Poll of the Day > So why did the rebels rebel against the empire anyway?

(+) Yeah! (+)

They never really say in episode 4 except "empire bad"

They were mad about the intergalactic 1% and Space Capitalism.

Because they're ultraliberal pansys and the Empire were good old Christian boys who never did any wrong.

They were space nazis, George had a lot of inspiration from WWII

Cruddy_horse posted...

never did any wrong

What about that time they blew up Alderaan?

Water rights

Cruddy_horse posted...

Because they're ultraliberal pansys and the Empire were good old Christian boys who never did any wrong.

Make Coruscant Great Again



EclairReturns posted...

What about that time they blew up Alderaan?

You mean that hotbed of traitorous rebellion, whose leadership was at the heart of an insurrection movement for decades?

Gotta break a few eggs.

Muscles posted...

They were space nazis, George had a lot of inspiration from WWII

so jedi are jewish?

cuz the space serials it was based on didn't really care, it just had 'hehe bad guys good guys'

You just never see the empire being dickish to imperial citizens. It seems the rebels hate the empire because they are rebels and rebels are supposed to rebel against something.
But perhaps I'm taking a kids movie about space wizards too seriously.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/1/2/5/AAFUswAAEl-d.jpg

JOExHIGASHI posted...

so jedi are jewish?

Well they are the chosen people being killed by a charismatic racist tyrant that tries to take over the entire world/galaxy

How is Palpatine racist?

EclairReturns posted...

What about that time they blew up Alderaan?

It was filled with degenerate alt-lifestyle immigrants and those who held different beliefs, therefore they were not worthy of life or human rights.

#alllivesmattertho
#prolife
#inb4modded

pretty sure they were reeeeeeally brutal and ruled through fear and violence

Zareth posted...

How is Palpatine racist?

I guess it's more like specist but when other species are just as sentient as humans is there really much of a difference?

It seemed more like the rebels were against the idea of a totalitarianism government rather then because there was a specific aspect of their lifestyle that was being made miserable by Palpatine's rule.

Generally speaking, you never actually see the average galactic citizen care about who's running the show in Coruscant one way or another.

EclairReturns posted...

What about that time they blew up Alderaan?

They brought unemployment on that planet down to zero

I think in the expanded universe they go more into how the empire was anti-alien or something.

It doesn't really matter, the empire are supposed to be space nazis.

Aliens can be Sith apprentices but can't have a position in government or the military apparently

I always thought Palpatine only actually gave a shit about how useful others were to him and didn't actually care about species, but it was easier to consolidate control and exploit entire groups by stoking a sense of human superiority

After all, Thrawn's canon again, and he's a blue dude. Probably Palpatine's most trusted admiral and literally one step down from the top position in the Navy

It is a children's movie, they aren't going to show how they are bad outside of "Dark side bad, Jedi good"

JOExHIGASHI posted...

so jedi are jewish?

jewdi

Something about no taxation without representation.

Zareth posted...

You just never see the empire being dickish to imperial citizens. It seems the rebels hate the empire because they are rebels and rebels are supposed to rebel against something.
But perhaps I'm taking a kids movie about space wizards too seriously.

Watch Andor. Life under The Empire sucked.

Akuryu posted...

Watch Andor. Life under The Empire sucked.

So it took them over 40 years to finally show it. Pathetic.

Zareth posted...

So it took them over 40 years to finally show it. Pathetic.

they showed it plenty of times in the old canon, and i'm pretty sure they showed it in the disney continuity in star wars rebels pretty soon after disney bought them out

you just have to realize there's more to star wars than the movies alone

JOExHIGASHI posted...

so jedi are jewish?

The Jedi are basically ronin crossed with Buddhist monks. Because that's what the characters essentially were when Lucas stole them from The Hidden Fortress.



papercup posted...

I think in the expanded universe they go more into how the empire was anti-alien or something.

It was the EU explanation for why there are more aliens in the prequels than the original films. The real answer being that it was more difficult to do make-up and costuming in the 70s/80s while shitty CGI made it easier to cram aliens in pretty much everywhere in the prequels, but that's an out-of-universe explanation, not an in-universe one.

It's similar to how the EU pushed the idea that there was a galactic recession once the Empire took over because the ships looked cleaner and sleeker in the prequels but clunkier and more beat up in the original movies (even though that was stupid because most of the ships you see in the original films are being used by the Rebellion - which by definition should be using older, more obsolete tech they've scrounged rather than top-of-the-line tech).

But the expanded universe also no longer exists as canon, so it doesn't really matter what reasons they came up with. Because they no longer count.

agesboy posted...

I always thought Palpatine only actually gave a shit about how useful others were to him and didn't actually care about species, but it was easier to consolidate control and exploit entire groups by stoking a sense of human superiority

After all, Thrawn's canon again, and he's a blue dude. Probably Palpatine's most trusted admiral and literally one step down from the top position in the Navy

Even in the prequels, you literally see one of Palp's direct apprentices is an alien, and he's constantly palling around with the blue alien dude who is clearly corrupt as fuck (even if he doesn't know Palp is Sith, he's absolutely helping him manipulate the Senate).

Again, the only real worthwhile canonical evidence that the Empire was racist was that most of the Imperials you see were human. But by that standard the Rebellion is also racist because outside of a couple tokens (mostly just Itsa Trapman and Replacement Chewbacca Guy), they're almost entirely human as well.

Lucas definitely relied too much on "hey come on guys they're space nazis obviously they're evil and the rebellion is good" for the movies, but I think for the movies, that was fine. It's not like it was an incorrect assumption, and both continuities are there if you want to look deeper for specifics about life under imperial rule

It's not like Star Wars was incredibly original or anything

Maybe I've read the expanded universe too recently from old Canon, but you guys have some details wrong.
It was about aliens. The rebels fought for freedom for all.
Thrawn was hidden away cause he was blue. The emperor wanted someone inside pretty much, and you gotta have an alien for that. Just like Mara being female but her all tucked away as well

i am pretty sure rebels thrawn does not hide himself away and mara does not exist in canon yet

The Empire is largely inspired by colonial Britain, Nazi Germany and cold war America along with a smattering of other influences (Shogunate Japan, Imperial Rome, Bush Jr).

The prevailing aesthetic of the Empire in the films is the dominance of military culture. It's a state ruled by the military and whose only representatives on screen are members of the military, who are devoid of humanity or mercy. The creation of the Empire is tied to the creation of a standing army, in a war between two forces largely lacking humanity in a morally ambiguous war (at least in the films).

Lucas's politics in Star Wars can largely be characterized as "pro war, anti military". The Empire does not use its military to enforce its evil agenda. The Empire is evil because its military exists at all. The Empire is a critique of military propaganda and hero worship. You can't ask "what if the Empire used it's power for good" because it is so evil on its face and its power is tied to that.

Star Wars argues that nations like this can only be evil. The only good militaries are the purely defensive versions created by necessity.

He was completely non existent in 4, 5 and 6. How is that not hidden? Most did not know of his existence.

pedro45 posted...

How is that not hidden?

not being shown in the movies from luke's point of view does not mean he is purposefully hidden narratively, though? thrawn wasn't even conceptualized at the time of the movies, and it's entirely plausible he was always just stationed on a different front than where luke was attacking. it's a galactic war and the empire had a lot of territory to defend

Oh my god Thrawn fucking sucks so goddamn bad

He's the OC of every teenage boy who's just old enough to think Jedi are lame

Blightzkrieg posted...

The Empire is largely inspired by colonial Britain, Nazi Germany and cold war America along with a smattering of other influences (Shogunate Japan, Imperial Rome, Bush Jr).

The prevailing aesthetic of the Empire in the films is the dominance of military culture. It's a state ruled by the military and whose only representatives on screen are members of the military, who are devoid of humanity or mercy. The creation of the Empire is tied to the creation of a standing army, in a war between two forces largely lacking humanity in a morally ambiguous war (at least in the films).

Lucas's politics in Star Wars can largely be characterized as "pro war, anti military". The Empire does not use its military to enforce its evil agenda. The Empire is evil because its military exists at all. The Empire is a critique of military propaganda and hero worship. You can't ask "what if the Empire used it's power for good" because it is so evil on its face and its power is tied to that.

Star Wars argues that nations like this can only be evil. The only good militaries are the purely defensive versions created by necessity.

You just spent more time writing this post than Lucas ever spent thinking about those things.

He used Nazi imagery and style (as lifted from things like Triumph of the Will) because it was short hand for "bad guys", and he isn't even remotely subtle. He wasn't trying to convey complex political messages, he was trying to homage Flash Gordon serials from the 30s (just like Indiana Jones is homaging pulp adventure serials from the 30s, and American Grafitti is Lucas getting nostalgic about being a teenager).

People have spent years writing books and articles about the underlying philosophy of Star Wars, but it's almost always a case of reading far more into something than was ever really there. And then Lucas agreeing with other people's interpretations after the fact because it makes him look like the genius people keep telling him he is.

The original Star Wars is what you get when you throw a samurai film, WWII dogfighting footage, and Flash Gordon into a pot and stir.

The prequel trilogy is what you get after a crazy old man spends 30 years being told how much of a genius he is, and then tries to write a more complex and symbolic narrative. But half-assed because he's not actually a genius, and was too lazy to spend more than a week or so writing the script.

Not knowing much about star wars lore, it was because the empire was a generic imperialist dictatorship that was just interested in conquering and ethnic cleansing, as they viewed non-human races as inferior and often enslaved them. Sometimes it was in reference to Nazi Germany, sometimes it was in reference to American imperialism.

The rebels were pro-democracy. The Jedi were basically liberals who were complacent and helped push Anakin to the dark side with their rules.

You can sum it all up by looking at Papatine, who at the end of the day had no real ideology or goals beyond more power.

Yellow posted...

they viewed non-human races as inferior and often enslaved them.

None of this is shown in the original trilogy at all.

Zareth posted...

None of this is shown in the original trilogy at all.
Well the one guy does refer to bounty hunters as "scum" but then again there are just as many humans and robots as there are aliens in that scene.

Palpatine only cared about power, but used racism (speciesism) as a means to do that.

https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Speciesism

Although the Galactic Emperor Palpatine was not himself speciesist, he nonetheless encouraged it in the Empire due to viewing it as facilitating his control over the galaxy.[6] It was thanks to speciesism that Palpatine appealed to Wilhuff Tarkin early in his career, given Tarkin's Humanocentrism tendencies.[7]

Again, none of that is from the original trilogy.

Zareth posted...

Again, none of that is from the original trilogy.

Sure it did. The empire didn't employ non-humans. This was established all along anyway, whether it was on screen or not. George didn't come up with this just for the prequels.

Yellow posted...

Sure it did. The empire didn't employ non-humans.

See PO's previous comments about alien effects

Ok. Does it matter if it was written earlier or later? Anything written by Lucas is the star wars universe as far as I'm concerned.

Also is PO arguing that the empire wasn't racist? That's definitely not true.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

You just spent more time writing this post than Lucas ever spent thinking about those things.

He used Nazi imagery and style (as lifted from things like Triumph of the Will) because it was short hand for "bad guys", and he isn't even remotely subtle. He wasn't trying to convey complex political messages, he was trying to homage Flash Gordon serials from the 30s (just like Indiana Jones is homaging pulp adventure serials from the 30s, and American Grafitti is Lucas getting nostalgic about being a teenager).

People have spent years writing books and articles about the underlying philosophy of Star Wars, but it's almost always a case of reading far more into something than was ever really there. And then Lucas agreeing with other people's interpretations after the fact because it makes him look like the genius people keep telling him he is.

The original Star Wars is what you get when you throw a samurai film, WWII dogfighting footage, and Flash Gordon into a pot and stir.

The prequel trilogy is what you get after a crazy old man spends 30 years being told how much of a genius he is, and then tries to write a more complex and symbolic narrative. But half-assed because he's not actually a genius, and was too lazy to spend more than a week or so writing the script.

I can't help but completely concur.

I don't even think imperial speciesism exists in the new canon at all, movies or otherwise. It's completely a legends thing.

90% of the Star Wars galaxy population is human, it's more or less that straightforward.

They started painting all the droids the same color

Also idk how you can watch the prequels and come away with "this person doesn't have any real political views in here".

The views expressed in Star Wars are childish and simplistic by nature, because of the nature of the story and it's target audience (ten year old boys). But they are definitely there.

Zareth posted...

Again, none of that is from the original trilogy.

Ok, lets just focus on the original trilogy and nothing else... The Empire develops a planet destroying weapon, then uses it on an Imperial planet, killing billions of Imperial citizens. Men, women, children, and presumably, a bunch of space dogs and cats. That's pretty evil.

If the US President nukes an entire State because he's having a bad day, we will probably have some rebels. Well... depending on the State I guess. Maybe Alderaan was space Florida?

Yellow posted...

Also is PO arguing that the empire wasn't racist? That's definitely not true.

No, PO pointed out that by the logic of the films alone, the Rebellion would also be racist. Because apart from a couple token aliens, they don't have aliens in positions of power either.

Aliens not being on camera in positions of power doesn't necessarily mean much when you're talking about films made at a time where costuming and special effects meant you weren't going to include all that many aliens no matter what.

There's a reason why the original films cram most of their aliens into scenes that exist sort of separately from the rest of the film (ie, the Cantina and Jabba's Palace). Because it made it easier to handle the special effects and costuming for most of the rest of the movie, and meant you didn't have a ridiculous alien walking through serious scenes and making things look goofy (see also why people are annoyed by the Special Editions inserting random shit into scenes just because). Most of the time you'd get Chewbacca and a couple droids in any given scene and literally everyone else was human. Because that was what about the extent of what you could do in the 1970s, and because it works better for the story being told (or to put it another way, AotC did not need a random 1950s diner scene with a fat alien in it).

At no point do the films actually show aliens being oppressed (at least not any more than humans are also oppressed), or explicitly say it's a thing. It's just what people infer from the lack of aliens. But there are out-of-universe reasons for that.

About the only directly implied racism in the original films is towards droids (with them not being allowed in the Cantina).

Most of the narrative that the Empire was racist comes from the EU, and the EU is essentially fanfiction.



Akuryu posted...

Ok, lets just focus on the original trilogy and nothing else... The Empire develops a planet destroying weapon, then uses it on an Imperial planet, killing billions of Imperial citizens. Men, women, children, and presumably, a bunch of space dogs and cats. That's pretty evil.

If the US President nukes an entire State because he's having a bad day, we will probably have some rebels. Well... depending on the State I guess. Maybe Alderaan was space Florida?

Hiroshima.

Nagasaki.

Don't act like the US never invented super-weapons to "keep the peace".