PT and the problem of choice: Jedi, Clones and war!

Jul 16, 2021 14:55:01 GMT mikeximus said:

Mace never says "we don't want to be involved in any war effort". That is not even an inference here! The Jedi are continuously engaged in "warfare". The idea that somehow they would stay out of it on the galactic scale, but, somehow a planetary one was OK is also a bit of head scratcher.

Once again, Mace is giving Palpatine the stark and stern reality of the situation, while also being irritated with Palpatines Boasts of his negotiations not failing:

Not even an inference?

No, not even an inference...

I think the fact that Mace then goes on to say, "We're keepers of the peace, not soldiers" does in fact create an inference (at the very least) that this is more than an issue of practicality, but a matter of what role the Jedi are suited for by their very nature.

Taking 1 single line of dialogue of a larger conversation is not proper. The line about peacekeepers and soldiers does not live in a bubble unto itself. It is a part of a larger conversation, in which Mace is talking about the practicalities of the Jedi situation, which is how many there are. Mace is not talking about ideology.

In my best Sam Jackson voice, Mace is saying.. "Listen Mother Fucker, there's not enough of us Jedi to fight a war for your punk ass, because we are a peacekeeping force, not an army." Mace literally says it's a numbers game, because they are a peace keeping force, not a standing army of soldiers. Peacekeepers, by earthly definition and reasoning are smaller forces that are not equipped nor have the numbers to take on established armies. Mace is not talking about the Jedi ideology. He does not say, "Fighting in war is against the Jedi Code, so we cannot help you if it comes to a full scale war."

George Lucas from the Archival Commentary for AOTC:

The first real scene in the movie is with Palpatine and the Jedi, and it's primarily designed to setup the fact that the Jedi are having a hard time keeping peace and justice in the galaxy. And that they aren't really designed as an army, they are designed as a kind of police force and diplomatic core, and I just needed to remind the audience here that the Jedi aren't really.. that there aren't enough of them really to conduct a full scale war. Which is something that is more or less unknown in the galaxy at this point. When the Republic came into being, War was, it pretty much ended all wars because of the Senate and doing things through the Senate.

Notice at the end of the quote.. Lucas doesn't say the formation of the Republic ended all war. He says it pretty much ended all wars. The words "pretty much" is a very important distinction as it means that there were still some wars, and that is why the Jedi were needed. When the Senate could not bring things to a conclusion via negotiations, and open hostility broke out, than the Jedi were needed. Because there were no large or full scale wars, the Jedi were enough to keep the peace and justice of the Republic during those 1000 years. Now that there is a threat of a full scale, galaxy wide war, that changes the math, and Mace is telling Palpatine about the reality of the math. Not Jedi Ideology.

As Lucas says, the scene is about telling you and I that there are not enough Jedi to fight a full scale war.

You mention the Jedi choosing sides in the Naboo conflict in the previous movie, but that is not actually true. Qui-Gon explicitly tells the Queen that he can only protect her, not fight a war for her. Later he reminds Obi-Wan that they cannot use their powers to help the Queen persuade the Gungans to aid her in her campaign. The Jedi have not chosen sides in a war; they have chosen to protect the Queen from being killed. They are very careful not to exceed that limited mandate.

Once again.. grabbing one line of dialogue from a larger conversation is not proper because it loses the context of the greater conversation. The conversation is going on because everyone is perplexed by Amidala's decision to return to Naboo where the Trade Federation has control with their army. Panaka says they have no standing army. This is where Qui-Gon steps in right after Panaka says his peace, and says "I can only protect, I cannot fight a war for you". This is a reminder to the Queen of his mandate and the fact he is only 1 person. Unless you really think Qui-Gon felt he could fight an entire war by himself if there was no mandate in place? I highly doubt even Qui Gon could do that or would think he could do it, so what Qui Gon is getting across here is a reminder of his mandate and the practicality of the situation where the Queen has not told anyone of her plans on how to deal with the Droid Army.

I hate to break it to you.. When the Jedi choose to protect the Queen from the Trade Federation, they picked a side. I mean.. that is "literally" picking sides. They did not send Jedi to protect the Trade Federations leadership in order to be equal, balanced, and impartial.. They choose to help the Queen and Naboo only, and by doing so it impacted the outcome. No Jedi to protect her, no Jedi to protect her and her forces as they made their way into the palace, and no Jedi to protect her and her forces from Maul.

Remember that in the beginning of the movie, the Jedi are not there to attack the Trade Federation. As George Lucas has explained, they're there to say, "You get half, and you get half" to make the Trade Federation end the blockade. They really are there to negotiate. It is only upon being attacked by the Trade Federation that they employ force in an attempt to reach the Viceroy. They use force as a last resort and only to the extent that is required to accomplish the necessary outcome should diplomacy utterly fail, within the contexts of a specific mandate. This is a far cry from commanding troops against enemy forces in a full-scale, galactic war lasting for an indefinite period of time.

Yes, I do understand all that. That is why I said in my last post that the Jedi pick a side after they determine that the Trade Federation are the bad aggressors in the situation. Again, when they choose to protect the leadership of one side of a conflict over the other, they choose a side in the conflict. What I said in my last post:

The Jedi also choose sides. In TPM, they clearly choose sides. The Jedi identify the Trade Federation (who are full fledged members of the Galactic Senate) as the aggressors in the conflict, and choose to help the Queen and Naboo. They insert themselves into a War, they choose sides, and that choice has a direct impact on the outcome of the war.

If the Jedi were completely impartial, than they would have left the Queen and Naboo to their own fate of the choices the Queen made. Instead they choose to help her. That is picking sides in a conflict, even if it is the right thing and choice to make, it is still picking sides. The Jedi cannot use their power to influence the Gungans because that is a highly unethical thing to do. Tricking the Gungans into fighting and dying via mind tricks is an extremely unethical and immoral thing.

War is not a simple, tit-for-fat, you-attacked-me-so-the-arm-comes-off situation. War is messy and fraught with moral horrors. The Jedi are no longer using their powers to prevent wider conflict but to perpetuate it. When they cross that line, anything starts to become permissible. The limits the Jedi used to impose on their own power fall away, as does the humility they once observed regarding their own knowledge and judgment, and it all leads them to a dark place.

Yes, war is full of moral horrors, no doubt about that.. However, no where in the movies does any Jedi ever say that they should not be doing what they are doing, when it comes to fighting in the Clone Wars. The closest we get to that is in the Clone Wars animated series where Yoda never says they shouldn't be fighting, he only says that they were not prepared for the darkness that comes with fighting in such a prolonged and wide spread conflict. Which was, in part, due to the Jedi and his own arrogance.

As Lucas says in the quote I provided in my previous post. Everyone has a right to protect themselves, even resorting to violence. What matters is what's the motivating factor behind it, compassion or greed.

GL: There’s a conundrum ultimately. It’s been

there forever. Which is, are you just going to sit

there and let them kill you? Or your loved ones?

Or destroy the world that you know? Or are you

going to try to fix it? At some point, you do have

to stand up for what you believe in. Obviously, I

can make my religion be whatever I want it to

be. It doesn’t have to be consistent. If a cobra’s

going to strike you, I think you have every right

to put a stick up there and hit him over the

head. Because it’s either him or you.

Of course, this is the mythology of the

cowboy. They always put him in these crises

where you have to choose between your own

personal values and the practicality of what

you need to do. You’ve got to pick up the sheriff’s badge even though you had all these

problems in the past. You’re going to have to go

out and kill people again. Even though you said

you’d never do it.

JC: It’s a collision of values.

GL: And it’s an interesting story. But generally

speaking, if you’re compassionate, you’re on

the bright side, and you live a good life. Dark

side, you turn into Darth Vader, and all is bad.

Quote

Last Edit: Jul 18, 2021 0:43:59 GMT by mikeximus

Cryogenic
Emperor

Posts: 2,261

PT and the problem of choice: Jedi, Clones and war! Jul 18, 2021 23:26:25 GMT jppiper and thephantomcalamari like this

Post by Cryogenic on Jul 18, 2021 23:26:25 GMT

Jul 18, 2021 0:37:50 GMT mikeximus said:

I think the fact that Mace then goes on to say, "We're keepers of the peace, not soldiers" does in fact create an inference (at the very least) that this is more than an issue of practicality, but a matter of what role the Jedi are suited for by their very nature.

Taking 1 single line of dialogue of a larger conversation is not proper.

I think you are doing a version of the same thing, though. In your case, you are focusing on the notion that Mace is starkly reminding Palpatine that it's a numbers game and there are too few Jedi to protect the Republic. This, you might say, is the pragmatic argument against war from the Jedi POV. But there's also a moral or spiritual one. How invested the Jedi are in presenting the case for that argument, it's hard to say.

Nevertheless, as TPC has pointed out, Mace's line ends with him telling Palpatine point-blank: "We're keepers of the peace, not soldiers." How much clearer can that be? Just as TPC said, an inference (or implication) is created that the Jedi may not be suitable, because that's not what they're trained to be, nor has there been anything like a full-scale war (per Sio Bibble's line later in the movie) "since the formation of the Republic".

Thus, it's a big thing for the Jedi to get their heads around; and even if the numbers were there, which they aren't, that isn't what they signed on to do for the Republic, nor is it some small constitutional change for the Jedi or the Republic.

The line about peacekeepers and soldiers does not live in a bubble unto itself. It is a part of a larger conversation, in which Mace is talking about the practicalities of the Jedi situation, which is how many there are. Mace is not talking about ideology.

It's true that the line doesn't live in a bubble (except a "speech bubble" -- haha). None of the lines in the movies do. They are all inextricably bound together. This is part of Palpatine's gambit: he plans to tear apart these symbiotic connections and put something much starker and uglier ("If it works") in their place.

Mace doesn't have to be talking about ideology in any explicit way for him to be reminding Palpatine, "Hey, champ. This isn't what we're about." In a way, you might argue that he is dodging the issue by hiding behind the numbers thing. But a Supreme Chancellor is no fool. They know how the Jedi work and what they stand for.

In my best Sam Jackson voice, Mace is saying.. "Listen Mother Fucker, there's not enough of us Jedi to fight a war for your punk ass, because we are a peacekeeping force, not an army." Mace literally says it's a numbers game, because they are a peace keeping force, not a standing army of soldiers. Peacekeepers, by earthly definition and reasoning are smaller forces that are not equipped nor have the numbers to take on established armies. Mace is not talking about the Jedi ideology. He does not say, "Fighting in war is against the Jedi Code, so we cannot help you if it comes to a full scale war."

Yet there's an important qualitative difference between low-level enforcement and the settling of disputes and arguments and all-out military aggression. Palpatine's machinations are clearly designed to push the Jedi into war -- a path they don't really want the Republic or themselves going down.

BTW, while I would agree with you that the Jedi aren't strictly impartial, they are meant to uphold the basic laws and the underlying constitution of the Republic; whatever those laws are deemed to be. Becoming embroiled in a war is a major constitutional change; not some trifling amendment.

At some point, it becomes hard to maintain complete impartiality and perfect detachment, especially when circumstances become dire and it's clear that sweeping changes will affect things on a major scale. If the Jedi are reluctant to see the Republic fall into war, they have a right to be concerned and to counsel dialogue and diplomacy. After all, as "guardians of peace and justice", that is what is expected of them in their covenant with the Republic. To completely sit back and mindlessly allow the Republic to crumble into ruin, or become a twisted parody of itself, would be extremely immoral from the Jedi POV -- and, indeed, an abdication of their basic responsibilities.

George Lucas from the Archival Commentary for AOTC:

The first real scene in the movie is with Palpatine and the Jedi, and it's primarily designed to setup the fact that the Jedi are having a hard time keeping peace and justice in the galaxy. And that they aren't really designed as an army, they are designed as a kind of police force and diplomatic core, and I just needed to remind the audience here that the Jedi aren't really.. that there aren't enough of them really to conduct a full scale war. Which is something that is more or less unknown in the galaxy at this point. When the Republic came into being, War was, it pretty much ended all wars because of the Senate and doing things through the Senate.

Notice at the end of the quote.. Lucas doesn't say the formation of the Republic ended all war. He says it pretty much ended all wars. The words "pretty much" is a very important distinction as it means that there were still some wars, and that is why the Jedi were needed. When the Senate could not bring things to a conclusion via negotiations, and open hostility broke out, than the Jedi were needed. Because there were no large or full scale wars, the Jedi were enough to keep the peace and justice of the Republic during those 1000 years. Now that there is a threat of a full scale, galaxy wide war, that changes the math, and Mace is telling Palpatine about the reality of the math. Not Jedi Ideology.

As Lucas says, the scene is about telling you and I that there are not enough Jedi to fight a full scale war.

With all due respect, I think it's best to avoid telling other people what you think Lucas is telling them. People interpret things different ways (according to their personal tastes, biases, lived experiences, etc.). Sure, a galaxy-wide war changes the math. But it doesn't just change the arithmetic, it changes the calculus of everything. It's a significant shift away from what the Republic is or is meant to represent; with the Jedi assisting and maintaining the peace where they can. Haggling over "pretty much" is pettifogging. In the movie itself, Sio Bibble clearly says: "It's unthinkable. There hasn't been a full-scale war since the formation of the Republic." His incredulity when he says that can be taken to mean that a civil war is a major break in the continuity of the Republic and what it supposedly stands for.

In a way, and I can see why this would happen, you seem to be taking the Palpatine case for war. You are making light of the situation by reducing it to a problem of numbers and strenuously downplaying the major qualitative adjustment and systemic transformation the possibility of full-scale war implies.

AOTC is rather obviously constructed as the movie where the Jedi metaphorically lose their heads and are induced to become generals in a major galactic conflict. This is perfectly satirised by Lucas with Threepio's "great adventure" on Geonosis: Threepio loses his head (or his body) in a huge factory (i.e., a place of conspicuous machinery) and is pressed into battle against his will, just as the Jedi become morally discombobulated by the machinery of politics and move from cautious diplomats to steely-minded aggressors.

You mention the Jedi choosing sides in the Naboo conflict in the previous movie, but that is not actually true. Qui-Gon explicitly tells the Queen that he can only protect her, not fight a war for her. Later he reminds Obi-Wan that they cannot use their powers to help the Queen persuade the Gungans to aid her in her campaign. The Jedi have not chosen sides in a war; they have chosen to protect the Queen from being killed. They are very careful not to exceed that limited mandate.

Once again.. grabbing one line of dialogue from a larger conversation is not proper because it loses the context of the greater conversation. The conversation is going on because everyone is perplexed by Amidala's decision to return to Naboo where the Trade Federation has control with their army. Panaka says they have no standing army. This is where Qui-Gon steps in right after Panaka says his peace, and says "I can only protect, I cannot fight a war for you". This is a reminder to the Queen of his mandate and the fact he is only 1 person. Unless you really think Qui-Gon felt he could fight an entire war by himself if there was no mandate in place? I highly doubt even Qui Gon could do that or would think he could do it, so what Qui Gon is getting across here is a reminder of his mandate and the practicality of the situation where the Queen has not told anyone of her plans on how to deal with the Droid Army.

Well, in some cut dialogue, none other than Darth Sidious recognises that the Jedi are bound by a covenant of relative non-aggression:

imsdb.com/scripts/Star-Wars-The-Phantom-Menace.html

(Overlooking the typo on the page and corrected for clarity):

INT. THEED - PALACE - THRONE ROOM - DAY

NUTE, RUNE, DARTH MAUL, OOM-9, and a hologram of DARTH SIDIOUS walk through the throne room.

DARTH SIDIOUS: ...she is more foolish than I thought.

NUTE: We are sending all available troops to meet this army of hers assembling near the swamp. It appears to be made up of primitives. We do not expect much resistance.

OOM-9: I am increasing security at all Naboo detention camps.

DARTH MAUL: I feel there is more to this, My Master. The two Jedi may be using the Queen for their own purposes.

DARTH SIDIOUS: The Jedi cannot become involved. They can only protect the Queen. Even Qui-Gon Jinn will not break that covenant.... This will work to our advantage...

NUTE: I have your approval to proceed then, My Lord.

DARTH SIDIOUS: Proceed. Wipe them put...all of them.

Ergo, the Jedi are limited in what they can do, and the implication is that they are self-limiting. In fact, this is a whole other layer to this idea that it's just a numbers thing.

The Jedi could easily take more candidates in if they wanted to. But they have clearly established a pact with the Republic where they have agreed to limit their powers and their numbers. They only accept the most promising individuals to be trained; and even then (as in the case of Anakin initially), not always. Why is this, exactly? Why don't they take more people; even people with weaker midi-chlorian counts and train them to be soldiers? Surely, if they really wanted to, they could.

There is obviously a mandate of some sort between the Jedi and the Republic where the Jedi have agreed not to fill their ranks with Force-trained individuals and allow a standing army plus Padawans, Knights, Masters "above" them. They could obviously devote time and resources to both. But they don't. Jedi training is surely some high-level shit -- even people with somewhat lower counts could clearly benefit. And even then, the Jedi could farm the training of Force-powered soldiers out to some other organisation if they considered that more practical. But they don't do that, either. Even the Republic doesn't have its own army. Nobody wants war.

Clearly, as on Naboo, the combination of the Jedi, ambassadors, and local security teams was generally considered a reasonable enough set of resources/measures to quell disputes from becoming worse than minor skirmishes, let alone erupting into full-scale war. Thus, if the Jedi got involved in something that was verging on a bigger conflict, like the occupation of Naboo, it would look bad and compromise their peacekeeping objectives (like Anakin and Padme getting together as Jedi and Senator).

I hate to break it to you.. When the Jedi choose to protect the Queen from the Trade Federation, they picked a side. I mean.. that is "literally" picking sides. They did not send Jedi to protect the Trade Federations leadership in order to be equal, balanced, and impartial.. They choose to help the Queen and Naboo only, and by doing so it impacted the outcome. No Jedi to protect her, no Jedi to protect her and her forces as they made their way into the palace, and no Jedi to protect her and her forces from Maul.

Although the Jedi choose to help the Queen, they avoid doing anything to sway her; and they remain by her side until Darth Maul appears on Theed. Indeed, that's basically why the Jedi Council authorised them to return with Amidala to Naboo. The Council saw an opportunity to use the situation to its advantage, to discover more about Qui-Gon's mysterious attacker. Perhaps they wouldn't have been sent back otherwise.

The Jedi also choose sides. In TPM, they clearly choose sides. The Jedi identify the Trade Federation (who are full fledged members of the Galactic Senate) as the aggressors in the conflict, and choose to help the Queen and Naboo. They insert themselves into a War, they choose sides, and that choice has a direct impact on the outcome of the war.

If the Jedi were completely impartial, than they would have left the Queen and Naboo to their own fate of the choices the Queen made. Instead they choose to help her. That is picking sides in a conflict, even if it is the right thing and choice to make, it is still picking sides. The Jedi cannot use their power to influence the Gungans because that is a highly unethical thing to do. Tricking the Gungans into fighting and dying via mind tricks is an extremely unethical and immoral thing.

Again, they choose to help Amidala because the Jedi Council authorises them to be sent back to protect her, and to flush out Darth Maul (who they aren't yet sure the identity and motivations of). Obviously, once at her side, the Jedi are hardly going to hide in the bushes or have a picnic in a clearing and let her come to harm. They are going to stick near her and ensure her safety. Also bear in mind the shady legality of the Trade Federation's presence on Naboo and the way they deny invading Amidala's planet in the Senate. Yet the Jedi know better. Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan have witnessed the invasion with their own eyes and sense there is something else at work -- as, implicitly, does the Jedi Council. In these unusual circumstances, they can at least protect Amidala and even lend a touch of tactical support (as in the scene where Amidala discusses her military plan). This is not the same as fighting a war, or even authorising one, however -- they basically leave the bulk of it up to Amidala and Boss Nass, the leaders of their respective societies.

War is not a simple, tit-for-fat, you-attacked-me-so-the-arm-comes-off situation. War is messy and fraught with moral horrors. The Jedi are no longer using their powers to prevent wider conflict but to perpetuate it. When they cross that line, anything starts to become permissible. The limits the Jedi used to impose on their own power fall away, as does the humility they once observed regarding their own knowledge and judgment, and it all leads them to a dark place.

Yes, war is full of moral horrors, no doubt about that.. However, no where in the movies does any Jedi ever say that they should not be doing what they are doing, when it comes to fighting in the Clone Wars. The closest we get to that is in the Clone Wars animated series where Yoda never says they shouldn't be fighting, he only says that they were not prepared for the darkness that comes with fighting in such a prolonged and wide spread conflict. Which was, in part, due to the Jedi and his own arrogance.

As Lucas says in the quote I provided in my previous post. Everyone has a right to protect themselves, even resorting to violence. What matters is what's the motivating factor behind it, compassion or greed.

GL: There’s a conundrum ultimately. It’s been

there forever. Which is, are you just going to sit

there and let them kill you? Or your loved ones?

Or destroy the world that you know? Or are you

going to try to fix it? At some point, you do have

to stand up for what you believe in. Obviously, I

can make my religion be whatever I want it to

be. It doesn’t have to be consistent. If a cobra’s

going to strike you, I think you have every right

to put a stick up there and hit him over the

head. Because it’s either him or you.

Of course, this is the mythology of the

cowboy. They always put him in these crises

where you have to choose between your own

personal values and the practicality of what

you need to do. You’ve got to pick up the sheriff’s badge even though you had all these

problems in the past. You’re going to have to go

out and kill people again. Even though you said

you’d never do it.

JC: It’s a collision of values.

GL: And it’s an interesting story. But generally

speaking, if you’re compassionate, you’re on

the bright side, and you live a good life. Dark

side, you turn into Darth Vader, and all is bad.

The funny thing about that analogy of GL's is that cobras actually aren't all that aggressive -- well, not always, anyway:

nationalzoo.si.edu/animals/king-cobra

Although the king cobra is undoubtedly a very dangerous snake, it prefers to escape unless it is provoked. Despite its aggressive reputation, the king cobra is actually much more cautious than many smaller snakes. The cobra only attacks people when it is cornered, in self-defense or to protect its eggs. Throughout its entire range from India to Indonesia, the king cobra causes fewer than five human deaths a year, about one-fifth as many as caused by rattlers in North America. This behavior is not true of nesting females, which may attack without provocation.

I'm not sure if Lucas is trying to make a subtle point about the political situation of the film (Episode II). Either way, we do see characters expressing some caution in the first half of the film, and Amidala twice warns others (the first is a cut scene, but you earlier mentioned it yourself): "Wake up, Senators... you must wake up! If you offer the separatists violence, they can only show us violence in return!" And then on Naboo: "If the Senate votes to create an army, I'm sure it's going to push us into a civil war."

Just as one has to be careful not to provoke a dangerous animal, Lucas seems to urge (through Amidala) that violence causes violence, and blood will have blood. Therefore, while one shouldn't necessarily be naive, one should always strive to be patient and cautious in assessing a situation; and not end up making personal or political choices that could make a delicate situation worse.

Furthermore, Lucas seems to imply in the Cameron exchange above that the Jedi are being inconsistent, and he directly equates them with cowboys. That is meant to be the Han Solo archetype, not the archetype of aloof mystics. He also ends by stressing that compassion is the way to happiness/joy/contentment. But the Jedi's choices end with them being wiped out en masse in Episode III (the same episode where Darth Vader is born). You cannot expect a happy outcome when flawed choices are made and pasted over as normal or necessary. That, I think, is ultimately what he is pointing out and cautioning the viewer/reader about.

Quote

Last Edit: Jul 18, 2021 23:31:29 GMT by Cryogenic

"I have a great admiration for George Lucas. I like him as a person. He's very serious and gentle. These films are very well-intentioned. All right, they make tremendous amounts of money and appeal to kids, but they say good things, and they say them in a broad way. I believe in the Star Wars films."

-- Ian McDiarmid, May 1984, Starlog #82

thephantomcalamari
Ambassador

Posts: 95

PT and the problem of choice: Jedi, Clones and war! Jul 28, 2021 21:47:53 GMT Cryogenic and jppiper like this

Post by thephantomcalamari on Jul 28, 2021 21:47:53 GMT

Jul 18, 2021 0:37:50 GMT mikeximus said:

George Lucas from the Archival Commentary for AOTC:

The first real scene in the movie is with Palpatine and the Jedi, and it's primarily designed to setup the fact that the Jedi are having a hard time keeping peace and justice in the galaxy. And that they aren't really designed as an army, they are designed as a kind of police force and diplomatic core, and I just needed to remind the audience here that the Jedi aren't really.. that there aren't enough of them really to conduct a full scale war. Which is something that is more or less unknown in the galaxy at this point. When the Republic came into being, War was, it pretty much ended all wars because of the Senate and doing things through the Senate.

Notice at the end of the quote.. Lucas doesn't say the formation of the Republic ended all war. He says it pretty much ended all wars. The words "pretty much" is a very important distinction as it means that there were still some wars, and that is why the Jedi were needed. When the Senate could not bring things to a conclusion via negotiations, and open hostility broke out, than the Jedi were needed. Because there were no large or full scale wars, the Jedi were enough to keep the peace and justice of the Republic during those 1000 years. Now that there is a threat of a full scale, galaxy wide war, that changes the math, and Mace is telling Palpatine about the reality of the math. Not Jedi Ideology.

As Lucas says, the scene is about telling you and I that there are not enough Jedi to fight a full scale war.

But what a difference a change in emphasis makes:

The first real scene in the movie is with Palpatine and the Jedi, and it's primarily designed to setup the fact that the Jedi are having a hard time keeping peace and justice in the galaxy. And that they aren't really designed as an army, they are designed as a kind of police force and diplomatic core,. and I just needed to remind the audience here that the Jedi aren't really.. that there aren't enough of them really to conduct a full scale war Which is something that is more or less unknown in the galaxy at this point. When the Republic came into being, War was, it pretty much ended all wars because of the Senate and doing things through the Senate.

(Always remember, your focus determines your reality.)

Note how Lucas says here that the Jedi are (emphasis mine) "designed as a kind of police force and diplomatic corps". Designed. That is, their numbers are the way they are as a result of their intended function. If they had been intended to be an army, then the Jedi would presumably have relaxed their midi-chlorian standards a bit and cultivated a large group of foot soldiers to be placed under their command in the event of war. As the clones prove, it doesn't take a whole lot of Force sensitivity to be reliable cannon fodder. But they didn't do that, because it was never their intention to be an army.

Quote

Last Edit: Jul 28, 2021 21:50:42 GMT by thephantomcalamari

Alexrd
Administrator

Posts: 520

PT and the problem of choice: Jedi, Clones and war! Jul 28, 2021 22:03:24 GMT jppiper and thephantomcalamari like this

Post by Alexrd on Jul 28, 2021 22:03:24 GMT

The two concepts aren't mutually exclusive though. The fact that the Jedi aren't designed to be soldiers doesn't exclude their involvement in a war if the situation called for it (which it did). Mace does say that if there's a split, there aren't enough Jedi to protect the Republic. And as Lucas explains, that means there aren't enough Jedi to serve as a line of defense in a war.

The Jedi's involvement in a war would be to protect the Republic, but their numbers are too small to count on them for that purpose (precisely because their purpose is not, and never was, being a military force). That's why there's debate around the creation of an army for the Republic. An army meant to assist the Jedi, not to have no relation to them.

Quote

Last Edit: Jul 28, 2021 22:04:05 GMT by Alexrd

Star Wars Lucasverse

thephantomcalamari
Ambassador

Posts: 95

PT and the problem of choice: Jedi, Clones and war! Jul 28, 2021 22:19:45 GMT Cryogenic, tonyg, and 1 more like this

Post by thephantomcalamari on Jul 28, 2021 22:19:45 GMT

Jul 28, 2021 22:03:24 GMT Alexrd said:

The two concepts aren't mutually exclusive though. The fact that the Jedi aren't designed to be soldiers doesn't exclude their involvement in a war if the situation called for it (which it did). Mace does say that if there's a split, there aren't enough Jedi to protect the Republic. And as Lucas explains, that means there aren't enough Jedi to serve as a line of defense in a war.

The Jedi's involvement in a war would be to protect the Republic, but their numbers are too small to count on them for that purpose (precisely because their purpose is not, and never was, being a military force). That's why there's debate around the creation of an army for the Republic. An army meant to assist the Jedi, not to have no relation to them.

Good points, but also remember how the scene in Palpatine's office begins: "I don't know how much longer I can hold off the vote, my friends."

It's clear that the Jedi are not particularly eager for this vote to take place, which is why Palpatine is affecting fake sympathy with their reluctance. The Jedi know that the creation of a federal army will on the face of it necessitate their involvement by virtue of their parallel oath to protect the Republic, but they also know that this is not a role the Jedi Order is designed to assume. The Jedi are caught between a rock and a hard place precisely because the creation of an army represents the imposition of conflicting moral imperatives on the Order.

Quote

Cryogenic
Emperor

Posts: 2,261

PT and the problem of choice: Jedi, Clones and war! Jul 28, 2021 23:09:09 GMT jppiper, stampidhd280pro, and 1 more like this

Post by Cryogenic on Jul 28, 2021 23:09:09 GMT

Jul 28, 2021 22:03:24 GMT Alexrd said:

The two concepts aren't mutually exclusive though. The fact that the Jedi aren't designed to be soldiers doesn't exclude their involvement in a war if the situation called for it (which it did).

Whoa. You're taking quite the leap there. The two concepts may not be mutually exclusive, but that doesn't automatically entail your second sentence. You are merely interpreting the connection between the two concepts (the Jedi aren't a military force and their numbers are limited) a particular way. Then, on top of that, you're asserting a priori that the situation calls for the Jedi to become involved. That is precisely what Palpatine wants: for the Jedi to feel they ultimately have no choice. That's always his gambit: whether it's manipulating Amidala in Episode I, the Jedi in Episode II, Anakin in Episode III, Luke in Episode VI, or Rey in Episode IX. He always pushes others to compromise their values by making them feel they have no other choice. He is extremely consistent on that front. This is also why you need all the episodes (whether your bag is Disney or Lucas) to really see what is going on.

Mace does say that if there's a split, there aren't enough Jedi to protect the Republic. And as Lucas explains, that means there aren't enough Jedi to serve as a line of defense in a war.

Mace is defending Jedi doctrine on a pragmatic point. It saves him getting into the weeds of Jedi philosophy. They can't get involved because their numbers are too few. Note that this is basically Luke's defence, amidst a veneer of other rationalisations, when he initially refuses to become involved in Obi-Wan's mission to go to Alderaan. Only here, in AOTC, that simple "refusal of the call" has been inverted and the situation is far more insidious. Obi-Wan wants Luke to embrace his talents and venture down the Jedi path and push back against tyranny. Palpatine, on the other hand, is trying to pervert the Jedi's talents for his own ends, and convince them to violate their covenant in order to serve tyrannous ends.

The Jedi's involvement in a war would be to protect the Republic, but their numbers are too small to count on them for that purpose (precisely because their purpose is not, and never was, being a military force). That's why there's debate around the creation of an army for the Republic. An army meant to assist the Jedi, not to have no relation to them.

Protection is also Anakin's rationalisation to Padme on Mustafar. I see what you're saying, but confusion is being introduced here. Are the Jedi too few in number "because their purpose is not, and never was, being a military force"; or are they too few in number as a consequence of their never being designed as a military force? The latter implies a trivial solution: either create more Jedi recruits quickly, or gather an army of some kind. The former, however, is a lot more complicated. If they were never meant to be a military force, but rather, via Lucas' words, "they are designed as a kind of police force and diplomatic core", then that suggests they aren't fundamentally cut out to wage war, or have any real involvement in one, least of all as soldiers or generals leading soldiers in military campaigns -- which, to me, is the core of the issue, and not their simply being too few in number.

Indeed, I think this is Lucas' meditation on the Jedi being made to serve militaristic ends:

Followed by this:

And this:

(Note also how Yoda and Anakin are shrewdly linked by Lucas and several times juxtaposed in AOTC).

Quote

Last Edit: Jul 28, 2021 23:11:56 GMT by Cryogenic

"I have a great admiration for George Lucas. I like him as a person. He's very serious and gentle. These films are very well-intentioned. All right, they make tremendous amounts of money and appeal to kids, but they say good things, and they say them in a broad way. I believe in the Star Wars films."

-- Ian McDiarmid, May 1984, Starlog #82

thephantomcalamari
Ambassador

Posts: 95

PT and the problem of choice: Jedi, Clones and war! Jul 29, 2021 4:32:39 GMT Subtext Mining, Cryogenic, and 3 more like this

Post by thephantomcalamari on Jul 29, 2021 4:32:39 GMT

All this leads me to an interesting observation on the status quo political arrangement of the Republic at the outset of the films. There is no large, centralized military under the control of a singular executive authority, but rather thousands of small militias under the command of the planetary authorities. This has the advantage of avoiding the concentration of military power in one source--which ultimately leads to tyranny in the films--but has the disadvantage of creating the constant potential for armed conflict among the planetary systems.

This is where the Jedi seem to come in. It's their job to prevent such armed conflicts through diplomacy and--if necessary--the judicious and limited use of force. Through a combination of Jedi intercession and the natural inoculation against aggression that comes from being part of a united, interconnected polity, large-scale wars are usually averted.

It's a fascinating, almost utopian vision of a peaceful, universal society. I'm not sure what the equivalent of the Jedi could ever possibly be in our world, however. I guess maybe they represent a sort of generalized human ideal more than anything else. A state of being all of us should aspire to in order to better bring about the kind of world we would prefer to live in.

Quote

Last Edit: Jul 29, 2021 4:34:39 GMT by thephantomcalamari

Alexrd
Administrator

Posts: 520

PT and the problem of choice: Jedi, Clones and war! Jul 29, 2021 9:24:40 GMT mikeximus and jppiper like this

Post by Alexrd on Jul 29, 2021 9:24:40 GMT

Whoa. You're taking quite the leap there. The two concepts may not be mutually exclusive, but that doesn't automatically entail your second sentence. You are merely interpreting the connection between the two concepts (the Jedi aren't a military force and their numbers are limited) a particular way. Then, on top of that, you're asserting a priori that the situation calls for the Jedi to become involved. That is precisely what Palpatine wants: for the Jedi to feel they ultimately have no choice.

Of course it's precisely what Palpatine wants. He's the one who created the crisis. His goal is to involve the Jedi, so yes, my assertion is correct. The situation called for the Jedi's involvement. That's the very premise of the it. Palpatine's plan hinges on that.

The issue is not that they get involved in a war, the issue is that there's someone manipulating all of it behind the scenes, unbeknownst to them and to everyone else as well.

Mace is defending Jedi doctrine on a pragmatic point. It saves him getting into the weeds of Jedi philosophy. They can't get involved because their numbers are too few. Note that this is basically Luke's defence, amidst a veneer of other rationalisations, when he initially refuses to become involved in Obi-Wan's mission to go to Alderaan. Only here, in AOTC, that simple "refusal of the call" has been inverted and the situation is far more insidious. Obi-Wan wants Luke to embrace his talents and venture down the Jedi path and push back against tyranny. Palpatine, on the other hand, is trying to pervert the Jedi's talents for his own ends, and convince them to violate their covenant in order to serve tyrannous ends.

Mace is simply laying the cards on the table. That if there's a split, the Republic will become vulnerable and the senate can't count on the Jedi to protect it in case of a large conflict. Mace is reminding Palpatine and the audience that they can't assume the Jedi will take care of things if it comes to war. They can't assume the Jedi are the Republic's army and they can't assume they have the numbers. This explains why the Republic is debating the creation of an army for itself.

Protection is also Anakin's rationalisation to Padme on Mustafar. I see what you're saying, but confusion is being introduced here. Are the Jedi too few in number "because their purpose is not, and never was, being a military force"; or are they too few in number as a consequence of their never being designed as a military force? The latter implies a trivial solution: either create more Jedi recruits quickly, or gather an army of some kind. The former, however, is a lot more complicated. If they were never meant to be a military force, but rather, via Lucas' words, "they are designed as a kind of police force and diplomatic core", then that suggests they aren't fundamentally cut out to wage war, or have any real involvement in one, least of all as soldiers or generals leading soldiers in military campaigns -- which, to me, is the core of the issue, and not their simply being too few in number.

The numbers are what they are, I don't think the number of existing Jedi is the consequence of anyone's choice. The point is that if they were meant to serve as an army, there would need to be many more Jedi.

However, the Jedi by virtue of their ways do have abilities that can make a positive difference in a war and help save lives. The Jedi, even though they will do their best to prevent it, are no strangers to violence and conflict. They aren't just monks, they are warrior-monks.

Jul 29, 2021 4:32:39 GMT thephantomcalamari said:

All this leads me to an interesting observation on the status quo political arrangement of the Republic at the outset of the films. There is no large, centralized military under the control of a singular executive authority, but rather thousands of small militias under the command of the planetary authorities. This has the advantage of avoiding the concentration of military power in one source--which ultimately leads to tyranny in the films--but has the disadvantage of creating the constant potential for armed conflict among the planetary systems.

I've always wondered about the issue of the local planetary forces. Naboo has its "security volunteers", but they obviously don't have proper means of defense against an attack on the planet. Do all systems have military forces? Probably not. Why is there no cooperation and unity in the Republic systems that do have military forces in order to address the separatist crisis? Is there inner conflict within the systems? Probably. There also seems like there's a general laxiness, a lack of will to stand up for themselves, a false sense of cooperation, that invariably makes them vulnerable. And of course, Palpatine takes advantage of that. Which goes along the main point that Lucas has always made regarding the Republic. They are more interested in themselves than in the common good. They are unwilling to compromise with each other, and they would rather have someone else to do the work for them. And Palpatine welcomed being that someone else.

Quote

Star Wars Lucasverse

Cryogenic
Emperor

Posts: 2,261

PT and the problem of choice: Jedi, Clones and war! Jul 29, 2021 14:46:16 GMT jppiper likes this

Post by Cryogenic on Jul 29, 2021 14:46:16 GMT

Jul 29, 2021 9:24:40 GMT Alexrd said:

Whoa. You're taking quite the leap there. The two concepts may not be mutually exclusive, but that doesn't automatically entail your second sentence. You are merely interpreting the connection between the two concepts (the Jedi aren't a military force and their numbers are limited) a particular way. Then, on top of that, you're asserting a priori that the situation calls for the Jedi to become involved. That is precisely what Palpatine wants: for the Jedi to feel they ultimately have no choice.

Of course it's precisely what Palpatine wants. He's the one who created the crisis. His goal is to involve the Jedi, so yes, my assertion is correct. The situation called for the Jedi's involvement. That's the very premise of the it. Palpatine's plan hinges on that.

Except you omitted what I said afterward:

That's always his gambit: whether it's manipulating Amidala in Episode I, the Jedi in Episode II, Anakin in Episode III, Luke in Episode VI, or Rey in Episode IX. He always pushes others to compromise their values by making them feel they have no other choice. He is extremely consistent on that front. This is also why you need all the episodes (whether your bag is Disney or Lucas) to really see what is going on.

The issue is not that they get involved in a war, the issue is that there's someone manipulating all of it behind the scenes, unbeknownst to them and to everyone else as well.

OF COURSE THE ISSUE IS THE JEDI (AND THE REPUBLIC) GETTING INVOLVED IN A WAR!

Dude, it like... changes everything.

And the Jedi are aware that the Sith are out there. As Yoda says to Mace, "Only the Dark Lord of the Sith knows of our weakness."

In fact, that little exchange between Mace and Yoda shows that they aren't being entirely forthcoming with Palpatine in his office. They aren't just few in number. Their powers have waned. And while Mace thinks it is time they informed the Senate, Yoda declares that they shouldn't disclose this to anybody, because the Dark Lord will seize on their weakness -- which, of course, he already has.

Also, at the end of the movie, Yoda rebukes Obi-Wan and expresses the gravity of what has just happened by grimly declaring, "Victory? Victory, you say? Master Obi-Wan, not victory. The shroud of the Dark Side has fallen. Begun this Clone War has." It is hyper-unusual for Yoda to repeat a word in that manner, suggesting Lucas really wanted to get something across to the audience here.

Moreover, if you watch the "From Puppets To Pixels" documentary, you can see it was critically important to get Yoda's facial reaction exactly right. They originally had him looking sad and fearful, with Lucas instructing Rob Coleman and his team that he should appear some mixture of sad, anxious, and despairing instead.

Or, in another word, desolate. One meaning of the word is "without friends, hope, or encouragement; forlorn, wretched, or abandoned", followed by "gloomy or dismal; depressing" -- all of which are supported by Yoda's expression, including his vocal tone, and even the basic visual arrangement (Yoda, Mace, and Obi-Wan occupy an otherwise empty chamber, and Yoda is visually separated from them as he makes his grim pronouncement).

And in TESB, there is Yoda's subtly devastating aside to Luke, "Wars not make one great." Not to mention his declaring that he has "failed" in the last act of ROTS. I mean, really, as mikeximus said before, focusing on a single line isn't "proper". The idea that there is just some practical limitation to the Jedi becoming involved in a full-scale war doesn't square with many other details on-screen. It is a much grander equation than that. (Even as I was typing all this out, a fighter jet was whizzing overhead).

Mace is defending Jedi doctrine on a pragmatic point. It saves him getting into the weeds of Jedi philosophy. They can't get involved because their numbers are too few. Note that this is basically Luke's defence, amidst a veneer of other rationalisations, when he initially refuses to become involved in Obi-Wan's mission to go to Alderaan. Only here, in AOTC, that simple "refusal of the call" has been inverted and the situation is far more insidious. Obi-Wan wants Luke to embrace his talents and venture down the Jedi path and push back against tyranny. Palpatine, on the other hand, is trying to pervert the Jedi's talents for his own ends, and convince them to violate their covenant in order to serve tyrannous ends.

Mace is simply laying the cards on the table. That if there's a split, the Republic will become vulnerable and the senate can't count on the Jedi to protect it in case of a large conflict. Mace is reminding Palpatine and the audience that they can't assume the Jedi will take care of things if it comes to war. They can't assume the Jedi are the Republic's army and they can't assume they have the numbers. This explains why the Republic is debating the creation of an army for itself.

Except he isn't laying the cards on the table -- not all of them, anyway (as I established above). While the Republic is debating the creation of an army, or the act that would lead to the creation of an army, there is obviously disagreement from some quarters. Padme is a notable voice of opposition, and Yoda says seeing her alive "brings warm feelings" to his heart. Why say that if he wasn't fond of her and glad to have her making the case for diplomacy and negotiation over war and aggression? You are ignoring or downplaying the fact that war isn't part of the Jedi rulebook. And as Sio Bibble says: "There hasn't been a full-scale war since the formation of the Republic."

The clear implication here is that the Jedi have maintained a careful peace for a thousand years (the lifespan of the existing Republic). In other words, there hasn't been a full-scale war since the formation of the Republic because the very existence of the Jedi allowed for the creation of a new social contract -- one where war became unthinkable. So this is like the rupturing of a dam, where the dam itself is now under pressure to conform to the very reality it is meant to quell and form a defence against. And you're treating that like it ain't no thang -- just bring more cement. No, wait. Put radioactive rocks in the water. That'll do it.

Protection is also Anakin's rationalisation to Padme on Mustafar. I see what you're saying, but confusion is being introduced here. Are the Jedi too few in number "because their purpose is not, and never was, being a military force"; or are they too few in number as a consequence of their never being designed as a military force? The latter implies a trivial solution: either create more Jedi recruits quickly, or gather an army of some kind. The former, however, is a lot more complicated. If they were never meant to be a military force, but rather, via Lucas' words, "they are designed as a kind of police force and diplomatic core", then that suggests they aren't fundamentally cut out to wage war, or have any real involvement in one, least of all as soldiers or generals leading soldiers in military campaigns -- which, to me, is the core of the issue, and not their simply being too few in number.

The numbers are what they are, I don't think the number of existing Jedi is the consequence of anyone's choice. The point is that if they were meant to serve as an army, there would need to be many more Jedi.

However, the Jedi by virtue of their ways do have abilities that can make a positive difference in a war and help save lives. The Jedi, even though they will do their best to prevent it, are no strangers to violence and conflict. They aren't just monks, they are warrior-monks.

The numbers are absolutely a consequence of choice. That is exactly my point. They aren't an incidental outcome. Rather, they are a direct result of the Jedi choosing to be self-limiting in their covenant with the Republic. War isn't something the Jedi are designed for. That said, yes: they are no strangers to violence and conflict. So Palpatine has a certain amount of clay to work with. But this still represents a major constitutional amendment for both the Jedi and the Republic, and it will push both to a dark place, the outcome of which we see in the next movie. To repeat: you need all the episodes to see what is actually going on and what the ramifications of prior choices really are. The fallacy of many viewers is to fail to grasp that the movies make a tapestry, which invariably leads one to false and limited conclusions.

Quote

"I have a great admiration for George Lucas. I like him as a person. He's very serious and gentle. These films are very well-intentioned. All right, they make tremendous amounts of money and appeal to kids, but they say good things, and they say them in a broad way. I believe in the Star Wars films."

-- Ian McDiarmid, May 1984, Starlog #82

Alexrd
Administrator

Posts: 520

PT and the problem of choice: Jedi, Clones and war! Jul 29, 2021 15:27:30 GMT mikeximus and jppiper like this

Post by Alexrd on Jul 29, 2021 15:27:30 GMT

Except you omitted what I said afterward:

That's always his gambit: whether it's manipulating Amidala in Episode I, the Jedi in Episode II, Anakin in Episode III, Luke in Episode VI, or Rey in Episode IX. He always pushes others to compromise their values by making them feel they have no other choice. He is extremely consistent on that front. This is also why you need all the episodes (whether your bag is Disney or Lucas) to really see what is going on.

I'm focusing on all six movies from Lucas. Besides, how does not quoting that part changes anything from what I'm saying?

OF COURSE THE ISSUE IS THE JEDI (AND THE REPUBLIC) GETTING INVOLVED IN A WAR!

Dude, it like... changes everything.

No, the issue is not the Jedi's involvement in the war, the issue is that a Sith Lord manufactured a crisis that led to a war, and was pulling the strings on both sides in order to take control of the galaxy and crush his enemies.

And the Jedi are aware that the Sith are out there. As Yoda says to Mace, "Only the Dark Lord of the Sith knows of our weakness."

In fact, that little exchange between Mace and Yoda shows that they aren't being entirely forthcoming with Palpatine in his office. They aren't just few in number. Their powers have waned. And while Mace thinks it is time they informed the Senate, Yoda declares that they shouldn't disclose this to anybody, because the Dark Lord will seize on their weakness -- which, of course, he already has.

I'm aware of all that. How is that related to my argument?

Also, at the end of the movie, Yoda rebukes Obi-Wan and expresses the gravity of what has just happened by grimly declaring, "Victory? Victory, you say? Master Obi-Wan, not victory. The shroud of the Dark Side has fallen. Begun this Clone War has." It is hyper-unusual for Yoda to repeat a word in that manner, suggesting Lucas really wanted to get something across to the audience here.

Yes, that the fact that there is a war is already bad in and not itself. Again, that's not the issue. The Jedi's involvement in the war is not the issue either. The issue is what I pointed out above.

Moreover, if you watch the "From Puppets To Pixels" documentary, you can see it was critically important to get Yoda's facial reaction exactly right. They originally had him looking sad and fearful, with Lucas instructing Rob Coleman and his team that he should appear some mixture of sad, anxious, and despairing instead.

Or, in another word, desolate. One meaning of the word is "without friends, hope, or encouragement; forlorn, wretched, or abandoned", followed by "gloomy or dismal; depressing" -- all of which are supported by Yoda's expression, including his vocal tone, and even the basic visual arrangement (Yoda, Mace, and Obi-Wan occupy an otherwise empty chamber, and Yoda is visually separated from them as he makes his grim pronouncement).

Is anyone arguing that the Jedi advocate war or are happy that there is one? I'm not. So I still don't see the relevance of any of that.

And in TESB, there is Yoda's subtly devastating aside to Luke, "Wars not make one great." Not to mention his declaring that he has "failed" in the last act of ROTS. I mean, really, as mikeximus said before, focusing on a single line isn't "proper". The idea that there is just some practical limitation to the Jedi becoming involved in a full-scale war doesn't square with many other details on-screen. It is a much grander equation than that. (Even as I was typing all this out, a fighter jet was whizzing overhead).

Who's focusing on a single line? Yoda says "wars not make one great" to humble Luke's "I'm looking for a great warrior". Because to be a Jedi is not about being a great warrior (even though they are).

Yoda said that he failed in relation to his task of defeating Sidious.

Except he isn't laying the cards on the table -- not all of them, anyway (as I established above). While the Republic is debating the creation of an army, or the act that would lead to the creation of an army, there is obviously disagreement from some quarters. Padme is a notable voice of opposition, and Yoda says seeing her alive "brings warm feelings" to his heart. Why say that if he wasn't fond of her and glad to have her making the case for diplomacy and negotiation over war and aggression?

What?! Are you implying that Yoda being glad that Padmé's alive is a partisan endorsement of her politics? Come on.

Yoda is glad that she's alive because she had just been a victim of an assassination attempt. And yes, we could also assume that he's probably found of her as a person. Nothing more.

You are ignoring or downplaying the fact that war isn't part of the Jedi rulebook. And as Sio Bibble says: "There hasn't been a full-scale war since the formation of the Republic."

The clear implication here is that the Jedi have maintained a careful peace for a thousand years (the lifespan of the existing Republic). In other words, there hasn't been a full-scale war since the formation of the Republic because the very existence of the Jedi allowed for the creation of a new social contract -- one where war became unthinkable. So this is like the rupturing of a dam, where the dam itself is now under pressure to conform to the very reality it is meant to quell and form a defence against. And you're treating that like it ain't no thang -- just bring more cement. No, wait. Put radioactive rocks in the water. That'll do it.

I'm not downplaying anything. There hasn't been a full-scale war since the formation of the Republic because the Jedi had been successful at keeping the peace for that long, yes. By the time of AOTC, however:

This separatist movement, under the leadership of the mysterious Count Dooku, has made it difficult for the limited number of Jedi Knights to maintain peace and order in the galaxy.

Hence the discussion about the creation of an army. An army meant to assist the overwhelmed Jedi.

The numbers are absolutely a consequence of choice. That is exactly my point. They aren't an incidental outcome. Rather, they are a direct result of the Jedi choosing to be self-limiting in their covenant with the Republic. War isn't something the Jedi are designed for. That said, yes: they are no strangers to violence and conflict. So Palpatine has a certain amount of clay to work with. But this still represents a major constitutional amendment for both the Jedi and the Republic, and it will push both to a dark place, the outcome of which we see in the next movie. To repeat: you need all the episodes to see what is actually going on and what the ramifications of prior choices really are. The fallacy of many viewers is to fail to grasp that the movies make a tapestry, which invariably leads one to false and limited conclusions.

What do the number of Jedi have to do with their covenant with the Republic?

Your assumption that I don't hold all the Episodes into account, or that I don't grasp their tapestry has no basis in reality though. It's an inexplicable fallacious conclusion that you are taking from my comments.

Quote

Last Edit: Jul 29, 2021 15:30:21 GMT by Alexrd

Star Wars Lucasverse

Cryogenic
Emperor

Posts: 2,261

PT and the problem of choice: Jedi, Clones and war! Jul 29, 2021 17:53:39 GMT jppiper likes this

Post by Cryogenic on Jul 29, 2021 17:53:39 GMT

Jul 29, 2021 15:27:30 GMT Alexrd said:

Except you omitted what I said afterward:

That's always his gambit: whether it's manipulating Amidala in Episode I, the Jedi in Episode II, Anakin in Episode III, Luke in Episode VI, or Rey in Episode IX. He always pushes others to compromise their values by making them feel they have no other choice. He is extremely consistent on that front. This is also why you need all the episodes (whether your bag is Disney or Lucas) to really see what is going on.

I'm focusing on all six movies from Lucas. Besides, how does not quoting that part changes anything from what I'm saying?

Asserting a thing doesn't make it true. I don't see much in the way of you focusing on the other movies here or trying to resolve AOTC against them, but whatever. Leaving out that part serves to make your argument look sturdier than it actually is. There is a clear pattern across the movies of Palpatine manipulating characters by making them believe they're out of options and inducing them to act hastily or unwisely. You can sit there and say, "Of course Palpatine's plan hinges on the Jedi accepting the army", but you need the other movies to see the exact nature of the problem and to contextualise the trap the Jedi are falling into.

OF COURSE THE ISSUE IS THE JEDI (AND THE REPUBLIC) GETTING INVOLVED IN A WAR!

Dude, it like... changes everything.

No, the issue is not the Jedi's involvement in the war, the issue is that a Sith Lord manufactured a crisis that led to a war, and was pulling the strings on both sides in order to take control of the galaxy and crush his enemies.

They're not mutually exclusive. This is the problem with many Star Wars fans: they tend to see situations as an "either/or" thing. We had this problem earlier with the interpretation of Mace's line to Palpatine, and now it's rearing its head again with the idea that the Jedi going to war is only bad because Palpatine is behind it.

And the Jedi are aware that the Sith are out there. As Yoda says to Mace, "Only the Dark Lord of the Sith knows of our weakness."

In fact, that little exchange between Mace and Yoda shows that they aren't being entirely forthcoming with Palpatine in his office. They aren't just few in number. Their powers have waned. And while Mace thinks it is time they informed the Senate, Yoda declares that they shouldn't disclose this to anybody, because the Dark Lord will seize on their weakness -- which, of course, he already has.

I'm aware of all that. How is that related to my argument?

That's interesting. In no place in your previous reply(ies) were you taking it into account. The point is that the Jedi aren't being entirely honest in front of Palpatine. Mace tells him there aren't enough Jedi to protect the Republic. But the Jedi's powers have also waned. Mace and Yoda explicitly discuss this in a later scene and decide not to tell the Senate. Yoda rationalises that coming forward with this revelation will cause their adversaries to multiply. But perhaps this is also a tacit admission that they fear not being able to control the forthcoming situation, if the Senate votes to create an army (or hand emergency powers over to Palpatine allowing him to do so). The army could be taken out of their control. So they keep quiet believing this is their best chance at still being respected enough to make high-level decisions. Palpatine is manipulating the future. The Jedi have begun to fear it. The Star Wars Saga repeatedly stresses the concept that decisions made out of fear are rarely ever good ones that engender positive outcomes.

Also, at the end of the movie, Yoda rebukes Obi-Wan and expresses the gravity of what has just happened by grimly declaring, "Victory? Victory, you say? Master Obi-Wan, not victory. The shroud of the Dark Side has fallen. Begun this Clone War has." It is hyper-unusual for Yoda to repeat a word in that manner, suggesting Lucas really wanted to get something across to the audience here.

Yes, that the fact that there is a war is already bad in and not itself. Again, that's not the issue. The Jedi's involvement in the war is not the issue either. The issue is what I pointed out above.

The Jedi's involvement in a shambolic conflict encompassing thousands of star systems, and major constitutional damage to the Republic, isn't the issue? Wow, okay. You and I are looking at this from very different vantage points.

Moreover, if you watch the "From Puppets To Pixels" documentary, you can see it was critically important to get Yoda's facial reaction exactly right. They originally had him looking sad and fearful, with Lucas instructing Rob Coleman and his team that he should appear some mixture of sad, anxious, and despairing instead.

Or, in another word, desolate. One meaning of the word is "without friends, hope, or encouragement; forlorn, wretched, or abandoned", followed by "gloomy or dismal; depressing" -- all of which are supported by Yoda's expression, including his vocal tone, and even the basic visual arrangement (Yoda, Mace, and Obi-Wan occupy an otherwise empty chamber, and Yoda is visually separated from them as he makes his grim pronouncement).

Is anyone arguing that the Jedi advocate war or are happy that there is one? I'm not. So I still don't see the relevance of any of that.

Strawman. I'm stressing the burden Yoda feels and implying that he already regrets the Jedi Order getting drawn into war and becoming another political tool in the Republic's arsenal. Moreover, even if the Jedi don't feel happy about it, that very scene makes the point that some Jedi aren't as concerned as they should be. Obi-Wan's qualified but relatively airy endorsement of the clones, causing him to prematurely declare the battle a "victory", is deliberately counterpointed by Yoda's strong rebuke and manifestly doleful attitude toward the whole thing. Yoda already grasps the grave consequences of their actions, while the other Jedi seemingly do not; even some of those that most frequently seek his counsel and walk beside him (as earlier in the film when Yoda, Mace, and Obi-Wan are walking through the atrium and discussing Anakin being given his first assignment).

And in TESB, there is Yoda's subtly devastating aside to Luke, "Wars not make one great." Not to mention his declaring that he has "failed" in the last act of ROTS. I mean, really, as mikeximus said before, focusing on a single line isn't "proper". The idea that there is just some practical limitation to the Jedi becoming involved in a full-scale war doesn't square with many other details on-screen. It is a much grander equation than that. (Even as I was typing all this out, a fighter jet was whizzing overhead).

Who's focusing on a single line? Yoda says "wars not make one great" to humble Luke's "I'm looking for a great warrior". Because to be a Jedi is not about being a great warrior (even though they are).

It is obvious that Yoda regretted the Jedi's involvement in the Clone Wars from pretty much the moment the war started. His line to Luke can and does have a deeper meaning in light of the prequels. Moreover, there is the excerpt from the junior novelisation (which Lucas almost certainly read through carefully himself) which I posted back on the first page:

As Obi-Wan's message finished playing, Yoda frowned. He could sense the shock in the other members of the Jedi Council as Obi-Wan spoke of the treachery of the Trade Federation. But incomplete was Obi-Wan's report, Yoda thought. He looked at Mace Windu. "More happening on Geonosis, I feel, than has been revealed," he said.

"I agree," Mace said.

Their first step was to contact Chancellor Palpatine, for the threat to the Republic was plainly greater than anyone had thought. They met in the Chancellor's office, along with the loyalist Senators who supported Palpatine.

Everyone listened carefully to Mace Windu's summary; then Bail Organa shook his head. "The Commerce Guilds are preparing for war -- there can be no doubt of that."

Yoda's ears twitched. Listen, these Senators did not. They feared, and reacted. They did not think.

"Now we need that clone army!" Senator Ask Aak burst out.

But everyone knew the Senate would never give its approval for that -- not until it was too late. And there were not enough Jedi to hold off an army of droids.

"Through negotiation, the Jedi maintains peace," Yoda said pointedly. "To start a war, we do not intend." There might, even yet, be time to talk a way out of the conflict . . . but he sensed no patience in the room, only fear and urgency as the Senators discussed what to do.

"The Senate must vote the Chancellor emergency powers," Mas Amedda suggested at last. "Then he could approve the use of the clones."

War, you mean, Yoda thought sadly. What other use was there for an army? Not in centuries had Yoda so wanted to comment, to interfere in the politics playing out before him, but he had already said what was needed, and the Senators had not grasped his meaning. He held his peace. Jedi serve. Make laws, we do not.

The Senators looked at one another. Plainly, they thought the idea was a good one, but none of them wanted to be the one to propose such a huge change in the way the government ran. Finally, Jar Jar Binks stepped forward.

"Mesa proud to proposing the motion to give yousa honor emergency powers," he said to Palpatine, and the matter was quickly settled. Jar Jar would bring the motion up, and the other Senators would support it. When it passed, Chancellor Palpatine would approve the emergency use of the clone army.

Barely an hour later, Yoda sat beside Mace Windu, looking down from the visitors' balcony as the Senate seethed. The news had leaked out; he could feel the fear hanging over the chamber like dense fog. Fear is the path to the dark side, he thought, but the Senate would not understand even if there were some way he could tell them.

With almost indecent haste, the motion to give Chancellor Palpatine full emergency powers was proposed and passed. The Senate cheered Jar Jar's courage, and Palpatine rose to speak.

"It is with great reluctance that I have agreed to this," the Chancellor said. "The power you give me, I will lay down when this crisis has abated. And as my first act with this new authority, I will create a grand army of the Republic to counter the increasing threats of the Separatists."

Yoda shook his head sadly. Beside him, Mace Windu stirred. "It is done, then," he said heavily. He looked at Yoda. "I will take what Jedi we have left and go to Geonosis to help Obi-Wan."

That left the other task to him. Yoda nodded, accepting it. "Visit I will the cloners on Kamino, and see what it is they are creating." And to see whether there still is some way this war to avoid.

Yoda said that he failed in relation to his task of defeating Sidious.

Clearly, Yoda also felt he failed against Sidious because he tried to solve the problem with violence/aggression -- a repeat of the Clone Wars in micro. He gave into the Dark Side himself and realised that his folly had cost him (and the galaxy) dearly.

Except he isn't laying the cards on the table -- not all of them, anyway (as I established above). While the Republic is debating the creation of an army, or the act that would lead to the creation of an army, there is obviously disagreement from some quarters. Padme is a notable voice of opposition, and Yoda says seeing her alive "brings warm feelings" to his heart. Why say that if he wasn't fond of her and glad to have her making the case for diplomacy and negotiation over war and aggression?

What?! Are you implying that Yoda being glad that Padmé's alive is a partisan endorsement of her politics? Come on.

Yoda is glad that she's alive because she had just been a victim of an assassination attempt. And yes, we could also assume that he's probably found of her as a person. Nothing more.

You're being deliberately obtuse here. If you are giving yourself permission to "assume" that Yoda is "probably fond of [Padme] as a person", then that suggests he is sympathetic to her leanings. After all, Padme's identity is almost entirely defined by politics and fighting for just causes. Once again, you are erecting a false dichotomy here. This time, it's between the personal and the political; which are strongly entwined in Padme's case -- as we clearly see in the courtship between Anakin and Padme later on.

Furthermore, in TESB, Yoda tells Luke plainly, "A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defence, never for attack." Just as in TPM, he tells Anakin, "Fear is the path to the Dark Side. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering." War -- I hate to break it to you -- is full of, and leads to many future eruptions of anger, hate, and suffering. War is a total perversion of the Jedi Code. Even Obi-Wan shuts Anakin down when he protests that spying on Palpatine is treason with the bland rationalisation, "We are at war, Anakin."

You are ignoring or downplaying the fact that war isn't part of the Jedi rulebook. And as Sio Bibble says: "There hasn't been a full-scale war since the formation of the Republic."

The clear implication here is that the Jedi have maintained a careful peace for a thousand years (the lifespan of the existing Republic). In other words, there hasn't been a full-scale war since the formation of the Republic because the very existence of the Jedi allowed for the creation of a new social contract -- one where war became unthinkable. So this is like the rupturing of a dam, where the dam itself is now under pressure to conform to the very reality it is meant to quell and form a defence against. And you're treating that like it ain't no thang -- just bring more cement. No, wait. Put radioactive rocks in the water. That'll do it.

I'm not downplaying anything. There hasn't been a full-scale war since the formation of the Republic because the Jedi had been successful at keeping the peace for that long, yes. By the time of AOTC, however:

This separatist movement, under the leadership of the mysterious Count Dooku, has made it difficult for the limited number of Jedi Knights to maintain peace and order in the galaxy.

Hence the discussion about the creation of an army. An army meant to assist the overwhelmed Jedi.

Do we see the Jedi ever attempting to negotiate with the separatists? They seem to think the situation can't go bad because the other side is being led by a former Jedi. This obviously turns out to be a very naive assumption on their part -- a clear indication of their arrogance, which Yoda recognises is a problem that has become "more and more common" within the Jedi Order. The opening crawls don't tell you everything. In fact, in and of themselves, they tell you next to nothing. They are actually misleading. I went over this before. Who is the author of the crawls in-universe? In-universe, they don't even exist. Floating text in space. LOL. I prefer to look at what happens after. The crawls are really a framing device. Indeed, at the start of AOTC, we realise we have essentially been reading the crawl "upside down" (due to the reverse pan-down: i.e., a pan-up).