Is the Jedi Order Evil?

[Lightningman_42]

Just watched this fascinating YouTube video about the flaws of the jedi:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrfrdzRvIvQ


Some of the most noteworthy problems with the jedi:

-Servants of a corrupt and useless republic.

-As "keepers of the peace", they resolved enough superficial disputes on worlds to prevent wars from breaking out, but did not bother to address the roots of conflicts, and thus were only effective at causing short-term peace.

-Out of touch with the public; the common people of the Republic. Too involved in intragalactic politics, and mostly working with the rich and powerful. Basically, out-of-touch monks who infantilized the common people, and behaved as if only they themselves (the jedi) could resolve their problems and determine what's best for them.

-Antinatalism: this is something which I do think is a huge ethical problem with the jedi order. They forbade their own members from loving anyone. Forbade them from getting involved in any kind of romance, sexual relations, marriage, or procreation. Jedi did not produce children, and so how did they recruit knew members? Kidnapping Force-sensitive babies! Yeah, this obviously didn't help their public image. I've long been astounded at how the Jedi Order's leadership considered love, procreation, and development of families to be so dangerous that it would be better for them to only "adopt" other people's babies, even if it comes at the cost of a repulsive "babie-stealers" reputation.

-Attempted to arrest Chancellor Palpatine by force, which allowed him (a democratically-elected leader) to portray them as a power-hungry group of traitors trying to take over control of the galactic government.


So what do you all think of the jedi? How much of their negative public-image, near the end of the Clone Wars, was correct? What supposed flaws of the jedi were either incorrect or unreasonably exaggerated? Did they still do more good than bad, or was their net effect on the galaxy detrimental?

Would you like to see the Jedi Order become completely abolished? Do you agree with Luke's statement that, "It's time for the jedi to end", or would you like to see some reformed New Jedi Order with different principles? I'm curious to see what Luke and Rey, or Kylo Ren and Rey, end up doing together for the future of Force-users.

[Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]

When I first watched the films I genuinely thought it was the creator's intentions to portray them as the villains. The way that they had Vader at the beginning interrogate Princess Leia gave me the impression she was a criminal and he was like a tough policeman trying to put away scum. Especially the way he said "You are part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor!"

As well as that, the "Imperial March" music gave me that impression.

I now know that this is not the case, but I still like to think that the Empire are the good guys.

[brimstoneSalad]

I think there was a whole website dedicated to this, can't find it now.

I find the arguments credible. The empire did bring order; the harm they did seemed limited to collateral damage in fighting the rebels. Although there have been some mentions of life generally being harder under the empire for vague reasons.

Here's some conservative or libertarian site with a blog on the issue:
https://fee.org/resources/whats-so-bad-about-the-galactic-empire/

Liberty.

The only answer to this question that actually makes sense is that the Empire is an awful place to live because its people lack individual freedom.

Citizens of the Empire aren't secure in their possessions and property. They can't go where they want without being stopped by Imperial forces. They can be imprisoned or forced into an army without a trial or the opportunity to say no, and restrictions on trade and commerce make them poor and condemn them to getting what they need from dangerous black markets, smugglers, and gangsters.

If the Rebellion stands against that, then they are true heroes.

Pretty vague, and sounds more ideological than pragmatic.

Also, a Screenrant post with some good summaries of the issues favoring the empire:
https://screenrant.com/star-wars-reasons-galactic-empire-darth-vader-actually-good-guys/

I'm not very interested in Star Wars, but it's one of the most interesting discussions to get into and might be a good way to introduce people to political and ethical concepts.

[NonZeroSum]

I think there was a whole website dedicated to this, can't find it now.

I find the arguments credible. The empire did bring order; the harm they did seemed limited to collateral damage in fighting the rebels. Although there have been some mentions of life generally being harder under the empire for vague reasons.

It's playing around with alternative realities within the Star Wars universe, Lucas obviously wrote a script reflecting Hitlers rise to power, the gifting of chancellorship by a meek ruling class and disorganised/conned plebs. "The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers." The Empire is in a constant state of war because it needs to justify its corrupt takeover of all power/resources. Rogue One's guerrilla resistance was aces.

Star Wars, Capitalism and “Benign Dictatorship”
Kevin Carson | December 22nd, 2016
https://c4ss.org/content/47334

In what seems to be becoming an annual tradition, neoconservative grey eminence Bill Kristol tweeted in December 18, “When I first saw Star Wars in 1977, I was inclined to root for the empire. 25 years later, @JVLast proved me right.” Kristol authored a similar series of tweets in October of last year, and praised the same 2002 article by Jonathan Last. “Needless to say, I was rooting for the Empire from the first minute. It was a benevolent liberal empire, after all.” “No evidence Empire was ‘evil.’ A liberal regime w meritocracy, upward mobility.”

In the referenced Weekly Standard article (“The Case for the Empire,” May 15, 2002), Last argues that the old Galactic Republic was a “failed state” that was too big too be governable, and (in Amidala’s words) “no longer function[ed].” As an example of its ineffectiveness, Last mentions its inability to stop wars between its member states. Palpatine, meanwhile, is admittedly a dictator — “but a relatively benign one, like Pinochet.” And the Empire effectively polices the former territories of the Republic, suppresses organized crime and smuggling, and makes the galaxy safe for peaceful trade again. The central value of the Empire, in Darth Vader’s words, is “to bring order to the galaxy.”

Last attempts to defend the Empire’s brutality as justifiable. Aunt Beru and Uncle Owen were executed without due process, but “they were traitors.” And much like neoconservative apologists for Truman’s atomic bombing decision, Last goes out of his way to manufacture a plausible case for believing that Alderaan, despite Leia’s assurances to the contrary, was a center of rebel activity. So Grand Moff Truman — er, Tarkin — destroyed Alderaan because, like Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it was a “legitimate military target.”

Meanwhile, at the Washington Post (“The destruction of Alderaan was completely justified,” Oct. 29, 2015), Sonny Bunch developed the parallel to Hiroshima apologetics by arguing that the attack on Alderaan was a proportional use of force. He echoes, perhaps unconsciously, the specious argument that the only alternative to Truman’s atomic bombing would have been a costly amphibious invasion of the Home Islands: “putting boots on the ground” on Alderaan would have led to high Imperial casualties. And, drawing on the Iraq precedent, he argues that an invasion would have led to regional destabilization and perhaps a Jedi-led equivalent of ISIS operating out of Alderaan.

Let’s start with the last first. To his credit Bunch, unlike a lot of neocons, at least implicitly admits that the invasion and destabilization of Iraq led directly to Al Qaeda Iraq and ISIS. But I doubt he considers just leaving Iraq alone a legitimate option, and he certainly doesn’t leave that possibility open for Alderaan. After all Alderaan has its “center of rebel activity,” just like Saddam had his ties to Bin Laden and his weapons of mass destruction. And any neoconservatism is basically the ideology of people who read Thucydides so they can, um, pleasure themselves over the destruction of Melos.

Last’s admiration for the Empire’s “meritocracy” is also typical neocon Hamiltonian nonsense. To such managerialists, any system of stratification is justified so long as it’s possible for the most cunning and driven to claw their way up through it. It doesn’t matter whether the structure of power is objectively necessary to meet human needs, or the snapshot of power and wealth distribution at any given time is just or rational — just so long as there is “social mobility.”

Of course the opposite is true. What matters is whether the wealth and power of those at the top at any given time is legitimate and obtained by just means, not whether there’s some turnover of elites in the process of time.

But most importantly, what neocons mean by “benign” or “liberal” imperialism becomes crystal clear in light of Kristol’s apology for Lucas’s Empire, and his explicit comparison of it to Pinochet’s Chile.

Pinochet, remember, is commonly praised on the “free market” right as a “benign dictator” on the grounds that, while he might have been a “political authoritarian,” he was an “economic liberal.” Think about what this framing means. Pinochet cracked down, violently and brutally, on the owners of an entire factor of production — human labor power. He literally sent soldiers into the factories and had the bosses point out labor activists, who were subsequently tortured, murdered and disappeared. But for his neocon fans, this comes down entirely on the side of Pinochet’s political authoritarianism, and leaves his economic liberalism completely untarnished. Now, imagine a regime subjecting the owners of a different factor of production — say, capital or land — to exactly the same kind of brutality for bargaining to maximize the returns on it. Do you suppose the neoconservatives would take a similarly “benign” view of it?

Never mind Pinochet. When Kristol writes of “benign” or “liberal” Empire, we know what it’s really a stand-in for. He’s really defending, under the guise of movie criticism, the “benign” Empire that forcibly integrated Iraq into neoliberal global capitalism on the Empire’s terms. Lincoln, the nineteenth century heir to Hamiltonian mercantilism, launched his Whig political career by describing his platform as short and sweet: protective tariffs, internal improvements and a national bank. For Paul Bremer, the Empire’s benign puppet dictator in prostrate postwar Iraq, the checklist for “liberal capitalism” was similarly short and sweet: “strong intellectual property rights,” selling off the economy to global finance capital, and forcible suppression of the labor federation.

In other words, the Empire — whether in Lucas’s fictionalized version or the equally ugly real-world version, both of which the neocons venerate — uses what Naomi Klein called “disaster capitalism” to forcibly impose the rule of global capital whenever they find a country that’s momentarily at its mercy. Whether it’s Pinochet installed with the help of the CIA, Bremer installed with US armored divisions, or Yeltsin’s kleptocratic regime installed by his own action of encircling the Duma with tanks and starving it out, it’s all the same. Brutal, naked power. It’s not liberal, and it’s not benign.

[Lightningman_42]

When I first watched the films I genuinely thought it was the creator's intentions to portray them as the villains. The way that they had Vader at the beginning interrogate Princess Leia gave me the impression she was a criminal and he was like a tough policeman trying to put away scum. Especially the way he said "You are part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor!"

As well as that, the "Imperial March" music gave me that impression.

I now know that this is not the case, but I still like to think that the Empire are the good guys.

I can't honestly say, one way or the other, which side was definitely the better one (morally). I do agree though that it's fascinating to entertain the notion that the Empire really was better than the Republic and the Rebel Alliance. If the Empire really was the right side, then it could mean, by extension, that Darth Vader really was a hero. Sure, he might be seen as a monster by jedi and rebels, but he was certainly dedicated to the Empire, and he cared about doing right by the galaxy and its people. It's just not clear if he really was.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, have you seen Rogue One: A Star Wars Story? If so, then how did you like that scene of Darth Vader eviscerating those treacherous rebel scum, who were stuck in a dark hallway? It was one of the best movie scenes I've ever witnessed. It was something I'd been longing to see for many years already, but I didn't expect it would actually happen! I was quite impressed that Disney had the guts to approve a scene like that, a moment where Star Wars becomes a horror-movie.

[Lightningman_42]

I think there was a whole website dedicated to this, can't find it now.

I find the arguments credible. The empire did bring order; the harm they did seemed limited to collateral damage in fighting the rebels. Although there have been some mentions of life generally being harder under the empire for vague reasons.

I'd say that there's enough reason to consider that the Empire might have been better than the prior Republic (and following Rebel Alliance), but not enough to conclude that the Empire definitely was better (with certainty). The empire did bring "order", but it's unclear how beneficial this so-called "order" really was to the Empire's citizens.
The Empire did not manage to eliminate some of the most severe evils of the galaxy, like slavery, which the corrupt and useless Old Republic effectively allowed. Tatooine, for example, had slavery during the time of the Republic, but there's no indication that it was ended by the Empire. Furthermore, there is an example of the Empire causing slavery: In Season 1 of SW Rebels (in one of the first few episodes, I think), it's revealed that the Empire is enslaving Wookiees and thrusting them into forced labor.
One other noteworthy example of the Empire's wrongdoing is with regards to genocide. In Season 3 of SW Rebels it's revealed that the Empire tried to annihilate all of the native inhabitants of Geonosis, using poison-gas weaponry. They didn't succeed, because there was a single male Geonosian who managed to survive, and protect an egg carrying an unhatched Geonosian queen. Perhaps there were other survivors, but they were not revealed.
Regarding genocide, the Empire may have been worse than the Republic in this respect, as there's no example that I'm aware of, of the Republic performing (nor allowing) any kind of genocide.

Here's some conservative or libertarian site with a blog on the issue:
https://fee.org/resources/whats-so-bad-about-the-galactic-empire/

Liberty.

The only answer to this question that actually makes sense is that the Empire is an awful place to live because its people lack individual freedom.

Citizens of the Empire aren't secure in their possessions and property. They can't go where they want without being stopped by Imperial forces. They can be imprisoned or forced into an army without a trial or the opportunity to say no, and restrictions on trade and commerce make them poor and condemn them to getting what they need from dangerous black markets, smugglers, and gangsters.

If the Rebellion stands against that, then they are true heroes.

Pretty vague, and sounds more ideological than pragmatic.

Also, a Screenrant post with some good summaries of the issues favoring the empire:
https://screenrant.com/star-wars-reasons-galactic-empire-darth-vader-actually-good-guys/

Seems interesting. I'll check out these perspectives.

I'm not very interested in Star Wars,...

This comment doesn't seem to fit well with the rest of your sentence, because...

...but it's one of the most interesting discussions to get into and might be a good way to introduce people to political and ethical concepts.

...this right here is something that makes Star Wars interesting. It involves a lot of political and ethical issues that are not clear-cut, and are quite relevant to similar, real-world events.

[brimstoneSalad]

I'm not very interested in Star Wars,...

This comment doesn't seem to fit well with the rest of your sentence, because...

...but it's one of the most interesting discussions to get into and might be a good way to introduce people to political and ethical concepts.

...this right here is something that makes Star Wars interesting. It involves a lot of political and ethical issues that are not clear-cut, and are quite relevant to similar, real-world events.

The topic you brought up, interesting with respect to Star Wars.
There are a lot of less interesting discussions like how the force works, or Kaiber(?) crystals, or whatever, or more character centered theories. Of all of the fan discussions, this one is probably the most interesting or very near (there are some people talking alien physiology or robot engineering that's kind of interesting too).

With Star Trek you get the discussions of post-money economy and the prime directive, and teleportation thought experiments.

With the Matrix obviously you get discussions of brain in vat and solipsism.

With Westworld there's AI and consciousness/mind and some ethical discussions.

There are a few other movies or shows that get brought up regularly. Overall, entertainment can be a good way to connect with people and discuss some topics like these, but the depth of the discussions can be a bit limited since fiction can only be analyzed so far before it breaks down or we run out of information... it is fiction, after all.

I didn't mean to suggest it was one of the most interesting discussions *period*.

[Lightningman_42]

There are a lot of less interesting discussions like how the force works, or Kaiber(?) crystals, or whatever, or more character centered theories. Of all of the fan discussions, this one is probably the most interesting or very near (there are some people talking alien physiology or robot engineering that's kind of interesting too).

I see. So you don't want to engage in endless speculation about Supreme Leader Snoke's "secret identity" (assuming he actually is someone else than just Snoke), nor about Rey's ancestry? I seriously couldn't care less about who Rey's parents are.

With Star Trek you get the discussions of post-money economy and the prime directive, and teleportation thought experiments.

With the Matrix obviously you get discussions of brain in vat and solipsism.

With Westworld there's AI and consciousness/mind and some ethical discussions.

There are a few other movies or shows that get brought up regularly. Overall, entertainment can be a good way to connect with people and discuss some topics like these, but the depth of the discussions can be a bit limited since fiction can only be analyzed so far before it breaks down or we run out of information... it is fiction, after all.

I didn't mean to suggest it was one of the most interesting discussions *period*.

Star Trek, Matrix, and Westworld are all great examples as well. I enjoy all of the deep philosophical themes.

[brimstoneSalad]

I see. So you don't want to engage in endless speculation about Supreme Leader Snoke's "secret identity" (assuming he actually is someone else than just Snoke), nor about Rey's ancestry? I seriously couldn't care less about who Rey's parents are.

I don't even know who these characters are. Is Snoke the ugly CGI thing from the first Disney Starwars (or was that Rogue One)? I think Rey is the girl from that movie.

The most I've read about Star Wars is those articles on whether the empire is actually the good guy and a couple entries on wookiepedia to figure out what some memes meant; I think that's about as far as I've gone into the universe.
I don't think I've seen all of the movies (or don't remember the last of the prequels, maybe fell asleep).

The first Disney one was alright. Rogue one was terrible, I was excited when I saw Donnie Yen was in it but that was a terrible disappointment because he only had one half-decent scene. Oh well.

[Lightningman_42]

I see. So you don't want to engage in endless speculation about Supreme Leader Snoke's "secret identity" (assuming he actually is someone else than just Snoke), nor about Rey's ancestry? I seriously couldn't care less about who Rey's parents are.

I don't even know who these characters are. Is Snoke the ugly CGI thing from the first Disney Starwars (or was that Rogue One)? I think Rey is the girl from that movie.

That's right. Snoke is the weird-looking Gollum & Emperor Palpatine mix. Snoke is voiced by Andy Serkis, who played Gollum in the Lord of the Rings movies. He tends to get the motion-capture roles for weird-looking creatures.

The most I've read about Star Wars is those articles on whether the Empire is actually the good guy and a couple entries on wookieepedia to figure out what some memes meant; I think that's about as far as I've gone into the universe.
I don't think I've seen all of the movies (or don't remember the last of the prequels, maybe fell asleep).

The first Disney one was alright. Rogue One was terrible, I was excited when I saw Donnie Yen was in it but that was a terrible disappointment because he only had one half-decent scene. Oh well.

The best scene of Rogue One was the ending scene, where the Empire's great law-enforcement hero boards a ship, and eviscerates a hallway full of treacherous rebel scum*. I liked what little of a role Donnie Yen had, but it sucks that he didn't have more to do. I would have loved to see a movie set in the distant past of the SW galaxy, with Donnie Yen (or any famous martial-arts expert) playing a jedi character. Just to display some spectacular fighting skills. Star Wars really needs to break away from the "beaten path" and try something new. It's like they're afraid to make a movie that isn't within the Original Trilogy's era, or resembling it.


* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxL8bVJhXCM

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, there's your "Tough Policeman" cracking down on a gang of slimy little criminals!