Please tell me we are not going to have to deal with getting the sword back again

[Xyril]

Wait...are you not still on the "defense attorney" angle?

The "defense attorney angle" was a one-off joke that you're apparently now using to justify the straw-manning?

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, against my better judgment, and assume this is a sincere question. No. I am purely saying that your assertions have been unreasonable. As I have pointed out repeatedly, the movies didn't depict all of the relevant circumstances. In my view, what the movie did depict (Palpatine is Sith, Palpatine admits he was Sith to a Jedi, Jedi were aware of an unidentified Sith Lord acting against the Republic for some time, Sith Lords are dangerous even when alone and unarmed, lightsabers have substantial capacity to be used defensively that guns/blasters do not, etc.) weighs heavily in favor of the Jedi being completely reasonable. However, I acknowledged the possibility that unseen circumstances might change that analysis completely. You, on the other hand, rely heavily on unsourced implied assumptions to justify your conclusion that the Jedi were wrong, period, and are not open to the possibility that unseen facts might change that analysis. It is this intransigent position I disagreed with.

If you want me to argue "the defense attorney angle," then my answer is simple: You are wrong, at least under pretty much every jurisdiction in the United States. The various states recognize the right to self-defense with varying degrees of latitude as to when it is or isn't reasonable. However, even in states such as Florida, which gained notoriety for being very permissive in terms of self-defense and preemptive use of force, self-defense does not apply to law enforcement officers. In fact, the law is generally applied with strict liability with respect to your victim being a police officer. In other words, if you hear about a serial killer pretending to be a cop making traffic stops, you get pulled over by a cop, and you think he's a fake cop because he's inexperienced, hasn't learned to act very "cop-like" yet, doesn't have his uniform on right, etc. and so you shoot him, then you don't get to argue self-defense no matter how sincere and reasonable you belief that he wasn't a cop.

It's like statutory rape laws--it doesn't matter if she showed you two forms of ID, you met her in an age 21+ nightclub, and she looks and acts like she's thirty--if her biological age is low enough, you're breaking the law no matter how innocent your intent. Same with killing police officers trying to arrest you--no matter how unreasonable their show of force, no matter how reasonable you think it is for an innocent person to panic and defend himself, in the eyes of the law, no matter how innocent you are, if they were police officers, and you harmed them, then you're certainly not innocent anymore.

[The Aboleth]

Sure, but how is that to Mace's favor rather than Luke's? Mace had a helpless Sith Lord at lightsaber point, charring himself whenever he tried to blast Mace, and decided to go for the kill anyway (with the same statement Palpatine used to urge Anakin to kill Dooku, as has been pointed out). Luke had the fate of everyone he cared about riding on the Emperor's death and no one else likely to kill the Emperor. And Samuel L. Jackson is acting way angrier and less in control than Mark Hamill. If someone showed me both scenes, and said "One of these people is motivated by rage and hatred and is at risk of falling, the other is acting for the right reasons and is at no risk of falling," there would be no doubt in my mind that Mace was the one who was at risk of falling.

I'm not necessarily in disagreement, I'm just trying to figure out an argument that would justify one action being Fall-worthy and one not. I suppose you could say both WOULD have been Fall-worthy and Mace was ok with the consequences of that since he still was doing it for (what he believed were) Good reasons, or perhaps he didn't know it would be Fall-worthy and he'd become the Star Wars equivalent of Miko.

At the end of the day, I think we can all agree Lucas's writing was convoluted at best and awful at worst.

[hamishspence]

I suppose you could say both WOULD have been Fall-worthy and Mace was ok with the consequences of that since he still was doing it for (what he believed were) Good reasons, or perhaps he didn't know it would be Fall-worthy and he'd become the Star Wars equivalent of Miko.

That comparison was being used at the time - people comparing Miko to Mace and Shojo to Palpatine - the differences being that Miko hadn't been struck at by Shojo's sword, or blasted by Shojo's lightning, among others.)

[Xyril]

The book that confirmed that Thrawn knew of the Vong (telling Darth Sidious's henchman Doriana, who was the first of Sidious's people to meet him, of the Chiss's first encounter with a Vong task force), was Outbound Flight.

True, but at this point in time, Palpatine had already taken concrete steps to destabilize the Republic, so even if he learned about the Vong from Thrawn or others at this time, or even slightly before it, it happened to late to claim that the knowledge of the Vong motivated Palpatine's actions. IIRC, Outbound flight was set after the Clone Wars movie, during the Clone Wars series/comics, and Palpatine had been implementing his plan since before The Phantom Menace.

In the newcanon, Thrawn's reasoning for joining the Empire is the same "threats out there more evil than the Empire itself" but the Vong themselves aren't named.

This doesn't surprise me. Personally, I generally liked the Vong, the way their no-force gimmick was used to provide a plausible challenge to the Jedi and as a catalyst to character development, and how their history was used to explain their conduct, but not to excuse it, and to provide an avenue for redemption at the end. However, I recognize that their reception was divided at best, and I just don't see Disney has having the artistic courage to make such a risky decision as to bring them back. Everyone liked the original trilogy, so The Force Awakens conspicuously replicated elements from those movies while avoiding a repeat of the prequel trilogy. Everyone loves Thrawn (I'd argue he's perhaps the single most compelling EU-only character), so we get Thrawn. I don't see Disney bringing back the Vong--they're simply not a safe choice, and to me, Disney seems more interested in being safe and protecting the franchise they paid billions for than they are in taking a risk to advance that franchise.

[hamishspence]

Lucasfilm came very close to using the Vong in more mainstream media - a Vong ship was slated to appear in TCW before it was cancelled.

Outbound flight was set after the Clone Wars movie, during the Clone Wars series/comics, and Palpatine had been implementing his plan since before The Phantom Menace.

Not quite - but right general idea - it was 5 years after TPM, 5 years before AOTC - and Palpatine was recruited by Darth Plagueis as a teenager, several decades before TPM.

[Jasdoif]

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt...and assume this is a sincere question. No. I am purely saying that your assertions have been unreasonable.

Well that rather changes things, since there's no longer a judge to convince of/against narrative facts. It also partly obviates the uncertainty around Mace not specifically calling out what Palpatine was under arrest for, which seems kind of odd.


In the more general sense, the part that really messes this up is that Mace Windu, who's been mildly distrusting of Anakin throughout the movies, said in response to Anakin telling him that Palpatine was a Sith Lord...was that he sensed much confusion in Anakin, and wasn't convinced when he set off to arrest Palpatine. Threatening Palpatine if he was not a Sith Lord doesn't seem prudent, nor does providing forewarning to him if he was.

Well, unless Mace was specifically trying to provoke a response to determine if he was or was not a Sith Lord, with the expectation that he could handle Palpatine if so. Of course, "handling" a Sith Lord is rather unlikely to happen in a civilized fashion. And then, as Kish mentioned, is that Mace seemed particularly angry. Whether that's just Samuel L. Jackson's acting, or something in the script to make it seem like Anakin had reason for cutting off Mace's hand, or intended to be some reflection of Mace Windu's development of a lightsaber style centered around mentally skirting around the edge of the Dark Side, or Mace being understandably angry about the abrupt deaths of the Jedi Masters around him, or Mace as the Jedi's premier lightsaber duelist being distracted on account of never having encountered a threat of this level before, or something else entirely, or some combination thereof...is something I can't determine.

[Xyril]

That comparison was being used at the time - people comparing Miko to Mace and Shojo to Palpatine - the differences being that Miko hadn't been struck at by Shojo's sword, or blasted by Shojo's lightning, among others.)

I think there were a few other important differences. Shojo was at worst a liar and a hypocrite, and perhaps his scheming resulted in deaths that would not have otherwise. Miko wasn't killing him out of a reasonable belief that Shojo represented a concrete threat, he simply fell short of Miko's lawful-jerk morality as most people do. Palpatine had just killed three Jedi who were trying to arrest him--pretty handily, too. After a long struggle, Mace subdued him, putting him in a vulnerable position, and instead of finishing him off, Mace held back in order to arrest him... and Palpatine tried to blast him with Force Lightning anyway. It's the equivalent of four police officers getting in a gun fight with a suspect, who kills three of the officers, and then runs out of ammo after a protracted shootout with the surviving officer...and when that surviving officer holds him at gunpoint and tells him to surrender, he pulls a knife and makes a hail Mary attempt to kill that last cop. Nothing about Shojo implied that he had either the ability or the inclination to harm Miko or anyone else around him.

Really, the only parallel between Shojo and Palpatine is that arresting them might not have led to a conviction, and even that is questionable: The paladins are loyal, but not to the extent that loyalty trumps adherence to their code. If Shojo had the power to avoid arrest even if--as Miko alleged--he flagrantly violated their code, then he wouldn't have spent the past decades constantly maintaining his persona to avoid being seen violating that code.

Edit: "held back", not "head back"

[hamishspence]

A fairly good summary of the "among other differences" bit.

If Shojo had the power to avoid arrest even if--as Miko alleged--he flagrantly violated their code, then he wouldn't have spent the past decades constantly maintaining his persona to avoid being seen violating that code.

It would have been a lot easier for him to rig other people's trials than to rig his own.

[Xyril]

It also partly obviates the uncertainty around Mace not specifically calling out what Palpatine was under arrest for, which seems kind of odd.

This is also untrue. Police are not required to tell you what you're being arrested for at the moment of arrest--and often, they don't. They have to have some vague notion of the crime you committed in order for the arrest to be legitimate, but that is in many respects academic. Legally, they aren't required to list the specific charges until they file the charging document--and if, for whatever reason, they choose not to file charges, they can release you and they're never legally obligated to inform you of the charges.

I think what bothers you is privilege--if you're wealthy, well-connected, or a high-ranking government official, there's a certain expectation that you'll be treated with kid gloves, and Palpatine checks multiple boxes. However, this is a matter of pragmatism more than anything else--the law doesn't require that the powerful have special rights the common folk don't, nor do the police believe the powerful deserve special treatment.

Threatening Palpatine if he was not a Sith Lord doesn't seem prudent, nor does providing forewarning to him if he was.

In a vacuum, it's a choice that caries substantial risk. In context, the Jedi knew that there had been a substantial Sith plot being carried out under their collective noses, and as time passed without Jedi intervention, the Sith would only consolidate power. Then Anakin tells them that the Sith Lord was in fact the chancellor who has secured unprecedented amounts of personal power in the government--in other words, the Sith plan was far further along than the Jedi suspected. This implies urgency that might justify a risky decision.

I think you oversimplify by saying "Mace doesn't trust Anakin." If Mace had believed Anakin was a pathological liar, then it would make no sense to take him at his word. However, that's not really how Mace felt about Anakin--to me, it seemed like he felt that Anakin wasn't in control of his emotions and had divided loyalties, and for those reasons he couldn't always trust Anakin to be completely forthcoming and to always act in the interest of the Order and the Republic. In that context, it actually makes sense not to assume Anakin is lying--Anakin is loyal to the Jedi, but also to others. At any given moment, that loyalty to others may prompt Anakin to keep secrets from the Jedi, but as circumstances change, Anakin might change his mind.

or something in the script to make it seem like Anakin had reason for cutting off Mace's hand,

Well, there's that whole subplot where Anakin still felt loyalty to the Jedi, his master in particular, and had strong reservations about the dark side, but on the other hand felt great affinity to Palpatine as an individual and also saw him as the only means to save the life of the woman he loved. Thus, it would be entirely consistent with his characterization for him to act to prevent Palpatine from subverting the Republic, destroying the Jedi, and taking over, so long as Palpatine remains alive to save Padme. It would also be consistent if--upon seeing that Mace no longer was willing to risk taking Palpatine alive, and Palpatine apparently never intended to be taken alive, Anakin decided that saving Padme was more important than saving the Jedi.

[hamishspence]

It would also be consistent if--upon seeing that Mace no longer was willing to risk taking Palpatine alive, and Palpatine apparently never intended to be taken alive, Anakin decided that saving Padme was more important than saving the Jedi.

The novelisation was always better at this sort of thing:

"It's them or me, Anakin. Or perhaps I should put it more plainly: It's them or Padme."
Anakin made his right hand—his black-gloved hand of durasteel and electrodrivers—into a fist.
"It's just—it's not... easy, that's all. I have—I've been a Jedi for so long—"
Sidious offered an appalling smile. "There is a place within you, my boy, a place as briskly clean as ice on a mountaintop, cool and remote. Find that high place, and look down within yourself; breathe that clean, icy air as you regard your guilt and shame. Do not deny them; observe them. Take your horror in your hands and look at it. Examine it as a phenomenon. Smell it. Taste it. Come to know it as only you can, for it is yours, and it is precious."
As the shadow beside him spoke, its words became true. From a remote, frozen distance that was at the same time more extravagantly, hotly intimate than he could have ever dreamed, Anakin handled his emotions. He dissected them. He reassembled them and pulled them apart again. He still felt them—if anything, they burned hotter than before—but they no longer had the power to cloud his mind.
"You have found it, my boy: I can feel you there. That cold distance—that mountaintop within yourself—that is the first key to the power of the Sith."
Anakin opened his eyes and turned his gaze fully upon the grotesque features of Darth Sidious.
He didn't even blink.
As he looked upon that mask of corruption, the revulsion he felt was real, and it was powerful, and it was—
Interesting.
Anakin lifted his hand of durasteel and electrodrivers and cupped it, staring into its palm as though he held there the fear that had haunted his dreams for his whole life, and it was no larger than the piece of shuura he'd once stolen from Padme's plate.

On the mountain peak within himself, he weighed Padme's life against the Jedi Order.
It was no contest.
He said, "Yes."
"Yes to what, my boy?"
"Yes, I want your knowledge."
"Good. Good!"
"I want your power. I want the power to stop death."
"That power only my Master truly achieved, but together we will find it. The Force is strong with you, my boy. You can do anything."
"The Jedi betrayed you," Anakin said. "The Jedi betrayed both of us."
"As you say. Are you ready?"
"I am," he said, and meant it. "I give myself to you. I pledge myself to the ways of the Sith. Take me as your apprentice. Teach me. Lead me. Be my Master."

[Jasdoif]

They have to have some vague notion of the crime you committed in order for the arrest to be legitimate, but that is in many respects academic.

I'm sure in some times/locales even that isn't required for legitimacy.

I just double-checked the movie though, and Mace Windu did say they were already headed to the Chancellor's office to ensure he returned his emergency powers to the Senate, before Anakin mentioned he was a Sith Lord, so that removes my feeling of oddness.

I think what bothers you is privilege--if you're wealthy, well-connected, or a high-ranking government official, there's a certain expectation that you'll be treated with kid gloves, and Palpatine checks multiple boxes.

I was thinking more like "forcibly removing the Chancellor of the Republic from office, at the end of a war centered around whether or not the Republic deserves to exist to have an office, seems likely to cause/extend a lot of civil problems". Maybe that's a subset?

In a vacuum, it's a choice that caries substantial risk. In context, the Jedi knew that there had been a substantial Sith plot being carried out under their collective noses, and as time passed without Jedi intervention, the Sith would only consolidate power. Then Anakin tells them that the Sith Lord was in fact the chancellor who has secured unprecedented amounts of personal power in the government--in other words, the Sith plan was far further along than the Jedi suspected. This implies urgency that might justify a risky decision.

Hmm. Possible I suppose.

Well, there's that whole subplot where Anakin still felt loyalty to the Jedi, his master in particular, and had strong reservations about the dark side, but on the other hand felt great affinity to Palpatine as an individual and also saw him as the only means to save the life of the woman he loved. Thus, it would be entirely consistent with his characterization for him to act to prevent Palpatine from subverting the Republic, destroying the Jedi, and taking over, so long as Palpatine remains alive to save Padme. It would also be consistent if--upon seeing that Mace no longer was willing to risk taking Palpatine alive, and Palpatine apparently never intended to be taken alive, Anakin decided that saving Padme was more important than saving the Jedi.

All true, and all unrelated to Mace's expression. A hypothetical "we'll make Mace's face look angry too just in case" in the script wouldn't be the strangest decision I noticed in the prequels.

[GreatWyrmGold]

That means that in the "Anakin falls" scene in Revenge of the Sith, Anakin effectively had no good choice. Watch Mace murder Palpatine and fall? Stop Mace from murdering Palpatine and watch Palpatine murder Mace?

Remind me never to play a paladin in any campaign Lucas DMs.

Spoiler: Motivation: Power for Power's Sake?

Show

Palpatine's motivation was Power, and power alone. A cynic might say, that makes Palpatine the only realistic character in Star Wars.

For all its importance, power is nothing on its own. Power for power's sake is meaningless; one must have a specific goal they wish to apply that power to for that power to have any meaning. Someone who wants power for its own sake is, at best, a caricature of a corrupt politician or businessman. Such people are as realistic as one-dimensional villains. (Which isn't surprising, given their overlap. Many bland villains' motivations can be summarized as "do evil so I can get power, get power so I can do evil, repeat".)

I'm sorry, but are you trying to say that only a naive child would believe that a man would do evil things to become the most powerful man in the world? You obviously haven't seen the news lately.
Given current events that i will not discuss, i think Palpatine's motivations are VERY plausible. He wanted power, and he was willing to do and say anything to get it. That sounds terrifyingly familiar.

Whoever the world leader you're talking about, and whatever time you're referring to, I stand by my above statement. Call me naive if you will, but I'm convinced that every evil action has a logical and, more than likely, sympathetic motivation behind it. They just want to bring their country back to its perceived former glory, to protect its citizens, to stop a major threat to the world. (Of course, this doesn't shield them from criticism if their methods have undesirable side effects, unacceptable costs, and/or fail to meet their lofty goals.)

By your logic, Hitler must have been motivated by a sincere desire to make Germany great again for his grandchildren...or he sincerely and reasonably believed that the Jews were a threat to humanity and tried to exterminate them in an act of altruism, because only a "thirteen-year-old who thinks any nonsense is profound as long as it sounds grim enough" would believe that he was simply a man who wanted to be the most powerful man in his country, and for his country to be the most powerful country in the world, and who was prepared to do anything and everything to achieve that goal.

I see no reason to assume Hitler didn't believe that. He was, of course, incorrect, but that doesn't mean that he was motivated by power alone.

[Keltest]

Power for its own sake is perfectly plausible, especially when that power takes the form of a galactic empire that has to obey your every whim. The ability to have that power whenever you decide you want something is as tempting as the ability to have what you already want.

[Darth Paul]

My view of the chain of events is:

Palpatine and Mace trade accusations, confusing Anakin.
Palpatine loses his temper and attempts to lightning Mace, but has the silly thing in reverse. Meanwhile, he tempts Anakin with the knowledge that he can save Padme, reminding him that he must choose. Mace wants Anakin to resist temptation.

Palpatine then plays the pathetic old man, begging Anakin to save him from Mace, and claiming he is too weak to save himself.

Mace says he's going to end "this" once and for all- presumably by killing Palpatine. Anakin starts quoting Jedi principles. Mace knows the smartest thing is to just kill Palpatine, but the way he's doing it goes against his grain and he hesitates.

It's only when Anakin yells "I need him!" that Mace irrevocably decides to kill Palpatine; and that's when Anakin steps in and cuts Mace's hand off.

It was the knowledge that the Sith Lord was manipulating the Chosen One, and the Chosen One was embracing the Sith, that made Mace decide to kill at that point. Prior to that, the decision was based simply on "This man shoots frikkin' LIGHTNING out of his fingers, no jail can hold him... he's too dangerous to keep alive for trial." I didn't really see hatred at that time; just a determination.

[Koo Rehtorb]

I don't know where people are getting the idea that killing is wrong in Star Wars. Good guys kill people by the dozen all the time. What matters in Star Wars is how you ~feel~ about it. It's entirely possible that Mace Windu made a strategic decision that capturing and imprisoning a Sith Master with that level of power was never actually going to work and a summary execution was required to protect the galaxy (a-ok by Star Wars standards). It's also entirely possible that he was motivated by anger and therefore it was totally not okay.

For another example, if Anakin had hacked up a sand person camp to rescue his mother that'd be fine. Anakin hacking up a sand person camp because he was pissed his mother had already died was badwrong.

People can certainly question how sensible this whole arrangement is, but that's just how it works in Star Wars.

[Vinyadan]

BTW... how is killing jedi children worse than killing Tusken children? Because, if it's the same, Anakin was supposed to have fallen long ago. And Yoda seemed very conscious of that. And they promoted Anakin to the Council?

[Koo Rehtorb]

BTW... how is killing jedi children worse than killing Tusken children? Because, if it's the same, Anakin was supposed to have fallen long ago. And Yoda seemed very conscious of that. And they promoted Anakin to the Council?

I don't think it's worse so much as the Tuskens were a result of Anakin losing control, and he felt remorseful afterwards. The Jedi children were a result of him making a deliberate choice to turn to the dark side.

[Kantaki]

Wasn't Anakin's seat on the Council due to Palpatine wanting a reliable contact/source/voice there?
Besides influencing Anakin I mean.
Hence the other members saying „Okay, you get the chair, but not the rank.“

[hamishspence]

BTW... how is killing jedi children worse than killing Tusken children? Because, if it's the same, Anakin was supposed to have fallen long ago. And Yoda seemed very conscious of that.

Yoda sensed Anakin's anger and grief - but not what he was actually doing. Qui-Gon's "No, Anakin!" might have given him a clue - but not that Tusken innocents were being killed, only that he was acting in grief and anger.

They didn't question him very closely in the EU, after the fight on Geonosis. They may not have done so in the "newcanon-verse" either.

[GreatWyrmGold]

I don't know where people are getting the idea that killing is wrong in Star Wars. Good guys kill people by the dozen all the time. What matters in Star Wars is how you ~feel~ about it.

Which is, incidentally, yet another reason to be suspicious of the Jedi's idea of right and wrong. Along with conscripting children, forbidding emotion, and condoning slavery.

[Peelee]

Which is, incidentally, yet another reason to be suspicious of the Jedi's idea of right and wrong. Along with conscripting children, forbidding emotion, and condoning slavery.

Didn't conscript. Always had parental permission.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Didn't conscript. Always had parental permission.

Well, I'll grant that that's slightly better, but the idea of taking children and training them to be warrior-monks, to only think in the ways that the Jedi deem appropriate, to have a career chosen for them before they grow out of the "I wanna be a cowboy" phase, sounds cultish at best.

[Peelee]

Well, I'll grant that that's slightly better, but the idea of taking children and training them to be warrior-monks, to only think in the ways that the Jedi deem appropriate, to have a career chosen for them before they grow out of the "I wanna be a cowboy" phase, sounds cultish at best.

So say cultish instead. If there are multiple valid issues, then tossing a spurious one in there in lieu of a real one seems more than a bit silly, at best.

Sorry, I just have to bring up this gripe more often than you'd think.

[GreatWyrmGold]

So say cultish instead. If there are multiple valid issues, then tossing a spurious one in there in lieu of a real one seems more than a bit silly, at best.

See, the thing is...I didn't realize there was parental consent involved, because I don't read Wookipedia much.

[hamishspence]

In the movie we see Qui-Gon getting parental consent from Shmi, at least. However, in practice (although possibly not in law) Tatooine is outside the Republic.

The EU tended to flip-flop - some sources emphasised the Jedi getting consent - others suggested that this was technically not necessary, but the Jedi were trying to avoid bad PR by not insisting on their right to take Force-sensitive children of Republic citizens.

The age limit also varied - some said it was extremely rare for the Jedi to take children over 1 year old - others more often showed 3-4 year olds being taken frequently.


In the context of the newcanon - at least one planet - Bardotta - has had bad experiences with Jedi recruiters - growing to regard them as kidnappers. As a result, the Jedi had to tread extremely carefully with the Bardottas in the Season 6 arc focusing on them.

[Emanick]

Which is, incidentally, yet another reason to be suspicious of the Jedi's idea of right and wrong. Along with conscripting children, forbidding emotion, and condoning slavery.

Wait, when did the Jedi condone slavery? I'm no Star Wars expert, but I thought Phantom Menace explicitly stated that slavery was outlawed across the Republic - and neither Qui-Gon nor Obi-Wan appeared to be okay with the situation on Tatooine.

[Kish]

There's "not appearing to be okay with it" and then there's "doing anything to change it, ever, even in the specific case of Anakin's mother."

[Vinyadan]

Anyway, I think that the best decision in SW history was the council forcing Obi Wan's: "Listen, my young, emotional, easily impressed, and slightly unstable pupil, could you please keep an eye on this shrew politician who is about four times your age and could waltz intrigue around any council member? Because I am sure that he will not seduce you to whatever evil plan he might have. It's not like you already are best buddies, and you have chosen him as a mentor over any Jedi (which btw might hurt me just a little bit, if I weren't a Jedi and therefore, well, you know, I'm hurt anyway, I'm just not showing it). I mean, it's not like gives you the stuff you want and we don't want you to have, or he just forced us to give you a position, which we did in such a way as to scorn you and make it clear that you are in debt with him, and offended by us. Yup, this is gonna be so smooth."

[hamishspence]

Wait, when did the Jedi condone slavery?

The main case I've seen argued was - the clone army. Kamino pretty blatantly regards the clones it produces as property to be sold - and, by accepting the delivery of the clones, the Jedi and the Republic demonstrate an element of "condoning slavery" - especially since more clones are being ordered, and more payments being made - in TCW.


That said - also in TCW - when it comes to Separatists enslaving Republic citizens and handing them over to slave traders - the Jedi are real enthusiastic about invading the slave trader world of Zygerria and getting those citizens back.


A point was made in that arc (Season 4) that the last Zygerrian Slaver Empire was crushed by the Jedi centuries ago in an attempt to stop the slave trade, and that the old Sith Empire made heavy use of slavery (and that Sidious and Dooku are making overtures to the Zygerrians in order to ensure that slavery will thrive when Sidious turns the Republic into an Empire.)

[Keltest]

There's "not appearing to be okay with it" and then there's "doing anything to change it, ever, even in the specific case of Anakin's mother."

In Phantom Menace, the Jedi are acting as government officials on a specific diplomatic mission and are currently outside their jurisdiction. In the longer term, they are beholden to the republic and its leaders, and the government would almost certainly not appreciate them picking a fight with the Hutts without going through them first.