Empire Hated? Pah

[Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman]

If we're asking whether the Empire hated or not, first we should ask this question: can we, in reality, have benevolent dictatorship government?

Dictatorship means absolute power. There's no check & balance in dictatorship government. The ruler answers to no one. It means that nothing can prevent the ruler to f**k his subjects. And in dictatorship, if you're questioning the dictator's authority, you'll usually get your a** busted.

In democratic government, if the ruler is doing bad things, the people can replace him with another. But in dictatorship, IF the ruler's doing bad things, there's nothing we can do about it. Period.

But does it automatically translate that a dictator will always doing bad things to the people? (I mean average people, not the opposition/rebels) Yes, the dictator answers to no one. But if he make the people content and prosper, why should they hate him?

Next question: is Palpatine dictatorship benevolent or evil? Is the Empire hated by the people?

Unfortunately, that's very difficult to answer. In the movies we've never seen the lives of average Imperial citizen. Consider these:
- Leia: one of the Rebel leaders and ex-senator
- Obi-Wan: ex-Jedi Knight
- Han Solo: smuggler & outlaw
- Lando: operated business ilegally (Cloud City. Not that gas mining is illegal, but he doesn't have the appropriate license or such)

Now, the closest example to average citizen is Luke. In the movie, he stated that he hates the Empire, but, as I said before, there can be many explanations:
1. He was told his family history by Obi-Wan.
2. He maybe met & talked with Obi-Wan some times before events in ANH, and persuaded by Obi-Wan's views on the Empire
3. He lives on Tatooine and he hasn't seen or experienced anything like the Rebellion, before. As Master of Ossus had said, he was just like a little kid watching his first airplane fly by during WWI and knowing that it was off to fight the Germans.
4. He just hated the Empire like all other Imperial Citizens because they were oppressed by the government.

Explanation #3 indicates that in general, the people in Tatooine (or at least around Luke's neighborhood) hated the Empire. Luke's "little kid" zealousness to join the rebellion indicates that "the Empire is evil" is an accepted norm around his neighborhood.

But #3 doesn't necessarily mean that the Empire is hated by most of its citizen. Like TheDarkling said, it may depends on location.



Conclusion: Based on observing average Imperial citizen (Luke is the closest), it is hard to decide whether the Empire is hated or not. There's so little to observe. So many question unanswered.

The other thing may be used to analyze whether people hated the Empire or not is using Stormtrooper's covert approach in slaughtering Jawas & Luke's family. Unfortunately it proves nothing; only *indicates* that the Empire is not kind of government who usually oppresses and terrorizes its subjetcs.


Anyone has better theories? Different approach?


PS:

No, when he said that it wasn't that he liked the Empire, he hated it, but there was nothing he could do about it, he had ALREADY lost his family to stormtroopers, had seen the results of their slaughter of the Jawas, AND had been straightened out about part of the story of his father by Obi-Wan. Those are all events that could have rapidly changed one's opinion of the Empire, in fact, Kyle Katarn did so almost immediately for very similar reasons (ref. Rebel Agent, Soldier for the Empire).

Master of Ossus: Unfortunately this has to be singled out from the explanations because it actually happened before he knew he lost his family to the Stromies. But it may be because of his previous conversation with Obi-Wan, which is explained by #1 or #2.


PPS: I previously claimed that the Empire is not hated by the majority of the population. I admit it was my mistake. Based on facts we have here, I will assume nothing. At least not yet.

[Smiling Bandit]

Sorry about the mass format suckage on my last post here.

Germany also had something of a history of being democratic, and Hitler had to be voted into office before he even thought about seizing control of the entire country.

A few years of poorly functioning democratic rule by men who don't like democracy and have no experience with it doesn't count. In fact, that is very much a reason *why* Hitler came to power: in the Depression era, German democracy seemed weak, follish, and ineffective. Germans did not think of their nation as a democracy until after WWII, when the ravages of fascism and Communist control led to democracy as a a way of saying "we have nothing else to try".

Hitler was not made ruler of Germany. Oh, its true, he was voted in, and certainly the populace did get vote him into the position of high power. But they did not promote him to dictatrship - that he created himself with a rigged vote by men he, himself controlled.

[Smiling Bandit]

And please don't think i am excusing the Germans people then for voting up Hitler. Nevertheless, I just posted the history.

Back on topic, I agree the Emporer does not rule by terror alone. That is, I think, why he wants the Death Star: ships and BDZ fleets are nice, but they do not inspire the same terror as outright planetary destruction. People have been around such things for a very long time - they hold no fear of the big ships. If the galaxy were unified against him, or even partly so, Palpatine would fall without the Death Star.

But with it, he can control the whole galaxy. No one would oppose him, because no fleet or planet could hold him for more than a minute or two.

Luckily for us Imperial Civilians, the Death Star designers didn't even stop to think that a ship that big might have a spot small enough for a precisely aimed topedo on a specifically charted course to hit the voonerabbles [sic].

So, anyway. I think most Imperial civilians don't fear being murdered in their sleep by Stomttroopers. However, they might be afraid that if they said anything really bad about the Emporer and someone with some power overheard them, they might "dissappear". Hitler did this and he didn't rule by terror either. He did intimidate his opponents both before and

[IRG CommandoJoe]

How could you say Hitler didn't use terror? He used everything to enforce his will. If some parade or Nazi flags or something were in the streets, you were required to salute them, or you would have hell to pay. And even Wong said these Nazi fucks gang-raped women, and didn't even hide the fact because the people couldn't do jack shit about it. Now if you don't consider that terror and brutality, there's something wrong with you. I say that any dictatorship is horrible because there are no garauntees that it will go smoothly. What would happen if even a good ruler was insane, sick, or even in a bad mood?! There wouldn't be anything to stop him from doing horrible, evil things. Unless one uses violence. Violence comes with dictatorship. Also, what happens after the dictator dies? Another violent war that determines who has the power? Of course! And it never matters as to who becomes the next one, because it just matters on how good the guy can wage war. So a military tactician or strategist would most likely become the next dictator, and then after him, similar events would happen. Thus, dictatorships are nearly always militaristic, which isn't good for the average person. I don't see why a dictatorship with a SITHLORD as a dictator would be any different.

[Smiling Bandit]

BUt that was not how he maintained his power. Hitler had that and kept it *because* he was popular, a demogogue. He could have had power without terror, but he tolerated no political dissension from outside the party. Ironically, he promoted tensions inside the party, claiming "survival of the fittest" would ensure Germany stayed strong.