Star Wars: The Acolyte official trailer

[warty goblin]

I agree.

All states are violent and oppressive. As are all slavers. Anarchy is great. Lets rebel. That is punk as hell!

States can be violent and oppressive, that doesn't mean they necessarily are.

"Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me."

This is pretty much just fascism. Like, it's Umberto Ecco's Ur-Fascism in fancy non-rhyming couplets to look like an inspirational meme. Note in particular that peace doesn't exist, there's only constant pursuit of power and victory. For the speaker, not for you or anybody else, the goals of this ideology begin and end with the person acquiring power.

If the person leading the revolution is saying this, pray the revolution fails.

"There is no emotion, there is peace.
There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.
There is no passion, there is serenity.
There is no chaos, there is harmony.
There is no death, there is the Force."

This is just standard transcendent spiritualism. Which, on its own, is not revolutionary, no, although it can certainly motivate mass revolution. I'd point out however that the Rebellion were not Jedi, nor were the Jedi revolutionaries. They were a monastic order, and this is a perfectly decent monastic creed.

[Saph]

Now, when I say "Anarchy is great. Lets rebel. That is punk as hell!" that is a bit of poetic hyperbole as real life (or most fiction) is obviously more complex than that.

I think the reason you're getting confused here is that you're assuming that the emotional individualistic rebel faction are always supposed to be the good guys, while the serene collectivist establishment are always supposed to be the bad guys. Most settings don't share this assumption. (Honestly, the idea that being punk and anarchic somehow makes you virtuous strikes me as a pretty weird one in the first place).

[gbaji]

Now tell me, which of these codes of conduct sounds like a call for revolution?

a "call for revolution" is not always a good thing. Most revolutions result in authoritrian rule that is as bad or worse than what the revolutionaries were revolting against in the first place, and it's quite common for "evil leaders" to stoke revolutionary flames specifically to get young, foolish, idealistic people to do the work of handing them (the evil leaders) power.

"Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me."

Notice the preponderance of "I, my, and me" in there. This is not about what's good for "the people". It's about what is good for the individual embracing the Sith ideology. Everyone else is either a tool to be used to futher the Sith's own power, or an obstacle to be crushed on the way to that power.

That is not a great ideology to embrace, and those who do embrace it will pretty much universally be viewed as villains.

"There is no emotion, there is peace.
There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.
There is no passion, there is serenity.
There is no chaos, there is harmony.
There is no death, there is the Force."

Yup. Because the Jedi aren't concerning themselves with imposing their views on others. There are certainly problems with the Jedi as well, but in the same way they aren't running around the galaxy ending slavery, they are also not the ones enslaving anyone.

I would have loved a show or movie that explores why the Empire is evil on a human level.

Man, Andor was disappointing.

I'm not sure how those two fit. Andor was literally a show exploring why the Empire is evil on a human level. So.... those two statements contradict eachother IMO. Unless you were disappointed in Andor for some other reason (maybe it didn't do a good enough job of exploring the Empire's evil nature?).

[Errorname]

Whereas the Sith I can actively see leading a slave revolt or a revolution against a tyrranical government. Afterall, the Sith code ends with "..my chains are broken. The Force shall free me."

This is a staggering misread of the text. Look at any of the actual Sith characters we see in Star Wars and tell me if you think any of them would lead a slave revolt or revolution against tyranny for noble reasons. We literally see multiple Sith characters overthrow governments so they can implement more tyrannical ones that they control.

Now tell me, which of these codes of conduct sounds like a call for revolution?

You're placing too much emphasis on the Sith Code, which is extended universe stuff that wasn't part of George's vision and which doesn't fit their character. Even then it's also pretty clearly a lie to be sold to new recruits, not the actual core of the movement.

I would have loved a show or movie that explores why the Empire is evil on a human level.

Man, Andor was disappointing.

What about Andor did you think failed to show why the Empire was evil on a human level?

[Mordar]

Let me try and boil it down to a single thesis statement: "Star Wars morality gives me cognitive dissonance because it appears to be a story about how the freedom loving individualistic rebels are the good guys and the oppressive totalitarian empire are the bad guys. But at the same time we are told that the oppressive dehumanizing philosophy of the Jedi is the morally correct one, but the freedom loving and individualistic philosophy of the Sith is the morally repugnant one."

And I don't think I have seen anyone really dispute that, although I think most people in this thread agree that none of the Sith we see actually practice what they preach.

Jedi philosophy is not dehumanizing, but is perhaps unachievable. The only word in there that leans anywhere near is "emotion" and if it were replaced with "passion", which is the intent, I believe, there is no avenue for misinterpretation. Even as it sits it is not oppressive because (a) only those who actively join are expected to live to it, and (b) they can leave at will.

As to the Sith, as I said they are neither freedom loving or individualist beyond self. What they preach is a lie. It is utter bait and switch, not even a failure to live up to their creed, but just a sales pitch with no intent to make good. All others are suffered to exist only so long as they serve the whim of the Master. The only freedom they offer others is the limited freedom to do the Master's bidding within the parameters provided by the Master.

Unless there is published fiction somewhere else that shows the original/early Sith had a different performance record?

I begin to sense a disturbance...

- M

[gbaji]

Do you disagree that states routinely engage in over the top violence in an effort to force compliance?

This depends entirely on your definition of "routine" and "over the top".

My position is "no, most states do not". You, on the other hand, may disagree.

I suspect you are running afoul of the "less than perfect is bad" assumption, which IMO, is rarely a good approach. Nothing is perfect. Many things are still "better than the alternative". We can certainly say that the Old Republic was not perfect (far from it, in fact). It was still, unambigously, better than the Empire.

If both statements are true, it seems to be a basic logical syllogism that all states are evil.

Even if we arrive at this conclusion (I don't, but let's assume you do), what is the alternative? Instead of making a blanket (but operationally useless) statement like "All states are evil", why not the more useful "some states and methods of governing are better than others", and then push for the "better than others" ones?

Let me try and boil it down to a single thesis statement: "Star Wars morality gives me cognitive dissonance because it appears to be a story about how the freedom loving individualistic rebels are the good guys and the oppressive totalitarian empire are the bad guys. But at the same time we are told that the oppressive dehumanizing philosophy of the Jedi is the morally correct one, but the freedom loving and individualistic philosophy of the Sith is the morally repugnant one."

Pretty sure I already posted about this, but I'll do so again:

The Jedi are only "oppressive and dehumanizing" to their own members. They are not oppressing other people.

The Sith, on the other hand, do nothing but oppress and force others to do their bidding.

The Jedi restrict themselves and their own members, so as to *not* impose or enslave others. The Sith encourage free actions by their members, which results in those members imposing on and enslaving others.

The Jedi rules are "tough for the Jedi, but good for everyone else", while the Sith rules are "great for the Sith, but terrible for everone else".

It's not hard to see why "the people of the galaxy" will be better off with the Jedi being the dominant force theology in the galaxy versus the Sith. And we see that in the stories. While the Jedi are in ascendance, there is a Republic. It's flawed, but built on the principle that each member world gets to run themselves how they wish (significant freedom by "the people"). Under the Sith, we have an Empire, run by the Sith, and telling everyone what to do, and brutally punishing anyone who does not comply.

It's not hard to see the difference.

And I don't think I have seen anyone really dispute that, although I think most people in this thread agree that none of the Sith we see actually practice what they preach.

They absolutely do practice what they preach. I think the problem is that you are having a hard time separting "how I treat myself", and "how I treat others". Someone who embraces freedom in their own actions, does not necessarily allow freedom for others as well (and the Sith definitely don't).

[Talakeal]

You're placing too much emphasis on the Sith Code, which is extended universe stuff that wasn't part of George's vision and which doesn't fit their character. Even then it's also pretty clearly a lie to be sold to new recruits, not the actual core of the movement.

Perhaps. But nothing in the films seems to suggest that the Jedi code isn't as flawed as it appears.

I think the reason you're getting confused here is that you're assuming that the emotional individualistic rebel faction are always supposed to be the good guys, while the serene collectivist establishment are always supposed to be the bad guys. Most settings don't share this assumption. (Honestly, the idea that being punk and anarchic somehow makes you virtuous strikes me as a pretty weird one in the first place).

Pretty sure the vast majority of media produced between Vietnam and 9-11 is laced with strong messages of individualism and freedom are good and authority and conformity are bad. This was especially true in the very late 90s right before the prequel trilogy came out. The Matrix. American Beauty. Fight Club. Equilibrium. Mulan Rouge. I am sure I can come up with dozens of examples all released within a year of the millennium. And as I said, I was heavily into White Wolf games at that point in my life.

I just figured that Star Wars, with its heroes labelled as "The Rebels" would be in the same vein.

Having just turned 18 when Attack of the Clones came out, I think maybe I was the perfect age to side with Anakin in rebelling against the Jedi Council.

As to the Sith, as I said they are neither freedom loving or individualist beyond self. What they preach is a lie. It is utter bait and switch, not even a failure to live up to their creed, but just a sales pitch with no intent to make good. All others are suffered to exist only so long as they serve the whim of the Master. The only freedom they offer others is the limited freedom to do the Master's bidding within the parameters provided by the Master.

Unless there is published fiction somewhere else that shows the original/early Sith had a different performance record?

I begin to sense a disturbance...

That makes sense I guess. The Sith were founded by Darth Vitiate as a scheme to achieve godhood. KoToR begins with Revan having become dissuliusioned with Jedi Philosophy and abandoning the order, and then KoToR II begins with Revan having become similarly disillusioned with the Sith Philosophy and left the galaxy all together. Everyone, Jedi and Sith alike, end the prequel trilogy dead or crippled and alone.

I wonder if anyone in canon has ever been a Sith who plays the code straight. I certainly do when I play a Star Wars RPG... I can't be the only one. It is certainly allowed in most of the video games.

What about Andor did you think failed to show why the Empire was evil on a human level?

Everything was just so grey. Nobody was really likeable. Nobody seemed like they were "in the right". It just seemed like a bunch of jerks taking increasingly violent actions against one another.

Karn was the only character who showed more than a shred of idealism, and he was basically the shows butt-monkey.

Mon Mothma was a bit compelling, and seemed to be a fairly real and nuanced depiction of politics, but I just can't take it seriously when I contrast it with my knowledge of Star Wars; the Emperor is a cackling cartoon character who will defeated by space wizards with laser swords, and all this serious political drama just makes that look all the more ridiculous.

Notice the preponderance of "I, my, and me" in there. This is not about what's good for "the people". It's about what is good for the individual embracing the Sith ideology. Everyone else is either a tool to be used to futher the Sith's own power, or an obstacle to be crushed on the way to that power.

That is not a great ideology to embrace, and those who do embrace it will pretty much universally be viewed as villains.

I think we might be getting into political horseshoe territory here, as people will inevitably use their own freedoms to impinge on the freedoms of others.

This is pretty much just fascism. Like, it's Umberto Ecco's Ur-Fascism in fancy non-rhyming couplets to look like an inspirational meme. Note in particular that peace doesn't exist, there's only constant pursuit of power and victory. For the speaker, not for you or anybody else, the goals of this ideology begin and end with the person acquiring power.

Hmmm. Are you sure? Freedom and the right to pursue individual passions really read as anarchist motivations to me, and are about as far from fascism as one can get by most accounting.

Yeah, the strength and victory stuff could be pretty fascist, but its hardly unique. Most philosophies value strength. Even a few dedicated pacifist philosophies I can think of stress the importance of inner strength.


I don't know, I kind of feel like maybe they made a mistake in having Anakin's fall to the dark side by motivated by wanting to have / protect his family. It really makes the cruelty of the Jedi code into something personal.

If you want to look at a different Natalie Portman film from 2005, V for Vendetta includes a scene where she is in an old prison reading the diaries of the prisoners, and one of them is written by a woman who was imprisoned and killed for being in a same sex relationship. This really brings home the personal tragedy of the fascist government, and is a very effective scene.

Star Wars, on the other hand, keeps the personal evil of the Empire off screen and instead focuses on grand sweeping impersonal evil, whereas as it is the jedi, the heroes of the film, who are the one's standing in the way of the protagonists' normal human passions.

[Errorname]

Everything was just so grey. Nobody was really likeable. Nobody seemed like they were "in the right". It just seemed like a bunch of jerks taking increasingly violent actions against one another.

Andor is a cynical show but it's very clear about who is "in the right" but is also clear that under the circumstances the right thing is going to involve getting your hands very dirty. A revolution is bitter, ugly work.

Hmmm. Are you sure? Freedom and the right to pursue individual passions really read as anarchist motivations to me, and are about as far from fascism as one can get by most accounting.

You should not automatically assume that anyone talking about "Freedom" means it in the way you would mean it. To keep it within acceptable discussion points, have you played Helldivers II? Super Earth talks a big game about fighting to protect your freedoms while clearly being a deeply authoritarian and tyrannical state.

[ecarden]

The Sith are all about freedom! Freedom from democracy! Freedom from law! Freedom from empathy! Freedom from society! Freedom from the need to give even the tiniest of ****s about what anyone else thinks or does!

Those are the chains which are broken by their power. All those things that stop them from killing, enslaving, torturing or ****ting on anyone they want, whenever they want, for whatever reason they want.

It is probably a lot of fun to be a Sith (well, unless you're Vader, or one of the other guys who are all full of self-loathing). The Jedi are definitely party poopers by comparison. Like, compare the most famous Sith and the most famous Jedi. Palpatine is clearly having the time of his life. While Yoda very much isn't!

But if you aren't a Force user (IE 99.9999% of the galaxy) I know who I'd rather be around. And it's the guy whose moral code doesn't say 'I can kill you if it amuses me to do so.'

[warty goblin]

Hmmm. Are you sure? Freedom and the right to pursue individual passions really read as anarchist motivations to me, and are about as far from fascism as one can get by most accounting.

There is no right to pursue individual passions in that creed. There is the will to power for a single individual to do whatever they want. Yeah, I'm pretty comfortable saying the doctrine of no peace only power, embraced by the fascist dictator of the fascist space empire is, in fact, fascist.

Individual freedom as a societal good is a collectivist philosophy, it's quite literally saying it's better for everyone if people are broadly free to pursue their own interests and goals. It's why free societies generally outline universal rights inherent and inalienable to individuals, that's a collective decision about how to organize society for everyone. Notably these freedoms also limit what people can do - your freedom to swing your fist ends at my face and so on. The Sith creed is notably quite silent on the freedom of anybody else not to get punched by the Sith, because a careful examination of literally a second of Sith behavior indicates very strongly that the Sith do not care. If anything your face owes their knuckles an apology.

I don't know, I kind of feel like maybe they made a mistake in having Anakin's fall to the dark side by motivated by wanting to have / protect his family. It really makes the cruelty of the Jedi code into something personal.

This is one of the stronger choices the PT made in my eyes. Both from a simple narrative logic point of view that if you're showing somebody fall, you have to give them a reason, and because I think it's worth examining the case where protecting your family is the wrong thing to do. We act like it's a universal good, when it quite obviously isn't, because it's basically a comforting little narrative about how the bounds of necessary compassion begin and end with the people we already care about. It's a reification of lazy and limited caring, and it's everywhere. Revenge of the Sith is about the only major story I can think of that actually leans out of that narrative. I can see how that's maybe unsatisfying at a basic level, but as a tool to think and reflect, it's quite compelling, and the mere fact I can mull it over is why it remains my favorite Star Wars movie.

Star Wars, on the other hand, keeps the personal evil of the Empire off screen and instead focuses on grand sweeping impersonal evil, whereas as it is the jedi, the heroes of the film, who are the one's standing in the way of the protagonists' normal human passions.

Nowhere do the Jedi stop Anakin from having a wife, he simply cannot have a wife and be a Jedi. It's a free society, they are at liberty to define their membership criterion however they want. He is free to leave at any point. Anakin's problem is that he has never learned to not be dominated by his feelings and attachments. He's attached to the notion of being a Jedi, he's attached to the notion of being married to Padme, above all he's attached to his self-image of himself as a heroic and exceptional person, above others. He wants it all, without regard for the liberty of others, and the final tragic iron is that in his endless grasping and trying to avoid loss, he loses everything.

[Zevox]

The Sith are all about freedom! Freedom from democracy! Freedom from law! Freedom from empathy! Freedom from society! Freedom from the need to give even the tiniest of ****s about what anyone else thinks or does!

Those are the chains which are broken by their power. All those things that stop them from killing, enslaving, torturing or ****ting on anyone they want, whenever they want, for whatever reason they want.

It is probably a lot of fun to be a Sith (well, unless you're Vader, or one of the other guys who are all full of self-loathing). The Jedi are definitely party poopers by comparison. Like, compare the most famous Sith and the most famous Jedi. Palpatine is clearly having the time of his life. While Yoda very much isn't!

But if you aren't a Force user (IE 99.9999% of the galaxy) I know who I'd rather be around. And it's the guy whose moral code doesn't say 'I can kill you if it amuses me to do so.'

Indeed. Basically, what the Sith Philosophy boils down to can be summed up in a single, well-known phrase: Might Makes Right.

They want power - whether that takes the form of pure force abilities, physical strength, cunning plans that ultimately lay their opposition low, or whatever else - for the ultimate end of doing whatever they feel like, entirely for their own personal benefit, at the expense of anyone and everyone else. They respect nothing else - some of them don't even respect that when it's turned against them, but the few that display some manner of consistent philosophical beliefs beyond pure selfishness, like Darth Bane, do at least respect those who become powerful enough to overcome them. But only that. They don't care about freedom in any abstract sense, they use the term because it describes the state of them being so powerful that they cannot be stopped from doing whatever they want. That's why the path to it in their silly code only goes through strength, power, and victory.

Power and selfishness is the entirety of what they are, nothing deeper than that.

[Mechalich]

Perhaps. But nothing in the films seems to suggest that the Jedi code isn't as flawed as it appears.

The Force Ghosts do! Jedi who are sufficiently in tune with the code transcend death and achieve oneness with the Force. The Jedi Order is a religious institution with an answer to that most common of religious questions: 'what happens when we die?' that the films affirmatively answer in the favor of the Jedi.

Meanwhile, Sith cannot become Force ghosts without rejecting the Sith code - as Darth Vader does at the end of RotJ and as Darth Marr does in SWTOR by placing the needs of the Empire above his own even to the point of sacrificing himself for it. Instead, Sith cut themselves off from the Force and exist as doomed, isolated, and tormented spirits whose minds slowly break down and recede into oblivion.

Within the context of Star Wars, it is very, very clear that the Jedi are right and the Sith are wrong.

It is probably a lot of fun to be a Sith (well, unless you're Vader, or one of the other guys who are all full of self-loathing). The Jedi are definitely party poopers by comparison. Like, compare the most famous Sith and the most famous Jedi. Palpatine is clearly having the time of his life. While Yoda very much isn't!

Palpatine is having a great time because he's the top Sith. The galaxy's other Sith aren't doing so well. Dooku gets his head chopped off. Darth Maul gets sawed in half. Darth Vader is trapped in a special suit that makes his every moment a living torment. Oh, and Vader, Palpatine, and Maul plot to murder each other more or less constantly through the existence of the Empire, often coming quite close to success, with everyone else who can plausibly claim to be Sith also trying to get in on the action.

For another example, in both Sith stories in SWTOR, the PC is betrayed by the Sith Empire, including by direct superiors and by the Empire as whole both times, and has to mount a personal crusade to acquire enough power and authority to just survive, and both times the collateral damage is immense. Betrayal is constant among the Sith, and makes many of them quite miserable. Vitiate/Valkorion/Tenebrae, gets so sick of betrayal (including by his lover, his son, and his daughter) that he hides out inside the PC's mind during the SWTOR expansions just for some peace.

[Errorname]

They want power - whether that takes the form of pure force abilities, physical strength, cunning plans that ultimately lay their opposition low, or whatever else - for the ultimate end of doing whatever they feel like, entirely for their own personal benefit, at the expense of anyone and everyone else. They respect nothing else - some of them don't even respect that when it's turned against them, but the few that display some manner of consistent philosophical beliefs beyond pure selfishness, like Darth Bane, do at least respect those who become powerful enough to overcome them. But only that.

It's also clear that on some level, this is what the Dark Side does to people. It doesn't matter how you start, it's power is corrupting and it will ultimately take whatever you might have been and reduce it down to a hunger for more power for power's sake. Your feelings and passions are only acceptable in so much as they direct you to more power, anything else must be discarded to make you a more perfect vessel for violent ambition.

[ecarden]

Palpatine is having a great time because he's the top Sith. The galaxy's other Sith aren't doing so well. Dooku gets his head chopped off. Darth Maul gets sawed in half. Darth Vader is trapped in a special suit that makes his every moment a living torment. Oh, and Vader, Palpatine, and Maul plot to murder each other more or less constantly through the existence of the Empire, often coming quite close to success, with everyone else who can plausibly claim to be Sith also trying to get in on the action.

For another example, in both Sith stories in SWTOR, the PC is betrayed by the Sith Empire, including by direct superiors and by the Empire as whole both times, and has to mount a personal crusade to acquire enough power and authority to just survive, and both times the collateral damage is immense. Betrayal is constant among the Sith, and makes many of them quite miserable. Vitiate/Valkorion/Tenebrae, gets so sick of betrayal (including by his lover, his son, and his daughter) that he hides out inside the PC's mind during the SWTOR expansions just for some peace.

So, it's a bit hard to tell. Is Palpatine having a grand time because he's top Sith, or because he's one of the only Sith we see who actually lives by their code and isn't tricked, forced, or manipulated into falling? Dooku thinks he's still the good guy. Vader believes he's utterly destroyed everyone he loves. Maul is basically a child soldier. Palpatine is very good at making everyone around him miserable, because that's what makes him happy, but if you're willing (and able) to actually embrace it, the Sith code is a lot of fun. I mean, there's a reason one of the most popular genres in the world is 'power fantasy'!

[KorvinStarmast]

What do you mean? We see the Empire is evil because they go around murdering and enslaving innocent people. They killed a planet to make a point.

That's a bit of an indicator.

Odd.

I am curious where the miscommunication is.

I am not. But it's all coming from your end. I suggested earlier that the "overthinking" bit is involved, and I still feel that's a good diagnosis of the problem you are having with this.

Let me try and boil it down to a single thesis statement:

OK, let's do that.

"Star Wars morality gives me cognitive dissonance because it appears to be a story about how the freedom loving individualistic rebels are the good guys and the oppressive totalitarian empire are the bad guys. But at the same time we are told that the oppressive dehumanizing philosophy of the Jedi is the morally correct one, but the freedom loving and individualistic philosophy of the Sith is the morally repugnant one."

The bold bit. That bit is on you. I told you about Sith core values a few posts back.
They use Power and Deceit to Dominate others. That is not "freedom loving" in any way, shape, or form.

[Talakeal]

Ok. You guys convinced me. Thanks.

Great... now I am going to have to get my Sith tattoo changed to like, a porg or something.

[DaedalusMkV]

To be fair, the basic Sith philosophy isn't necessarily evil - the idea that passion is something to be channeled rather than denied, the acknowledgement that struggle is an inherent part of the nature of life and the assertion that strength is necessary to achieve freedom are all perfectly reasonable ideas. If the Sith were consistent and coherent in their philosophy they would be encouraging strength in others, encouraging spirited but fair competition in every aspect of life and acknowledging the right of others to claim freedoms. If you judge the factions solely by their codes, the Jedi come off as foolishly naive to the point of denying reality while the Sith wind up looking like pragmatic realists. A sort of anarcho-capitalist dreamworld would fit perfectly with the Sith creed and the teachings they feed to their new recruits.

The problem is that they don't actually do this. In The Old Republic it's actually possible to play a Sith this way (Light Side Sith Warrior is a very interesting experience, full of very confused enemies wondering why they're still alive after you leave the room), and a couple of the Sith characters do kind of espouse this philosophy, but by and large the Sith are all somewhere between ruthless self-interested sociopaths and tyrannical fascists (or both), using the Sith Code as a justification for being horrible people. I actually agree that you could play a very fun Sith in an RPG, but in general they certainly aren't great neighbors or the kind of people I'd want running an institution I belong to.

Of course, there's certainly something to be said that a non-corrupt Sith society might have some virtues. That just doesn't seem to actually happen in the canon.

[Infernally Clay]

To be fair, the basic Sith philosophy isn't necessarily evil - the idea that passion is something to be channeled rather than denied, the acknowledgement that struggle is an inherent part of the nature of life and the assertion that strength is necessary to achieve freedom are all perfectly reasonable ideas. If the Sith were consistent and coherent in their philosophy they would be encouraging strength in others, encouraging spirited but fair competition in every aspect of life and acknowledging the right of others to claim freedoms. If you judge the factions solely by their codes, the Jedi come off as foolishly naive to the point of denying reality while the Sith wind up looking like pragmatic realists. A sort of anarcho-capitalist dreamworld would fit perfectly with the Sith creed and the teachings they feed to their new recruits.

The problem is that they don't actually do this. In The Old Republic it's actually possible to play a Sith this way (Light Side Sith Warrior is a very interesting experience, full of very confused enemies wondering why they're still alive after you leave the room), and a couple of the Sith characters do kind of espouse this philosophy, but by and large the Sith are all somewhere between ruthless self-interested sociopaths and tyrannical fascists (or both), using the Sith Code as a justification for being horrible people. I actually agree that you could play a very fun Sith in an RPG, but in general they certainly aren't great neighbors or the kind of people I'd want running an institution I belong to.

Of course, there's certainly something to be said that a non-corrupt Sith society might have some virtues. That just doesn't seem to actually happen in the canon.

I’m not so sure about this. Boiled down to the core philosophies, Sith are really about selfishness while the Jedi are really about selflessness. The former promotes using the Force for personal gain only whereas the latter explicitly forbids it. Now you might not have a problem with being selfish occasionally and that’s totally understandable but if it was only occasionally we wouldn’t be having this conversation. The whole point of the dark side of the Force is that it is insidious and corrupting, the more you use it the more intoxicated you become in its use. There is no using the dark side safely (unless your name is Anakin Skywalker but look what happened to him) and very few Jedi or former Jedi ever showed the ability to use the dark side without it overwhelming them and once you start using the dark side it’s almost impossible to stop. It’s a wonder Dooku was ever able to use the dark side without succumbing to it and it took Asajj Ventress a lot of time and effort to let go of it.

If the Sith didn’t use the dark side and actually just used the light side differently to the Jedi, maybe there would be ground upon which the Sith could prove they’re not inherently evil. The problem is, however, when you talk about the Sith achieving freedom they only ever do so for themselves. The Sith concept of freedom is “I can do what I want without any limitations or repercussions” and understandably that causes a lot of problems if there are too many Sith. That’s why the Tule of Two was implemented, after all, because of all the in-fighting. If the Sith had been as benevolent as you suggest they can be, they’d have never lost to the Jedi.

[DaedalusMkV]

If the Sith had been as benevolent as you suggest they can be, they’d have never lost to the Jedi.

I think you may have misunderstood me. The Sith are a bunch of backstabbing hypocrites who generally fall into the category of 'horrible, evil monster'. The tiny number of exceptions to this rule, mostly showing up in The Old Republic MMO, are generally exasperated by how stupid, evil and shortsighted their fellow Sith are, and all either get killed by the general population of Sith or eventually break away and found their own movement. Notably, they are also all portrayed as Light Side-aligned, according to the game's morality system.

The stated philosophy of the Sith is not necessarily evil, which is probably a factor in them continuing to gain recruits, and theoretically if they stuck to that philosophy they might be able to achieve some sort of positive outcome. But they don't, and thus pretty much always wind up in exactly the situation you describe.

If the conflict in Star Wars was between 'be detached, deny your emotions, achieve enlightenment' and 'channel your passion, empower yourself, embrace freedom', as the Codes of the Jedi and Sith would suggest, the Sith might have a point. Practically, what the two Orders stand for are 'be responsible, you have great power and should accept restrictions as a result' and 'do whatever, consequences are for chumps'. And the Sith end up the cartoon supervillains they are.

I certainly think you could portray a bunch of non-Dark-Side Sith who actually stand for personal freedom and constructive channeling of emotion. But that certainly isn't a thing that Star Wars has ever actually done, and I certainly am not claiming that actually represents the Sith as they are.

[Mechalich]

The stated philosophy of the Sith is not necessarily evil, which is probably a factor in them continuing to gain recruits, and theoretically if they stuck to that philosophy they might be able to achieve some sort of positive outcome. But they don't, and thus pretty much always wind up in exactly the situation you describe.

It's not that they don't, it's that they can't. Sith philosophy doesn't exist in a vacuum, it's a framework for how they relate to the Force. In Star Wars the Force is very real and approaching the Force via Sith philosophy means diving deep into the dark side and getting all twisted and deranged as a result. The Sith Code is in denial about this: they believe the Force can be made to serve them (as Lana Beniko says: 'may the Force serve you well'), which is an absolutely delusional stance. As such, because the philosophy of the Sith is selfishness mixed with denialism about the nature of reality, it produces evil.

It's also important to recognize that the Sith Code is a post-hoc piece of propaganda. It's something that the fallen Jedi of the Hundred Year Darkness came up with to indoctrinate the Sith people they had conquered, not any sort of actual philosophy.

[LibraryOgre]

The Mod Ogre: Let us be careful about political discussions, please?

However, I think addressing the problems with the Order as of TPM is part of what you see in the High Republic. In most Star Wars media, the order is either freshly destroyed, actually destroyed in story, or now rebuilding from having been destroyed. The High Republic shows a vital order, engaged with the galaxy, that doesn't try to make people emotionless, but rather aware of their emotions; there is even a point where two Masters talk about this... it's not wrong to have the feelings, you're [human], but you need to know how they're affecting you, and avoid the ones that will corrupt you. You can have joy and love and friendship, but you need to be aware of your anger and fear and attachment, and how they're affecting you.

[Talakeal]

I think you may have misunderstood me. The Sith are a bunch of backstabbing hypocrites who generally fall into the category of 'horrible, evil monster'. The tiny number of exceptions to this rule, mostly showing up in The Old Republic MMO, are generally exasperated by how stupid, evil and shortsighted their fellow Sith are, and all either get killed by the general population of Sith or eventually break away and found their own movement. Notably, they are also all portrayed as Light Side-aligned, according to the game's morality system.

The stated philosophy of the Sith is not necessarily evil, which is probably a factor in them continuing to gain recruits, and theoretically if they stuck to that philosophy they might be able to achieve some sort of positive outcome. But they don't, and thus pretty much always wind up in exactly the situation you describe.

If the conflict in Star Wars was between 'be detached, deny your emotions, achieve enlightenment' and 'channel your passion, empower yourself, embrace freedom', as the Codes of the Jedi and Sith would suggest, the Sith might have a point. Practically, what the two Orders stand for are 'be responsible, you have great power and should accept restrictions as a result' and 'do whatever, consequences are for chumps'. And the Sith end up the cartoon supervillains they are.

I certainly think you could portray a bunch of non-Dark-Side Sith who actually stand for personal freedom and constructive channeling of emotion. But that certainly isn't a thing that Star Wars has ever actually done, and I certainly am not claiming that actually represents the Sith as they are.

This is very much how I always viewed it.

I always played as a light side Sith warrior in KOTOR, SWoTOR, and SAGA; and I very much thought that most Sith were a bunch of backstabbing hypocrites.

This is in line with my IRL personally philosophy or anarcho-cynisism.

[Zevox]

To be fair, the basic Sith philosophy isn't necessarily evil - the idea that passion is something to be channeled rather than denied, the acknowledgement that struggle is an inherent part of the nature of life and the assertion that strength is necessary to achieve freedom are all perfectly reasonable ideas. If the Sith were consistent and coherent in their philosophy they would be encouraging strength in others, encouraging spirited but fair competition in every aspect of life and acknowledging the right of others to claim freedoms. If you judge the factions solely by their codes, the Jedi come off as foolishly naive to the point of denying reality while the Sith wind up looking like pragmatic realists. A sort of anarcho-capitalist dreamworld would fit perfectly with the Sith creed and the teachings they feed to their new recruits.

I think it would be more accurate to say that one can imagine a variation on the Sith Code that isn't inherently evil. The actual one is, and I think it wrong to claim the Sith are hypocritical in any way. The thing is that in the context of Star Wars, passion leading to strength/power is entirely literal, because of how the Dark Side of the Force works, and the Sith's entire belief system is that they should be able to use that however they wish, without restriction or concern for anyone else. They're quite consistent about that. Having power is all the justification they need to use it in any way they see fit as far as they're concerned - hence my prior remark about their code being a more elaborate way to say Might Makes Right.

It's not inconsistent that they're not encouraging strength in others, because nothing about their code is meant to apply to anyone but them. It's not a philosophy for everyone, just for them. (Incidentally, that's one of the few traits it shares with the Jedi Code - neither is a religion for the masses, just the creed of an exclusive order.)

[KorvinStarmast]

Ok. You guys convinced me. Thanks.

Great... now I am going to have to get my Sith tattoo changed to like, a porg or something.

Why not get a tattoo of Princess Leia in that metal bikini? Or a flaming sword? When I was a kid, we lived in Germany and some of the soldiers we encountered had this patch. Cool long before star wars or D&D.
https://www.usamm.com/products/army-...-class-a-patch

It's not that they don't, it's that they can't. Sith philosophy doesn't exist in a vacuum, it's a framework for how they relate to the Force. In Star Wars the Force is very real and approaching the Force via Sith philosophy means diving deep into the dark side and getting all twisted and deranged as a result. The Sith Code is in denial about this: they believe the Force can be made to serve them (as Lana Beniko says: 'may the Force serve you well'), which is an absolutely delusional stance. As such, because the philosophy of the Sith is selfishness mixed with denialism about the nature of reality, it produces evil.

It's also important to recognize that the Sith Code is a post-hoc piece of propaganda. It's something that the fallen Jedi of the Hundred Year Darkness came up with to indoctrinate the Sith people they had conquered, not any sort of actual philosophy.

Nice parsing of the Force and the Sith's interaction with it.

I always played as a light side Sith warrior in KOTOR, SWoTOR, and SAGA

Strikes me as the game creating an imbedded oxymoron to allow people to play a variety of characters; D&D in space? You played a Force variation on Drz'zt.

[Infernally Clay]

The Mod Ogre: Let us be careful about political discussions, please?

However, I think addressing the problems with the Order as of TPM is part of what you see in the High Republic. In most Star Wars media, the order is either freshly destroyed, actually destroyed in story, or now rebuilding from having been destroyed. The High Republic shows a vital order, engaged with the galaxy, that doesn't try to make people emotionless, but rather aware of their emotions; there is even a point where two Masters talk about this... it's not wrong to have the feelings, you're [human], but you need to know how they're affecting you, and avoid the ones that will corrupt you. You can have joy and love and friendship, but you need to be aware of your anger and fear and attachment, and how they're affecting you.

I feel like that's the point of the High Republic era, to show us what the Jedi Order should be.

By the time of The Phantom Menace, the Jedi have all but abandoned the galaxy and operate exclusively out of Coruscant. This blinds them to the dangers and plights of the galaxy at large, but also strengthens the control of the Senate over them because they're practically next door to each other. Indeed, Jedi are expected to defer to the wisdom of the Jedi Council and not doing what they say can cause problems. It's also interesting to note that the Jedi have become very monocultural. They all wear the same clothes, they all speak the same way, they're practically raised in a vacuum.

This is a stark contrast to the Jedi Order of the High Republic era, who had temples and outposts all across the galaxy and they were very in tune with the goings on in different star systems and cultures. Jedi wore different clothes, believed different things, belonged to different cultures... The Jedi Council understood it did not always have the answers and so there were Jedi who did not answer to the Council but to their own conscience, kinda like Qui-Gon Jinn would do centuries later. The Jedi Order still answered to the Senate as far as we're aware but they had a greater degree of autonomy.

I think there's a real chance that Acolyte will address this and we'll get our first true look at what the Jedi Order was meant to be.

[LibraryOgre]

This is a stark contrast to the Jedi Order of the High Republic era, who had temples and outposts all across the galaxy and they were very in tune with the goings on in different star systems and cultures. Jedi wore different clothes, believed different things, belonged to different cultures... The Jedi Council understood it did not always have the answers and so there were Jedi who did not answer to the Council but to their own conscience, kinda like Qui-Gon Jinn would do centuries later. The Jedi Order still answered to the Senate as far as we're aware but they had a greater degree of autonomy.

In the High Republic books (I'm getting back on Fallen Star, and have read most of the previous ones), it's made clear "We work with the Senate and Chancellor, because we think they're mostly right... but we do not answer to them." Over time, their independence seems to have waned... agreeing with the Chancellor seems to have become habit.

I always wonder how much of it is Yoda's fault, or at least have him as a source. Hundreds of years to cement his style into the Jedi could lead them to be sticks in the mud.

[Keltest]

In the High Republic books (I'm getting back on Fallen Star, and have read most of the previous ones), it's made clear "We work with the Senate and Chancellor, because we think they're mostly right... but we do not answer to them." Over time, their independence seems to have waned... agreeing with the Chancellor seems to have become habit.

I always wonder how much of it is Yoda's fault, or at least have him as a source. Hundreds of years to cement his style into the Jedi could lead them to be sticks in the mud.

In a lot of his appearances in the old EU at least, Yoda was something of a gremlin, and we sure see that side of him when he's screwing with Luke.

But maybe more to the point, the Jedi seem as independent from the Senate and Chancellor as ever. Perhaps more so, since presumably the legislature wasn't actively useless during the High Republic.

[Infernally Clay]

In the High Republic books (I'm getting back on Fallen Star, and have read most of the previous ones), it's made clear "We work with the Senate and Chancellor, because we think they're mostly right... but we do not answer to them." Over time, their independence seems to have waned... agreeing with the Chancellor seems to have become habit.

I always wonder how much of it is Yoda's fault, or at least have him as a source. Hundreds of years to cement his style into the Jedi could lead them to be sticks in the mud.

That's certainly part of it. The Jedi, I feel, became complacent and convinced of their own immortality, as it were. Yoda wasn't even born until after the Sith were defeated a thousand years ago, so for him his tenure has been centuries of relative peace with small threats here and there that have never been a significant risk to the Order. The idea that anyone could take the Jedi Order out was likely, in his eyes, impossible and that likely influenced how the Jedi Order, or at least the Jedi Council, saw their place in the galaxy.

Heck, when the Council found how that Count Dooku had ordered the creation of the clone army it didn't even seem to cross any of their minds that the army could be used against them. How arrogant could you be to believe that whatever plans your enemy had were of less concern than not letting anyone else find out about them?

[Sapphire Guard]

I mean, the High Republic era Jedi are massively struggling and taking considerable casualties against opposition that amounts to a large pirate gang with a few hardcore zealots in their leadership. Entire Jedi Temples are being destroyed (because they are picking off the isolated ones in the Outer Rim, Jedi Masters and Council members are battle casualties, and it's just a big gang of pirates.

Spoiler: Fallen Star

Show

Starlight Beacon, full of Jedi Knight and Masters, fell to a handful of non force sensitive terrorists, that doesn't say much about them being particularly more alert to threats. There is a Sith alive during the High Republic era that they haven't detected.

Orla and Cohmac massively screw up and unleash the Drengir on the galaxy, which overrun entire worlds.

If we're using the Clone Wars to indicate that the Jedi don't care about slavery, don't forget about Zygerria, a slave empire that the Jedi can and did destroy. But you have to be very selective with your source material if you try to talk about Jedi faults and ignore all the inconvenient parts.

Heck, when the Council found how that Count Dooku had ordered the creation of the clone army it didn't even seem to cross any of their minds that the army could be used against them. How arrogant could you be to believe that whatever plans your enemy had were of less concern than not letting anyone else find out about them?

What should they have done, exactly? That's always where these criticisms fall short, it's much easier to talk about faults than address them.

[Infernally Clay]

What should they have done, exactly? That's always where these criticisms fall short, it's much easier to talk about faults than address them.

Criticisms only fall short when people ignore they even exist. It’s like talking to a brick wall. You can sit there all day pointing out the obviously and intentionally dumb decisions the Council made, story beats inserted into the narrative explicitly for the purpose of showing how the Jedi had lost their way, but it’s just a waste of time when there’s no effort from others to acknowledge them. It’s legitimately frustrating when you reference this and that and connect all these dots and it just gets handwaved by people who are more interested in saying you’re wrong than proving you are.

It should be pretty clear, for example, that if you found out the army you were using was commissioned by the very same Sith Lord your Order is fighting, you would want to find out what the bloody hell is going on before you sent any more Jedi out there to fight with that army, especially considering the Jedi Council already knew about the inhibitor chips inside the clone troopers and that when one of them malfunctioned they killed a Jedi in cold blood. The whole thing with Fives happened before all this, remember. The more the war felt like a trap waiting to be sprung, the sooner the Jedi should have withdrawn from it. Yoda saying that they just had to win the war before Dooku could spring his trap is arrogance of the highest order.

You don’t risk your own people because you’re worried you’ll lose face. Or are we meant to believe the clones could not hold their own in the war without the Jedi? If a Jedi is worth a hundred, a thousand battle droids, just send a thousand more clones and let the Jedi withdraw from the front lines until they figure out what’s going on. It’s not like the Republic couldn’t afford it and an unpopular but alive Jedi Order is preferable to a dead but popular one.