Just like the nazis tried to end destructive conflict and bring order to the world.
Not.
Order and stability means rule of law: Everyone knows the rules and if you follow them you will be safe. Stability is predictability.
Both the empire and the nazis went completely against that, purposely. The “order” they want to bring is “I am king and you are nothing”. It means if you are higher up you can do whatever you want without any consequences at all.
The result of that is that there is no order and stability for the common people, and not even for the higher ups that aren’t on the top of the food chain. The Führer just needs to have a bad day and suddenly the’s going to force choke you to death.
Nazis (and also the empire) use double speak extensively. They say “order and stability” but mean "fear and insecurity.
Remember, they are the ones who put “Arbeit macht frei” (“work makes free”) on top of the entrance to the concentration camps that were death camps camouflaged as labour camps. The only freedom these camps brought was death.
That’s a good way of looking at it. The Galactic Empire was definitely reminiscent of a certain 1940s regime. But don’t forget:
Many characters (especially in the spinoff shows) preferred the Empire because the republic was a bit of a shit show. War and chaos was everywhere, and the senate was gridlocked. Nothing got done because of endless debates.
The Empire also secured trade routes, improved infrastructure, and lowered crime rates (at first).
The rebels, on the other hand were terrorists. Blowing up military installations, raiding imperial supply lines, and assaulting officials. To people who weren’t suffering under the empire, the rebels looked like dangerous extremists.
The spinoffs do a great job at demonstrating how people internalise propaganda.
“I’m iust savin’, somewhere someone in this galaxy is ruling and others are being ruled. I mean, look at your race. Do you think all those people that died in wars fought by Mandalorians actually had a choice? So how are they any different than the Empire? If you were born on Mandalore, you believe one thing, if you’re born on Alderaan, ou believe somethin else.” - Migs Mayfeld.
True, the spinoffs do show a lot of that, but that’s getting away from the original Episode IV-VI argument.
Even Episode I-III already showed a bit more of what lead to the downfall of the republic.
When you look at real-life Germany or Austria leading up to the Nazis you had quite similar situations: instable democracies in permanent crisis mode that were gridlocked and finally replaced by fascist regimes.
What’s the big difference though between the lead-up to the nazis and to the empire is the government that came before.
Both Germany and Austria were (financially) destroyed after WW1. Democracy was very new in both countries, only 15 years at the time when the nazis/austrofascists took over. The democratic systems of these two countries were full of holes and weaknesses. Political extremism was very strong while the political center was weak.
The extremist parties has their own paramilitary forces that ended up being stronger than the official forces of the state, and when the great depression hit and destroyed the livelihood of most people, protest votes pushed the fascists into power.
So the main issues were young, instable democratic systems, voters inexperienced with democracy who knew no precedence of democracy collapsing, combined with a massive economic crash.
The Empire on the other hand got into power from a completely different precondition. The Galactic Republic had existed for millenia. It was mature beyond belief. It was financially stable, there was no major crisis apart from politics being a little slow. It was just some trade dispute that escalated into full secession, because apparently there has never been a trade war or a separatist movement over the last millenia in a republic that spanned most of the galaxis.
This is where Lucas’ US bias shines through. Episode I-III are a case study of what if the US Civil War happened in the 1990s USA, but for no actual reason and then everyone missed that their beloved moderate head of state was secretly Hitler all along.
Here the historical analogy breaks down and it shows that Lucas is primarily an action film maker and not a history scholar.
Trade wars usually don’t escalate into real wars because the goal of trade wars is to get more advantageous trade while real wars destroy trade.
The motivations of the trade federation and the separatists are never explained beyond “the world jewish conspiracy wants more power right now”.
Because it’s mostly an action movie and everything beyond that is just sprinkles on top to justify light saber duels and space fighter dogfights.
As for the spinoffs, although they aren’t part of the OT, they were set around that time. The Mandolorian being the exception. It was set 5 years after Return of the Jedi.
The main difference between the original trilogy and the spinoffs isn’t the setting but when they were created and by whom.
The original trilogy wasn’t social commentary. It wasn’t complex or philosophical. They were just fun 70s/80s action movies, like Indiana Jones but in space. The evil guys were evil, the good guys were good. No need for any kind of deep or complex stuff. Good guys shoot bad guys and are good because of that, no matter what else they are doing.
The modern spinoffs were created in the last ten years in a very politically charged environment. Escapism wasn’t the point any more, instead you see a lot more social commentary. There are actually imperial characters that have something like a character arc, like e.g. Syril Karn or Dedra Meero. We see a lot more of what goes on behind the scenes in the Empire. We see people who are thinking they are doing something good, following orders and causing mayham instead (e.g. Syril being manipulated into starting the rebellion on Ghorman).
There’s a lot more depth there, but I still don’t see them portraying the Empire in any positive light. I do see them portraying the rebellion (or at least parts of it) in a very negative light too, though, showing that even the “good” guys aren’t exactly good. Like e.g. Saw Gerrera, who is a plain terrorist, or Luthen Rael who commits all sorts of atrocities for the greater good. Luthen himself states multiple times that he is not a good person and that he has no place in the society that he tries to create.
Fair enough, but if we’re judging validity based on when it was made then the Star Wars lore falls apart since a lot of it was made by fans and not the original creator
Just like the nazis tried to end destructive conflict and bring order to the world.
Not.
Order and stability means rule of law: Everyone knows the rules and if you follow them you will be safe. Stability is predictability.
Both the empire and the nazis went completely against that, purposely. The “order” they want to bring is “I am king and you are nothing”. It means if you are higher up you can do whatever you want without any consequences at all.
The result of that is that there is no order and stability for the common people, and not even for the higher ups that aren’t on the top of the food chain. The Führer just needs to have a bad day and suddenly the’s going to force choke you to death.
Nazis (and also the empire) use double speak extensively. They say “order and stability” but mean "fear and insecurity.
Remember, they are the ones who put “Arbeit macht frei” (“work makes free”) on top of the entrance to the concentration camps that were death camps camouflaged as labour camps. The only freedom these camps brought was death.
That’s a good way of looking at it. The Galactic Empire was definitely reminiscent of a certain 1940s regime. But don’t forget:
Many characters (especially in the spinoff shows) preferred the Empire because the republic was a bit of a shit show. War and chaos was everywhere, and the senate was gridlocked. Nothing got done because of endless debates.
The Empire also secured trade routes, improved infrastructure, and lowered crime rates (at first).
The rebels, on the other hand were terrorists. Blowing up military installations, raiding imperial supply lines, and assaulting officials. To people who weren’t suffering under the empire, the rebels looked like dangerous extremists.
The spinoffs do a great job at demonstrating how people internalise propaganda.
“I’m iust savin’, somewhere someone in this galaxy is ruling and others are being ruled. I mean, look at your race. Do you think all those people that died in wars fought by Mandalorians actually had a choice? So how are they any different than the Empire? If you were born on Mandalore, you believe one thing, if you’re born on Alderaan, ou believe somethin else.” - Migs Mayfeld.
True, the spinoffs do show a lot of that, but that’s getting away from the original Episode IV-VI argument.
Even Episode I-III already showed a bit more of what lead to the downfall of the republic.
When you look at real-life Germany or Austria leading up to the Nazis you had quite similar situations: instable democracies in permanent crisis mode that were gridlocked and finally replaced by fascist regimes.
What’s the big difference though between the lead-up to the nazis and to the empire is the government that came before.
Both Germany and Austria were (financially) destroyed after WW1. Democracy was very new in both countries, only 15 years at the time when the nazis/austrofascists took over. The democratic systems of these two countries were full of holes and weaknesses. Political extremism was very strong while the political center was weak.
The extremist parties has their own paramilitary forces that ended up being stronger than the official forces of the state, and when the great depression hit and destroyed the livelihood of most people, protest votes pushed the fascists into power.
So the main issues were young, instable democratic systems, voters inexperienced with democracy who knew no precedence of democracy collapsing, combined with a massive economic crash.
The Empire on the other hand got into power from a completely different precondition. The Galactic Republic had existed for millenia. It was mature beyond belief. It was financially stable, there was no major crisis apart from politics being a little slow. It was just some trade dispute that escalated into full secession, because apparently there has never been a trade war or a separatist movement over the last millenia in a republic that spanned most of the galaxis.
This is where Lucas’ US bias shines through. Episode I-III are a case study of what if the US Civil War happened in the 1990s USA, but for no actual reason and then everyone missed that their beloved moderate head of state was secretly Hitler all along.
Here the historical analogy breaks down and it shows that Lucas is primarily an action film maker and not a history scholar.
Trade wars usually don’t escalate into real wars because the goal of trade wars is to get more advantageous trade while real wars destroy trade.
The motivations of the trade federation and the separatists are never explained beyond “the world jewish conspiracy wants more power right now”.
Because it’s mostly an action movie and everything beyond that is just sprinkles on top to justify light saber duels and space fighter dogfights.
True. I can’t argue with that.
As for the spinoffs, although they aren’t part of the OT, they were set around that time. The Mandolorian being the exception. It was set 5 years after Return of the Jedi.
Does that count?
The main difference between the original trilogy and the spinoffs isn’t the setting but when they were created and by whom.
The original trilogy wasn’t social commentary. It wasn’t complex or philosophical. They were just fun 70s/80s action movies, like Indiana Jones but in space. The evil guys were evil, the good guys were good. No need for any kind of deep or complex stuff. Good guys shoot bad guys and are good because of that, no matter what else they are doing.
The modern spinoffs were created in the last ten years in a very politically charged environment. Escapism wasn’t the point any more, instead you see a lot more social commentary. There are actually imperial characters that have something like a character arc, like e.g. Syril Karn or Dedra Meero. We see a lot more of what goes on behind the scenes in the Empire. We see people who are thinking they are doing something good, following orders and causing mayham instead (e.g. Syril being manipulated into starting the rebellion on Ghorman).
There’s a lot more depth there, but I still don’t see them portraying the Empire in any positive light. I do see them portraying the rebellion (or at least parts of it) in a very negative light too, though, showing that even the “good” guys aren’t exactly good. Like e.g. Saw Gerrera, who is a plain terrorist, or Luthen Rael who commits all sorts of atrocities for the greater good. Luthen himself states multiple times that he is not a good person and that he has no place in the society that he tries to create.
Fair enough, but if we’re judging validity based on when it was made then the Star Wars lore falls apart since a lot of it was made by fans and not the original creator
We are judging validity based on the original premise of this discussion thread:
I said:
Which you acknowledged here: