Star Wars Star Wars Discussion Thread - LET THE PAST D-! Oh, wait, nevermind

[LindyAF]

I'm seeing the deleted message too even though I saw it before. It's probably still showing for you because you have a copy in your cache, check with a different browser.

Good point. Looks like it was deleted, idk why. Not much I can do about that, didn’t download it.

 

[Zyobot]

RIP. Not mine, saw it on r/fudd_lore Still showing for me?

Huh; that's weird.

No idea why it won't register on everyone else's end, while remaining up on yours. But, since you mention the subreddit you got it from, I'll check it out.

Edit
Just refreshed the page and for whatever reason, the meme's back up. Never mind, I guess?

 

[Hlaalu Agent]

In that case, I don't suppose you've heard of A Second Chance or Sonderweg before? They're by the same author and both share the same (baseline) premise, which is Darth Vader time-traveling to the Clone Wars and serving as a Separatist general. The former is abandoned, however, and the latter is a rewrite that's slow to update, at best.

They sound familiar, I think I might have read one or the other or both. But thank you for bringing them to my attention.

 

[LindyAF]

Just refreshed the page and for whatever reason, the meme's back up. Never mind, I guess?

And it’s down for me now. *Technical difficulties intensify*

Also, I was thinking - what if the rule of two was a lie, and the “apprentice” is in actuality just the Sith Lord’s intended next host, with the real Sith Lord being a millennia-old bodyjacker, having long since lost any semblance of humanity/(or alien-species-ity).

Darth Bane is the one that came up with the rule of two, but he also attempted to bodyjack his apprentice, Darth Zannah. There are a few other times Sith attempt to take over apprentices, both pre-Bane and post-Bane. This also IMO would sort of squared the circle of what Sidious wants out of an apprentice and makes him trying to goad Luke into striking him down make a lot more sense. Even if Luke killing Sidious in anger caused him to fall, he’d then not exactly make a good apprentice for Sidious nor have the training to be he new Sith Master, and Vader wouldn’t have proven himself against Sidious either. On the other hand, if Luke falling gave an opening to Sidious to steal his body, that makes Sidious’ plan make more sense.

Couple ways this could work. First off is that it’s all Darth Bane. Alternatively, it could be something that many Sith tried before it was perfected at some point, or something Plagueis developed. Sidious mentions “the tragedy of Darth Plageuis” as "an ancient Sith legend” which is a bit odd as Plageuis was Sidious’ Master, but this makes more sense if Sidious killed Plageuis (or “killed” Plageuis) well before either Palpatine or Demask were born.

Obviously jossed by various things in both continuities, mostly thinking about in the context of movies-only or how it would affect various fic ideas. Also weirdly kinda-canon in Disney, but not really well done... this sort of formalizes it and makes it a bit more sensible.

 

[Jaenera Targaryen]

One thing it had that I thought would be relevant for @Zyobot's idea was that in that fic being a Sith isn't illegal - so the Jedi can't really act against Vader b/c he's being helpful and not doing anything illegal. That's kind of necessary for the fic, but IMO dark side force use in general, and particularly being a Sith, probably is formally illegal in the Republic, probably as a law that got on the books during the wars against the Sith empire and never got taken off. Mace Windu and the Jedi go to arrest Palpatine on the grounds that he's a Sith Lord and this is treated as perfectly legitimate in universe (even if it's sometimes presented as not in fanfic). I guess this could be because "being a Sith Lord" makes him a suspect for the Sith Lord who is working with the confederacy, but it also seems pretty likely that being a Sith is straight up illegal in the Republic, given the Sith wars only really ended when the Sith were (supposedly) wiped out. And we never really get any Sith doing the "technically I am doing nothing illegal" thing that I know of, and if they could one absolutely would.

In the Darth Vader + Death Squadron sent back idea, this would put Vader on a much more adversarial ground with the Jedi + Republic.

Actually, no. The RotS novelization has Sidious literally telling Mace to the face that arresting him because he's a Sith counts as religious persecution, which is forbidden by the Galactic Constitution's articles on religious freedom. Now, in the pre-Ruusan Era, being a Sith was illegal, in fact, in the aftermath of the Great Hyperspace War, Sith were considered non-persons, as part of the Sith Holocaust. However, it's likely this law was repealed/indefinitely suspended as unconstitutional after the Ruusan Reformations. The Jedi either didn't notice - I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case - or didn't care as they believed the Sith exterminated after Ruusan. Letting the law disappear into legal obscurity would just have been another case of the post-Ruusan Jedi willfully blinding themselves to the possibility of the Sith's survival and resurgence.

 

[AspblastUSA]

I have absolutely no evidence of this whatsoever, but I choose to believe that the repeal occurred not terribly long before the events of the prequels by standards of the SW timeline (say two centuries or so), when "sithism" became fashionable as a sort of counterculture not entirely unlike Laveyan Satanism. After being called in as witnesses in a number of court cases where it was established that aside from the name there was nothing in common with the ancient sect, including the fact that there was not a single trained force user among them (and in fact their rates of force sensitivity didn't vary from that of the general population at all); and fully confident that the actual Sith were long gone, the Jedi gave their backing to the repeal.

The fad died out afterwards, aside from the occasional commune in the mid-rim, and the galactic community has long since forgotten it was ever a thing.

 

[LindyAF]

Actually, no. The RotS novelization has Sidious literally telling Mace to the face that arresting him because he's a Sith counts as religious persecution, which is forbidden by the Galactic Constitution's articles on religious freedom. Now, in the pre-Ruusan Era, being a Sith was illegal, in fact, in the aftermath of the Great Hyperspace War, Sith were considered non-persons, as part of the Sith Holocaust. However, it's likely this law was repealed/indefinitely suspended as unconstitutional after the Ruusan Reformations. The Jedi either didn't notice - I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case - or didn't care as they believed the Sith exterminated after Ruusan. Letting the law disappear into legal obscurity would just have been another case of the post-Ruusan Jedi willfully blinding themselves to the possibility of the Sith's survival and resurgence.

Ah, I wasn't aware of that line.

I do think this is a bit of a silly thing to have be canon, since it needlessly complicates that scene and doesn't really do anything at any other point in Star Wars. Especially since even if being a Sith were not illegal, the arrest still seems legitimate - the Jedi and Senate members have both suspected for some time that there is a Sith Lord in the senate who has been aiding the Separatists, and aiding the Separatists makes that Sith Lord a traitor regardless of the legality of being a Sith. Being a Sith in the senate would presumably be enough to make Palpatine a suspect. It is important that Mace Windu was somewhat acting illegally and against Jedi code in attempting to execute Sidious, since this and it's mirroring Anakin's own execution of Dooku is part of what pushes Anakin toward the Dark Side. Sith being legal doesn't really do much after that scene, since AFAIK, Sidious keeps the fact that he's a Sith secret even afterward. But it is canon, regardless of whether or not it makes sense, in both continuities.

I have absolutely no evidence of this whatsoever, but I choose to believe that the repeal occurred not terribly long before the events of the prequels by standards of the SW timeline (say two centuries or so), when "sithism" became fashionable as a sort of counterculture not entirely unlike Laveyan Satanism. After being called in as witnesses in a number of court cases where it was established that aside from the name there was nothing in common with the ancient sect, including the fact that there was not a single trained force user among them (and in fact their rates of force sensitivity didn't vary from that of the general population at all); and fully confident that the actual Sith were long gone, the Jedi gave their backing to the repeal.

The fad died out afterwards, aside from the occasional commune in the mid-rim, and the galactic community has long since forgotten it was ever a thing.

Yeah, I was thinking about how it could make sense for the repeal to go through. I was thinking something along those lines, except perhaps that the repeal is a matter of judicial precedence rather than it ever being legislatively repealed - i.e. the old anti-Sith law is still on the books, but there's a more recent "no religious persecution" amendment, with it having been successfully argued in court that the amendment overturns the law in the context you're describing - although I have a hard time seeing it being given Jedi backing, even then. This would somewhat reflect Windu's issue with leaving Sidious alive in the movie- "he controls the courts" although it somewhat contradicts the novelization line, although only weakly.

Alternatively, perhaps the repeal was pushed through by Palpatine and his allies, under another guise (something like "tolerance for non-Jedi force cults"), nominally as an attempt to make sure any non-Jedi force cults (stuff like the Nightsisters, maybe?) didn't feel like they had to join the Separatists.

Hmmm, this being true could be fun to add as a complexity or dimension in fan ideas that are not explicitly or tacitly pro-Sith. "Sithism is a religion of peace" stuff.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

I do think this is a bit of a silly thing to have be canon, since it needlessly complicates that scene and doesn't really do anything at any other point in Star Wars.

I think it makes sense as canon; it makes explicit that the Sith have in fact turned the Jedi against their own Republic. When the security recordings are shown to the Senate and broadcast to the general public, the evidence is absolutely clear that the Jedi aren't the victims of some horrible misunderstanding; they are knowingly launching a coup against the rightful Supreme Chancellor of the Republic.

And that's even completely true. The Jedi brought this on themselves with their arrogance and refusal to wait for actual evidence.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Actually, no. The RotS novelization has Sidious literally telling Mace to the face that arresting him because he's a Sith counts as religious persecution, which is forbidden by the Galactic Constitution's articles on religious freedom. Now, in the pre-Ruusan Era, being a Sith was illegal, in fact, in the aftermath of the Great Hyperspace War, Sith were considered non-persons, as part of the Sith Holocaust. However, it's likely this law was repealed/indefinitely suspended as unconstitutional after the Ruusan Reformations. The Jedi either didn't notice - I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case - or didn't care as they believed the Sith exterminated after Ruusan. Letting the law disappear into legal obscurity would just have been another case of the post-Ruusan Jedi willfully blinding themselves to the possibility of the Sith's survival and resurgence.

To quote:

MACE WINDU: You're a Sith Lord!

PALPATINE: Am I? Even if true, that's hardly a crime. My philosophical outlook is a personal matter. In fact— the last time I read the Constitution, anyway—we have very strict laws against this type of persecution. So I ask you again: what is my alleged crime? How do you expect to justify your mutiny before the Senate? Or do you intend to arrest the Senate as well?

MACE WINDU: We're not here to argue with you.

PALPATINE: No, you're here to imprison me without trial. Without even the pretense of legality. So this is the plan, at last: the Jedi are taking over the Republic.

MACE WINDU: Come with us. Now.

PALPATINE: I shall do no such thing. If you intend to murder me, you can do so right here.

MACE WINDU: Don't try to resist.

[sounds that have been identified by frequency resonances to be the ignition of several lightsabers]

PALPATINE: Resist? How could I possibly resist? This is murder, you Jedi traitors! How can I be any threat to you? Master Tiin—you're the telepath. What am I thinking right now?


To be fair, this doesn't match the scene in the movie at all. On the other hand, this entire section of the novelization is preceded by: "[the following is a transcript of an audio recording presented before the Galactic Senate on the afternoon of the first Empire Day; identities of all speakers verified and confirmed by voiceprint analysis]". In other words, the clear intent is that this recording is entirely fabricated by Palpatine's agents, whereas what we saw in the movie was what "really happened", but at this point only Palpatine knows it.

 

[LindyAF]

I think it makes sense as canon; it makes explicit that the Sith have in fact turned the Jedi against their own Republic. When the security recordings are shown to the Senate and broadcast to the general public, the evidence is absolutely clear that the Jedi aren't the victims of some horrible misunderstanding; they are knowingly launching a coup against the rightful Supreme Chancellor of the Republic.

And that's even completely true. The Jedi brought this on themselves with their arrogance and refusal to wait for actual evidence.

I'd agree that this might thematic sense if we saw or if there was any support for the Sith turning the Jedi against the Republic. If Sidious had managed to disillusion or increase dissent with the Jedi towards the Republic, or fomented inclinations within elements of the Jedi towards the idea that maybe they ought to be in charge. Or even if he'd used influence to cultivate a tendency in the Jedi to act first and get results and ask forgiveness later. But we never see anything like this. Sidious' influence on the order is pretty minimal - the most it ever amounts to is getting his friend (Anakin) on the council at the very end of the war, but Anakin is one of several and doesn't appear to have any influence in the council. Besides that, Sidious snags Dooku and Anakin but only as rogue elements.

And turning opinion against the Jedi isn't at all how Sidious actually resists the coup or destroys the Jedi. He isn't arrested but then able to get out of it because the Jedi didn't cross their ts, or even get out of it by calling for help from Republic-loyal forces. He gets out of being arrested by simply killing the people attempting to arrest him, with the exception of Windu - who Anakin kills because 1) Palpatine has convinced Anakin that he knows something that Anakin needs to know, so Anakin needs him alive and 2) Windu executing Palpatine goes against Jedi teaching. But Anakin at least is under the impression that arresting him and having him stand trial is perfectly legitimate - he says something to this affect in the movie. He purges the Jedi with a mind-controlled Clone Army who he doesn't have to present any evidence for at all. Him going to the Senate and the spin is all after the fact, and after any Jedi who could have disputed his narrative anyway is dead or in hiding.

If the Jedi brought this down on themselves in some sense with their arrogance, this would be an important theme that should show up elsewhere in the movies - it makes the Jedi more morally complicated than "they're the good force-users" which is what we see. But it never does. Maybe this is a theme that "should" be there, or would make for an interesting story, but it isn't.

 

[LindyAF]

To be fair, this doesn't match the scene in the movie at all. On the other hand, this entire section of the novelization is preceded by: "[the following is a transcript of an audio recording presented before the Galactic Senate on the afternoon of the first Empire Day; identities of all speakers verified and confirmed by voiceprint analysis]". In other words, the clear intent is that this recording is entirely fabricated by Palpatine's agents, whereas what we saw in the movie was what "really happened", but at this point only Palpatine knows it.

The fact that this is intended to be a fabrication of the dialogue IMO reinforces my point, since then canonically Sidious never actually tried to play the "I'm technically not doing anything illegal" card, he just said he did afterward.

Sidious could just be straight up lying about what is and isn't legal. Possibly having subsequently passed pro-Sith legislation after the arrest/coup and backdated it, or just expecting that it won't be checked and even if it is it's not like admitted to being a Sith here.

In the movies, Windu initially says "the Senate will decide your fate" making it very clear that it's intended to be a legitimate arrest and not a coup at this point. And if it were not a legitimate arrest, Sidious could pretty easily just play along for a bit and get off scott free. It being illegitimate from the get-go weakens that it becomes illegitimate, with Windu deciding to kill Palpatine without trial, which is part of what pushes Anakin over the edge.

 

[StormEagle]

Actually, no. The RotS novelization has Sidious literally telling Mace to the face that arresting him because he's a Sith counts as religious persecution, which is forbidden by the Galactic Constitution's articles on religious freedom. Now, in the pre-Ruusan Era, being a Sith was illegal, in fact, in the aftermath of the Great Hyperspace War, Sith were considered non-persons, as part of the Sith Holocaust. However, it's likely this law was repealed/indefinitely suspended as unconstitutional after the Ruusan Reformations. The Jedi either didn't notice - I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case - or didn't care as they believed the Sith exterminated after Ruusan. Letting the law disappear into legal obscurity would just have been another case of the post-Ruusan Jedi willfully blinding themselves to the possibility of the Sith's survival and resurgence.

Which is kinda stupid, given all the times in their history that the Jedi and the Republic have been fucked over by some random force user/Jedi finding and fucking around with the Holocron/tomb of insert Dark lord here.

You would think that’d be a law that the Jedi would want to keep around.

 

[BlackDragon98]

Hmmm, this being true could be fun to add as a complexity or dimension in fan ideas that are not explicitly or tacitly pro-Sith. "Sithism is a religion of peace" stuff.

Going off Legends here

Mostly peaceful religious sacrifices.

Mostly peaceful gang rapes of underage persons (Sariss).

Mostly peaceful slavery.

Mostly peaceful mass life-force draining rituals.

Much peaceful, very life.

 

[LindyAF]

Going off Legends here

Mostly peaceful religious sacrifices.

Mostly peaceful gang rapes of underage persons (Sariss).

Mostly peaceful slavery.

Mostly peaceful mass life-force draining rituals.

Much peaceful, very life.

Well, of course those were all sith extremists and also not real sith who clearly don't follow it's teachings, being non-peaceful. It wouldn't be tolerant to generalize from those few extremists onto the large number of moderate Sith who only work for and with them and run cover for them!

 

[Jaenera Targaryen]

Which is kinda stupid, given all the times in their history that the Jedi and the Republic have been fucked over by some random force user/Jedi finding and fucking around with the Holocron/tomb of insert Dark lord here.

You would think that’d be a law that the Jedi would want to keep around.

The Jedi have a habit of sticking their heads in the sand. Especially the post-Ruusan Order, which constantly insisted on the Sith's destruction after the New Sith Wars. It took the death of a Jedi Master and the discovery of Sith involvement in a literal corporate uprising against the Republic to admit that yes, the Sith were still around.

There was also their overdependence on precognition, i.e. their belief that they would always be able to sense and predict when and where a possible Sith resurgence, and nip it in the bid. Which was exactly what the Rule of Two took advantage of: the Jedi were on the lookout for a resurgent Sith Empire, but while they were looking out for that, they completely missed the two Sith Lords just standing there, plus a handful of their acolytes mucking about.

Yoda outright realizes how...arrogant, presumptuous, and even impious the Jedi Order had become when he faced off against Darth Sidious. In the novelization of RotS, while he was holding off Sidious' Force Lightning, Yoda pierced the Shroud of the Dark Side and saw the Order of the Sith Lords in their entirety. It's explicitly stated he knew the Jedi had lost long before he confronted Sidious, because while the Jedi Order had stagnated, the Sith had evolved into something new that Yoda couldn't simply destroy by killing Sidious (especially since the whole point of the Rule of Two was to concentrate as much of the Dark Side's power within the two Sith, i.e. killing Sidious would only make Vader stronger).

 

[ShadowArxxy]

He isn't arrested but then able to get out of it because the Jedi didn't cross their ts, or even get out of it by calling for help from Republic-loyal forces.

No, he does one worse: he four-dimensional chesses the Jedi into committing actual armed treason against the Republic, simply because they believe that the actual justice system and the democratic legislature would side with the Chancellor and not them. He doesn't *have to* get out of it; he made his enemies so convinced of their own protagonist-centered morality that they didn't even consider taking legal measures.

If the Jedi brought this down on themselves in some sense with their arrogance, this would be an important theme that should show up elsewhere in the movies - it makes the Jedi more morally complicated than "they're the good force-users" which is what we see. But it never does. Maybe this is a theme that "should" be there, or would make for an interesting story, but it isn't.

It does show up elsewhere in the movies, when the Jedi are openly against democracy and plan a coup against the Supreme Chancellor before they have any evidence that he's a Sith, and is hinted at all the way back in Episode I, where they openly state that they have no intention of freeing the slaves on Tatooine because their mission is only to help the rich people on Naboo.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

The way I see it, the actual "Revenge of the Sith" isn't just succeeding in wiping out the Jedi Order; it's an ideological and philosophical victory in maneuvering the Jedi into exposing their own hypocrisy and the complete emptiness of all of the higher ideals that the Jedi supposedly believe in.

This is what makes it so ironic that Obi-Wan declares that his allegiance is "to the Republic, to democracy!" -- because the entire Jedi Order just openly demonstrated that they have *no* loyalty at all to either the Republic or to democracy.

 

[LindyAF]

No, he does one worse: he four-dimensional chesses the Jedi into committing actual armed treason against the Republic, simply because they believe that the actual justice system and the democratic legislature would side with the Chancellor and not them. He doesn't *have to* get out of it; he made his enemies so convinced of their own protagonist-centered morality that they didn't even consider taking legal measures.



It does show up elsewhere in the movies, when the Jedi are openly against democracy and plan a coup against the Supreme Chancellor before they have any evidence that he's a Sith, and is hinted at all the way back in Episode I, where they openly state that they have no intention of freeing the slaves on Tatooine because their mission is only to help the rich people on Naboo.

See, I think you're big braining something that you want to be in the text - and maybe it would have even made for a more compelling story - but it's just not there. (With the big exception of Windu.)

Because the thing is, they do have evidence that he's Sith. He all but straight out admits it to Anakin. Anakin tells the other Jedi and the other Jedi (correctly) do not really doubt him - Anakin is Palpatine's friend and political ally, he would have no reason to lie. This might not be enough to convict, since presumably Anakin did not record him and he isn't testifying, but if being a Sith is a crime I can't think of any possible legal system where heavily implying you've done a serious crime to what is essentially a cop would not be grounds for arrest.

If being a Sith is not a crime, then the Jedi still have pretty solid evidence that he's committed treason. Because the Jedi have evidence that he's a Sith Lord, and reason to believe that there's a Sith Lord in the Senate in league with the Separatists. And Sith are an extremely small group - Yoda appears to know about the Rule of Two in TPM, and Dooku just died, so there's only one Sith Lord in the galaxy and he's in the senate and in league with the Separatists... and Palpatine has all but told Anakin he's a Sith Lord. Again, probably not enough to convict. But an arrest? What do you think they need for an arrest? Him to start screaming "UNLIMITED POWER" on the holonet while juggling red lightsabers?

And the Jedi, when they go to arrest the chancellor do not believe at that point that the senate and courts would side with Palpatine because Mace Windu says "The senate will decide your fate." It's only later, after Windu is the last master standing, that he decides that Palpatine is too dangerous to be left alive.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Because the thing is, they do have evidence that he's Sith. He all but straight out admits it to Anakin.

Sidious admitted it to Anakin and Anakin told Windu, true, but the scene where the Jedi planned to depose the Chancellor *and* the Senate *and* the courts happened well before that.

The Jedi High Council already agreed that they were going to confront the Supreme Chancellor, demand that he surrender his emergency wartime powers (even though the war was not yet over), and that if he did not immediately comply with their demand, they were going to depose the Chancellor on the spot, then send more Jedi to depose the courts and even the Senate itself "to facilitate a peaceful transition of power" to the Jedi. It is very clearly indicated that the Jedi attend to simply *appoint* judges who will railroad the Chancellor and anyone who sides with him.

 

[LindyAF]

Sidious admitted it to Anakin and Anakin told Windu, true, but the scene where the Jedi planned to depose the Chancellor *and* the Senate *and* the courts happened well before that.

The Jedi High Council already agreed that they were going to confront the Supreme Chancellor, demand that he surrender his emergency wartime powers (even though the war was not yet over), and that if he did not immediately comply with their demand, they were going to depose the Chancellor on the spot, then send more Jedi to depose the courts and even the Senate itself "to facilitate a peaceful transition of power" to the Jedi. It is very clearly indicated that the Jedi attend to simply *appoint* judges who will railroad the Chancellor and anyone who sides with him.

Been a while since I watched ROTS, is this the scene you're referring to?