Tarkin launching a coup with the Death Star would have been a fun idea, ultimate technology vs ultimate dark side with rebels trying to figure out which is worse and how to ensure there is someone left afterwards Edit: couple to coup cause autocorrect
I think it would come over to what Vader does. He seems loyal to Palpatine and despises the Death Star, but we know he's already tried to conspire against his master (through Starkiller) and he also respects Tarkin at least to an extent. In Rogue One he also seems to be in league with Tarkin in sidelining Krennic, but that may just be him trolling the person responsible for this "technological terror" and not actively trying to consolidate Tarkin's power.
Palpatine was in fact growing frustrated about tarkins growing ambition and power and had vader on board the Death Star to curb feeling of he got out of line. Palpatine said that it was a good thing he died aboard the Death Star as his days were numbered.
The Stormtrooper Corps is ultimately loyal to Palpatine. The legion on the Death Star(while seemingly overkill) are actually there to make sure Tarkin(& his cadre) don't get any ideas. The Death Star Troopers are the counter to this as Tarkin recruited them out of the best Naval Troopers & Marines, gave them specialized training & a distinct uniform (which filtered back to the Fleet) & placed them on board the "ultimate weapon" as a testament to their "elite" status. Thus they were ultimately loyal to Tarkin... ... I guess it would ultimately fall to Vader(like a kid caught between divorcing parents!)
Maybe the idea of being in control of a new and supposedly unstoppable super weapon would eventually lead to feelings of invincibility, but there's way too many examples (and still being added with each new spin-off) of Tarkin's incompetence as a military strategist so it seems a little bit more on the far-fetched side of possibilities. But maybe that can be blamed on new canon
The Naboo situation is a little more nuanced than depicted here. It's not that open warfare between worlds in the Republic was allowed. Instead, what we have is a legal dispute which is being ostensibly resolved according to normal legal and bureaucratic channels. The Trade Federation objects to the tariffs Naboo is levying, and refuses to pay. They then institute a blockade in order to protect their legally recognized monopoly rights. They are not supposed to actually initiate hostilities or invade the planet. That would not be legal or allowed. Back on Coruscant, the situation is presented as a literal he said / she said. Amidala alleges atrocities, aggression, and coercion. The Trade Federation denies these allegations. The Senate then votes to convene a committee to study the situation and determine what the truth is before proceeding. This is similar to how a dispute might be resolved in the UN. Meanwhile, of course, we know the Federation has invaded Naboo and will try to have them sign a treaty granting the Federation more rights before the Senate can do anything. All of this is part of Palpatine's plan, because by reducing people's faith in democracy and presenting short cuts he lays the foundation for his Empire, and positions himself perfectly to completely take over once the Civil War gets going. He doesn't know at the time, but this is also part of how Anakin is swayed toward fascism.
It also had the double effect of bolstering the burgeoning secessionist movement. Amidala shows up, asks the Senate for help, and then turns around and goes ‘fine, I’ll do it myself’ when they don’t. And then she goes and _wins_ .Ironically, many planets who wanted out of the republic or argued that they could better take care of themselves and their problems on their own without a central galactic government or it’s bureaucracy saw what she did as the perfect example of what could be possible without republic ‘interference.’ Paradoxically, many of those same worlds would end up in the CIS, fighting for or alongside the same corporations that initiated or supported the invasion of Naboo in the first place.
I'm going to do a bit of "Urm actually" but "absolutism" in itself wasn't something theorized by monarchs or people living at their time, but something theorized later, during the restauration, so after the french revolution. It was used in hindsight to define the way monarchs were ruling before.
The term yes, but the things the term described were the goals of the monarchs. It's a descriptive label. I touched on this with the part about transitions as well.
Fascinating. I always thought it was more directly analogous to Napoleon, or more likely the Romans he tried so hard to copy, given the Roman senate's system of electing dictators in times of crisis, with the risk of said dictator then acquiring and cementing more power. When Caesar did it he did so pretty much by force which is a difference, but after naming himself dictator for life and then emperor, then transitioned Rome from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire, with the moffs also perhaps being analogous to the Roman military governors that were appointed to rule over and pacify provinces in the empire. The prevalance of the idea of divine right in medieval Europe kinda stems from Caesar too, given how he created the Imperial Cult which was the idea that he and some relatives were beings granted divine sanction to rule by the gods, and long after that, a lot of Christian monarchs in Europe had a thing for trying to ape the half-remembered glories of Rome, which also sometimes included a similar 'I'm chosen by god' thing. France was in some ways under its monarchy, but ESPECIALLY in Napoleon's 'republic' after that, trying to LARP as ancient Rome pretty hard given the consuls, imperial eagles, the "I'm an emperor but this is a republic, honest" shtick, and declaring war on almost everyone trying to forge a vast European and Mediterranean empire shenanigans.
Caesar is almost certainly a more direct inspiration, but the quote is a good jumping off point to discuss the later form of western European absolutism and the similarities (and differences) which exist there. And yes, absolutist rulers especially also made parallels with themselves and Roman Emperors- art in Versailles, for example, shows the latter Bourbon monarchs in this period dressed as Roman Emperors. But none of the situations are entirely analogous, and in some cases the similarities are more aesthetic.
Actually the European Monarchist absolutism is far more recent of a development. It was understood throughout the medieval period that rulers powers were not truly absolute, they owed their vessels and their vessels owed them. If one or the other didn't keep their bargain they could be overthrown. Rebellion and pseudo independenve of powerful vassels was common. Divine Right wasn't even a thing as the Church competed with monarchs and monarchs with them. The Holy Roman Emperor and the Pope had a literal war in Italy over their circular power dynamic. No, absolution and divine right came about when the French Monarchy in the Early modern era was able to get all the powerful Aristocrat's under one roof and keep them distracted over pointless titles. Allowing them to centralize their Kingdom and declaw their vessels. Hell, something similar happened in Russia were Ivan the Terrible tricked the nobility into giving him absolute power so he could purge them.
I'm not sure Lucas was ever well studied enough to really know about Napoleon or have him in his cultural reference point. Nor how Caesar set up the foundation for the transition to empire and then how Augustus eventually did become the first emperor. His comparisons are much more banal and recent. 50 years at the time of the writing of the movie and only 30 from his first movie. It's very obvious with the idea of Chancellor. However, the ultimate administrative system does come much more to be like the Roman empire of old. Especially the battles with the bureaucracy. Though the bureaucracy was as far as I'm aware not a strong issue in the Roman republic, though I can always be proven incorrect on that should it be true. Also the idea of divine right I believe was more simply due to the blessing of the church. Regicide was surprisingly common before the early modern period. And as far as I'm aware the first ruler truly divined as king by divine right was the Holy Roman Emperor Charlemenge when he was crowned that by the church. Thus, the divine right was claimed in Europe. Of course, rulers claiming themselves or rule divine was common well outside and before Europe or Rome. All you simply need to do is look at the mandate of heaven in China or the Pharoahs of Egypt.
@@buddermonger2000 I don't know if Lucas had any interest in Napoleon, but it's very clear the Galactic Republic draws heavily from Rome as inspiration.
@@supersuper111 Except that he himself did not want to back down from the standoff , and that it was Germany first then A-H who declared on Russia. But hey, lets do revisionism , its always fun.
Considering that there's a lot of themes the star wars movies the OG 3 touch on especially during the Vietnam war, you could say the empire is a reflection of the US.
If you want to go back even further with this subject, to the earliest states, I highly recommend the article "Early Mesopotamia: The Presumptive State" by Seth Richardson. 'The concept of the "presumptive state" in early Mesopotamian states (2800-1600 BC) is that these states were claimed powers that they did not necessarily have. They did this by making vague and unfalsifiable claims to power, and by establishing their "voices" as generically valid, whether through legal codes or other large public displays. This process of people coming to believe in something they did not necessarily imagine before led to the gradual emergence of Mesopotamian "state power".'
I would argue that Palpatine was more like a self made dictator akin to Stalin, Caesar and so on rather than like a traditional European monarch. While European monarchs were very powerful, as you said, they were very limited by the aristocracy, church and so on. Whereas, Palpatine's limits seemed almost self made since he chose not to engage in direct rule of the Empire and chose to allow his subordinates to do all the governing for him while he focused mainly on Sith experiments and other weird stuff, much to the chagrin of Vader,
Palpatine came to power in the same way Hitler did- patience, corruption, becoming chancellor, eroding democracy slowly, using secret police and storm troopers. Also Stalin was not a dictator, even the CIA understood this but still rolled with it as propaganda.
Oh man, this is one of your best (in my opinion). Loved the inclusion of Weber's state monopoly on violence. As a scholar of nationalism, I can't help but think about the effects that standardization and uniformity the Empire inevitably brought to far-flung systems would have on creating a sense of belonging to a unified polity. Benedict Anderson obviously points to common language and the advent of widespread print and literacy being the flashpoint for the development of national identity in our world, and I suppose there's a potential argument to be made in Star Wars for Basic and Aurebesh playing a similar role, but that's so far back in galactic history I wonder how fleshed out that debate would really be.
I know this is a little off topic, but I don't like the new canon use of the Jedi Temple as the Imperial Palace. There's no way you can possibly argue that Palpatine could use the Jedi temple as his palace without people knowing and understanding why that's significant while also writing the Jedi out of history. I prefer the idea we saw in Legends - for once not just because I grew up with it - in Legends Palpatine's Palace was a lot like the Death Star - a show of power and wealth that eclipsed anything that came before it. The Imperial Palace in Legends is supposed to eclipse even the largest mountains that existed on Coursacant. I remember the scene from X-wing when Kirtan Loor remarks that they couldn't land a shuttle in the tower because it was too small - but then the pilot explained it was because they were STILL so far away from the thing. But at the same time - I guess that only works in legends. When would he have built it in the canon timeline? Fair enough.
Hutt space was its own thing seperate from the republic, similar to bothan space. They wre basically independent countries so the empire couldnt enforce its will without an invasion. And while bothan space was small enough for occupation hutt space was not. The hutt cartel is a different organisation in itself. Its not the government of hutt space (that would be the hutt council), its the combined personal force of jabba, his relatives and his underlings.
While Hutt space was not part of the Republic, the Empire did claim it as part of their territory. Many historically Hutt-ruled systems became full Imperial sectors, while the parts of Hutt space not sectioned off into other sectors were included as part of the Trans-Nebular oversector under Byluir. The Hutt Council and Hutt cartels are not the same organization, but they are connected. The Cartel*s* (not one cartel, it was not all Jabba and his family) were connected to various Hutt kajidics, which were represented on the Council. A full invasion is only necessary if you're going to be fought, and the types of relationships I'm talking about made that largely avoidable in a way both sides were happy with.
Great video. Would love to see one similar to this one regarding the influence of the Core Worlds and how some of them were able to get away with being a little more vocal in the Senate, like Chandrila or Alderaan, without direct repression until the DS was operational.
Emperor Frederick II’s absolutism in Sicily and Italy is much closer to the Empire’s conception. Per the Constitutions of Melfi, Frederick II was Lex Animata (Law Incarnate) and his transformational and profoundly influential legislation remains at the very heart of the European continental state. Louis XIV’s absolutist France was still less unified and institutions were only connected to the monarch-not to ruthlessly centralized to each other, the hallmark of 20th century autocratic states. Frederick’s state in Sicily and eventually most of Italy was closer to the latter, marking just how much European constitutional history it underwrites.
Lovely video. Keep up the great work! Would like to see you maybe attempt a political approach on the Galactic Triumvirate or the Federation, maybe even how politically possible was the splintering of the empire after Endor into warlord holds!
I know I've said it a bunch, but I really love these videos. They're a great intersection of my interests. The implementation of power via Palpatine's legitimacy goes a long way to explaining the dysfunctional nature of the Imperial Remnants in both Cannon and Legends. Without the unifying figurehead, there is simply no legal basis for one Moff to be in charge of another, and so you get Warlords and Pretender Empires.
A republic is not the same as democracy. A pure democracy is both unwieldy, as well as potentially undesired. Majority rule is mob rule. Protection of minorities and enforcement of contracts are important functions of government. Corruption enters all systems over time, as greedy humans seek to game the system. You could argue that no one system or government should last forever unchanged and unexamined. I think we are currently at the turning of an age, and whether existing systems and governments will endure will be decided by how well they can adapt. I see a lot of refusal to adapt from the existing governments, which makes me think we are in for a harsh paradigm shift.
interesting video, would you also consider doing a analysis on the parallels between Carl Schmitts writings on law and politics and the rise of the empire
0:45: The first translation shows why "Woolseyism" is necessary. Hence, the second translation. If I have a say on absolutism, it's that it's better off closed, private, subtle, and abstract, like a shadow government. A weird example would be how Mycroft Holmes, Sherlock's brilliant but lazy brother, is depicted in the non-Doyle tale "The Case of Death and Honey", where his passing away post-WW1 ensures the beginning of the fall of the British Empire all the way to the Cold War... because his much overlooked consultancies (like the Bruce-Partington plans, once stolen blueprints for what will essentially be the submarines of the later World Wars) and political connections MAINTAINED said empire, for he was THE EMPIRE. *Not the royal family, nor Parliament, but him, whose head HAS the British government: not the ballot and hustings nonsense, but the business of the thing, for no one else knows how the colonial Afghanistan troop movements influence even the later Troubles in Ireland.*
I always saw the Empire as a mixture of 20th Century nations like Mustache man's Germany and the Soviet Union combined with modern Enlightened Absolutism. ( With Palpatine's r*cial caste of Humans>Near humans>non-humans and the centralized Corporate guilds of Fascist Corporatism) Note: Corporatism itself is older than Fascism and older versions of far more Decentralized. And I know some may think the Rebel alliance as been compared to the Vietcong, but as I think about it. It seems more analogous to the 13 colonies rebeling against the English parliament and crown.
I believe George Lucas himself stated that the films are supposed to be inspired by the Vietnam War. Meaning the Rebels are supposed to be like the North Vietnamese and the Empire, the United States of America. A lot of sort of fringe movies from the 60s and 70s were inspired by Vietnam and a distrust of the US government if I remember right.
@@jaykemp2861 I remember reading somewhere that the rebels were more akin to the 13 colonies and that if they really were the Vietcong, they would’ve have won by waiting for the Imperial civilian population to grow distrustful of their government and tired of the war and protest, but the rebels beat the Empire militarily.
A Common History video? On Corey’s Star Wars Lore Channel? What is this? A crossover episode! In all seriousness, I love this content! I hope we get heaps more of it. No one else is doing this kind of thing on RUclips it seems.
Corey I would love to see your real world comparisons and analysis published in some form. Even if it's just a compiled set of scripts, I think there's real value in what you've done beyond just fun Star Wars videos.
I honestly never heard that quote attributed to Loius before, but even if it is apocryphal it fits him so well. He had such a habit of saying/doing the worst thing at the worst time. I honestly didn't expect a tie-in to history like that, but I'm all for it. I'd love to get more history from Corey.
Maybe the idea of being in control of a new and supposedly unstoppable super weapon would eventually lead to feelings of invincibility, but there's way too many examples (and still being added with each new spin-off) of Tarkin's incompetence as a military strategist so it seems a little bit more on the far-fetched side of possibilities. But maybe that can be blamed on new canon
I find it funny that Louis the 11th would've said that since I think that would've been during the hundred years war, when he controlled less of France than Britain did.
A correction, the Imperial Palace was built into and expanded upon the Presidential Palace, not the Jedi Temple as symbolically Palpatine wanted his Palace to be the largest single structure on the planet, dwarfing the former Jedi Temple and Senate.
@@CoreysDatapadHonestly it makes more sense. Wasn't the Jedi temple built atop a Sith temple to suppress its power? That fact itself may not be Canon, so either way... What else do you do with the Jedi temple and all of the archives? It has the infrastructure and the encryption systems, the vaults, and all kinds of things if you're a maniacal space warlock-emperor with a Fascist Fashion obsession with stolen art and artifacts. The Jedi temple is a great place to make a great Space British Museum. Another possible and practical reason for it is well... Imagine all of the pain, fear, and terror which would linger around the place. The passion, anger, and hatred must be for a Sith, equivalent to starting your mornings with eggs in a blender.
I wouldn't call them nation-states but Yeah. Hutt Space was never imperial/republican. Sort of the same thing with Mandalore and the Mandalorians who resisted imperial rule. Several neutral independent planets appear in the Clone Wars series and there are emissaries of both the Republic and the Seperatists. Palpatine knew about the Chiss government in the unknown regions. Kamino before the clone wars was completely independent. A few examples
The Hapes Consortium from Legends springs to mind. It was a fully sovereign state with a monarchy that the Empire allowed to do its own thing. Kinda like Switzerland or Sweden during WW2. There was also the Corporate Sector Authority which had a lot of autonomy, and Hutt Space
@@ChaoMung-t9uI wanna see a full breakdown on Hutts and Hutt politics. They are depicted as an organized crime gang but is there a recognized Hutt state? Are they a vassal who the Empire is allowed to enter as they please?
Love, love, LOVE these kinds of videos!! The Story of Star Wars always was tied to the real world. Really cool historical excursion here! And the sun king comparison is so amazing because I remember making a palatine meme out of him on a worksheet in 8th class when we learned about him!!! DER STAAT BIN ICH! ICH BIN DER SENAT! Seemed really similar to me in German even as an 8th grader.
When looking at the goals of absolutism and fascism one could easily make the claim that fascism is just neo-absolutism. The ultimate goal of both is to establish a supreme state. This is why the empire can mirror both so well without being explicit about either, which if intentional was a very clever play from george lucas.
I would argue that any government at all tends to want more power to establish its goals, making every government desire absolutism as its end goal. The only way to stop that is to hamstring your own government, as with a constitution. But our current day leaders hate and often ignore the constitution, which shows that even that isn't enough. The people must hold its government accountable, but most aren't interested, and some are even bribed to want more government power.
Wise in episode 7 the first order turns on the sith after supreme leaders death and Hukes or another general secures control and begins purging any force usesers
The Greeks phylodophers had many books about tirany and that can be born in any political system and most of The tine The tirany can come from inside goverment institutions
Nahnah Versaille ha dtoo look cool big and expanisve, but that wasn't themain function. The function was to take noble and feudal lrod and have them be here, under watch. Close to the king court. So they couldn't plot in their fiefdom.
I don't believe I claimed looking impressive was the *main* or only function of Versailles in an institutional sense, but it is the point of making it *look* as impressive as it does. These were all mutually and self-reinforcing factors. I also discussed the point of the court being there (which is not the same as all the dukes and whatever other lords live there), and the institutional importance of that centralization in the video.
🤔. . . Okay, so without using the Force, how does Sheev Palpatine compare to Kazuya Souma of _How a Realist Hero Rebuilt the Kingdom_ ? They’re both absolutists in their own way, right?
Have you checked out the new (2024) Disney EU book "The Rise and Fall of the Galactic Empire"? It's an in-universe history book about the Empire that would be right up your alley.
It is Legends. There were significant portions of Hutt space incorporated into the Empire and put under control of Moffs. As a whole, Hutt space was also under Byluir's Trans-Nebular oversector.
@@ChaoMung-t9u There were also a couple of regions that, while not part of traditional Hutt Space, were within Hutt Space's general sphere of influence that the Empire reorganized into Imperial sectors like the Baxel sector or removed Hutt influence like in the Kastolar sector or on the planet Gyndine.
My guess is that in essence, for the Hutts it was like the Kingdom of Egypt being a protectorate of the British Empire. In fact in WW2 Egypt was technically 'neutral' in the conflict, even with the North African campaign going on.
That wouldn't actually be the worst idea, especially with the new DLC. The Star Wars galaxy could probably be better represented by the feudal system. You could have religion be representative of ideology (you could use a system akin to insular, where the "pope" is 'Sith' but the rest of the government is 'Imperial'. Culture being species ofc. I haven't played the new DLC yet so I can't comment on how the Byzantine mechanics could represent various aspects of the Rebellion and how there could be a split between traditional CK rulership and the Byzantine system representing the wealthy families of the Core and the Grand Moffs.
Tarkin launching a coup with the Death Star would have been a fun idea, ultimate technology vs ultimate dark side with rebels trying to figure out which is worse and how to ensure there is someone left afterwards
Edit: couple to coup cause autocorrect
I think it would come over to what Vader does. He seems loyal to Palpatine and despises the Death Star, but we know he's already tried to conspire against his master (through Starkiller) and he also respects Tarkin at least to an extent. In Rogue One he also seems to be in league with Tarkin in sidelining Krennic, but that may just be him trolling the person responsible for this "technological terror" and not actively trying to consolidate Tarkin's power.
Palpatine was in fact growing frustrated about tarkins growing ambition and power and had vader on board the Death Star to curb feeling of he got out of line. Palpatine said that it was a good thing he died aboard the Death Star as his days were numbered.
The Stormtrooper Corps is ultimately loyal to Palpatine. The legion on the Death Star(while seemingly overkill) are actually there to make sure Tarkin(& his cadre) don't get any ideas. The Death Star Troopers are the counter to this as Tarkin recruited them out of the best Naval Troopers & Marines, gave them specialized training & a distinct uniform (which filtered back to the Fleet) & placed them on board the "ultimate weapon" as a testament to their "elite" status. Thus they were ultimately loyal to Tarkin...
... I guess it would ultimately fall to Vader(like a kid caught between divorcing parents!)
"Summon a hundred more holocrons, an arsenal of superweapons! Nothing will stop me" -Tenebre/Vitiate/Valkorian/The Emperor of the Sith
Maybe the idea of being in control of a new and supposedly unstoppable super weapon would eventually lead to feelings of invincibility, but there's way too many examples (and still being added with each new spin-off) of Tarkin's incompetence as a military strategist so it seems a little bit more on the far-fetched side of possibilities. But maybe that can be blamed on new canon
10:00 truly the most terrifying manifestation of dark side power: becoming France.
The Naboo situation is a little more nuanced than depicted here. It's not that open warfare between worlds in the Republic was allowed. Instead, what we have is a legal dispute which is being ostensibly resolved according to normal legal and bureaucratic channels. The Trade Federation objects to the tariffs Naboo is levying, and refuses to pay. They then institute a blockade in order to protect their legally recognized monopoly rights. They are not supposed to actually initiate hostilities or invade the planet. That would not be legal or allowed. Back on Coruscant, the situation is presented as a literal he said / she said. Amidala alleges atrocities, aggression, and coercion. The Trade Federation denies these allegations. The Senate then votes to convene a committee to study the situation and determine what the truth is before proceeding. This is similar to how a dispute might be resolved in the UN. Meanwhile, of course, we know the Federation has invaded Naboo and will try to have them sign a treaty granting the Federation more rights before the Senate can do anything. All of this is part of Palpatine's plan, because by reducing people's faith in democracy and presenting short cuts he lays the foundation for his Empire, and positions himself perfectly to completely take over once the Civil War gets going. He doesn't know at the time, but this is also part of how Anakin is swayed toward fascism.
It also had the double effect of bolstering the burgeoning secessionist movement. Amidala shows up, asks the Senate for help, and then turns around and goes ‘fine, I’ll do it myself’ when they don’t. And then she goes and _wins_ .Ironically, many planets who wanted out of the republic or argued that they could better take care of themselves and their problems on their own without a central galactic government or it’s bureaucracy saw what she did as the perfect example of what could be possible without republic ‘interference.’
Paradoxically, many of those same worlds would end up in the CIS, fighting for or alongside the same corporations that initiated or supported the invasion of Naboo in the first place.
I'm going to do a bit of "Urm actually" but "absolutism" in itself wasn't something theorized by monarchs or people living at their time, but something theorized later, during the restauration, so after the french revolution. It was used in hindsight to define the way monarchs were ruling before.
The term yes, but the things the term described were the goals of the monarchs. It's a descriptive label. I touched on this with the part about transitions as well.
Thomas Hobbes was not around when Restoration kicked off
Really glad you're putting politics in Star Wars. Unironically exactly what Star Wars needs.
Fascinating. I always thought it was more directly analogous to Napoleon, or more likely the Romans he tried so hard to copy, given the Roman senate's system of electing dictators in times of crisis, with the risk of said dictator then acquiring and cementing more power. When Caesar did it he did so pretty much by force which is a difference, but after naming himself dictator for life and then emperor, then transitioned Rome from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire, with the moffs also perhaps being analogous to the Roman military governors that were appointed to rule over and pacify provinces in the empire.
The prevalance of the idea of divine right in medieval Europe kinda stems from Caesar too, given how he created the Imperial Cult which was the idea that he and some relatives were beings granted divine sanction to rule by the gods, and long after that, a lot of Christian monarchs in Europe had a thing for trying to ape the half-remembered glories of Rome, which also sometimes included a similar 'I'm chosen by god' thing. France was in some ways under its monarchy, but ESPECIALLY in Napoleon's 'republic' after that, trying to LARP as ancient Rome pretty hard given the consuls, imperial eagles, the "I'm an emperor but this is a republic, honest" shtick, and declaring war on almost everyone trying to forge a vast European and Mediterranean empire shenanigans.
Caesar is almost certainly a more direct inspiration, but the quote is a good jumping off point to discuss the later form of western European absolutism and the similarities (and differences) which exist there. And yes, absolutist rulers especially also made parallels with themselves and Roman Emperors- art in Versailles, for example, shows the latter Bourbon monarchs in this period dressed as Roman Emperors. But none of the situations are entirely analogous, and in some cases the similarities are more aesthetic.
@@CoreysDatapad A fair point! It's all got me thinking and reconsidering some things, so thanks for that 😊
Actually the European Monarchist absolutism is far more recent of a development. It was understood throughout the medieval period that rulers powers were not truly absolute, they owed their vessels and their vessels owed them. If one or the other didn't keep their bargain they could be overthrown. Rebellion and pseudo independenve of powerful vassels was common. Divine Right wasn't even a thing as the Church competed with monarchs and monarchs with them. The Holy Roman Emperor and the Pope had a literal war in Italy over their circular power dynamic.
No, absolution and divine right came about when the French Monarchy in the Early modern era was able to get all the powerful Aristocrat's under one roof and keep them distracted over pointless titles. Allowing them to centralize their Kingdom and declaw their vessels. Hell, something similar happened in Russia were Ivan the Terrible tricked the nobility into giving him absolute power so he could purge them.
I'm not sure Lucas was ever well studied enough to really know about Napoleon or have him in his cultural reference point. Nor how Caesar set up the foundation for the transition to empire and then how Augustus eventually did become the first emperor.
His comparisons are much more banal and recent. 50 years at the time of the writing of the movie and only 30 from his first movie. It's very obvious with the idea of Chancellor. However, the ultimate administrative system does come much more to be like the Roman empire of old. Especially the battles with the bureaucracy. Though the bureaucracy was as far as I'm aware not a strong issue in the Roman republic, though I can always be proven incorrect on that should it be true.
Also the idea of divine right I believe was more simply due to the blessing of the church. Regicide was surprisingly common before the early modern period. And as far as I'm aware the first ruler truly divined as king by divine right was the Holy Roman Emperor Charlemenge when he was crowned that by the church. Thus, the divine right was claimed in Europe.
Of course, rulers claiming themselves or rule divine was common well outside and before Europe or Rome. All you simply need to do is look at the mandate of heaven in China or the Pharoahs of Egypt.
@@buddermonger2000
I don't know if Lucas had any interest in Napoleon, but it's very clear the Galactic Republic draws heavily from Rome as inspiration.
The absolutism of the Empire is more akin to late czarist absolutism.
Or Stalinist USSR, Tsarist Russia wasn't competent enough.
A Tsar's power so _absolute_ that he couldn't overrule his ministers from declaring war on Austria-Hungary.
"Tsarist Absolutism".
@@the_Kutonarchhe did not want to overrule them
Nicholas had every power to do so he was just spineless
@@supersuper111 Except that he himself did not want to back down from the standoff , and that it was Germany first then A-H who declared on Russia. But hey, lets do revisionism , its always fun.
Considering that there's a lot of themes the star wars movies the OG 3 touch on especially during the Vietnam war, you could say the empire is a reflection of the US.
6:50 That sounds like the inspiration for the Tarkin Doctrine.
If you want to go back even further with this subject, to the earliest states, I highly recommend the article "Early Mesopotamia: The Presumptive State" by Seth Richardson.
'The concept of the "presumptive state" in early Mesopotamian states (2800-1600 BC) is that these states were claimed powers that they did not necessarily have. They did this by making vague and unfalsifiable claims to power, and by establishing their "voices" as generically valid, whether through legal codes or other large public displays. This process of people coming to believe in something they did not necessarily imagine before led to the gradual emergence of Mesopotamian "state power".'
I would argue that Palpatine was more like a self made dictator akin to Stalin, Caesar and so on rather than like a traditional European monarch. While European monarchs were very powerful, as you said, they were very limited by the aristocracy, church and so on. Whereas, Palpatine's limits seemed almost self made since he chose not to engage in direct rule of the Empire and chose to allow his subordinates to do all the governing for him while he focused mainly on Sith experiments and other weird stuff, much to the chagrin of Vader,
Palpatine was more an Eastern style monarch.
ironically enough ceasar and triumvirate was necessary. stalin and others were not.
@@Kaze-i9z Napoleon was necessary as well for France to survive. Although he shouldn't have declared himself Emperor. That was a big mistake.
@@tk-6967 Napoleon was also necessary for Poland - i am not sure if it was an mistake though.
Palpatine came to power in the same way Hitler did- patience, corruption, becoming chancellor, eroding democracy slowly, using secret police and storm troopers.
Also Stalin was not a dictator, even the CIA understood this but still rolled with it as propaganda.
Oh man, this is one of your best (in my opinion). Loved the inclusion of Weber's state monopoly on violence. As a scholar of nationalism, I can't help but think about the effects that standardization and uniformity the Empire inevitably brought to far-flung systems would have on creating a sense of belonging to a unified polity. Benedict Anderson obviously points to common language and the advent of widespread print and literacy being the flashpoint for the development of national identity in our world, and I suppose there's a potential argument to be made in Star Wars for Basic and Aurebesh playing a similar role, but that's so far back in galactic history I wonder how fleshed out that debate would really be.
I know this is a little off topic, but I don't like the new canon use of the Jedi Temple as the Imperial Palace. There's no way you can possibly argue that Palpatine could use the Jedi temple as his palace without people knowing and understanding why that's significant while also writing the Jedi out of history.
I prefer the idea we saw in Legends - for once not just because I grew up with it - in Legends Palpatine's Palace was a lot like the Death Star - a show of power and wealth that eclipsed anything that came before it. The Imperial Palace in Legends is supposed to eclipse even the largest mountains that existed on Coursacant. I remember the scene from X-wing when Kirtan Loor remarks that they couldn't land a shuttle in the tower because it was too small - but then the pilot explained it was because they were STILL so far away from the thing.
But at the same time - I guess that only works in legends. When would he have built it in the canon timeline? Fair enough.
Hutt space was its own thing seperate from the republic, similar to bothan space. They wre basically independent countries so the empire couldnt enforce its will without an invasion. And while bothan space was small enough for occupation hutt space was not.
The hutt cartel is a different organisation in itself. Its not the government of hutt space (that would be the hutt council), its the combined personal force of jabba, his relatives and his underlings.
While Hutt space was not part of the Republic, the Empire did claim it as part of their territory. Many historically Hutt-ruled systems became full Imperial sectors, while the parts of Hutt space not sectioned off into other sectors were included as part of the Trans-Nebular oversector under Byluir.
The Hutt Council and Hutt cartels are not the same organization, but they are connected. The Cartel*s* (not one cartel, it was not all Jabba and his family) were connected to various Hutt kajidics, which were represented on the Council. A full invasion is only necessary if you're going to be fought, and the types of relationships I'm talking about made that largely avoidable in a way both sides were happy with.
Great video. Would love to see one similar to this one regarding the influence of the Core Worlds and how some of them were able to get away with being a little more vocal in the Senate, like Chandrila or Alderaan, without direct repression until the DS was operational.
Alderaan did not get suppressed. Quite the opposite. It was expanded quite suddenly. Into smithereens.😢
@@shaydowsith348 well yes that’s one way of looking at it lol
Tarkin is the Richelieu of Star Wars, and Palpatine is Louis XIV.
Emperor Frederick II’s absolutism in Sicily and Italy is much closer to the Empire’s conception. Per the Constitutions of Melfi, Frederick II was Lex Animata (Law Incarnate) and his transformational and profoundly influential legislation remains at the very heart of the European continental state. Louis XIV’s absolutist France was still less unified and institutions were only connected to the monarch-not to ruthlessly centralized to each other, the hallmark of 20th century autocratic states. Frederick’s state in Sicily and eventually most of Italy was closer to the latter, marking just how much European constitutional history it underwrites.
Lovely video. Keep up the great work!
Would like to see you maybe attempt a political approach on the Galactic Triumvirate or the Federation, maybe even how politically possible was the splintering of the empire after Endor into warlord holds!
Great video Corey, i do love your historical/policy videos.
There are realy good, Thank You!
I know I've said it a bunch, but I really love these videos. They're a great intersection of my interests.
The implementation of power via Palpatine's legitimacy goes a long way to explaining the dysfunctional nature of the Imperial Remnants in both Cannon and Legends. Without the unifying figurehead, there is simply no legal basis for one Moff to be in charge of another, and so you get Warlords and Pretender Empires.
"my allegiance is to the Republic, to DEMOCRACY"
This quote turned out more useful than George Lucas could have possibly imagined..
Worshipping democracy is cringe. Not everyone should vote.
@@generalj216 "Worshiping democracy?"
You, my good General, are part of the problem
A republic is not the same as democracy. A pure democracy is both unwieldy, as well as potentially undesired. Majority rule is mob rule. Protection of minorities and enforcement of contracts are important functions of government.
Corruption enters all systems over time, as greedy humans seek to game the system. You could argue that no one system or government should last forever unchanged and unexamined. I think we are currently at the turning of an age, and whether existing systems and governments will endure will be decided by how well they can adapt. I see a lot of refusal to adapt from the existing governments, which makes me think we are in for a harsh paradigm shift.
@@generalj216everyone should vote
interesting video, would you also consider doing a analysis on the parallels between Carl Schmitts writings on law and politics and the rise of the empire
0:45: The first translation shows why "Woolseyism" is necessary. Hence, the second translation.
If I have a say on absolutism, it's that it's better off closed, private, subtle, and abstract, like a shadow government. A weird example would be how Mycroft Holmes, Sherlock's brilliant but lazy brother, is depicted in the non-Doyle tale "The Case of Death and Honey", where his passing away post-WW1 ensures the beginning of the fall of the British Empire all the way to the Cold War... because his much overlooked consultancies (like the Bruce-Partington plans, once stolen blueprints for what will essentially be the submarines of the later World Wars) and political connections MAINTAINED said empire, for he was THE EMPIRE. *Not the royal family, nor Parliament, but him, whose head HAS the British government: not the ballot and hustings nonsense, but the business of the thing, for no one else knows how the colonial Afghanistan troop movements influence even the later Troubles in Ireland.*
Another great video corey@
i really enjoy these recent videos!
I always saw the Empire as a mixture of 20th Century nations like Mustache man's Germany and the Soviet Union combined with modern Enlightened Absolutism. ( With Palpatine's r*cial caste of Humans>Near humans>non-humans and the centralized Corporate guilds of Fascist Corporatism) Note: Corporatism itself is older than Fascism and older versions of far more Decentralized.
And I know some may think the Rebel alliance as been compared to the Vietcong, but as I think about it. It seems more analogous to the 13 colonies rebeling against the English parliament and crown.
I believe George Lucas himself stated that the films are supposed to be inspired by the Vietnam War.
Meaning the Rebels are supposed to be like the North Vietnamese and the Empire, the United States of America.
A lot of sort of fringe movies from the 60s and 70s were inspired by Vietnam and a distrust of the US government if I remember right.
@@jaykemp2861 I remember reading somewhere that the rebels were more akin to the 13 colonies and that if they really were the Vietcong, they would’ve have won by waiting for the Imperial civilian population to grow distrustful of their government and tired of the war and protest, but the rebels beat the Empire militarily.
Thanks for discussing political thought and philosophy into this Star Wars video.
A Common History video? On Corey’s Star Wars Lore Channel? What is this? A crossover episode!
In all seriousness, I love this content! I hope we get heaps more of it. No one else is doing this kind of thing on RUclips it seems.
Corey I would love to see your real world comparisons and analysis published in some form. Even if it's just a compiled set of scripts, I think there's real value in what you've done beyond just fun Star Wars videos.
I honestly never heard that quote attributed to Loius before, but even if it is apocryphal it fits him so well. He had such a habit of saying/doing the worst thing at the worst time.
I honestly didn't expect a tie-in to history like that, but I'm all for it. I'd love to get more history from Corey.
Maybe the idea of being in control of a new and supposedly unstoppable super weapon would eventually lead to feelings of invincibility, but there's way too many examples (and still being added with each new spin-off) of Tarkin's incompetence as a military strategist so it seems a little bit more on the far-fetched side of possibilities. But maybe that can be blamed on new canon
I studied Louis XIV because his reign was interesting so I certainly found this comparison interesting since I love Star Wars. Thanks!
Loving these political science videos because I studied that in college
I find it funny that Louis the 11th would've said that since I think that would've been during the hundred years war, when he controlled less of France than Britain did.
Cheer~~~the acceptance of or belief in absolute principles in political, philosophical, ethical, or theological matters.😊
A correction, the Imperial Palace was built into and expanded upon the Presidential Palace, not the Jedi Temple as symbolically Palpatine wanted his Palace to be the largest single structure on the planet, dwarfing the former Jedi Temple and Senate.
The Jedi temple joke was about canon, where the palace was built on the Jedi Temple.
That's in legends, in canon it was the Jedi Temple
@@CoreysDatapadHonestly it makes more sense. Wasn't the Jedi temple built atop a Sith temple to suppress its power? That fact itself may not be Canon, so either way...
What else do you do with the Jedi temple and all of the archives? It has the infrastructure and the encryption systems, the vaults, and all kinds of things if you're a maniacal space warlock-emperor with a Fascist Fashion obsession with stolen art and artifacts. The Jedi temple is a great place to make a great Space British Museum.
Another possible and practical reason for it is well... Imagine all of the pain, fear, and terror which would linger around the place. The passion, anger, and hatred must be for a Sith, equivalent to starting your mornings with eggs in a blender.
I just have to laugh with the image
Were the empire/republic aware of any nation states out beyond their own borders? And if so was there any type of ambassadorial exchange?
I wouldn't call them nation-states but Yeah. Hutt Space was never imperial/republican. Sort of the same thing with Mandalore and the Mandalorians who resisted imperial rule.
Several neutral independent planets appear in the Clone Wars series and there are emissaries of both the Republic and the Seperatists.
Palpatine knew about the Chiss government in the unknown regions.
Kamino before the clone wars was completely independent.
A few examples
The Hapes Consortium from Legends springs to mind. It was a fully sovereign state with a monarchy that the Empire allowed to do its own thing. Kinda like Switzerland or Sweden during WW2. There was also the Corporate Sector Authority which had a lot of autonomy, and Hutt Space
@@ChaoMung-t9uI wanna see a full breakdown on Hutts and Hutt politics. They are depicted as an organized crime gang but is there a recognized Hutt state? Are they a vassal who the Empire is allowed to enter as they please?
The chiss
Love, love, LOVE these kinds of videos!!
The Story of Star Wars always was tied to the real world.
Really cool historical excursion here! And the sun king comparison is so amazing because I remember making a palatine meme out of him on a worksheet in 8th class when we learned about him!!!
DER STAAT BIN ICH! ICH BIN DER SENAT! Seemed really similar to me in German even as an 8th grader.
When looking at the goals of absolutism and fascism one could easily make the claim that fascism is just neo-absolutism.
The ultimate goal of both is to establish a supreme state. This is why the empire can mirror both so well without being explicit about either, which if intentional was a very clever play from george lucas.
I would argue that any government at all tends to want more power to establish its goals, making every government desire absolutism as its end goal. The only way to stop that is to hamstring your own government, as with a constitution. But our current day leaders hate and often ignore the constitution, which shows that even that isn't enough. The people must hold its government accountable, but most aren't interested, and some are even bribed to want more government power.
I guess Palpatine really *is* the Senate
Wise in episode 7 the first order turns on the sith after supreme leaders death and Hukes or another general secures control and begins purging any force usesers
It hurts
The Greeks phylodophers had many books about tirany and that can be born in any political system and most of The tine The tirany can come from inside goverment institutions
Nahnah Versaille ha dtoo look cool big and expanisve, but that wasn't themain function. The function was to take noble and feudal lrod and have them be here, under watch. Close to the king court. So they couldn't plot in their fiefdom.
I don't believe I claimed looking impressive was the *main* or only function of Versailles in an institutional sense, but it is the point of making it *look* as impressive as it does. These were all mutually and self-reinforcing factors. I also discussed the point of the court being there (which is not the same as all the dukes and whatever other lords live there), and the institutional importance of that centralization in the video.
🤔. . . Okay, so without using the Force, how does Sheev Palpatine compare to Kazuya Souma of _How a Realist Hero Rebuilt the Kingdom_ ? They’re both absolutists in their own way, right?
Conclusion: George Lucas was a big nerd.
"What'ya know?"
Have you checked out the new (2024) Disney EU book "The Rise and Fall of the Galactic Empire"? It's an in-universe history book about the Empire that would be right up your alley.
So that’s why the empire always seemed to be the good guys…it’s because they were the good guys from the start!
The Hutts were never incorporated into the Empire in the legends lore. Is this some new Disney retcon?
It is Legends. There were significant portions of Hutt space incorporated into the Empire and put under control of Moffs. As a whole, Hutt space was also under Byluir's Trans-Nebular oversector.
@@CoreysDatapad interesting never encountered that in books and media. But a good case of de jure not de facto
@@ChaoMung-t9u There were also a couple of regions that, while not part of traditional Hutt Space, were within Hutt Space's general sphere of influence that the Empire reorganized into Imperial sectors like the Baxel sector or removed Hutt influence like in the Kastolar sector or on the planet Gyndine.
My guess is that in essence, for the Hutts it was like the Kingdom of Egypt being a protectorate of the British Empire. In fact in WW2 Egypt was technically 'neutral' in the conflict, even with the North African campaign going on.
2:07 based
Star Wars CK3 mod incoming
That wouldn't actually be the worst idea, especially with the new DLC.
The Star Wars galaxy could probably be better represented by the feudal system.
You could have religion be representative of ideology (you could use a system akin to insular, where the "pope" is 'Sith' but the rest of the government is 'Imperial'. Culture being species ofc.
I haven't played the new DLC yet so I can't comment on how the Byzantine mechanics could represent various aspects of the Rebellion and how there could be a split between traditional CK rulership and the Byzantine system representing the wealthy families of the Core and the Grand Moffs.
I am Grand Admiral Thrawn, Warlord of the Empire, servant of the Emperor.
Wasn't aware that Thrawn was a Warlord as well. Good to know.
Not.
Yet.
God or Ruler
Ruler
Party
State
Is the general formula. I’d toss in religious leaders or groups. But there position varies.
Queen Elizabeth II reigned way longer than the *Sun King*.
She reigned 70 years, Louis XIV reigned 72.
There has to be a better way to do this