's a Republic world, but they didn't give a **** about the civil war occurring on its surface until Obi-Wan told them that the planet was rich in Tibana gas.
2 hours ago, Archlyte said:I don't know that the movies really support this hypothesis though Nivrap. Where is this information coming from because to be honest we don't get to see much of anything going on except for the foreground characters. I think people are filling in the blanks here with stuff they like based on how they perceive the precepts of the Jedi order.
Anakin's character development spans not only Ep. I, but Ep. II and III as well. Either it was an intentional plot point or just an incredibly lucky recurring coincidence that Anakin talks about his relationship with governance in all 3 movies. In Phantom Menace, he believed that the Jedi were serving the greater good. In Attack of the Clones, he and Padme resent the Republic's corruption and inability to act decisively, and decide to act on their own, and in Revenge of the Sith he comes to truly believe that the Jedi are pawns of the corrupt government.
9 minutes ago, Nivrap said:Not true. Tatooine is incredibly close to Naboo, which is a Republic planet, so distance is not the problem. The Hutts rule Tatooine like the Mafia owned Chicago. The law can't reach them, and Tatooine is so worthless that the Republic doesn't care to govern it. It's like that planet in the Obi-Wan and Anakin comics; it's a Republic world, but they didn't give a **** about the civil war occurring on its surface until Obi-Wan told them that the planet was rich in Tibana gas.
Nope. While Tattooine is astograhically close to Naboo, that does not make it a Republic world. It was still a Hutt world, much like Kitan, and other Hutt worlds. It was not a member of the Republic, and was outside of Republic jurisdiction.
Edited by Tramp Graphics4 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:Nope. While Tattooine is astograhically close to Naboo, that does not make it a Republic world. It was still a Hutt world, much like Kitan, and other Hutt worlds. It was not a member of the Republic, and was outside of Republic jurisdiction.
Can you provide a quote from the movies to back that up?
8 hours ago, Nivrap said:Anakin's character development spans not only Ep. I, but Ep. II and III as well. Either it was an intentional plot point or just an incredibly lucky recurring coincidence that Anakin talks about his relationship with governance in all 3 movies. In Phantom Menace, he believed that the Jedi were serving the greater good. In Attack of the Clones, he and Padme resent the Republic's corruption and inability to act decisively, and decide to act on their own, and in Revenge of the Sith he comes to truly believe that the Jedi are pawns of the corrupt government.
Yeah but that is Anakin, who is being manipulated by Palpatine, as is Padme when she was Queen of Naboo because he was exerting behind the scenes pressure to get her to get rid of Valorum. I agree with you that Anakin certainly had doubts about the Jedi, but don't think that it is ever demonstrated that he is right.
3 hours ago, Stan Fresh said:Can you provide a quote from the movies to back that up?
The movies don't draw a map for us that shows exactly which planets are under control of different groups. But the movie does tell us that the world is under Hutt rule, and that the Republic has does not exist on Tatooine, and that Republic credits are no good on the planet. All of this is enough evidence to at least imply that Tatooine is not part of the Galactic Republic. More evidence than the movies provide for Tatooine being part of the Republic. And if you look into the Expanded Universe, plenty of sources tell us that Tatooine was not a member of the Republic, including the old Star Wars Databank (Not sure if it still states that, however).
Even if Tatooine weren't part of the Republic, it's still on the very outer edge of the Republic, with no Republic presence on the planet. You can hardly blame the Jedi, who only numbered 10,000, for not stopping slavery across the entirety of a heavily populated galaxy. And on such distant worlds as Tatooine and a few others, it's pretty understandable how it would go unnoticed by the galaxy as a whole.
Edit - Current official, canon Star Wars Databank entry:
"A harsh desert world orbiting twin suns in the galaxy’s Outer Rim, Tatooine is a lawless place ruled by Hutt gangsters." Also, the Galactic Republic is not among the "Affiliations" listed for Tatooine in the Databank, but the Hutt Clan is.
Also, Qui-Gon in The Phantom Menace makes reference of "If he had been born in the Republic..." Which straight up tells us Tatooine is not part of the Republic.
Edited by Underachiever5996 minutes ago, Underachiever599 said:But the movie does tell us that the world is under Hutt rule,
No, only that the Hutts control it. The same way the Trade Federation controls planets. Doesn't make them the rulers. A crime family can be in de facto control of something while there is a legitimate, yet ineffective, government.
1 minute ago, Stan Fresh said:No, only that the Hutts control it. The same way the Trade Federation controls planets. Doesn't make them the rulers. A crime family can be in de facto control of something while there is a legitimate, yet ineffective, government.
Ah, right. It was The Clone Wars movie that outright states that the Hutts control that planet, not the Republic. It was sort of the driving plot of that movie. And, of course, the Star Wars Databank, from the official Star Wars website, does outright state that Tatooine is under Hutt rule.
Edited by Underachiever59912 hours ago, Stan Fresh said:No, only that the Hutts control it. The same way the Trade Federation controls planets. Doesn't make them the rulers. A crime family can be in de facto control of something while there is a legitimate, yet ineffective, government.
And, as @Underachiever599 stated, Qui Gon even said that "Had Anakin been born in the Republic, they would have identified him early." He is clearly stating that Tatooine is not a part of the Republic. If it were, Anakin would have been identified as Force Sensitive as a baby.
7 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:And, as @Underachiever599 stated, Qui Gon even said that "Had Anakin been born in the Republic, they would have identified him early." He is clearly stating that Tatooine is not a part of the Republic. If it were, Anakin would have been identified as Force Sensitive as a baby.
We don't know where Anakin was born, though. Could have been another planet. It would fit what Anakin tells Qui-Gon about being sold to Gardulla.
Just now, Stan Fresh said:We don't know where Anakin was born, though. Could have been another planet. It would fit what Anakin tells Qui-Gon about being sold to Gardulla.
Yes, we do. The movie clearly establishes that Anakin and his mother have been on Tattooine since at least before Anakin was born. Shmi was property of Gardulla the Hutt before Watto, and Gardulla lived on Tattooine. We see her next to Jabba during the Pod Race sequence.
1 minute ago, Tramp Graphics said:Yes, we do. The movie clearly establishes that Anakin and his mother have been on Tattooine since at least before Anakin was born. Shmi was property of Gardulla the Hutt before Watto, and Gardulla lived on Tattooine. We see her next to Jabba during the Pod Race sequence.
That doesn't mean they started out on Tatooine. Someone sold them to Gardulla, after all. They could have come from anywhere. At least Episode 1 doesn't definitely establish Tatooine as Anakin's birthplace.
Just now, Stan Fresh said:That doesn't mean they started out on Tatooine. Someone sold them to Gardulla, after all. They could have come from anywhere. At least Episode 1 doesn't definitely establish Tatooine as Anakin's birthplace.
Someone may have sold Shmi to Gardulla. However, Anakin started life enslaved to Gardulla. Gardulla is the only other master before Watto Anakin ever had.