PDA

View Full Version : Vader had the problem with surviving Jedi, not Palpatine



Tycho
12-14-2006, 09:40 PM
Darth Vader was more bi-polar and mentally imbalanced than he was as Anakin Skywalker!

Palpatine had engineered his coup perfectly:

The clones executed Order 66 and eliminated nearly 10,000 Jedi on probably 5,000 worlds. Prior to that, they were dying in engagements with the Separatists anyway.

The Senate ratified his declaration of himself as Emperor and they formulated the new government as some sort of Constitutional monarchy (in theory, not practice of course).

The surviving Jedi, and there could have been hundreds to 1,000 of them, were scattered and on the run. A disinformation campaign laid the blame for the war upon them: Dooku had been a Jedi and it wasn't common knowledge that either he or Palpatine were Lords of the Sith; the Jedi (through Dooku likely) created the Clones, and helped perpetuate the war starting with Geonosis as its initial flashpoint. Thus public sentiment was against the Jedi and the public would turn them in or lynch them at their own discretion.

Palpatine seemed satisfied (in Purge, Dark Lord, The Last of the Jedi novels, and some items appearing in Star Wars Tales comics, Tales from the Empire collected, etc.)

Darth Vader on the other hand, was obsessed with killing all the Jedi, perhaps feeling it would help erase who Anakin Skywalker had been, and the betrayal he helped engineer? He didn't want there to be anyone who could recognize him I guess. That's quite a leap into paranoia, isn't it?

JimJamBonds
12-15-2006, 12:29 AM
No he was just mad at the Jedi and wanted them all gone. Palpy thought they would no longer matter so he didn't bother with them.

Tycho
12-15-2006, 12:44 AM
Why was Vader mad at all the Jedi?

It was the Council rules that forbade him a wife, or access to the Masters' holocrons to access information he hoped would save Padme (as exemplified better by Matt Stover's novelization than George Lucas' movie).

The Younglings in the Temple led a life of priviledge by Anakin's standards, and thus they were already on Coruscant and might bind into an insurgency only blocks away from the Imperial Throne - so there was a morbid logic to why he killed the 5-10 year olds. But we assume he may have done similar "justice" to the infants / toddlers? If so, that's really pathetic of him!

Meanwhile, rogue Jedi who escaped their Clone Commanders or who operated without them, who are just spread out there galaxy-wide, really have nothing to do with the Sith's takeover and control. Palpatine is right. Yeah, Obi-Wan is Vader's public-enemy No.1, but if Quinlan Vos is out there somewhere, he's really not Vader's priority (or shouldn't be) unless he starts messing with Imperial interests.

The issue for the Jedi out there is that Palpatine has established an Empire. People like Tarkin, Motti, and Jerjerrod won't give up their power even if Sidious and Vader were both assasinated by some Jedi. The Senate ratified the creation of an Empire, and Palpatine's death wouldn't (and didn't) change that. This is an EU thread, so we all know that the Empire fought on under Thrawn, etc.

So the Jedi became something like Shogun - lost knights who allied themselves to whatever small local cause there was.

The Balance of the Force theory as its embodied by 2 on each side doesn't seem to apply either, this way:

Sidious and Vader vs. Yoda and Kenobi then Yoda & Skywalker after ANH.

But there may have still been rogue Jedi running around from the Old Republic era, not to mention new ones like Kyle Katarn - and Luke wasn't a Knight until ROTJ anyway.

Meanwhile, his father was the most confused character in SW history.

JimJamBonds
12-15-2006, 12:48 AM
Yup I say he was mad at the whole lot of them. Obbers was the one exception but he wasn't interseted so Anners was mad at Obi as well.

El Chuxter
12-15-2006, 09:56 AM
So the Jedi became something like Shogun - lost knights who allied themselves to whatever small local cause there was.

Mean you "ronin" (masterless samurai) instead of "shogun" (feudal military governor)?

Tycho
12-15-2006, 10:26 AM
Mean you "ronin" (masterless samurai) instead of "shogun" (feudal military governor)?

Yes. Thank you Chux. I learned something new today.

Bel-Cam Jos
12-15-2006, 10:12 PM
For me to move small boat named "Nin," me row "Nin."

When me in bar in Old West, me show gun.

After me make sarcastic comments on website, me commit sepuku. :eek: :spilled innards: