Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
In Star Wars, This Neocon Prefers The Empire  
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8530 posts, RR: 11
Posted (11 years 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2740 times:


Apparently, if the State does it in the name of Order and Security, it's okay.

(My comments are in bold, but my summation is not. Quotes from the article are "in quotation marks").

Palpatine is an esoteric Straussian. And a benign dictator, "like Pinochet."

"It's a dictatorship people can do business with. They collect taxes and patrol the skies. They try to stop organized crime (in the form of the smuggling rings run by the Hutts). The Empire has virtually no effect on the daily life of the average, law-abiding citizen."

During the Cold War, it sure seems like there were plenty on the Right who never met a dictator that they couldn't do business with. Plenty on the Left, too, who freely gave away American wealth to support them, in the glorious cause of "the people," or, "the children."

The Empire is a meritocracy, unlike the elitist, divine-right Jedi. Witness Captain Piett's quick promotion from captain to admiral after Ozzel's early demise.

The Empire has manners and decorum. Note that Vader didn't even refer to the infamous Boba Fett by his name, just, "bounty hunter." And the author suspects that when Boba Fett calls Han Solo "Captain Solo," it's because he was a graduate of the Academy, the Imperial equivalent of West Point. Disregarding the fact that Han Solo owned and captained his own spacecraft.

I just disagree with this point. The only person Vader ever would have to use a title for would be old Palpy, not some bounty hunter, even Fett. And why would Fett regard Solo, a deserter, as still being worth his comission? I think that the author is a typical "patriot" who places more weight on people who serve the State, especially when they fight It's wars.

Darth Vader, to Luke Skywalker: "There is no escape. Don't make me destroy you... Join me, and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy." Obviously, the real impulse for the Dark Side and the Empire isn't "slaves or destruction or 'evil.' It's order."

And that is supposed to justify tyranny and the subjugation of liberty?

Aunt Beru and Uncle Owen weren't given due process of law, but they deserved what was coming to them because they aided the rebellion by hiding Luke and harboring two fugitive droids. Clearly they were traitors to the State.

Grand Moff Tarkin's destruction of Alderaan would've been evil, if the planet was genuinely peaceful and had no weapons. But we only have Leia's word on that (in the movies, disregarding the Expanded Universe), and she was clearly unafraid to lie to Tarkin and Vader. Thus, the author argues that such a strong spirit, like Leia Organa's of Alderaan, is a good sign that the planet really was rebellious. Which means it was fair game for the Star Wars version of WMDs: planeticide by Death Star.

Obviously, I think that most people would agree with me that a historical peaceful planet would NEVER be a legitimate target. Unless you subscribe to the Lincoln/Sherman plan of murdering civilians and destroying their homes, clearly no honorable person would obliterate a peaceful community, regardless of whether they agreed with the imperial rulers or not.

Of course, the Rebel Alliance doesn't seem to have a governing strategy or plans for a post-Empire galaxy. Their victory doesn't liberate the galaxy, rather it plunges it (supposedly) "into Somalia writ large: dominated by local warlords who are answerable to no one."

"Which makes the rebels--Lucas's heroes--an unimpressive crew of anarchic royals who wreck the galaxy so that Princess Leia can have her tiara back."

"I'll take the Empire."

Jonathan V. Last is online editor of The Weekly Standard.

Judging from the apparent bloodlust ofso many Americans, most of them on the Foreign Wars wing of the party, is it unsurprising that a neocon writing in a neocon publication would say that the Rebellion was wrong, that no matter how the ideal of liberty was crushed, and practical freedom diminished (they're not the same thing, folks), that because the Empire represented Order and Security, that it was Right, and Good, and Not To Be Overthrown?

Frankly, I found the article to be quite unsurprising. Especially from someone of the party of "patriotism," the party that supports "freedom and democracy."

Neither wing of the Statist Party supports and encourages liberty, although liberals at least seem to understand the movie.

5 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineBoeing4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (11 years 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2707 times:

It's a fucking movie for crying out loud. Jeez, how many freakin' Star Wars threads to we need? Thank God this is the last Star Wars movie. This craze will die down and be swept back into the basements of the parents of 35 year olds everywhere soon where it belongs.  biggrin  But I do admit, it's been a slow month debate wise, so desecting the film has provided some entertainment.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

User currently offlineAR1300 From Argentina, joined Feb 2005, 1750 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (11 years 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2704 times:

Who the hell cares anyways?


You are now free to move about the cabin
User currently offlineTheCoz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2693 times:

User currently offlineAirlinelover From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 5580 posts, RR: 20
Reply 4, posted (11 years 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2689 times:

Ok. Just to make sure I understand correctly, MD-90, you preferr the dark side of the force?


Lets do some sexy math. We add you, subtract your clothes, divide your legs and multiply
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8530 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (11 years 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2683 times:

I'm not a neocon, Airlinelover, even though I did have neocon-tendencies in my foolish younger days.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Is Hayden Christensen In Star Wars VI? posted Mon May 15 2006 10:13:27 by LTU932
Sinead O'Connor In Star Wars posted Mon May 16 2005 20:40:25 by Marcus
Star Wars=Nerds? You Be The Judge. (Video) posted Tue May 10 2005 13:12:54 by Thom@s
If GWB Was A Character In Star Wars posted Fri Jan 21 2005 20:23:19 by Yukimizake
Star Wars II - Attack Of The Clones Is Next posted Fri Nov 23 2001 08:37:55 by Lax
"Star Wars Kid" Takes Matter To The Courts. posted Fri Mar 31 2006 13:47:49 by Thom@s
The Oficial ''stop That Star Wars Crap'' Thread posted Wed May 25 2005 06:08:10 by AR1300
The Official A.net Star Wars III Thread posted Wed May 18 2005 07:40:44 by UTA_flyinghigh
Why The Long Wait Between Star Wars? posted Mon Apr 4 2005 03:54:09 by Venezuela747
Star Wars Ep. III Revenge Of The Sith posted Fri Apr 1 2005 00:23:48 by TrijetFan1