The Case for the Empire

fReNeTiK writes "In this amusingly controversial article over at the weekly standard's web site, we get to hear an opinion not often heard among the hordes of Star Wars fanatics out there: The rebel alliance are actually "... an unimpressive crew of anarchic royals who wreck the galaxy so that Princess Leia can have her tiara back." An entertaining read which will surely spark flame wars of epic proportions." Reader kaypro submits an MSNBC story examining the science of Star Wars. And Ant notes that the Clones DVD will be out earlier than expected.

Comments

Thoughtful Articles

[Spencerian]

This article reminds me of a series of articles found on Space.com called The Phantom Heresies, a collection of speculation on why things were in Star Wars. (Because these links are fairly old, you may have to scrounge around--use Google.)

The link above discusses the powers and the arrogance of the Jedi, and why they had it coming. The cool part for me about these articles was that they reflected my views after watching The Phantom Menace after watching how mortibund both Jedi Council and Senate were in comparison to the efficient manipulations of Darth Sidious in TFM.

Was the Empire a better system? I think that a gilded cage is a cage, no matter how informative or high-class the reading material is that covers the bottom of my cage. I would side with the Rebels, lightsaber in hand if I were a Jedi.

Re:Pinochet?

[Yokaze]

> While no one can dispute that Pinochet was a brutal military dictator, most people forget how bad things were in Chile before Pinochet took power.

AFAIK, Chile was ruled by a Socialist named Salvador Allende,
who was elected and was determined to reform the admittantly crumbling economy with structural changes.
Those structural changes included the nationalising of of the industrial sector (including U.S.-owned copper mines). This lead to strong oppositon of the expropriated U.S. companies, (esp. copper mining and ITT) and the US goverment.
To quote Henry Kissinger:

I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people.

In the two first years of Allende's rule "Unemployment declined as the economy expanded, inflation was kept under control, and workers' incomes rose by fifty percent[...]"(John Foran, Allende's Chile, 1972)

The expatriation of US companies led to countermeasurements from the US goverment.
The U.S. ambassador to Chile probably words his goverment's stance best:

Not a nut or a bolt will reach Chile.... We will do all in our power to condemn Chileans to utmost poverty

For some reason, the Chilenian economy was declining.
Despite heavy support from the US goverment for the conservative party and the economical decline, Allende's party increased its share of the votes at the next election.

The CIA was heavily involved in supporting the conservative and right-wing groups with money, weapons and training. In 1971 to 1972 several coups were attempted, when Pinochet finally succeded.

The National Security Archive of the GWU has some of the partially disclosed CIA documents.

Lastly, about the economical developement in Chile.
Between 1972 nd 1987, the GNP per capita fell 6.4 percent.

Maybe have a look at "Analysis of Chilean economic and socioeconomic policy: 1975-1989 by Sherman Souther".

Re:Satire?

[iphayd]

I call Godwin's law. The conversation is over, please go home everyone there is nothing to see here.

http://www.godwinslaw.com/