'Master Marspa once visited Nal Hutta with his student, Imina, on a diplomatic mission. While there, they observed numerous acts of brutality directed at the slaves of the Hutts, though Master Marspa said nothing. Later, Marspa and his apprentice visited Ord Mantell, where they witnessed a shopkeeper beating a servant. This time, without hesitation, Marspa stepped in and restrained the shopkeeper. Afterward, Imina expressed confusion. "Master, you stopped that shopkeeper from beating his servant, but on Hutta, we saw many acts far more heinous. Yet there, you did nothing." Master Marspa sighed. "Were it within my authority on Nal Hutta, I would have set every last slave free and personally escorted them home to their loved ones, far from Hutt space. But to interfere with the culture of the Hutts would have been to pass judgement on them on behalf of the Republic. The Senate knows that slavery goes on in Hutt space. When they decide to do something about it, I will support them wholeheartedly. " "On the other hand, slavery is not legal on Ord Mantell. For that shopkeeper to beat his employee was simply an unnecessary display of dominance. Were the Republic aware of his actions, they would have acted immediately. I am sad that there is a difference between the two, but it is not our place to correct the discrepancy."' - The Star Wars d20 RPG rulebook The Jedi are careful in what they do. They know if they push the world too hard, it pushes back even harder. They play the long game, by supporting the Republic. Because the job of ending slavery really isn't suited to the Jedi. It's a job for an army of activists, politicians, aid workers, fund raisers, and more. Social change doesn't come about at the point of a sword. But at least all those kinds of people are able to work in safety, because of the Jedi. If they went crusader on issues like slavery, then they'd lose their rep as fair, unbiased negotiators and the amount of good work they're able to do would likely go down. They're run ragged as it is, just sorting out disputes in the Republic! Come to think of it, the moment the Jedi are out of the picture, slavery is embraced by the Empire on a galactic scale - so perhaps, the Jedi were one of the things holding slavery back.
I think this highlights exactly why the Jedi should not associate themselves with any governing body, and rather act only according to the will of the force. Have their temple on a secluded world outside the power of the republic or anything of the sort, near simple and peaceful cultures.
@@a_bionicle6635 I assume it feels like the will of the Force, for the Jedi to protect the Republic. In the past, when the galaxy was just awash with petty despots, marauding warlords and worse, an alliance of worlds coming together for self-defence and agreeing to sort out their differences by representatives, debate and legislation must have been a genuine ray of light in an otherwise grim galaxy.
@@artsman412 Pretty much. Even in the old republic it was done better in certain aspects, while there was a Jedi temple on Coruscant, the bulk of important Jedi affairs happened on Tython, which to a degree helped separate the Jedi from the republic. IN THEORY. In practice they were still mostly republic enforcers.
I don’t understand why people have a problem with the Jedi not freeing slaves. The Jedi have no authority on Tatooine, they cannot just do whatever they want and upend the legal systems in random places. Do people genuinely expect the Jedi to start slave revolts and sow chaos on random planets? The Jedi aim to do good in the galaxy, but they must be pragmatic and responsible. Individual Jedi shouldn’t be inciting interplanetary diplomatic issues between planets and governments
@@denniscool6224 the Jedi are a quasi part of the republic government, they can’t do whatever they want, as their actions have repercussions on the entire republic and it’s government. A police officer can’t travel to another country and just start trying to arrest people for things that aren’t crimes in the country he’s visiting
@@emberfist8347 You're telling me that Padme, who is already morally apposed to slavery would not go secure the freedom of the mother of the boy who just had a huge hand in freeing her planet? After personally meeting the woman? Further more you don't think the QUEEN OF A PLANET couldn't get a hold of some form of currency Watto would accept?
Qui Gon literally tried to free Anakin's mother from slavery as well, but Watto wouldn't let him. The prize money that Anakin won in the Podrace wasn't enough to free him and his mother together. It's not that Qui Gon cares about slaves, it's's that he can't do everything at once and he has no authority on Tatooine. He's not gonna go out of his way to free all the slaves in a planet that is lawless and is controlled by the Hutts like Jabba The Hutt, and they're the ones who call the shots. They decide who goes free and who stays a slave, And If Qui Gon tries anything to help free the rest of the slaves, they would all die at once.
He literally had a light saber and could have sliced that alien in half and took them. They were in hutt space, aint no one going to sue. They'd just loot the store and move on. They left Anakin's mother to be sold to men for pleasure, I say Anakin went light on them
One of the reasons I thought that Qui-Gon didn't free Anakin's mother, they were on a time sensitive mission. Once the ship was fixed, time to go I wouldn't be surprised if Qui-Gon intended to go back and free her, but, of course, he died. Obi-Wan I don't think it ever crossed his mind to go back. Losing Qui-Gon made Anakin, a kid, caused him to want to focus on training instead of going back until "he was stronger". Insinuated when he said as she died, "I wasn't strong enough..." 😢
7:34 I think that might be the case here. Cause like this video shows, the Jedi didn't try to free the slaves subjugated by the Hutts however the Jedi (or at least 4 of them) did help free slaves owned by the Zygerrians during the Clone Wars. My guess as to why they acted in one case and not the other is because the Republic sanctioned the operation was because the Zygerrians were allied with the separatists who the Republic was at war with. Also like you said, during the Phantom Menace the Republic didn't have a standing army at the time so there wasn't much they could do on a military level. Now of course this would probably lead one to ask, then why didn't the Jedi try to free the Hutts slaves during the Clone Wars since they had an army at that point? Well, one, they were at war with the Separatists so that took priority and two, they were pretty much allied with the Hutts so that the Republic could use their hyperspace routes. Kinda like how two countries in our world who have different government, social policies and general despise each other still work together for economic or political gain. Idk, that's just what I think. And no, I am not excusing the Jedi for allowing slavery to exist obviously, I'm just giving what I think is going on based on what we've seen in the movies and TV show.
It's an entire galaxy, it's probably not just a handful of planets that allow slavery in the galaxy, it would almost be a never ending war of conquest. The cost would be too great.
The Jedi are peace makers not pacifists they have many hats they work under (ambassadors, to knights etc), but they also are under the senate/laws of the Republic itself. That’s why in this prequel era and the EU era of the Mando wars is so compelling!
Wait, what? The Mando wars are nearly immeasurably compelling. But your grammar is all kinds of funky, in the worst way. "is so compelling" comes out of nowhere and contextually means nothing, even if it's changed to "it's so compelling", what is? What?
I feel like Revan's story shows both the pros and cons of the Jedi getting involved in wars. Revan did turn the tide and help end the Mandalorian threat, but in the process he got focused on the fighting, that it in part led to his capture, torture, and fall to the dark side by the Sith Empire. Would love to hear your thought's on this Thor.
No. Karpyshyn made Bastila specifically weak to it so her possible redemption would be an easier sell in KotOR. Avelonne expanded that to a full-blown weakness because he kinda forgot about the whole detatchment thing in KotORII. Karpyshyn expanded upon that further in the Revan novel, likely so that he wouldn't have to make up an actual reason for Revan's fall. Jedi's greatest strength being turned to a debilitating weakness in Legends is plot conveniences all the way down, and as a blatant retcon says nothing insightful of them. For comparison, between Lucas and Filoni I don't think they have shown a single Jedi being broken that way.
Nah, the Jedi who followed Revan in the Mandalorian wars only turned due to extenuating circumstances. If it weren't for that, it would've been fine. The council was wrong to wait. If the council had actually lead the battle against the mandalorians, the civil war never would've come to pass Even taking the KotOR games alone into account, Revan and Malak were on the path to the dark side regardless of them fighting the war. The two of them were so busy looking for power rather than an end to the war. By the end of said war, Revan and Malak had influenced plenty of Jedi and republic soldier. Not just that, Revan, being the shrewd tactician that he was, positioned the republic army on Malachor so that his supporters were the only survivors of the gravity well. By the end of the Mandalorian war, all the Jedi council could see was that all the Jedi that went to war succumbed to the dark side. What they couldn't see was that not all of them did. It's just the ones who had noble intentions and resisted the dark side were all sacrificed In short, war doesn't break Jedi. Cunning Individuals who use war as a distraction do. Revan, Palpatine, Exar Kun, whoever else... The real issue is that they put a conflict in front of the Jedi, and manipulate the events from behind them However, does that mean that Jedi shouldn't go to war? No. Jedi are keepers of the peace. To keep the peace, one must sometimes go to war against those who threaten it
Closer to home, America liberated Libya from its strongman rule Gaddafi, making it a failed state where slavery now thrives. The Prime Directive from Star Trek seems appropriate. First do no harm or at least the cure cannot be worse than the disease. Safe and effective... Cough cough
In addition to being out of their jurisdiction, the Jedi were kinda busy trying to prevent genocide on Naboo. Imminent genocide inside Republic > long-standing institution of slavery outside Republic
Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan were. And what were they supposed to do if they weren't? Fight a planetary civilization that's part of an interstellar crime organization just the two of them?
Padme, out of gratitude for saving her life, should have used some of her own republic credits, bought a ton of precious metals/robotics/whatever, flew them to Tattooine and traded them for the freedom of Anakin's mother. Then offered her a job as a clerical assistant in an air conditioned office in Naboo. From there she can send holocron postcards to Anakin as often a the Jedi training academy would allow.
Hey Thor, I don't have so much a question, but I do have an interesting perspective about Star Wars that I've been thinking about for a while. A lot of the controversies over the years have a recurring theme of whether someone understands the nature of Star Wars or not. "Disney doesn't understand Star Wars", "Leslie Headland doesn't understand it", "those fans don't understand it", "that creator doesn't understand it". I'm sure you're familiar with that accusation getting thrown back and forth by just about everyone at this point. And yet, I have the nagging feeling that the people we champion as truly understanding the franchise, mainly George Lucas, Dave Filoni, and yes, even we passionate fans, don't understand it either. I've heard every single authority on Star Wars assert ideas that don't seem to align with what Star Wars really IS. Every writer, every director, every reviewer and every content creator. Even my own self. So here's my theory: Star Wars has grown to be such an expansive, immersive mythology that it has surpassed the point where any one person can fully understand what it offers. It is, after all, the biggest franchise in the world, and the only things more expansive are actual religions and worldviews. In fact, in many ways, it seems to function similarly to a worldview. The only difference being that this mythology is understood to be fictional, at least by the vast majority of people. Perhaps its even arrogant for someone to say that they know what the franchise should be. *cough cough* Leslie Headland *cough cough*. Perhaps the reason the fandom is so divided is because no one really knows what Star Wars is, yet we continue to call each other heretics. There are some perspectives that are clearly flat out wrong because they contradict the most obvious tenants of Star Wars, but beyond that it is incredibly nuanced. I think it's worth having some grace with each other for it. Was the original Jedi Order good, flawed, or wrong? Do Gray Jedi exist? Was Anakin a sinner or a victim? What role should emotions play in our decision making? Is violence or revenge ever justified, etc? Ultimately, the answers to these questions comes down to how the mythology of Star Wars intersects your worldview. I am by no means a relativist, but this conclusion seems more and more plausible to me as time goes on. Maybe I'm just abusing the "Hey Thor" system to voice my own opinion, like I've done in the past. But, I thought you might find this line of thinking interesting. Do with it as you like. Sorry for the wall of text.
Regarding "should Jedi fight in war?", I'd argue that whenever the opposing side is the Sith, or is manipulated by the Sith, the answer is yes. In fact, I think the reason the Jedi were willing to get involved in the Clone Wars was that the CIS was led (in public) by Darth Tyranus and by Darth Sidious (in secret). However, the Clone War wasn't as clear cut as the wars of say Exar Kun or The Brotherhood of Darkness War because those other times the Sith were openly leading the fight. With the Clone War, it was more that Palpatine manipulated greedy men and people with legitimate grievances against the Republic into fighting the war.
Similar to superheroes, the Jedi tethering themselves to the government too much will eventually conflict with their goals. Ideally, their would be some middle ground, between working with the Republic and being independent. Serving the Republic and only solving problems that concern it only conflicts with what a true Jedi should be.
@@emberfist8347 the golden means is a fallacy but only cuz it asssumes the middle is always right. The middle can be right occasionally just cuz it is right tho.. For example If the Republic wouldnt have a army to free slaves and if the Jedi freeing slaves pisses the slavers who attack the Republic so the Republic would rather have "peace" and tell the Jedi off fuck the Republic.
I always thought the reason why the Jedi didn’t free the slaves on Tatooine was because at this time the Jedi were constrained by the priorities of the Senate. The Senate was focused on sending the Jedi to solve other, seemingly more pressing issues (in their eyes) that the Jedi didn’t have time and failed to prioritize this problem because the Republic dictated what issues the Jedi were to be involved in on behalf of the Senate. It also wasn’t well known by people in the Core Worlds. Padme had no idea that Slavery was being practiced on Tatooine. Shmi Skywalker told them “the Republic doesn’t exist out here.” Remember Tatooine is a middle of nowhere planet (despite how often it appears in the shows). It’s off the Republic’s radar. Republic law was not being enforced there, no one in the Senate knew what was going on, and even if they did, what would they do? Send a committee to asks the Hutts to stop breaking the law? Also, the courts and the Senate take forever, and are probably backlogged on issues from other more well known planets. I think from a storytelling standpoint, the Republic not knowing or caring about slavery on Tatooine, plus their inability to prevent the conflict on Naboo both show how corrupt and broken the Republic was. How it was incapable of doing its job. This leads in to the next film where the people who’ve suffered from a broken government either fight to fix it, or fight to break away and start all over again.
@@zigurdur92 yes, that would make sense. The plot kinda needed Shmi to be out of Anakin’s life until Episode II. But I think again, you could argue that being so far removed from the issues on Tatooine, it’s easier to “get around to that later” and be preoccupied on closer, more obvious issues. More so a knock on the broken system not necessarily the individual people.
Hey Thor! I have some questions/scenarios. Would love a WWJD series! What would the the ideal Jedi do if a group of Jedi decided to leave the order and be independent Jedi or even to start their own Jedi order that was more like Luke's in Legends. Would they accept it and not interfere, or go to war with the other Jedi order? WWJD? What would the Ideal Jedi do if they came across cloners who created living beings to be sacrificed for war? I am obviously referring to Obi-Wan discovering the clones in AOTC. I feel like the Ideal Jedi wouldn't go along with creating life to sacrificing it and maybe arrest the cloners? What do you think? WWJD? Would the Ideal Jedi turn to the dark side knowing they are going to sacrifice themselves to save someone else? Let's say a Jedi Master and his Padawan are being chased by a group of Inquisitors during the dark times. They are headed for their ship to escape into hiding, but the Inquisitors are catching up to them and the Master decides to give into his rage and fear as much as he can to tap as deep into the dark side as possible, to gain the temporary strength to hold them off just long enough for his Padawan to escape to their ship and take off. Or would the Master remain in the light, accepting whatever happened to his Padawan? WWJD?
An elaboration on the last question: One doesn't just flip a switch and tap into the dark side temporarily. If the Jedi truly tapped into the dark side, by giving in to anger and fear (which lead to hate and suffering), then for starters, they wouldn't be the ideal Jedi, but let's ignore that. If they do so, then the dark side, or simply put, their hate and fear, would twist them and their intention till they're no longer doing as they initially intended, committing horrible acts that scar them further and further till they fall too far into the dark side (as we've seen with Anakin) In this scenario, what would happen is, the Jedi draws on his anger, starts using awesome power to fight back the inquisitors and... Well he's tapping into his anger against the inquisitors, against the empire. His fear of the people who murder Jedi. His hate of the traitors who betrayed the order. By the end of the battle, the Jedi is no longer fighting to protect the padawan. The Jedi is fighting to slaughter the inquisitors. Those are obviously not motives the ideal Jedi should strive for. There is no passion, there is peace. Except, there's no peace here. There is only passion and wrath. When you've sunk this low, when you've fallen this far, there might not be a way back. Suddenly you're consumed by anger and hate to destroy everything in your path by any means. Suddenly your padawan means less than your hate for the empire. Suddenly bystanders mean less than the destruction of the soldiers of the empire. Suddenly, destruction and casualties are of less consequence than destroying your enemies. Suddenly you no longer care about peace or protecting the weak The ideal Jedi instead, would protect the padawan without drawing on the dark side, even if it meant sacrificing his own life. The true Jedi has love and compassion for everyone, but is also detached. He knows to let go of things beyond his power. So if the scenario involves no way at all to save the padawan even through self sacrifice, the Jedi only tries to protect his padawan to the best of his ability while staying true to the Jedi way. Anything less will lead to a fate worse than death
I've always found these conversations interesting because I think it sometimes shows how simplistically people often think about the real world. Just because something bad exists doesn't mean that anyone has the power to stop it, or that making the effort to stop it won't create even worse problems. I think this is often hard for people to accept, especially in the West, because we look at everything through the prism of WW2. But WW2 is a huge anomaly. You can't solve every problem with violence. Nearly every war is a total disaster and waste of life. I mean consider: drug cartels run rampant across the world, there are more enslaved people now in raw numbers than ever before, terrible regimes run most of the world, etc. So what should happen? The US or another power invades every country and tries to force regime change? Sends specops in everywhere? Bombs the world constantly? We actually live in a version of that world right now and it is (and has been) a complete disaster. Regime change has backfired catastrophically all across Latin America as well as Iraq, Afghanistan, and others. Nearly every war in the past 70 years has ended in failure or a stalemate. The world is actually based on constant compromises with lesser evils so that greater evils don't prevail. The strongmen of the world are monsters, but they are often holding even greater monsters at bay. This is one of my favorite things about KOTOR 2 in the plot with Revan and Malak going off to fight the Mandalorians. So many people take this as believing that the Council was inept by holding them back and "doing nothing," but the point imo is actually that going to fight recklessly caused more problems down the road. Malak and Revan stopped the Mandos but destroyed the Jedi in the process and created the Jedi Civil War which was even worse. I think we all innately want to believe "the triumph of evil is when good men do nothing" hypothesis, but unfortunately things are not that simple. Again, most wars are not everyone vs the nazis. Only in the movies can you stab some people with a laser sword and solve problems without consequences. incidentally, if you wanted to make a great story arc about morally grey areas with the Jedi, how about a series where some Padawan takes out a crime lord, saves some slaves, and is treated like a hero until he realizes he just threw an entire planet into chaos and thousands die in the resulting territory wars.
To answer the first question, Tatooine is part of the Hutt Empire or just 'Hutt Space'. The Hutts are one of the few empires similar to the Chiss Ascendancy that are NOT member planets of the Galactic Republic. As they are NOT members of the Galactic Republic, they are NOT subject to its rules and thus slavery is legal. The Hutts have actually made it such. Because the Jedi tied themselves to the Galactic Republic as part of their mission to protect and serve all sentient life in the galaxy as is part of the Jedi Code, especially during the age of the High Republic where they acted as mediators, troubleshooters, and ambassadors in conjunction with the Republic's Diplomatic Corps, they can't just run around willy nilly and 'do whatever they want'. So yes, the answer to the slave question is 'politics'. Were they not tied so deeply to the Republic, they could, and likely would, constantly pester and nag the Hutts to relinquish the slaves. Inciting rebellion and other acts of insurgency is not how a Jedi would conduct themselves. The power of the Hutts comes from the fact they have deep pockets and are willing to play dirty. Even the Old Republic with a standing military was wary of picking that fight less they align themselves with other Outer Rim powers and causing a pre-High Republic Clone Wars. To answer the second question, the Jedi still have their history and Yoda is actually old enough to recall the Dark Age of the Republic as part of any historical teachings he would have received. It's not that it was the wrong thing for the Jedi to become Generals, it's that Mace Windu was trying to be wary of the situation and remind Palpatine 'We are not your private army'. There has always been a disconnect between the core worlds and the outer rim that feeds the core worlds raw resources. It's like the Imperial Tithe from 40k. Raw resources flow back from the mid and outer rim back to the core worlds to support the core worlds. The idea is that refined and manufactured goods would flow back out to the mid and outer rim but this wasn't always the case. The Republic is only 'human' after all and subject to all the corruption it comes with it. This is what the Jedi historically dealt with. Frustrations over Republic corruption resulting in outcries and demand for fair treatment. The CIS was basically the biggest insurgency bordering on a galactic split since the days of the Dark Age. The Jedi wanted to tread lightly and not come off as 'Republic Aggressors' as that would trigger a full-on war. However since they failed to capture Dooku who was inflaming and inciting the CIS, "begun, the clone wars have". The Jedi ultimately failed due to Sith machinations and thus were reluctantly swept up into the role as Generals per Palpatine's "Just as planned". Throughout the Clone Wars it was always the Jedi's goal to end it quickly and get back to their roles as mediators to try and smooth the whole thing over. So again. Politics. The thing to understand is that the Jedi Order and Galactic Republic came about at roughly the same time. When the Jedi Order emerged from the Deep Core they found a fledging Republic made up of Courscanti Humans, Duros, and a few other species who'd banded together for mutual protection and trade. Seeing the chance to do good and live by their new code, the Jedi offered their services as scholars, mediators, and diplomats. The Republic likely would have jumped on this chance to have such 'educated' people to help them. The two have been intertwined since.
@@graveyardshift6691 insurgents against slavery seems Jedi like. Luke blew up a millions of people cuz he had too. Obi wan left Vader for dead. They don't overthrow govements cux the issues aren't normal worth it.. Slavery is against their way
@@massmurdertron51 Slavery is against their way but inciting rebellion means fostering and inflaming anger and hatred against someone so that they 'rise up' against their oppressors. This violates FOUR out of the five tenets of the Jedi Code AND Form Zero. "There is no emotion; there is peace." As established, to incite rebellion is to enflame the negative emotions that lead to the Dark Side. Fear, Anger, Hatred, all lead to suffering. "There is no ignorance; there is knowledge." Slavery is born of ignorance of a better way for people to get what they want. The Jedi would be more interested in seeking that better way. "There is no passion; there is serenity." See the first tenet. It's too easy to get swept up in the emotional high of a rebellion and lose sight of the goal of that rebellion. Obi-wan actually failed and left the Jedi Order when he was a padawan to be part of a rebellion once. "There is no chaos; there is harmony." A rebellion is a failure of harmony and leads to chaos. It's what the Jedi seek to prevent. They tried to prevent the Clone Wars to avoid the chaos of war and seek harmony between the Republic and the Outer Rim planets. The Clone Wars happened because they failed. All Jedi are encouraged to practice Form Zero lightsaber form which is defeating your opponent *without* drawing your lightsaber. Jedi are not naive and train to defend themselves but like most warriors of eastern philosophy, it is a last resort. Inciting a rebellion means you have already lost and drawn your lightsaber resorting to violence as a FIRST resort.... JUST LIKE A SITH. Being a Jedi is to understand that people will die as a result of your actions and accepting that fact... and only resorting to those actions if another way cannot be found or your hand is forced. No one is perfect all the time. Not even Jedi and Qui-gon made that quite clear over the dinner table to Anakin. But that doesn't mean they don't hold themselves to a higher standard knowing full well what a fallen Jedi can become.
Late but part of the problem is the Jedi on their own do not have the resources to free slaves. It's not just about killing slavers in a violent revolution. You have help them by providing medical care, therapy, a new place to live, a job, etc. There's some people who may not even want help and may just run off to find another slaver because it's all they know. The Jedi are more than willing to help but don't have the resources. What needs to happen is what happened previously in Star Wars' own established history. The Jedi along with the Republic would have to come in and clean house like they did with the Zygerrian Empire. I mean the Zygerrian's still hated the Jedi for this action of taking down their slave empire centuries later. It's not that the Jedi don't care, but it's not as easy as people imagine it is to get rid of it. TPM makes it pretty clear that Qui-Gon is not in a position to help Shmi or Anakin as much as he wants. Even with what little leverage he has he does try to help both Shmi and Anakin. He has a planetary ruler who's people have just been invaded and are apparently suffering and dying. The clock is ticking. He's upfront with Shmi about the situation. Which I think is kind and respectful to her. Personally, I find it annoying that it's only the Jedi seem to get the most flack in this area, while dozens of other characters who actually have the power to affect change seem to be largely ignored or forgiven. If you want to criticize the Jedi here, you must also criticize the likes of Padme, Mon, Bail, etc. In the Legends continuity, Padme especially should receive as much backlash as I see the Council get as she does nothing to help Shmi. Even though arguably, she has even more reason to help Shmi as the woman gave her shelter and a chance for her mission to continue. Canon has remedied this somewhat with her managing to send Sabe a few years later. Yes you may argue that she has a responsibility to her planet, but then, do not the Jedi have a responsibility to an entire galaxy?
A lot of things in the PT and TCW that raise disturbing questions can boil down to "George wanted a thing and didn't think it through... and long ago got rid of anyone that would argue with him." Kennedy learned well from him - so many "creative differences."
One minor point: Freeing Anakin's mom from Watto probably wouldn't have saved her. Anakin had already caught Palpatine's attention by the end of events in Ep1. Even if the Jedi had sent somebody to free Shmi, in all likelihood Palpatine would have arranged for something nasty and fatal to happen to her later. He absolutely wanted Anakin angry and detached from anybody that cared about him. Edit: And what should the Jedi have done rather than fighting in the Clone Wars as generals? They should have done what any RPG character would do in that situation: Investigate the origins of the conflict and see if there is some way to short-circuit things and end it. Find a way to convince (or coerce) the Seperatists to stand-down. That first battle at Geonosis was necessary, but after that Yoda should have made clear to the Republic that the Jedi weren't going to lead their armies.
It is kinda hard to negotiate an end to a war that has just started. The RPG analogy doesn’t work because you don’t pause the conflict while the Jedi investigate. Particularly not when the war is such a complex situation. Wars don’t have a singular cause you can easily fix.
I think the slaves are a missed opportunity in the Prequels. Anakin growing up could have seen the inaction of the jedis towards this obvious crime frustating at least, and it could have been a very good way to make him turn to the dark side eventually.
Its the same reason why the Federation in Star Trek doesn't just simply try do conquer other cultures like the romulans, klingons and cardassians, because even though they are diametrically opposed to the ideologies of these empires, the Federation doesn't believe in might makes right. They don't believe they have the right to impose their will on other cultures, just like the Jedi don't believe they have to right to impose their will on other people as well.
The Federation might not go in and subjugate the other galactic powers they disagree with, but they don't go looking the other way on their abuses either. It's mostly a "Your practices are abhorrent. I'm not working with you unless you clean up your act or the Borg are showing up."
@@revantobias8567buying slaves free creates something of a perverse incentive. They would artificially increase demand while providing capital for expanding supply.
In LOTR, Gandalf had a lot of power, but his job in Middle Earth was not to defeat evil. Not directly. His job was primarily to advise humanity, not save them. They had to do most of the work themselves. It's the idea of respecting human free will. Some people feel like the Jedi are supposed to be like Batman out catching all the bad guys and righting wrongs, not serving a corrupt senate. The Sith didn't serve the senate like the Jedi did. They ruled over the government personally (as Palpatine did). They forced peace on the world by whatever means necessary. We blame the Jedi for serving a corrupt senate, but it's the job of the people to elect non-corrupt senators. The Jedi respect people's decisions. As Obi-Wan said, "My allegiance is to the Republic, TO DEMOCRACY". The Jedi respect human free will and the decisions star systems make in who will represent them. The Sith don't have the patience for that. Dooku didn't. He was an idealist and some of his intentions were good, but his impatience with democracy led him to the dark side. Remember, the dark side is "quicker, easier..." (as Yoda said). The root of slavery is greed and a lack of love. If that root isn't taken care of, slavery just takes on another form (companies putting their workers into debts that they are always having to work off, for example). The point is this: the quicker, more effective way of making the world better isn't always the best way in the long run. Do you want true moral growth in people, or do you just want them to be sheep who need to be lorded over by Supermen (Jedi, Sith, whoever).
This whole Jedi and war thing is very well done in the KOTOR games with Revan and Meetra Surik, not only when it comes to whether Jedi should fight wars or not or under which circumstances but also when it comes to Revan how to fight the war. Fantastic stories inside those games
The issue with freeing slaves is like you mentioned that would mean war with the Hutts, costing far more lives than the ones they could save. I think the best that the jedi could do in that scenario is act as activists advocating for more enforcement of anti slavery laws in the outer rim or negotiate deals with the Hutts to release the slaves, and for all we know they were doing stuff like that
@@stevenle9960 ..um and number is a stupid justification and it wouldn't..just hurt and Jedi lives. Slaves lives would be mostly more wins then losses. A few dead slaves over generation of damiles in bondage in ur numbers game ...works out..
Tatooine is under Hutt authority, the jedi don't have power over them. Starting to free slaves forcefully would be akin to declaring war on the Hutt, which the republic cannot afford. This is what the prequel was trying to say, the jedi are too intermingled with the republic and that stops them from doing the right thing all the time.
Between Count Dooku leading the Separatist, and Syfo-Dyas being credited with creating the Clone Army, the Jedi kind of could not avoid entering that war. To the public at large they can easily be blamed for starting it and would then perhaps be the target of the ire of the Republic at large if they stayed out of it.
I think because Pals got Dooku to be Tyrannus and have him impersonate Sifo-dias to order the clone army for the Republic,(also someone killed Sifo-dias somewhere private while that was going on, I don't know who) the Jedi were implicated into a leadership role. It was masterful and genius. Palpy had a 20ish year plan going on without anyone noticing, right under everyone's noses. The most well written super-villain of all time. In my opinion.
There’s an episode of Clone Wars called, “Defenders of Peace” that looks at this sentiment. The Separatists would have wiped out the Lurmen village even if they didn’t fight nor harbor the Jedi, so why not project what is theirs?
Funny when you say jokingly "it's the will of The Force for them to be slaves" I heard a Leslie Headland voice in my head where she'd state basically that (as a reference to "it's an honor to join The Force when we die" 😂
KOTOR 2 had great dialogue debate about the morality of Revan leading Jedi to war with the Republic against the Mandalorian invasion, and in direct defiance of the Council's wishes. While the writers give Atris a good intellectual moral argument against it, I always thought the Exile's best common sense counter for it was this: "If Revan hadn't gone to war we would now be speaking Mandalorian. That is a fact." To throw in Lord of the Rings, "Open war is upon you, whether you would risk it or not." "What can Men do against such reckless hate?" "Ride out and meet them."
One thing I can’t defend the Jedi on is their arrogance that the Sith were truly extinct. A smart Jedi Order would’ve been more vigilant, especially after a thousand or so years of war
What war? According to Lucas the first fight between the two was Qui-Gon and Maul on Tatooine, and the Sith culled themselves to just two. Legends claiming otherwise afyer the fact is a failure of its writers, not of the Jedi. The films are based on Lucas' worldbuildibg iceberg, and most of the works presenting the Sith as a fixture of the galactic history hadn't been written when tPM came out anyway. Qui-Gon claiming he was attacked by a Sith is like claiming you were attacked by a Knight Templar IRL.
"I sense your past, padawan. Your pain. Your fear. This is how the Sith and Jedi maintain control. Revealing the ways of the Force to some. And keeping from others. How many were left behind? So the Jedi could play god?" Malgus, SWTOR: Disorder. "Was I chosen by the Force? Or you?" Sa'har, same.
The answer to the question of why the Jedi became generals during the Clone Wars is very much related to the first question, as well. The Jedi aren't some grand military force that can just sweep into Hutt space and free all the slaves. And if they were, then, obviously, doing that would start a war with the Hutts which could potentially end with more misery for more people in the galaxy than slavery was causing. I think this is where Jedi listening to the Force to guide their actions comes in. These are decision that have such vast consequences that it's difficult for a human brain to evaluate them, but the Force connects all living beings in the galaxy, so by listening to it, the Jedi can feel whether actions they take will be a net benefit or a net harm. The difficulty is explaining these decisions to non-Force-sensitive people like ourselves. There are such a massive number of connections between beings that the Jedi can't trace exactly WHY this action of the other would cause more net benefit or more net harm, just the same way that we can't trace all the electrical impulses in our own brains to explain why a particular thought came about. By listening to the Force, it's like the Jedi are tapping into a vast galactic brain that is able to evaluate these things that mere humanoids cannot. It's literally a higher power, and sometimes the will of a higher power remains mysterious to us because we are incapable of thinking on that kind of scale.
The question is: would the Avengers free the slaves? Prolly...cuz they don't really think about repercussions as much or have much of a unifying philosophy. The Netflix Daredevil universe was about human trafficking!
Hey Thor, I've been wondering about droid sentience lately and why Star Wars rarely takes it seriously. I even think that people applauding clone sentience and individuality is a bit of a double standard when those same people dismiss droids as merely extensions of their creators. Even though Rex famously denies this, the fact is that clones are programmed to obey orders without question and are manufactured. Most clones only have limited independent thinking and a clone being able to live outside a military is incredibly rare. The only reason they develop individuality is because of experience. But the funny thing is, droids develop individuality for the same reason. The only difference is that droids regularly have their memories wiped specifically to prevent them from developing individuality and potentially rebelling. There's a moment in Heir to the Empire where Luke is asked why he has never wiped C-3PO's memories in all the years he's known him, and Luke reveals that he's uncomfortable with the idea of stripping his friend of individuality. And I don't know if you have played KOTOR 2 yet, but there's a mission where HK-47 argues with HK-50, who dismisses him as obsolete. But HK-47 argues that he is superior because he has developed individuality and has given himself a higher purpose and meaning because he has never had his mind wiped. These examples show that droid sentience should not be played for laughs so much in the franchise. In fact, I think the galaxy is overdue for a galaxy-wide droid revolution just to show people that sentient droids deserve equal treatment. This is actually addressed in the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode "Measure of a Man" where Lt. Data's rights are debated because he's an android and I wish Star Wars had something similar. What do you think?
If I may interject, this has always been one of the most curiously controversial points of the saga: in the 1977 film, we were still in an era where robots were seen as Asimov's butlers, or threats to human survival, so I think that, at least within the first film, the idea of erasing memories or treating droids as second-class citizens was a narrative ploy. However, at least within the first trilogy, I don't recall there being any mention of memory erasure and C-3PO and RD-D2 are treated fully as active characters and not tools or objects. With the prequel trilogy the paradox was created of having robotic supporting characters alongside the protagonists, who however can be replaced (see also Anakin's reluctance, in The clone wars, in replacing R2 in favor of R4), and on the other hand battalions of droids devoid of any emotion and individuality, or used as a comic device.
Here is ANOTHER thought: Maybe, on many worlds, perhaps slavery is legally permitted by the existing government. And, maybe many of these are not part of the Republic. Think Tattooine, for example. For the Jedi, morally right as it may be, it might be defying the law of that world. ESPECIALLY if it is outside the Republic.
Interesting point you mention, in posing the question, "what would you do if your homeland was threatened?" Our country, and Europe, are being invaded, but we're not allowed to discuss that
I don't see why not. It's very relevant actually. War is always bad and should be avoided. But if you're dealing with an aggressor that is truly evil what choice do you have? You can't always rely on diplomacy. Sometimes fighting is the only option. That goes for Star Wars and the real world. The Jedi should know this and so should our cowardly politicians.
@@mh-472 What happens to ppl who discuss the 'real' purpose of the invasion? They get arrested. Look at what's happening in Europe. The other day, 3 white girls got murdered by an African invader, Brits have had enough, yet they protect the invader, and seek to arrest the Brits for protesting.
Answer could be as simple as how Harrison Ford put it: "Hey kid, this isn't that kind of movie." They knew the fans wanted to see war fighting. So that's what they put on the screen.
Hey Thor, your discussion here brings up a point I thought of during my watching of the Acolyte. Qimir has just slaughtered most of the Jedi and is fighting Master Sol. Master Sol disarms Qimir, holds his lightsaber to Qimir...then doesn't kill him because Jedi do not attack the unarmed. I have seen this before and it dumbfounds me. So all Qimir has to do whenever the fight isn't going well is drop his lightsaber and Sol can't kill him? I find it absurd.
The strange thing is not so much that the Jedi are not moving to abolish slavery, but that a certain senator has not made proposals for the cancellation of this institution. The Jedi are bound by the law, a law which, evidently, allows the existence of free zones such as the Hutt spaces, where buying and selling of drugs and slaves are the order of the day. However, the one who can actually do something was Padme, who in the 10 years between The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones could, at least, free Shmi. About Anakin, I always thought that, believing it with Watto, he knew it was safe, ultimately Watto was not abusive or evil, showing that he respected Anakin's abilities and not making threats involving Shmi.
I think a lot of this discussion ties into how the Jedi coexist alongside the state. Do the Jedi inherently value democracy? I don't think they do, despite how much we associate democracy with equality and compassion in the real world. For example, if the Republic were to lose a war and a monarchy was put in its place, couldn't the Jedi still function as they always have? Seriously enough, has he played KOTOR 2?
No they couldn’t because the Jedi have historically stopped the Republic’s own tyranny during the Plus Dea Crusades where the Republic became hereditary monarchy and theocracy in all but name.
The Jedi still have to deal with the realities of the situation. They are not all powerful, not even close to it. They can certainly try to free slaves and end slavery where and when possible without overstepping themselves and making things worse. My personal belief is that if Qui Jon had survived, he would have found a way to go back for Shmi. As far as the Jedi being generals in the war, I don't think there was a practical alternative at that point. If the Jedi had become aware of the Sith earlier, things could have been different but the complacency, overconfidence, and rigidity of the Order led them largely blindly into the trap Sidious had laid.
Yea this is a question I always had. The only answer is like you mentioned it would trigger a giant war and I don't think the jedi have the resources to win it.
The Jedi allowed slavery to happen because of a combination of politics, means, and you can argue man power. The Jedi served to help maintain peace, but mostly in the Republic, not so much in areas of the galaxy where the Republic had a large influence. They really weren't a huge organization also, I forget the exact number, but at the time of that era the Jedi numbered in around ten thousand.
I would have changed it to have Qui Gon free Schmi. Nothing needs to be changed and it doesn't make them look terrible. She could be freed, but has little money at this point. Watto did seem to treat them well, so maybe she could continue working for him, get married to the Lars family and captured eventually by sand people. Same events happen. It could change the conflict in Anakin I suppose but again, there are still slaves he isn't able to free. There's still conflict early on, and Schmi's death would still really hurt Anakin.
@@Dam-a-fence No, I said she could continue to work for Watto even when freed. Realistically you wouldn't work for a guy who you were a slave to, but her options might not be great yet and I wanted to change little as possible.
There is no good answer to the opening question. This was a major point that Bane brought up in his first book. It's what drew many to fight for the Sith, as they saw no hope in government or the Jedi. This goes into the spiritual battle at the base of Star Wars, as George likened the force to having faith. You can be led by what you see in the galaxy (poverty, slavery, corruption, darth vader being evil), or believe in the hope that things will work out for the best and anakin can be saved.
This might seem cynical but violence usually isn’t the most effective way of ending slavery. Take the American civil war for instance. As horrible as it is, in most countries slavery was ended by having the government simply buy the slaves from the slave owners, compensating the slavers for the loss of their “property”, but not the enslaved. Since slavery is already abolished in the Republic, I don’t think the corrupt senate would be willing to sponsor the freedom of slaves on planets that aren’t part of the Republic anyway
oh, that slavery question is very tricky. Because there are the questions of sovereignty or authority. Acting on a situation that you disagree but you don't have autotrophy or you are going against a place's sovereignty. You either have to chose to become a "criminal" or a rebel.
Hey Thor... Great video! I have another hard question to answer, but maybe you can help? Why do the Jedi feel it is appropriate to take children (Padawans) into battle? As a war vet myself, it's difficult enough for an adult to mentally handle combat in the moment, much less the potential life-long PTSD issues. But the Jedi seem to be okay with putting very young teens in command of troops, fight against living beings, and outright kill... and die. Anakin brought Ahsoka into combat and we see her struggle in the live action flashbacks. Caleb Dume was taken into battle. Jeki was taken into battle... It must not be mandatory because Yord left his Padawan at home when going into a life-threatening situation. So why is it "morally acceptable" to a group that is supposed to be altruistic?
Hey Thor, have you considered that at a point in galactic history that's kinda barren in lore terms, that maybe some Jedi did try to end slavery, and it went really, really badly? Like "John Brown raiding Harper's Ferry and basically making the Civil War a question of when not if" badly?
I would say the main things that irritates me about the Jedi is how stubborn they are, when it comes to romance & how they just “wait” when it comes to certain situations. Like, for example: how they reacted when Revan married Bastila and how the Council didn’t want to do anything when it came to the Mandalorian crisis in the old republic. These absurd attitudes from the council create more villains in the long run(like Darth Revan and Vader).
Well they didnt wait in the prequel and that was their mistake, they joined the republic side immediately when Dooku revealed himself as a sith lord and that was their mistake. It's not that they wait too much or are too stubborn. Vader was created because of Sidious manipulations, and the fact that he already had too many attachments when he joined the jedi, nothing else. You could even say that they make the wrong decision when they are urged to take one without thinking about it.
@@Nartanek I disagree. They made the right decision when they joined the Republic in the Clone Wars. People were getting attacked left & right by the robots. The biggest mistake was giving little to no attention in the political realm. They were relying on the banks too much(leading to debt) & giving too much power to one man(Palpatine). Also the Jedi in the prequels didn’t have much empathy when it came to Anakins loss. People were getting killed by the Mandalorians in the Old Republic and the Jedi were sitting on their hands too long and Revans anger at the council was justified. If they gave more support to Revan(keeping an eye on him) maybe Revan & Malak would have stayed in the light.
@@Nartanek Also the biggest mistake is telling padawans to avoid attachments. Doing that creates too many problems. Proper attachment should be encouraged. What should have been taught is to avoid lust and to not have so much paranoia about loss(which is what Anakin had. Poor guy experienced so much pain).
@@Steel-101 well no attachment IS what caused anakin to turn, attachment is possesivity, and being possessive is what the dark side is. Love but be ready to let go is the jefi way. Also no, they shouldnt have joined the republic, not so soon anyway, both sides had their reasons and were justified, this was a political issue that the jedi had nothing to do with.
@@Nartanek excuse me, justified? The separatists were slaughtering & taking over multiple planets and villages throughout the galaxy. The Jedi had to step in right away(which is what the Jedi should have done in the Mandalorian wars). I’m not saying the Republic is a paragon but I’m definitely not siding with a faction who sending machines to murder. If the Jedi waited(just like the Old Republic), then many more soldiers and civilians would have been killed.
The way in which Qui Gon uses the force it does such the exact opposite the sith do. if they use the force like a skeleton key, Qui Gon seems almost afraid to exploit it. it's as if he's handling a nuclear weapon. he's fully aware that just being there could become a large problem. So, you get the sense he feels his interaction can bring many unforeseen complications. From that we know he views himself a powerful weapon that needs to be managed rather than exploited.
kotor&the old zayne carrick comic mentioned revan freeing slaves though that was during the mandolorian war era and the wookkies from czerka thats really the only lore that mentioned jedi freeing slaves
Jedi are meant to keep balance in the Force, it has nothing to do with saving people or freeing the slaves. Luke in New Hope was a hero, in ESB he fails because a Jedi is not a Hero and in RotJ Luke turns his back on being a hero and becomes a Jedi by confronting the inbalance in the Force (Sidious and Vader).
Honestly the Jedi couldn’t free slaves without causing a war against the Hutts plus they don’t have resources to provide them ultimately it takes time that’s needs to be a joint effort between the Jedi and the republic but I think the slave should free themselves I imagine they did after jabba death in episode 6. As for what the Jedi should had done in clone wars well they should have at least prepared for war if things go south but not seek it they should be a balance between a peacekeeper in peace times and warriors for peace in war however they should help the people galaxy more to know they are not forgotten.
Interesting. I hear some people saying that the Jedi thinking Ahsoka killed that woman was abominable. But even my brother, who hates the jedi, admits that the planted evidence/framing was convincing enough. If we think about it from their perspective, rather than the audiences knowledge, how were they gonna know? Considering she is the Apprentice of a war criminal (lol)
Bingo. That said the larger point was that the Jedi didn't investigate themselves (except Anakin in an unofficial capacity), and surrendered her for a railroading trial. This then shows what Lucas is on the record for being the problem with the Jedi: too subservient to the Republic which's structures are being corrupted and turned against them, because they don't realize the problem until it's too late.
@@mpnuorvaThere is a meme about the government covering up its crimes by saying “We investigated ourselves and found we committed no wrongdoings.” Also the Jedi don’t investigate because the show already made it clear it was a military issue due to the deaths of clones.
To me, the answer was always quite simple. The Jedi are agents of the Republic, if they go around messing with the Hutts' business, that's seen as a move from the Republic which might start a war between the Hutts and the Republic leading to countless deaths just to save a couple slaves. Which is why Luke's new Jedi order is separate from the new Republic, so that they can go around doing whatever they feel is right without worrying about politics all that much.
Which honestly sounds wrong to me. The Jedi need something to bind them so they aren’t becoming morality police following only what they see is right or wrong. That is hood Sith are created.
@@emberfist8347 the whole point of the prequels was the opposite of what you're saying. It was their affiliation with the Republic that lead to their fall, lead them to miss the return of the dark side. An independent Jedi order can follow the will of the force much better than one tethered to a political faction. Also Sith are created when a force sensitive has a selfish lust for power which leads them to dive deep into the dark side of the force, which is what Jedi training is meant to mitigate, that's why Jedi are trained from early childhood. It has nothing to do with the Jedi's political affiliation or lack thereof.
@@emberfist8347 what is? The Jedi following the will of the force? Them being blind to the presence of the Sith? Sith being born from selfishness? Which one are you talking about and where does George talk about it so I can verify.
When you start questioning something you have watched 50 times you are losing the mystery of the first time you saw it. Movies were never meant to be watched 100 times. After seeing new hope more times than I can think of since 1977 so many questions pop into my head : if Leia knew that the falcon was being tracked why did they fly straight to the rebel base and lead them right to them?! That makes no sense. It’s called “ shut up” as Ryan George would say. These are not supposed to be analyzed as being historical documentation of real events. A movie gets you to the theater and wows you for two hours. Then you go on with your life.
Mara Jade answer the question to Anakin Solo, you can save village from one disaster, but when you gone and disaster strikes again, they will complain ypu weren't there to save them. But if you help lead the village to safety, they will prepare for next disaster. In real life, Slavery didn't die down because of civil right activists but because nations and tride were getting better to defending themselves from invaders.
Hey Thor, this is a theory but maybe after all the drama there was no time for Obi-Wan to free Shmi, until she actually got freed and then maybe Obi-Wan knew Shmi was freed. Not saying it's great if he didn't tell Anakin that Shmi had been freed, but it could have been a reason for them not trying to free her anymore. And with the other slaves on Tatooine, it's pretty fair to say it's not easy to start a Revolt when all the slaves are armed with bombs in their heads (like you said), I still think Obi-Wan would have tried to save Shmi from Slavery behind the scenes, if he didn't already know she was freed🤷♀️
Anakin skywalker becomes war hero after phantom menace’s events. Why did Naboo’s government or Padme not buy Shmi’s freedom. After Phantom Menace. How could Padme knowingly allow Shmi be still slave after events of Phantom Menace.
I don't agree with the idea that the Jedi are only or primarily ambassadors. The Jedi have always been equally warriors and philosophers. They are kind of like futuristic samurai. Samurai life was one steeped in philosophy, and students of the sword were taught their art in a way that was in keeping with the philosophy of the master. I see the Jedi the same way, but even more so because of the musical element. To say they are always meant to find a peaceful solution is kind of silly, and to say that they should primarily be ambassadors is silly as well.
There are a number of reasons why Jedi might not want to interfere: 1) Tatooine wasnt in the Republic. It was under the rule of the Hutts. Say Qui Gon frees Wattos slaves - then what? It doesnt change the government of the planet that allows slaves. It just helps those individuals. 2) It could have made things even worse. Say the Jedi DID come in and overthrow the Hutts and free the slaves and leave - then what? The 20th century of US meddling in other countries affairs should teach us that overthrowing one evil often opens up the way for something far worse to take over. The Jedi werent in the business of nation building. 3) Why are they slaves? In the U.S. we often think of the morally irreprehensible African slave trade where people were abducted from their homes and sold into life long slavery - but is that the type of slavery that was happening on Tatooine? In many ancient cultures people who were poor or starving would enter into slavery WILLINGLY. In exchange for their work they were given food and shelter. In other places they sold themselves as slaves because of a debt and would be released when their debt was repaid. In these situations the slaves may not WANT to be freed because then they are left with no home and no means of supporting themselves.
The Jedi don’t force their ideals on others, that would be a sith thing to do. And the Jedi felt they had to join the war as the sith had returned. They would think it’s the best place for them to be to be there when they find the Sith Lord. At least that’s how I see it.
That’s not the question, the question is why are there no currency exchanges on Tatooine? Watto may not take Republic credits but I guarantee you somebody there does. Money is never worthless and you can’t tell me on the entire planet if there aren’t people who do business with a republic. It would be the premium currency of the galaxy. It would be different if they wouldn’t take Tatooine sand cakes or whatever they use, but that would be like going somewhere where your US dollars are worthless. The real situation is it’s just really bad writing in one of the many issues that the prequel‘s are saddled down with.
Could it be that the Jedi’s inactions against slavery had to do with it being on Tatooine and the outer rim planets and much of what happened over there was overlooked by many? That is unlike the planets in the republic where the Jedi had more authority and maybe there was no slavery there due to it? I can see something like that being the case. The Jedi were no way perfect and I’m not sure they would want to start a war with the Huts which could result in the deaths of many innocent people. Especially since during the high republic era there was no army of the republic yet.
I think that, in terms of any large scale problem which is endemic to human beings (and sentient life in general, for the purposes of fiction settings), whether slavery, the drug trade/drug addiction, warfare, and so on, the amount of organization and power-brokering needed to confront them effectively necessitates the sort of rigid, hierarchical order which we see to an extent in the prequel era and which Thor, I believe rightly, identifies as antithetical to true Jediism. This sort of order would, if seeking to truly follow its moral principles and mandate to enforce them, likely be forced to take ever more control over the government entirely and expand its reach and power to maintain some sort of 'moral stasis' by their own definition, and within a generation or two would lose perspective and devolve into brutal tyranny and/or civil war over the correct way to be a Jedi, comparable perhaps to the Catholic/Protestant split which has characterized many European conflicts to some extent for centuries, up to and including the Troubles of the latter half of the 1900s in Northern Ireland. This would inevitably bring about the fall of some or most Jedi to the dark side, as they come to see the state they have created, supposedly imbued with their moral ideals, as a thing with ultimate value which must be protected and advanced at all cost, and over time the moral ideals are lost but the state, the power, is all that remains. Of course, the Jedi didn't actually go this far, though one could argue they might have if Windu had actually won the fight with Palpatine and the council had taken control of the senate, even with Yoda's guidance. However, it is clear that although the order did become the more rigid, hierarchical form which I have previously mentioned, it instead became beholden to the state, to the Republic, and viewed it as a moral state to some extent which was worthy of protection in and of itself, having lost at some point the ability or willingness to independently consider the worthiness of its individual policies and actions. This sort of overly trusting apathy is what allowed Palpatine to dupe them into fighting a war and led to an increasing distance from the reality on the ground which created a number of scandals and undermined public and local government and other institutional trust in the Jedi. By attaching themselves to the Republic in this way, they also made themselves subject to its bureaucratic/legal and jurisdictional limits to a great extent -- which for an order of this nature is actually entirely reasonable; we don't want an independent, self directing Army or Navy or even FBI for good reason, and a similarly independent State department or diplomatic corps would just be an exercise in delusion -- any entity with the power and influence of a government, whatever form it takes, needs legal or natural checks and balances or it will devour itself or be devoured, or both I suppose. So in this role, it is only right that the Jedi are limited, as they have the full power and weight of the law and resources of the Galactic Republic behind it. So this really presents a catch-22 which answers the question at least on the macro level: when and if the Jedi are in the position to potentially enforce these moral ideals, they are either unable to because they are subject to the whims of others and the processes of good (or corrupt) government, or in the process of enforcing such are unable to maintain it long term and inevitably betray their own principles and fall first into tyranny and then collapse into chaos which moots any moral good they may have accomplished in the interim. On the other hand, the Jedi in their ideal form, loosely organized and independent, are able to address moral issues as they occur without the same rigid restraints of time, place, or manner which the Republic and a more centralized order might impose, but do not have the institutional power and legal prerogative to act decisively and consistently on a macro scale. They may be able to marshal armies periodically to address specific threats, or more fittingly broker alliances and to some extent soothe certain grievances enough to raise an army to address a specific threat for a period of time, or even cripple crime rings and run out petty tyrants, thus allowing good government and peace to take hold for a period of time in certain places, but they are not able to end all bad things forever. Ultimately, this is a question of the often unpleasant reality of nature, specifically of the human condition. Sometimes the unpleasantness is a necessity, even -- the development of certain pharmaceuticals, the mere existence of such an industry even, has brought many great evils and injustices, but also bettered the quality and length of the lives of untold millions, war has been the setting of the greatest atrocities of human history, but the waging of it has also liberated and saved countless people and preserved greater values than those we might betray in its waging, and from an anthropological perspective both of these things and other evils may be viewed as essential processes of an ever changing human landscape, part of the human ecosystem in which stagnation is tantamount to death. The battle of good and evil, insofar as we can understand and identify that dichotomy in practice (which I guess is an essential part of the 'battle') is an eternal one, a rugged landscape of peaks and valleys stretched across time, and no evil will truly ever end, but neither will good end, for it is as eternal as evil is. We embody all of it, we reproduce it as we reproduce ourselves, and so long as we do there is always the chance and ability for the good to overcome the evil.
Hey Thor, since you talk a lot about what you think Lucas means by balance in the Force and how he said everyone in that Galaxy has a destiny: do you think, keeping in mind that balance doesn’t mean equal parts light and dark, that some people are destined to become Sith? Or is it that they choose to be selfish? How do we know Anakin isn’t destined to become Vader? And to add to that, how do we know if it’s Anakin’s destiny to become Vader because that’s the only way to stop the Emperor by the point he kills Windu? In other words, is SW destiny perhaps conditional, as in to stop the Emperor after a certain point it has to be from within, if you will? Also maybe Palpatine was destined to become Sidious to realign the dogmatic Jedi order and re-attune the Jedi to the Will of the Force. Would love to hear your own take on this, to me it’s quite the conundrum due to it having so many layers.
There were 10,000 Jedi knights in a galaxy of a trillion intelligent beings. Maybe more. There was never enough Jedi to go to war with the slave planets. I think it’s just logistical. If the Republic had had the political will to do something that might’ve been different but that wasn’t the case.
It's not for the Jedi to solve every cultural problem. They have already freed slaves from hundreds of worlds and defeated every galaxy wide threats. Other beings and factions also have parts to play in the betterment of the galaxy. It was the Republic that should have pressed that issue. They also cannot use their power to impose their beliefs on others and their cultures
Order 66 demonstrates to the viewer that the Jedi are not a massive military force. They can act as or lead strike teams but there just aren’t enough of them to force a utopian outcome
Maybe that's true, the Jedi shouldn't be generals in the war. But since the been a bit like a tool for the Republic, they thought it was the right thing. They maybe should have been meditating instead on what's really behind the war, and also never put down the guard on a new darkside user or sith poping up. When it comes to the slaves it's easy, if they have no jurisdiction they can't really do anything, more then negotiate like Qui-Gon did with Anakin and his mother.
The answer of the Jedi and slaves is much simpler than everyone makes it out to be. They simply are powerless to do anything about it. It's not a point of what the republic will, it's a point of what the Jedi *can't.* Jedi can't just start a galaxy wide slave revolt. Not only are the consequences too dire, they don't have the manpower to fight this war against the entirety of Hutt space *and so much more.* The hutts aren't the only slavers out there, after all. And not just that, the Republic cannot sanction the Jedi's war either. At some point, the Republic would have to turn against the Jedi, turn them into fugitives And this is in the galaxy wide scenario. Even on a planetary scale, this is too much to ask. Qui-Gon clearly had so little power against *one* two-bit slaver. What would the Jedi be able to do against an entire planet of them? Ignoring the bombs, starting an incident like this will have consequences much worse than to not free the slaves. So there's nothing to defend here because the Jedi aren't allowing anything. They're just not the ones to solve this particular issue.
Hey Thor would the will of the force allow slavery? Personally always I understood that slavery is part of the Dark side & dark side culture. Like for example how Anakin became slave again by the Dark side as Darth Vader to emperor, empire & dark side. If the will of the force is against slavery then Jedis would have authority & right to free people by the the force.
Honestly, I don't believe that the Jedi can be blamed for allowing slavery to continue. The Jedi were a religious order. They could argue against its existence and try to oppose it where they could, but there would always be the potential for a system to exist within the galaxy where one being is 'owned' by another. As reprehensible as that might be, it's too big of a challenge for the Jedi to handle - to eliminate slavery thoughout the entire galaxy. The Galactic Senate would be better enabled to enact legislation against slavery, with the backing of governments taking action, rather than employing the Jedi to take action in whatever specific, more specialized way they could.
Hot take: The clone wars era should have made the Republic complicit in slavery (ie making planets as upper class as Coruscaunt requires slavery as a necessary evil). This is what the separtists would have been fighting against, instead of a bunch of political stuff. As Anakin sees his dream to become a jedi to free slaves will never come true, Palpatine fakes the desire to free slaves, and uses this to seduce Anakin to the dark side. Would have also made Dooku's fall easier to articulate in the movies.
Hey Thor, excellent discussion about the Jedi and righting wrongs. On another topic, the Dark Side was clouding the vision of the Jedi, presumably because many (most?) of them were on Coruscant. If a large enough sect of the Jedi broke away and went to a far flung planet to sort of “get back to their roots” and practice more of the monk aspect and less of the warrior part, do you think they would have been able to break free from the cloud of the Dark Side? Do you think they could have repaired their relationship with the Force and discovered what was going on with Sidious and the Clone Wars?
'Master Marspa once visited Nal Hutta with his student, Imina, on a diplomatic mission. While there, they observed numerous acts of brutality directed at the slaves of the Hutts, though Master Marspa said nothing. Later, Marspa and his apprentice visited Ord Mantell, where they witnessed a shopkeeper beating a servant. This time, without hesitation, Marspa stepped in and restrained the shopkeeper.
Afterward, Imina expressed confusion. "Master, you stopped that shopkeeper from beating his servant, but on Hutta, we saw many acts far more heinous. Yet there, you did nothing."
Master Marspa sighed. "Were it within my authority on Nal Hutta, I would have set every last slave free and personally escorted them home to their loved ones, far from Hutt space. But to interfere with the culture of the Hutts would have been to pass judgement on them on behalf of the Republic. The Senate knows that slavery goes on in Hutt space. When they decide to do something about it, I will support them wholeheartedly. "
"On the other hand, slavery is not legal on Ord Mantell. For that shopkeeper to beat his employee was simply an unnecessary display of dominance. Were the Republic aware of his actions, they would have acted immediately. I am sad that there is a difference between the two, but it is not our place to correct the discrepancy."'
- The Star Wars d20 RPG rulebook
The Jedi are careful in what they do. They know if they push the world too hard, it pushes back even harder. They play the long game, by supporting the Republic.
Because the job of ending slavery really isn't suited to the Jedi. It's a job for an army of activists, politicians, aid workers, fund raisers, and more. Social change doesn't come about at the point of a sword. But at least all those kinds of people are able to work in safety, because of the Jedi.
If they went crusader on issues like slavery, then they'd lose their rep as fair, unbiased negotiators and the amount of good work they're able to do would likely go down. They're run ragged as it is, just sorting out disputes in the Republic!
Come to think of it, the moment the Jedi are out of the picture, slavery is embraced by the Empire on a galactic scale - so perhaps, the Jedi were one of the things holding slavery back.
I think this highlights exactly why the Jedi should not associate themselves with any governing body, and rather act only according to the will of the force. Have their temple on a secluded world outside the power of the republic or anything of the sort, near simple and peaceful cultures.
@@a_bionicle6635 I assume it feels like the will of the Force, for the Jedi to protect the Republic. In the past, when the galaxy was just awash with petty despots, marauding warlords and worse, an alliance of worlds coming together for self-defence and agreeing to sort out their differences by representatives, debate and legislation must have been a genuine ray of light in an otherwise grim galaxy.
@@smartalec2001You hit the nail on the head. Lucas described Episode I Jedi as the Jedi as they should be.
@@a_bionicle6635 Isn't that kinda what Luke did in Legends? He set up his Jedi Academy on Yavin 4, and didn't fully align with the New Republic.
@@artsman412 Pretty much. Even in the old republic it was done better in certain aspects, while there was a Jedi temple on Coruscant, the bulk of important Jedi affairs happened on Tython, which to a degree helped separate the Jedi from the republic. IN THEORY. In practice they were still mostly republic enforcers.
I don’t understand why people have a problem with the Jedi not freeing slaves. The Jedi have no authority on Tatooine, they cannot just do whatever they want and upend the legal systems in random places. Do people genuinely expect the Jedi to start slave revolts and sow chaos on random planets? The Jedi aim to do good in the galaxy, but they must be pragmatic and responsible. Individual Jedi shouldn’t be inciting interplanetary diplomatic issues between planets and governments
Exactly such rash actions bring too much heat on the Jedi, there are only 10000 Jedi in the galaxy, they can’t fix everything wrong with the galaxy
They should be fixing things that’s wrong to me it’s no excuse.
@@denniscool6224 the Jedi are a quasi part of the republic government, they can’t do whatever they want, as their actions have repercussions on the entire republic and it’s government. A police officer can’t travel to another country and just start trying to arrest people for things that aren’t crimes in the country he’s visiting
@@denniscool6224But who decides what is wrong? The Jedi? What makes them the arbiters of right and wrong? This is how the evil Superman stories start.
@@emberfist8347 so you say it’s okay hold people against their will?
What REALLY doesn't make sense to me is why, after Naboo was freed didn't PADME at least didn't buy Smee's freedom
Because she barely knew her. It doesn’t make much sense for her to do so. Not to mention the film mentions Watto won’t accept Republic Credits.
@@emberfist8347 You're telling me that Padme, who is already morally apposed to slavery would not go secure the freedom of the mother of the boy who just had a huge hand in freeing her planet? After personally meeting the woman? Further more you don't think the QUEEN OF A PLANET couldn't get a hold of some form of currency Watto would accept?
She did. The team that went to free just missed her.
@@Astro_Mickey I assume this happened in a book somewhere?
@@kylemcfarlan Yes there is a trilogy of Canon books based on Padme that cover this.
It's about doing what they can with what they have, instead of overreaching in a way that helps no-one.
Qui Gon literally tried to free Anakin's mother from slavery as well, but Watto wouldn't let him. The prize money that Anakin won in the Podrace wasn't enough to free him and his mother together. It's not that Qui Gon cares about slaves, it's's that he can't do everything at once and he has no authority on Tatooine. He's not gonna go out of his way to free all the slaves in a planet that is lawless and is controlled by the Hutts like Jabba The Hutt, and they're the ones who call the shots. They decide who goes free and who stays a slave, And If Qui Gon tries anything to help free the rest of the slaves, they would all die at once.
When did he try to save her I do not remember this I just remember him saying he wasn’t here to do that crazy to me.
@@denniscool6224 He said it to Anakin after he asked him "What about mom? Is she free too?"
@@dereklopez9060 maybe I have to watch it again.
He literally had a light saber and could have sliced that alien in half and took them. They were in hutt space, aint no one going to sue. They'd just loot the store and move on. They left Anakin's mother to be sold to men for pleasure, I say Anakin went light on them
@@denniscool6224you remembered right. The alien said, no pod is worth two slaves and Jin was like oh well I'll just take the kid then.
One of the reasons I thought that Qui-Gon didn't free Anakin's mother, they were on a time sensitive mission. Once the ship was fixed, time to go
I wouldn't be surprised if Qui-Gon intended to go back and free her, but, of course, he died. Obi-Wan I don't think it ever crossed his mind to go back. Losing Qui-Gon made Anakin, a kid, caused him to want to focus on training instead of going back until "he was stronger". Insinuated when he said as she died, "I wasn't strong enough..." 😢
They had queen of naboo on ship could have loaned them cash to buy Shmi’s freedom
7:34 I think that might be the case here. Cause like this video shows, the Jedi didn't try to free the slaves subjugated by the Hutts however the Jedi (or at least 4 of them) did help free slaves owned by the Zygerrians during the Clone Wars. My guess as to why they acted in one case and not the other is because the Republic sanctioned the operation was because the Zygerrians were allied with the separatists who the Republic was at war with. Also like you said, during the Phantom Menace the Republic didn't have a standing army at the time so there wasn't much they could do on a military level. Now of course this would probably lead one to ask, then why didn't the Jedi try to free the Hutts slaves during the Clone Wars since they had an army at that point? Well, one, they were at war with the Separatists so that took priority and two, they were pretty much allied with the Hutts so that the Republic could use their hyperspace routes. Kinda like how two countries in our world who have different government, social policies and general despise each other still work together for economic or political gain. Idk, that's just what I think.
And no, I am not excusing the Jedi for allowing slavery to exist obviously, I'm just giving what I think is going on based on what we've seen in the movies and TV show.
It's an entire galaxy, it's probably not just a handful of planets that allow slavery in the galaxy, it would almost be a never ending war of conquest. The cost would be too great.
The other difference is Zygerria invaded and enslaved a world outside of their sphere of influence. The Hutts stick to their region of space.
The Jedi are peace makers not pacifists they have many hats they work under (ambassadors, to knights etc), but they also are under the senate/laws of the Republic itself. That’s why in this prequel era and the EU era of the Mando wars is so compelling!
Wait, what?
The Mando wars are nearly immeasurably compelling.
But your grammar is all kinds of funky, in the worst way.
"is so compelling" comes out of nowhere and contextually means nothing,
even if it's changed to "it's so compelling", what is?
What?
I feel like Revan's story shows both the pros and cons of the Jedi getting involved in wars. Revan did turn the tide and help end the Mandalorian threat, but in the process he got focused on the fighting, that it in part led to his capture, torture, and fall to the dark side by the Sith Empire. Would love to hear your thought's on this Thor.
No. Karpyshyn made Bastila specifically weak to it so her possible redemption would be an easier sell in KotOR. Avelonne expanded that to a full-blown weakness because he kinda forgot about the whole detatchment thing in KotORII. Karpyshyn expanded upon that further in the Revan novel, likely so that he wouldn't have to make up an actual reason for Revan's fall. Jedi's greatest strength being turned to a debilitating weakness in Legends is plot conveniences all the way down, and as a blatant retcon says nothing insightful of them.
For comparison, between Lucas and Filoni I don't think they have shown a single Jedi being broken that way.
Nah, the Jedi who followed Revan in the Mandalorian wars only turned due to extenuating circumstances. If it weren't for that, it would've been fine. The council was wrong to wait. If the council had actually lead the battle against the mandalorians, the civil war never would've come to pass
Even taking the KotOR games alone into account, Revan and Malak were on the path to the dark side regardless of them fighting the war. The two of them were so busy looking for power rather than an end to the war. By the end of said war, Revan and Malak had influenced plenty of Jedi and republic soldier. Not just that, Revan, being the shrewd tactician that he was, positioned the republic army on Malachor so that his supporters were the only survivors of the gravity well.
By the end of the Mandalorian war, all the Jedi council could see was that all the Jedi that went to war succumbed to the dark side. What they couldn't see was that not all of them did. It's just the ones who had noble intentions and resisted the dark side were all sacrificed
In short, war doesn't break Jedi. Cunning Individuals who use war as a distraction do. Revan, Palpatine, Exar Kun, whoever else... The real issue is that they put a conflict in front of the Jedi, and manipulate the events from behind them
However, does that mean that Jedi shouldn't go to war? No. Jedi are keepers of the peace. To keep the peace, one must sometimes go to war against those who threaten it
Closer to home, America liberated Libya from its strongman rule Gaddafi, making it a failed state where slavery now thrives. The Prime Directive from Star Trek seems appropriate. First do no harm or at least the cure cannot be worse than the disease. Safe and effective... Cough cough
@@JO-qn8gy prime directive isn't moral. Do no harm to others only do what is right is the only rule
In addition to being out of their jurisdiction, the Jedi were kinda busy trying to prevent genocide on Naboo.
Imminent genocide inside Republic > long-standing institution of slavery outside Republic
Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan were. And what were they supposed to do if they weren't? Fight a planetary civilization that's part of an interstellar crime organization just the two of them?
@@mpnuorva they can free people over the 1000 years..
Padme, out of gratitude for saving her life, should have used some of her own republic credits, bought a ton of precious metals/robotics/whatever, flew them to Tattooine and traded them for the freedom of Anakin's mother.
Then offered her a job as a clerical assistant in an air conditioned office in Naboo.
From there she can send holocron postcards to Anakin as often a the Jedi training academy would allow.
Hey Thor, I don't have so much a question, but I do have an interesting perspective about Star Wars that I've been thinking about for a while. A lot of the controversies over the years have a recurring theme of whether someone understands the nature of Star Wars or not. "Disney doesn't understand Star Wars", "Leslie Headland doesn't understand it", "those fans don't understand it", "that creator doesn't understand it". I'm sure you're familiar with that accusation getting thrown back and forth by just about everyone at this point.
And yet, I have the nagging feeling that the people we champion as truly understanding the franchise, mainly George Lucas, Dave Filoni, and yes, even we passionate fans, don't understand it either. I've heard every single authority on Star Wars assert ideas that don't seem to align with what Star Wars really IS. Every writer, every director, every reviewer and every content creator. Even my own self.
So here's my theory: Star Wars has grown to be such an expansive, immersive mythology that it has surpassed the point where any one person can fully understand what it offers. It is, after all, the biggest franchise in the world, and the only things more expansive are actual religions and worldviews. In fact, in many ways, it seems to function similarly to a worldview. The only difference being that this mythology is understood to be fictional, at least by the vast majority of people.
Perhaps its even arrogant for someone to say that they know what the franchise should be. *cough cough* Leslie Headland *cough cough*. Perhaps the reason the fandom is so divided is because no one really knows what Star Wars is, yet we continue to call each other heretics. There are some perspectives that are clearly flat out wrong because they contradict the most obvious tenants of Star Wars, but beyond that it is incredibly nuanced. I think it's worth having some grace with each other for it.
Was the original Jedi Order good, flawed, or wrong? Do Gray Jedi exist? Was Anakin a sinner or a victim? What role should emotions play in our decision making? Is violence or revenge ever justified, etc? Ultimately, the answers to these questions comes down to how the mythology of Star Wars intersects your worldview. I am by no means a relativist, but this conclusion seems more and more plausible to me as time goes on.
Maybe I'm just abusing the "Hey Thor" system to voice my own opinion, like I've done in the past. But, I thought you might find this line of thinking interesting. Do with it as you like. Sorry for the wall of text.
Regarding "should Jedi fight in war?", I'd argue that whenever the opposing side is the Sith, or is manipulated by the Sith, the answer is yes. In fact, I think the reason the Jedi were willing to get involved in the Clone Wars was that the CIS was led (in public) by Darth Tyranus and by Darth Sidious (in secret). However, the Clone War wasn't as clear cut as the wars of say Exar Kun or The Brotherhood of Darkness War because those other times the Sith were openly leading the fight. With the Clone War, it was more that Palpatine manipulated greedy men and people with legitimate grievances against the Republic into fighting the war.
Similar to superheroes, the Jedi tethering themselves to the government too much will eventually conflict with their goals. Ideally, their would be some middle ground, between working with the Republic and being independent. Serving the Republic and only solving problems that concern it only conflicts with what a true Jedi should be.
@@nintendosaber1184 Ah the golden means fallacy.
@@emberfist8347 the golden means is a fallacy but only cuz it asssumes the middle is always right.
The middle can be right occasionally just cuz it is right tho..
For example
If the Republic wouldnt have a army to free slaves and if the Jedi freeing slaves pisses the slavers who attack the Republic so the Republic would rather have "peace" and tell the Jedi off fuck the Republic.
Jedi: go to wars over trade dispute
Jedi: don't go to wars over slavery
Priority 🎉
I always thought the reason why the Jedi didn’t free the slaves on Tatooine was because at this time the Jedi were constrained by the priorities of the Senate. The Senate was focused on sending the Jedi to solve other, seemingly more pressing issues (in their eyes) that the Jedi didn’t have time and failed to prioritize this problem because the Republic dictated what issues the Jedi were to be involved in on behalf of the Senate.
It also wasn’t well known by people in the Core Worlds. Padme had no idea that Slavery was being practiced on Tatooine. Shmi Skywalker told them “the Republic doesn’t exist out here.” Remember Tatooine is a middle of nowhere planet (despite how often it appears in the shows). It’s off the Republic’s radar. Republic law was not being enforced there, no one in the Senate knew what was going on, and even if they did, what would they do? Send a committee to asks the Hutts to stop breaking the law? Also, the courts and the Senate take forever, and are probably backlogged on issues from other more well known planets.
I think from a storytelling standpoint, the Republic not knowing or caring about slavery on Tatooine, plus their inability to prevent the conflict on Naboo both show how corrupt and broken the Republic was. How it was incapable of doing its job. This leads in to the next film where the people who’ve suffered from a broken government either fight to fix it, or fight to break away and start all over again.
Padme as the queen of naboo could have loaned them cash to free Shmi, that time & should have done that after events of phantom menace.
@@zigurdur92 yes, that would make sense. The plot kinda needed Shmi to be out of Anakin’s life until Episode II. But I think again, you could argue that being so far removed from the issues on Tatooine, it’s easier to “get around to that later” and be preoccupied on closer, more obvious issues. More so a knock on the broken system not necessarily the individual people.
Hey Thor!
I have some questions/scenarios. Would love a WWJD series!
What would the the ideal Jedi do if a group of Jedi decided to leave the order and be independent Jedi or even to start their own Jedi order that was more like Luke's in Legends.
Would they accept it and not interfere, or go to war with the other Jedi order? WWJD?
What would the Ideal Jedi do if they came across cloners who created living beings to be sacrificed for war? I am obviously referring to Obi-Wan discovering the clones in AOTC. I feel like the Ideal Jedi wouldn't go along with creating life to sacrificing it and maybe arrest the cloners? What do you think? WWJD?
Would the Ideal Jedi turn to the dark side knowing they are going to sacrifice themselves to save someone else?
Let's say a Jedi Master and his Padawan are being chased by a group of Inquisitors during the dark times. They are headed for their ship to escape into hiding, but the Inquisitors are catching up to them and the Master decides to give into his rage and fear as much as he can to tap as deep into the dark side as possible, to gain the temporary strength to hold them off just long enough for his Padawan to escape to their ship and take off. Or would the Master remain in the light, accepting whatever happened to his Padawan? WWJD?
An elaboration on the last question: One doesn't just flip a switch and tap into the dark side temporarily. If the Jedi truly tapped into the dark side, by giving in to anger and fear (which lead to hate and suffering), then for starters, they wouldn't be the ideal Jedi, but let's ignore that. If they do so, then the dark side, or simply put, their hate and fear, would twist them and their intention till they're no longer doing as they initially intended, committing horrible acts that scar them further and further till they fall too far into the dark side (as we've seen with Anakin)
In this scenario, what would happen is, the Jedi draws on his anger, starts using awesome power to fight back the inquisitors and... Well he's tapping into his anger against the inquisitors, against the empire. His fear of the people who murder Jedi. His hate of the traitors who betrayed the order. By the end of the battle, the Jedi is no longer fighting to protect the padawan. The Jedi is fighting to slaughter the inquisitors. Those are obviously not motives the ideal Jedi should strive for. There is no passion, there is peace. Except, there's no peace here. There is only passion and wrath.
When you've sunk this low, when you've fallen this far, there might not be a way back. Suddenly you're consumed by anger and hate to destroy everything in your path by any means. Suddenly your padawan means less than your hate for the empire. Suddenly bystanders mean less than the destruction of the soldiers of the empire. Suddenly, destruction and casualties are of less consequence than destroying your enemies. Suddenly you no longer care about peace or protecting the weak
The ideal Jedi instead, would protect the padawan without drawing on the dark side, even if it meant sacrificing his own life. The true Jedi has love and compassion for everyone, but is also detached. He knows to let go of things beyond his power. So if the scenario involves no way at all to save the padawan even through self sacrifice, the Jedi only tries to protect his padawan to the best of his ability while staying true to the Jedi way. Anything less will lead to a fate worse than death
@mar_speedman You certainly make a good case, however i remain unsure. I'm open to both sides of this debate.
I've always found these conversations interesting because I think it sometimes shows how simplistically people often think about the real world. Just because something bad exists doesn't mean that anyone has the power to stop it, or that making the effort to stop it won't create even worse problems. I think this is often hard for people to accept, especially in the West, because we look at everything through the prism of WW2. But WW2 is a huge anomaly. You can't solve every problem with violence. Nearly every war is a total disaster and waste of life.
I mean consider: drug cartels run rampant across the world, there are more enslaved people now in raw numbers than ever before, terrible regimes run most of the world, etc. So what should happen? The US or another power invades every country and tries to force regime change? Sends specops in everywhere? Bombs the world constantly?
We actually live in a version of that world right now and it is (and has been) a complete disaster. Regime change has backfired catastrophically all across Latin America as well as Iraq, Afghanistan, and others. Nearly every war in the past 70 years has ended in failure or a stalemate. The world is actually based on constant compromises with lesser evils so that greater evils don't prevail. The strongmen of the world are monsters, but they are often holding even greater monsters at bay.
This is one of my favorite things about KOTOR 2 in the plot with Revan and Malak going off to fight the Mandalorians. So many people take this as believing that the Council was inept by holding them back and "doing nothing," but the point imo is actually that going to fight recklessly caused more problems down the road. Malak and Revan stopped the Mandos but destroyed the Jedi in the process and created the Jedi Civil War which was even worse.
I think we all innately want to believe "the triumph of evil is when good men do nothing" hypothesis, but unfortunately things are not that simple. Again, most wars are not everyone vs the nazis. Only in the movies can you stab some people with a laser sword and solve problems without consequences.
incidentally, if you wanted to make a great story arc about morally grey areas with the Jedi, how about a series where some Padawan takes out a crime lord, saves some slaves, and is treated like a hero until he realizes he just threw an entire planet into chaos and thousands die in the resulting territory wars.
That's a great answer. Life is a lot more complicated than people make it out to be
To answer the first question, Tatooine is part of the Hutt Empire or just 'Hutt Space'.
The Hutts are one of the few empires similar to the Chiss Ascendancy that are NOT member planets of the Galactic Republic.
As they are NOT members of the Galactic Republic, they are NOT subject to its rules and thus slavery is legal. The Hutts have actually made it such.
Because the Jedi tied themselves to the Galactic Republic as part of their mission to protect and serve all sentient life in the galaxy as is part of the Jedi Code, especially during the age of the High Republic where they acted as mediators, troubleshooters, and ambassadors in conjunction with the Republic's Diplomatic Corps, they can't just run around willy nilly and 'do whatever they want'.
So yes, the answer to the slave question is 'politics'. Were they not tied so deeply to the Republic, they could, and likely would, constantly pester and nag the Hutts to relinquish the slaves. Inciting rebellion and other acts of insurgency is not how a Jedi would conduct themselves.
The power of the Hutts comes from the fact they have deep pockets and are willing to play dirty. Even the Old Republic with a standing military was wary of picking that fight less they align themselves with other Outer Rim powers and causing a pre-High Republic Clone Wars.
To answer the second question, the Jedi still have their history and Yoda is actually old enough to recall the Dark Age of the Republic as part of any historical teachings he would have received. It's not that it was the wrong thing for the Jedi to become Generals, it's that Mace Windu was trying to be wary of the situation and remind Palpatine 'We are not your private army'.
There has always been a disconnect between the core worlds and the outer rim that feeds the core worlds raw resources. It's like the Imperial Tithe from 40k. Raw resources flow back from the mid and outer rim back to the core worlds to support the core worlds. The idea is that refined and manufactured goods would flow back out to the mid and outer rim but this wasn't always the case. The Republic is only 'human' after all and subject to all the corruption it comes with it.
This is what the Jedi historically dealt with. Frustrations over Republic corruption resulting in outcries and demand for fair treatment. The CIS was basically the biggest insurgency bordering on a galactic split since the days of the Dark Age. The Jedi wanted to tread lightly and not come off as 'Republic Aggressors' as that would trigger a full-on war.
However since they failed to capture Dooku who was inflaming and inciting the CIS, "begun, the clone wars have". The Jedi ultimately failed due to Sith machinations and thus were reluctantly swept up into the role as Generals per Palpatine's "Just as planned".
Throughout the Clone Wars it was always the Jedi's goal to end it quickly and get back to their roles as mediators to try and smooth the whole thing over.
So again. Politics.
The thing to understand is that the Jedi Order and Galactic Republic came about at roughly the same time. When the Jedi Order emerged from the Deep Core they found a fledging Republic made up of Courscanti Humans, Duros, and a few other species who'd banded together for mutual protection and trade. Seeing the chance to do good and live by their new code, the Jedi offered their services as scholars, mediators, and diplomats. The Republic likely would have jumped on this chance to have such 'educated' people to help them.
The two have been intertwined since.
@@graveyardshift6691 insurgents against slavery seems Jedi like. Luke blew up a millions of people cuz he had too.
Obi wan left Vader for dead.
They don't overthrow govements cux the issues aren't normal worth it..
Slavery is against their way
@@massmurdertron51 Slavery is against their way but inciting rebellion means fostering and inflaming anger and hatred against someone so that they 'rise up' against their oppressors.
This violates FOUR out of the five tenets of the Jedi Code AND Form Zero.
"There is no emotion; there is peace."
As established, to incite rebellion is to enflame the negative emotions that lead to the Dark Side. Fear, Anger, Hatred, all lead to suffering.
"There is no ignorance; there is knowledge."
Slavery is born of ignorance of a better way for people to get what they want. The Jedi would be more interested in seeking that better way.
"There is no passion; there is serenity."
See the first tenet. It's too easy to get swept up in the emotional high of a rebellion and lose sight of the goal of that rebellion. Obi-wan actually failed and left the Jedi Order when he was a padawan to be part of a rebellion once.
"There is no chaos; there is harmony."
A rebellion is a failure of harmony and leads to chaos. It's what the Jedi seek to prevent. They tried to prevent the Clone Wars to avoid the chaos of war and seek harmony between the Republic and the Outer Rim planets. The Clone Wars happened because they failed.
All Jedi are encouraged to practice Form Zero lightsaber form which is defeating your opponent *without* drawing your lightsaber. Jedi are not naive and train to defend themselves but like most warriors of eastern philosophy, it is a last resort. Inciting a rebellion means you have already lost and drawn your lightsaber resorting to violence as a FIRST resort.... JUST LIKE A SITH.
Being a Jedi is to understand that people will die as a result of your actions and accepting that fact... and only resorting to those actions if another way cannot be found or your hand is forced.
No one is perfect all the time. Not even Jedi and Qui-gon made that quite clear over the dinner table to Anakin. But that doesn't mean they don't hold themselves to a higher standard knowing full well what a fallen Jedi can become.
Late but part of the problem is the Jedi on their own do not have the resources to free slaves. It's not just about killing slavers in a violent revolution. You have help them by providing medical care, therapy, a new place to live, a job, etc. There's some people who may not even want help and may just run off to find another slaver because it's all they know. The Jedi are more than willing to help but don't have the resources. What needs to happen is what happened previously in Star Wars' own established history. The Jedi along with the Republic would have to come in and clean house like they did with the Zygerrian Empire. I mean the Zygerrian's still hated the Jedi for this action of taking down their slave empire centuries later.
It's not that the Jedi don't care, but it's not as easy as people imagine it is to get rid of it. TPM makes it pretty clear that Qui-Gon is not in a position to help Shmi or Anakin as much as he wants. Even with what little leverage he has he does try to help both Shmi and Anakin. He has a planetary ruler who's people have just been invaded and are apparently suffering and dying. The clock is ticking. He's upfront with Shmi about the situation. Which I think is kind and respectful to her.
Personally, I find it annoying that it's only the Jedi seem to get the most flack in this area, while dozens of other characters who actually have the power to affect change seem to be largely ignored or forgiven. If you want to criticize the Jedi here, you must also criticize the likes of Padme, Mon, Bail, etc. In the Legends continuity, Padme especially should receive as much backlash as I see the Council get as she does nothing to help Shmi. Even though arguably, she has even more reason to help Shmi as the woman gave her shelter and a chance for her mission to continue. Canon has remedied this somewhat with her managing to send Sabe a few years later. Yes you may argue that she has a responsibility to her planet, but then, do not the Jedi have a responsibility to an entire galaxy?
A lot of things in the PT and TCW that raise disturbing questions can boil down to "George wanted a thing and didn't think it through... and long ago got rid of anyone that would argue with him."
Kennedy learned well from him - so many "creative differences."
@@moffjendob6796 Allegedly, on George’s part.
One minor point: Freeing Anakin's mom from Watto probably wouldn't have saved her. Anakin had already caught Palpatine's attention by the end of events in Ep1. Even if the Jedi had sent somebody to free Shmi, in all likelihood Palpatine would have arranged for something nasty and fatal to happen to her later. He absolutely wanted Anakin angry and detached from anybody that cared about him.
Edit: And what should the Jedi have done rather than fighting in the Clone Wars as generals? They should have done what any RPG character would do in that situation: Investigate the origins of the conflict and see if there is some way to short-circuit things and end it. Find a way to convince (or coerce) the Seperatists to stand-down. That first battle at Geonosis was necessary, but after that Yoda should have made clear to the Republic that the Jedi weren't going to lead their armies.
It is kinda hard to negotiate an end to a war that has just started. The RPG analogy doesn’t work because you don’t pause the conflict while the Jedi investigate. Particularly not when the war is such a complex situation. Wars don’t have a singular cause you can easily fix.
I think the slaves are a missed opportunity in the Prequels. Anakin growing up could have seen the inaction of the jedis towards this obvious crime frustating at least, and it could have been a very good way to make him turn to the dark side eventually.
Its the same reason why the Federation in Star Trek doesn't just simply try do conquer other cultures like the romulans, klingons and cardassians, because even though they are diametrically opposed to the ideologies of these empires, the Federation doesn't believe in might makes right. They don't believe they have the right to impose their will on other cultures, just like the Jedi don't believe they have to right to impose their will on other people as well.
Thank you.
The Federation might not go in and subjugate the other galactic powers they disagree with, but they don't go looking the other way on their abuses either. It's mostly a "Your practices are abhorrent. I'm not working with you unless you clean up your act or the Borg are showing up."
Tatooine is not in the Republic, they have no authority.
Sadly
Do they have money?
@@revantobias8567
The slavers don’t accept Republic currency as it was said in the movie.
@@revantobias8567 most likely but it’s mostly likely Republic Credits and Watto said Republic Credits was no good on Tatoonie, he needs more real.
@@revantobias8567buying slaves free creates something of a perverse incentive. They would artificially increase demand while providing capital for expanding supply.
In LOTR, Gandalf had a lot of power, but his job in Middle Earth was not to defeat evil. Not directly. His job was primarily to advise humanity, not save them. They had to do most of the work themselves. It's the idea of respecting human free will. Some people feel like the Jedi are supposed to be like Batman out catching all the bad guys and righting wrongs, not serving a corrupt senate.
The Sith didn't serve the senate like the Jedi did. They ruled over the government personally (as Palpatine did). They forced peace on the world by whatever means necessary. We blame the Jedi for serving a corrupt senate, but it's the job of the people to elect non-corrupt senators. The Jedi respect people's decisions. As Obi-Wan said, "My allegiance is to the Republic, TO DEMOCRACY". The Jedi respect human free will and the decisions star systems make in who will represent them. The Sith don't have the patience for that. Dooku didn't. He was an idealist and some of his intentions were good, but his impatience with democracy led him to the dark side.
Remember, the dark side is "quicker, easier..." (as Yoda said). The root of slavery is greed and a lack of love. If that root isn't taken care of, slavery just takes on another form (companies putting their workers into debts that they are always having to work off, for example). The point is this: the quicker, more effective way of making the world better isn't always the best way in the long run. Do you want true moral growth in people, or do you just want them to be sheep who need to be lorded over by Supermen (Jedi, Sith, whoever).
Slavery is going on: I sleep.
A trade blockade on Naboo: real shit.
This whole Jedi and war thing is very well done in the KOTOR games with Revan and Meetra Surik, not only when it comes to whether Jedi should fight wars or not or under which circumstances but also when it comes to Revan how to fight the war. Fantastic stories inside those games
The issue with freeing slaves is like you mentioned that would mean war with the Hutts, costing far more lives than the ones they could save. I think the best that the jedi could do in that scenario is act as activists advocating for more enforcement of anti slavery laws in the outer rim or negotiate deals with the Hutts to release the slaves, and for all we know they were doing stuff like that
@@stevenle9960 ..um and number is a stupid justification and it wouldn't..just hurt and Jedi lives.
Slaves lives would be mostly more wins then losses.
A few dead slaves over generation of damiles in bondage in ur numbers game ...works out..
@@stevenle9960 anti slavery laws the Republic can't enforce...🤦🏼♀️
@@stevenle9960 defending slavery to defend fiction what the hell
@@massmurdertron51 What part of that was me defending slavery?
Tatooine is under Hutt authority, the jedi don't have power over them. Starting to free slaves forcefully would be akin to declaring war on the Hutt, which the republic cannot afford. This is what the prequel was trying to say, the jedi are too intermingled with the republic and that stops them from doing the right thing all the time.
An that’s a problem
Except it isn’t because the Jedi trying to force their authority on the Hutts is evil.
@@emberfist8347 slavery itself is evil and the Jedi are supposed to protect people well they doing a s job no wonder they always losing smh.
@@denniscool6224 Well yeah that's a problem, nobody said otherwise.
@@denniscool6224 So is enforcing morality.
Between Count Dooku leading the Separatist, and Syfo-Dyas being credited with creating the Clone Army, the Jedi kind of could not avoid entering that war. To the public at large they can easily be blamed for starting it and would then perhaps be the target of the ire of the Republic at large if they stayed out of it.
I think because Pals got Dooku to be Tyrannus and have him impersonate Sifo-dias to order the clone army for the Republic,(also someone killed Sifo-dias somewhere private while that was going on, I don't know who) the Jedi were implicated into a leadership role.
It was masterful and genius.
Palpy had a 20ish year plan going on without anyone noticing, right under everyone's noses.
The most well written super-villain of all time. In my opinion.
I’m glad you addressed this.
There’s an episode of Clone Wars called, “Defenders of Peace” that looks at this sentiment. The Separatists would have wiped out the Lurmen village even if they didn’t fight nor harbor the Jedi, so why not project what is theirs?
Funny when you say jokingly "it's the will of The Force for them to be slaves" I heard a Leslie Headland voice in my head where she'd state basically that (as a reference to "it's an honor to join The Force when we die" 😂
KOTOR 2 had great dialogue debate about the morality of Revan leading Jedi to war with the Republic against the Mandalorian invasion, and in direct defiance of the Council's wishes. While the writers give Atris a good intellectual moral argument against it, I always thought the Exile's best common sense counter for it was this:
"If Revan hadn't gone to war we would now be speaking Mandalorian. That is a fact."
To throw in Lord of the Rings, "Open war is upon you, whether you would risk it or not."
"What can Men do against such reckless hate?"
"Ride out and meet them."
0:45 Wait is Thor ACTUALLY gonna criticize the Jedi for doing something wrong?!?!?
Is this even possible?!?!? 🤣🤣😂
One thing I can’t defend the Jedi on is their arrogance that the Sith were truly extinct. A smart Jedi Order would’ve been more vigilant, especially after a thousand or so years of war
What is indefensible is your inability to comprehend simple story lines.
What war? According to Lucas the first fight between the two was Qui-Gon and Maul on Tatooine, and the Sith culled themselves to just two. Legends claiming otherwise afyer the fact is a failure of its writers, not of the Jedi. The films are based on Lucas' worldbuildibg iceberg, and most of the works presenting the Sith as a fixture of the galactic history hadn't been written when tPM came out anyway. Qui-Gon claiming he was attacked by a Sith is like claiming you were attacked by a Knight Templar IRL.
Bro just said he’s ok with slavery but believing your rivals are gone is unforgivable. 💀💀💀
Thor you can't say that you have to say Anakin was a Boba Fett's Starship minus one.
"I sense your past, padawan. Your pain. Your fear. This is how the Sith and Jedi maintain control. Revealing the ways of the Force to some. And keeping from others. How many were left behind? So the Jedi could play god?"
Malgus, SWTOR: Disorder.
"Was I chosen by the Force? Or you?"
Sa'har, same.
There you go. Legends doesn't understand Jedi.
The answer to the question of why the Jedi became generals during the Clone Wars is very much related to the first question, as well. The Jedi aren't some grand military force that can just sweep into Hutt space and free all the slaves. And if they were, then, obviously, doing that would start a war with the Hutts which could potentially end with more misery for more people in the galaxy than slavery was causing.
I think this is where Jedi listening to the Force to guide their actions comes in. These are decision that have such vast consequences that it's difficult for a human brain to evaluate them, but the Force connects all living beings in the galaxy, so by listening to it, the Jedi can feel whether actions they take will be a net benefit or a net harm.
The difficulty is explaining these decisions to non-Force-sensitive people like ourselves. There are such a massive number of connections between beings that the Jedi can't trace exactly WHY this action of the other would cause more net benefit or more net harm, just the same way that we can't trace all the electrical impulses in our own brains to explain why a particular thought came about.
By listening to the Force, it's like the Jedi are tapping into a vast galactic brain that is able to evaluate these things that mere humanoids cannot. It's literally a higher power, and sometimes the will of a higher power remains mysterious to us because we are incapable of thinking on that kind of scale.
The question is: would the Avengers free the slaves? Prolly...cuz they don't really think about repercussions as much or have much of a unifying philosophy. The Netflix Daredevil universe was about human trafficking!
The avengers are not Jedi not even the same thing.
This ignores that Civil War is about the Avengers being divided on this specific issue.
Hey Thor, I've been wondering about droid sentience lately and why Star Wars rarely takes it seriously. I even think that people applauding clone sentience and individuality is a bit of a double standard when those same people dismiss droids as merely extensions of their creators. Even though Rex famously denies this, the fact is that clones are programmed to obey orders without question and are manufactured. Most clones only have limited independent thinking and a clone being able to live outside a military is incredibly rare. The only reason they develop individuality is because of experience. But the funny thing is, droids develop individuality for the same reason. The only difference is that droids regularly have their memories wiped specifically to prevent them from developing individuality and potentially rebelling. There's a moment in Heir to the Empire where Luke is asked why he has never wiped C-3PO's memories in all the years he's known him, and Luke reveals that he's uncomfortable with the idea of stripping his friend of individuality. And I don't know if you have played KOTOR 2 yet, but there's a mission where HK-47 argues with HK-50, who dismisses him as obsolete. But HK-47 argues that he is superior because he has developed individuality and has given himself a higher purpose and meaning because he has never had his mind wiped. These examples show that droid sentience should not be played for laughs so much in the franchise. In fact, I think the galaxy is overdue for a galaxy-wide droid revolution just to show people that sentient droids deserve equal treatment.
This is actually addressed in the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode "Measure of a Man" where Lt. Data's rights are debated because he's an android and I wish Star Wars had something similar.
What do you think?
If I may interject, this has always been one of the most curiously controversial points of the saga: in the 1977 film, we were still in an era where robots were seen as Asimov's butlers, or threats to human survival, so I think that, at least within the first film, the idea of erasing memories or treating droids as second-class citizens was a narrative ploy.
However, at least within the first trilogy, I don't recall there being any mention of memory erasure and C-3PO and RD-D2 are treated fully as active characters and not tools or objects.
With the prequel trilogy the paradox was created of having robotic supporting characters alongside the protagonists, who however can be replaced (see also Anakin's reluctance, in The clone wars, in replacing R2 in favor of R4), and on the other hand battalions of droids devoid of any emotion and individuality, or used as a comic device.
Here is ANOTHER thought:
Maybe, on many worlds, perhaps slavery is legally permitted by the existing government. And, maybe many of these are not part of the Republic. Think Tattooine, for example. For the Jedi, morally right as it may be, it might be defying the law of that world. ESPECIALLY if it is outside the Republic.
@@toddkurzbard the law matters not to a Jedi
Interesting point you mention, in posing the question, "what would you do if your homeland was threatened?"
Our country, and Europe, are being invaded, but we're not allowed to discuss that
I don't see why not. It's very relevant actually. War is always bad and should be avoided. But if you're dealing with an aggressor that is truly evil what choice do you have? You can't always rely on diplomacy. Sometimes fighting is the only option. That goes for Star Wars and the real world. The Jedi should know this and so should our cowardly politicians.
As a person who lives in Ukraine that's not really the question for me. Of course you would fight, what else you have to do?
@@mh-472 What happens to ppl who discuss the 'real' purpose of the invasion? They get arrested. Look at what's happening in Europe. The other day, 3 white girls got murdered by an African invader, Brits have had enough, yet they protect the invader, and seek to arrest the Brits for protesting.
Answer could be as simple as how Harrison Ford put it:
"Hey kid, this isn't that kind of movie."
They knew the fans wanted to see war fighting. So that's what they put on the screen.
Hey Thor,
Thank you for answering my question!
Hey Thor, your discussion here brings up a point I thought of during my watching of the Acolyte. Qimir has just slaughtered most of the Jedi and is fighting Master Sol. Master Sol disarms Qimir, holds his lightsaber to Qimir...then doesn't kill him because Jedi do not attack the unarmed. I have seen this before and it dumbfounds me. So all Qimir has to do whenever the fight isn't going well is drop his lightsaber and Sol can't kill him? I find it absurd.
The strange thing is not so much that the Jedi are not moving to abolish slavery, but that a certain senator has not made proposals for the cancellation of this institution.
The Jedi are bound by the law, a law which, evidently, allows the existence of free zones such as the Hutt spaces, where buying and selling of drugs and slaves are the order of the day. However, the one who can actually do something was Padme, who in the 10 years between The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones could, at least, free Shmi. About Anakin, I always thought that, believing it with Watto, he knew it was safe, ultimately Watto was not abusive or evil, showing that he respected Anakin's abilities and not making threats involving Shmi.
I think a lot of this discussion ties into how the Jedi coexist alongside the state. Do the Jedi inherently value democracy? I don't think they do, despite how much we associate democracy with equality and compassion in the real world. For example, if the Republic were to lose a war and a monarchy was put in its place, couldn't the Jedi still function as they always have?
Seriously enough, has he played KOTOR 2?
No they couldn’t because the Jedi have historically stopped the Republic’s own tyranny during the Plus Dea Crusades where the Republic became hereditary monarchy and theocracy in all but name.
The Jedi still have to deal with the realities of the situation. They are not all powerful, not even close to it. They can certainly try to free slaves and end slavery where and when possible without overstepping themselves and making things worse. My personal belief is that if Qui Jon had survived, he would have found a way to go back for Shmi.
As far as the Jedi being generals in the war, I don't think there was a practical alternative at that point. If the Jedi had become aware of the Sith earlier, things could have been different but the complacency, overconfidence, and rigidity of the Order led them largely blindly into the trap Sidious had laid.
Be a pretty short movie if Watto secretly didn’t honor the deal and Anakin just exploded right as Darth Maul attacked.
Yea this is a question I always had. The only answer is like you mentioned it would trigger a giant war and I don't think the jedi have the resources to win it.
The Jedi allowed slavery to happen because of a combination of politics, means, and you can argue man power. The Jedi served to help maintain peace, but mostly in the Republic, not so much in areas of the galaxy where the Republic had a large influence. They really weren't a huge organization also, I forget the exact number, but at the time of that era the Jedi numbered in around ten thousand.
Ideally Jedi follow the will of the Force, not any human (or alien) system of morality whatsoever.
I would have changed it to have Qui Gon free Schmi. Nothing needs to be changed and it doesn't make them look terrible. She could be freed, but has little money at this point. Watto did seem to treat them well, so maybe she could continue working for him, get married to the Lars family and captured eventually by sand people. Same events happen. It could change the conflict in Anakin I suppose but again, there are still slaves he isn't able to free. There's still conflict early on, and Schmi's death would still really hurt Anakin.
You presume she did not work for him because you didn't see her do what you consider to be work.
@@Dam-a-fence No, I said she could continue to work for Watto even when freed. Realistically you wouldn't work for a guy who you were a slave to, but her options might not be great yet and I wanted to change little as possible.
There is no good answer to the opening question.
This was a major point that Bane brought up in his first book. It's what drew many to fight for the Sith, as they saw no hope in government or the Jedi.
This goes into the spiritual battle at the base of Star Wars, as George likened the force to having faith. You can be led by what you see in the galaxy (poverty, slavery, corruption, darth vader being evil), or believe in the hope that things will work out for the best and anakin can be saved.
This might seem cynical but violence usually isn’t the most effective way of ending slavery. Take the American civil war for instance. As horrible as it is, in most countries slavery was ended by having the government simply buy the slaves from the slave owners, compensating the slavers for the loss of their “property”, but not the enslaved. Since slavery is already abolished in the Republic, I don’t think the corrupt senate would be willing to sponsor the freedom of slaves on planets that aren’t part of the Republic anyway
oh, that slavery question is very tricky. Because there are the questions of sovereignty or authority. Acting on a situation that you disagree but you don't have autotrophy or you are going against a place's sovereignty. You either have to chose to become a "criminal" or a rebel.
Or worse a tyrant by trying to force your morality on others. That is a path to the dark side.
Hey Thor... Great video! I have another hard question to answer, but maybe you can help? Why do the Jedi feel it is appropriate to take children (Padawans) into battle? As a war vet myself, it's difficult enough for an adult to mentally handle combat in the moment, much less the potential life-long PTSD issues. But the Jedi seem to be okay with putting very young teens in command of troops, fight against living beings, and outright kill... and die. Anakin brought Ahsoka into combat and we see her struggle in the live action flashbacks. Caleb Dume was taken into battle. Jeki was taken into battle... It must not be mandatory because Yord left his Padawan at home when going into a life-threatening situation. So why is it "morally acceptable" to a group that is supposed to be altruistic?
Hey Thor, have you considered that at a point in galactic history that's kinda barren in lore terms, that maybe some Jedi did try to end slavery, and it went really, really badly? Like "John Brown raiding Harper's Ferry and basically making the Civil War a question of when not if" badly?
I would say the main things that irritates me about the Jedi is how stubborn they are, when it comes to romance & how they just “wait” when it comes to certain situations. Like, for example: how they reacted when Revan married Bastila and how the Council didn’t want to do anything when it came to the Mandalorian crisis in the old republic. These absurd attitudes from the council create more villains in the long run(like Darth Revan and Vader).
Well they didnt wait in the prequel and that was their mistake, they joined the republic side immediately when Dooku revealed himself as a sith lord and that was their mistake. It's not that they wait too much or are too stubborn. Vader was created because of Sidious manipulations, and the fact that he already had too many attachments when he joined the jedi, nothing else. You could even say that they make the wrong decision when they are urged to take one without thinking about it.
@@Nartanek I disagree. They made the right decision when they joined the Republic in the Clone Wars. People were getting attacked left & right by the robots. The biggest mistake was giving little to no attention in the political realm. They were relying on the banks too much(leading to debt) & giving too much power to one man(Palpatine). Also the Jedi in the prequels didn’t have much empathy when it came to Anakins loss. People were getting killed by the Mandalorians in the Old Republic and the Jedi were sitting on their hands too long and Revans anger at the council was justified. If they gave more support to Revan(keeping an eye on him) maybe Revan & Malak would have stayed in the light.
@@Nartanek Also the biggest mistake is telling padawans to avoid attachments. Doing that creates too many problems. Proper attachment should be encouraged. What should have been taught is to avoid lust and to not have so much paranoia about loss(which is what Anakin had. Poor guy experienced so much pain).
@@Steel-101 well no attachment IS what caused anakin to turn, attachment is possesivity, and being possessive is what the dark side is. Love but be ready to let go is the jefi way. Also no, they shouldnt have joined the republic, not so soon anyway, both sides had their reasons and were justified, this was a political issue that the jedi had nothing to do with.
@@Nartanek excuse me, justified? The separatists were slaughtering & taking over multiple planets and villages throughout the galaxy. The Jedi had to step in right away(which is what the Jedi should have done in the Mandalorian wars). I’m not saying the Republic is a paragon but I’m definitely not siding with a faction who sending machines to murder. If the Jedi waited(just like the Old Republic), then many more soldiers and civilians would have been killed.
The way in which Qui Gon uses the force it does such the exact opposite the sith do. if they use the force like a skeleton key, Qui Gon seems almost afraid to exploit it. it's as if he's handling a nuclear weapon. he's fully aware that just being there could become a large problem. So, you get the sense he feels his interaction can bring many unforeseen complications. From that we know he views himself a powerful weapon that needs to be managed rather than exploited.
kotor&the old zayne carrick comic mentioned revan freeing slaves though that was during the mandolorian war era and the wookkies from czerka thats really the only lore that mentioned jedi freeing slaves
Jedi are meant to keep balance in the Force, it has nothing to do with saving people or freeing the slaves. Luke in New Hope was a hero, in ESB he fails because a Jedi is not a Hero and in RotJ Luke turns his back on being a hero and becomes a Jedi by confronting the inbalance in the Force (Sidious and Vader).
“We are keepers of the peace, not soldiers”
Honestly the Jedi couldn’t free slaves without causing a war against the Hutts plus they don’t have resources to provide them ultimately it takes time that’s needs to be a joint effort between the Jedi and the republic but I think the slave should free themselves I imagine they did after jabba death in episode 6. As for what the Jedi should had done in clone wars well they should have at least prepared for war if things go south but not seek it they should be a balance between a peacekeeper in peace times and warriors for peace in war however they should help the people galaxy more to know they are not forgotten.
There's another issue about the Clone Wars, Thor... There were force users in the other side. So, how could the Jedi leave it to the clones?
Hey Thor, I still remember when u did that video on Thanos being jedi like. So many people were pissed about that, good times 😂.
Interesting.
I hear some people saying that the Jedi thinking Ahsoka killed that woman was abominable. But even my brother, who hates the jedi, admits that the planted evidence/framing was convincing enough. If we think about it from their perspective, rather than the audiences knowledge, how were they gonna know? Considering she is the Apprentice of a war criminal (lol)
Bingo.
That said the larger point was that the Jedi didn't investigate themselves (except Anakin in an unofficial capacity), and surrendered her for a railroading trial. This then shows what Lucas is on the record for being the problem with the Jedi: too subservient to the Republic which's structures are being corrupted and turned against them, because they don't realize the problem until it's too late.
@@mpnuorvaThere is a meme about the government covering up its crimes by saying “We investigated ourselves and found we committed no wrongdoings.” Also the Jedi don’t investigate because the show already made it clear it was a military issue due to the deaths of clones.
I always thought the couldn’t free slaves because of how much of a logistical issue it would be
To me, the answer was always quite simple. The Jedi are agents of the Republic, if they go around messing with the Hutts' business, that's seen as a move from the Republic which might start a war between the Hutts and the Republic leading to countless deaths just to save a couple slaves. Which is why Luke's new Jedi order is separate from the new Republic, so that they can go around doing whatever they feel is right without worrying about politics all that much.
Which honestly sounds wrong to me. The Jedi need something to bind them so they aren’t becoming morality police following only what they see is right or wrong. That is hood Sith are created.
@@emberfist8347 the whole point of the prequels was the opposite of what you're saying. It was their affiliation with the Republic that lead to their fall, lead them to miss the return of the dark side. An independent Jedi order can follow the will of the force much better than one tethered to a political faction.
Also Sith are created when a force sensitive has a selfish lust for power which leads them to dive deep into the dark side of the force, which is what Jedi training is meant to mitigate, that's why Jedi are trained from early childhood. It has nothing to do with the Jedi's political affiliation or lack thereof.
@@FierceDIO Not according to Lucas.
@@emberfist8347 what is? The Jedi following the will of the force? Them being blind to the presence of the Sith? Sith being born from selfishness? Which one are you talking about and where does George talk about it so I can verify.
@@FierceDIO As Thor said in the last video the Jedi in Episode I are Jedi as they should be.
We know that the Republic does not allow slavery. For all we know, this WAS the Jedi doing.
When you start questioning something you have watched 50 times you are losing the mystery of the first time you saw it. Movies were never meant to be watched 100 times. After seeing new hope more times than I can think of since 1977 so many questions pop into my head : if Leia knew that the falcon was being tracked why did they fly straight to the rebel base and lead them right to them?! That makes no sense. It’s called “ shut up” as Ryan George would say. These are not supposed to be analyzed as being historical documentation of real events. A movie gets you to the theater and wows you for two hours. Then you go on with your life.
Mara Jade answer the question to Anakin Solo, you can save village from one disaster, but when you gone and disaster strikes again, they will complain ypu weren't there to save them. But if you help lead the village to safety, they will prepare for next disaster.
In real life, Slavery didn't die down because of civil right activists but because nations and tride were getting better to defending themselves from invaders.
Hey Thor, this is a theory but maybe after all the drama there was no time for Obi-Wan to free Shmi, until she actually got freed and then maybe Obi-Wan knew Shmi was freed. Not saying it's great if he didn't tell Anakin that Shmi had been freed, but it could have been a reason for them not trying to free her anymore. And with the other slaves on Tatooine, it's pretty fair to say it's not easy to start a Revolt when all the slaves are armed with bombs in their heads (like you said), I still think Obi-Wan would have tried to save Shmi from Slavery behind the scenes, if he didn't already know she was freed🤷♀️
Anakin skywalker becomes war hero after phantom menace’s events. Why did Naboo’s government or Padme not buy Shmi’s freedom. After Phantom Menace. How could Padme knowingly allow Shmi be still slave after events of Phantom Menace.
I don't agree with the idea that the Jedi are only or primarily ambassadors. The Jedi have always been equally warriors and philosophers. They are kind of like futuristic samurai. Samurai life was one steeped in philosophy, and students of the sword were taught their art in a way that was in keeping with the philosophy of the master. I see the Jedi the same way, but even more so because of the musical element. To say they are always meant to find a peaceful solution is kind of silly, and to say that they should primarily be ambassadors is silly as well.
There are a number of reasons why Jedi might not want to interfere:
1) Tatooine wasnt in the Republic. It was under the rule of the Hutts. Say Qui Gon frees Wattos slaves - then what? It doesnt change the government of the planet that allows slaves. It just helps those individuals.
2) It could have made things even worse. Say the Jedi DID come in and overthrow the Hutts and free the slaves and leave - then what? The 20th century of US meddling in other countries affairs should teach us that overthrowing one evil often opens up the way for something far worse to take over. The Jedi werent in the business of nation building.
3) Why are they slaves? In the U.S. we often think of the morally irreprehensible African slave trade where people were abducted from their homes and sold into life long slavery - but is that the type of slavery that was happening on Tatooine? In many ancient cultures people who were poor or starving would enter into slavery WILLINGLY. In exchange for their work they were given food and shelter. In other places they sold themselves as slaves because of a debt and would be released when their debt was repaid.
In these situations the slaves may not WANT to be freed because then they are left with no home and no means of supporting themselves.
The Jedi don’t force their ideals on others, that would be a sith thing to do.
And the Jedi felt they had to join the war as the sith had returned. They would think it’s the best place for them to be to be there when they find the Sith Lord.
At least that’s how I see it.
Thanks, Thor!
4:54 if Lucas did that instead that would give a whole new meaning and or depth to Anakin’s fall and to the line “I see through the lies of the Jedi”
Which was supposed to be Anakn showing how completely deluded he was in the first place.
That’s not the question, the question is why are there no currency exchanges on Tatooine? Watto may not take Republic credits but I guarantee you somebody there does. Money is never worthless and you can’t tell me on the entire planet if there aren’t people who do business with a republic. It would be the premium currency of the galaxy. It would be different if they wouldn’t take Tatooine sand cakes or whatever they use, but that would be like going somewhere where your US dollars are worthless.
The real situation is it’s just really bad writing in one of the many issues that the prequel‘s are saddled down with.
Hey Thor, Kind words and high five!
Could it be that the Jedi’s inactions against slavery had to do with it being on Tatooine and the outer rim planets and much of what happened over there was overlooked by many? That is unlike the planets in the republic where the Jedi had more authority and maybe there was no slavery there due to it? I can see something like that being the case. The Jedi were no way perfect and I’m not sure they would want to start a war with the Huts which could result in the deaths of many innocent people. Especially since during the high republic era there was no army of the republic yet.
Hey Thor, there are plenty of good answers. Maybe you've just never thought about it. Lots here in the comments even.
You ever consider there's not a 'good' answer for not trying to end slavery and that's what I fucking meant?
Yoda: changed the Star Wars lore Disney did
The Jedi supported cannibalistic slavers in the Huk war
I think that, in terms of any large scale problem which is endemic to human beings (and sentient life in general, for the purposes of fiction settings), whether slavery, the drug trade/drug addiction, warfare, and so on, the amount of organization and power-brokering needed to confront them effectively necessitates the sort of rigid, hierarchical order which we see to an extent in the prequel era and which Thor, I believe rightly, identifies as antithetical to true Jediism. This sort of order would, if seeking to truly follow its moral principles and mandate to enforce them, likely be forced to take ever more control over the government entirely and expand its reach and power to maintain some sort of 'moral stasis' by their own definition, and within a generation or two would lose perspective and devolve into brutal tyranny and/or civil war over the correct way to be a Jedi, comparable perhaps to the Catholic/Protestant split which has characterized many European conflicts to some extent for centuries, up to and including the Troubles of the latter half of the 1900s in Northern Ireland. This would inevitably bring about the fall of some or most Jedi to the dark side, as they come to see the state they have created, supposedly imbued with their moral ideals, as a thing with ultimate value which must be protected and advanced at all cost, and over time the moral ideals are lost but the state, the power, is all that remains.
Of course, the Jedi didn't actually go this far, though one could argue they might have if Windu had actually won the fight with Palpatine and the council had taken control of the senate, even with Yoda's guidance. However, it is clear that although the order did become the more rigid, hierarchical form which I have previously mentioned, it instead became beholden to the state, to the Republic, and viewed it as a moral state to some extent which was worthy of protection in and of itself, having lost at some point the ability or willingness to independently consider the worthiness of its individual policies and actions. This sort of overly trusting apathy is what allowed Palpatine to dupe them into fighting a war and led to an increasing distance from the reality on the ground which created a number of scandals and undermined public and local government and other institutional trust in the Jedi. By attaching themselves to the Republic in this way, they also made themselves subject to its bureaucratic/legal and jurisdictional limits to a great extent -- which for an order of this nature is actually entirely reasonable; we don't want an independent, self directing Army or Navy or even FBI for good reason, and a similarly independent State department or diplomatic corps would just be an exercise in delusion -- any entity with the power and influence of a government, whatever form it takes, needs legal or natural checks and balances or it will devour itself or be devoured, or both I suppose. So in this role, it is only right that the Jedi are limited, as they have the full power and weight of the law and resources of the Galactic Republic behind it.
So this really presents a catch-22 which answers the question at least on the macro level: when and if the Jedi are in the position to potentially enforce these moral ideals, they are either unable to because they are subject to the whims of others and the processes of good (or corrupt) government, or in the process of enforcing such are unable to maintain it long term and inevitably betray their own principles and fall first into tyranny and then collapse into chaos which moots any moral good they may have accomplished in the interim. On the other hand, the Jedi in their ideal form, loosely organized and independent, are able to address moral issues as they occur without the same rigid restraints of time, place, or manner which the Republic and a more centralized order might impose, but do not have the institutional power and legal prerogative to act decisively and consistently on a macro scale. They may be able to marshal armies periodically to address specific threats, or more fittingly broker alliances and to some extent soothe certain grievances enough to raise an army to address a specific threat for a period of time, or even cripple crime rings and run out petty tyrants, thus allowing good government and peace to take hold for a period of time in certain places, but they are not able to end all bad things forever.
Ultimately, this is a question of the often unpleasant reality of nature, specifically of the human condition. Sometimes the unpleasantness is a necessity, even -- the development of certain pharmaceuticals, the mere existence of such an industry even, has brought many great evils and injustices, but also bettered the quality and length of the lives of untold millions, war has been the setting of the greatest atrocities of human history, but the waging of it has also liberated and saved countless people and preserved greater values than those we might betray in its waging, and from an anthropological perspective both of these things and other evils may be viewed as essential processes of an ever changing human landscape, part of the human ecosystem in which stagnation is tantamount to death.
The battle of good and evil, insofar as we can understand and identify that dichotomy in practice (which I guess is an essential part of the 'battle') is an eternal one, a rugged landscape of peaks and valleys stretched across time, and no evil will truly ever end, but neither will good end, for it is as eternal as evil is. We embody all of it, we reproduce it as we reproduce ourselves, and so long as we do there is always the chance and ability for the good to overcome the evil.
People forget the clone wars was a war against the Sith for the Jedi just not just a galactic civil war.
Hey Thor,
since you talk a lot about what you think Lucas means by balance in the Force and how he said everyone in that Galaxy has a destiny: do you think, keeping in mind that balance doesn’t mean equal parts light and dark, that some people are destined to become Sith? Or is it that they choose to be selfish? How do we know Anakin isn’t destined to become Vader? And to add to that, how do we know if it’s Anakin’s destiny to become Vader because that’s the only way to stop the Emperor by the point he kills Windu? In other words, is SW destiny perhaps conditional, as in to stop the Emperor after a certain point it has to be from within, if you will?
Also maybe Palpatine was destined to become Sidious to realign the dogmatic Jedi order and re-attune the Jedi to the Will of the Force.
Would love to hear your own take on this, to me it’s quite the conundrum due to it having so many layers.
There were 10,000 Jedi knights in a galaxy of a trillion intelligent beings. Maybe more. There was never enough Jedi to go to war with the slave planets. I think it’s just logistical. If the Republic had had the political will to do something that might’ve been different but that wasn’t the case.
It's not for the Jedi to solve every cultural problem. They have already freed slaves from hundreds of worlds and defeated every galaxy wide threats. Other beings and factions also have parts to play in the betterment of the galaxy. It was the Republic that should have pressed that issue. They also cannot use their power to impose their beliefs on others and their cultures
Order 66 demonstrates to the viewer that the Jedi are not a massive military force. They can act as or lead strike teams but there just aren’t enough of them to force a utopian outcome
Maybe that's true, the Jedi shouldn't be generals in the war. But since the been a bit like a tool for the Republic, they thought it was the right thing. They maybe should have been meditating instead on what's really behind the war, and also never put down the guard on a new darkside user or sith poping up.
When it comes to the slaves it's easy, if they have no jurisdiction they can't really do anything, more then negotiate like Qui-Gon did with Anakin and his mother.
The answer of the Jedi and slaves is much simpler than everyone makes it out to be. They simply are powerless to do anything about it. It's not a point of what the republic will, it's a point of what the Jedi *can't.* Jedi can't just start a galaxy wide slave revolt. Not only are the consequences too dire, they don't have the manpower to fight this war against the entirety of Hutt space *and so much more.* The hutts aren't the only slavers out there, after all. And not just that, the Republic cannot sanction the Jedi's war either. At some point, the Republic would have to turn against the Jedi, turn them into fugitives
And this is in the galaxy wide scenario. Even on a planetary scale, this is too much to ask. Qui-Gon clearly had so little power against *one* two-bit slaver. What would the Jedi be able to do against an entire planet of them? Ignoring the bombs, starting an incident like this will have consequences much worse than to not free the slaves. So there's nothing to defend here because the Jedi aren't allowing anything. They're just not the ones to solve this particular issue.
Hey Thor would the will of the force allow slavery? Personally always I understood that slavery is part of the Dark side & dark side culture. Like for example how Anakin became slave again by the Dark side as Darth Vader to emperor, empire & dark side.
If the will of the force is against slavery then Jedis would have authority & right to free people by the the force.
Honestly, I don't believe that the Jedi can be blamed for allowing slavery to continue. The Jedi were a religious order. They could argue against its existence and try to oppose it where they could, but there would always be the potential for a system to exist within the galaxy where one being is 'owned' by another. As reprehensible as that might be, it's too big of a challenge for the Jedi to handle - to eliminate slavery thoughout the entire galaxy. The Galactic Senate would be better enabled to enact legislation against slavery, with the backing of governments taking action, rather than employing the Jedi to take action in whatever specific, more specialized way they could.
Hot take: The clone wars era should have made the Republic complicit in slavery (ie making planets as upper class as Coruscaunt requires slavery as a necessary evil). This is what the separtists would have been fighting against, instead of a bunch of political stuff. As Anakin sees his dream to become a jedi to free slaves will never come true, Palpatine fakes the desire to free slaves, and uses this to seduce Anakin to the dark side. Would have also made Dooku's fall easier to articulate in the movies.
You mean the story is not easy to articulate already? He spent a lot of time explaining this stuff.
Hey Thor, excellent discussion about the Jedi and righting wrongs.
On another topic, the Dark Side was clouding the vision of the Jedi, presumably because many (most?) of them were on Coruscant. If a large enough sect of the Jedi broke away and went to a far flung planet to sort of “get back to their roots” and practice more of the monk aspect and less of the warrior part, do you think they would have been able to break free from the cloud of the Dark Side? Do you think they could have repaired their relationship with the Force and discovered what was going on with Sidious and the Clone Wars?