Star Wars: Now You Will Experience the Full Power of Disney

[Lord Varys]

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

"Our allegiance is to the Senate, not to its leader, who has managed to stay in office long after his term has expired" strongly suggests the Senate had the power to remove him from a technical/legal standpoint.

That is actually a reference to the otherwise cut fact that Palpatine managed to stay in office after his two terms were over (like the President of the US, the Supreme Chancellor is - or was supposed to be - only reelected once, with a term lasting only four years). This was to be part of the discussion between Anakin and Padmé during their arrival on Naboo in AOTC when Anakin mentions that Padmé's people liked her so much that they wanted to change the constitution so she could continue to be queen. She declined. But Palpatine accepted ... or rather: he and his buddies found some kind of loophole so he could stay in office.

Anakin also references this in ROTS when he counters the quote you gave with: 'The Senate demanded that he stay longer.'

One assumes that the term limit of the Supreme Chancellor is either not part of what counts for a constitution in the Galactic Republic - kind of a more easily changed law regulating the workings of the Senate - or they actually changed the Constitution for Palpatine. Both would most likely be perfectly legal, one imagines.

[You have to keep in mind that the Galactic Senate is both the legislative and executive branch of the United Nations-like government of the Galactic Republic (which seems to have very little right to interfere into the internal matters of its members states). The Supreme Chancellor acts as the Senate's chairman, but he doesn't seem to run a proper government independent of the Senate and its many committees ... that only started under Palpatine when he established his shadow/rival governmental structures which eventually developed into the Reginonal Governor/Moff/Grand Moff system of the Empire. In that sense, a term limit for the Chancellor isn't as important as it is in a system where the President runs the government.]

This all happened prior to the Clone Wars and has nothing to do with the Emergency Powers. Although, of course, those powers pretty much ensure that he is never removed from office while he has them - which, by the Senate's own decision, is as long as he, Palpatine, wants them. Nobody else has the legal right to interfere with that. Palpatine only promised he would return them once the crisis was over - which means he would never have to. And if it also fell to him to define when the crisis was over the Senate might never even have the right to ask that he return the powers since the crisis wasn't over.

But basically, my take on the creation of the Empire is that the Republic elites and the Senate had enough of their weirdo democratic system and exchanged it for the authoritarian system of the Galactic Empire. And they were quite happy with that.

Palpatine needed underhanded means and evil conspiracies to destroy the Jedi - who definitely had the power to prevent the Senate from introducing authoritarian rule as Mace Windu demonstrates - but not to turn the Republic into the Empire. That the Senate basically gave him for free.

[Kalbear]

The line "this is how democracy dies - to thunderous applause" is still one of the best lines in star wars 

[DMC]

6 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

This all happened prior to the Clone Wars and has nothing to do with the Emergency Powers. Although, of course, those powers pretty much ensure that he is never removed from office while he has them - which, by the Senate's own decision, is as long as he, Palpatine, wants them. Nobody else has the legal right to interfere with that. Palpatine only promised he would return them once the crisis was over - which means he would never have to. And if it also fell to him to define when the crisis was over the Senate might never even have the right to ask that he return the powers since the crisis wasn't over.

These are all assumptions if we're just basing it on the films.  We have no idea if Palpatine's term expired prior to the Clone Wars or during it.  There is no indication that the emergency powers "ensure that he is never removed from office while he has them" or as long as he wants them -- and the quote I provided, again, strongly suggests just the opposite.  Indeed the fact Palpatine "managed" to stay in power long after his term expired clearly indicates the Senate does have the power - in terms of a codified mechanism - to remove him/cease granting him these emergencies powers, they just lack the political will to do so.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

These are all assumptions if we're just basing it on the films.

It is based on the script of AOTC, cut dialogue, as I said.

But even if you want to ignore it ... it strikes one as rather weird that the Senate's opinion still mattered and Palpatine had still to ask them whether they wanted him to remain in office or not, aber he had received the emergency powers and was charged with fighting the Clone Wars on behalf of the Republic.

The point of those emergency powers is that he can effectively rule as a dictator.

Also in light of the fact that there is a Clone Wars show we would likely have heard something about Palpatine's term ending in the middle of the war if that's what happened - sure enough, just an indication that this didn't happen then, but still something.

But again - that's clearly an opaque reference to the cut plot point from AOTC. The intention was to present Padmé as a dutiful politician who steps down once her terms are over not giving in to or using the sway of public opinion to remain in power ... while Palpatine was to be seen as her opposite in that regard.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Kalibuster said:

The line "this is how democracy dies - to thunderous applause" is still one of the best lines in star wars 

Yeah, that's pretty good. And Lucas is kind of prophetic there. One really wonders who is going to be the US President equivalent to Finis Valorum.

[Kalbear]

8 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Yeah, that's pretty good. And Lucas is kind of prophetic there. One really wonders who is going to be the US President equivalent to Finis Valorum.

To be fair that is how democracies often die - willingly and happily giving their rights and authority away. 

[DMC]

17 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

It is based on the script of AOTC, cut dialogue, as I said.

You said that the cut dialogue said Palpatine stayed on after his second term, or eighth year, expired.  That doesn't necessarily mean that happened before the Clone Wars (for example, he could have served out much of Valorum's term and then served his own eight years for all we know), or does it specify that too?  Regardless, that's only one of the about half dozen assumptions you're making.

23 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

it strikes one as rather weird that the Senate's opinion still mattered and Palpatine had still to ask them whether they wanted him to remain in office or not, aber he had received the emergency powers and was charged with fighting the Clone Wars on behalf of the Republic.

The point of those emergency powers is that he can effectively rule as a dictator.

Um, no.  The inherent implication of referring to something as "emergency" powers is that they're contingent, temporary, and there's a mechanism for them to be rescinded.

 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

You said that the cut dialogue said Palpatine stayed on after his second term, or eighth year, expired.  That doesn't necessarily mean that happened before the Clone Wars (for example, he could have served out much of Valorum's term and then served his own eight years for all we know), or does it specify that too?  Regardless, that's only one of the about half dozen assumptions you're making.

It does mean just that, since the dialogue I talk about was cut from AOTC. And to be clear - the term length stuff is EU stuff, the script of AOTC only mentions that Padmé didn't continue after her terms were over while Palpatine did. Before the Clone Wars began.

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Um, no.  The inherent implication of referring to something as "emergency" powers is that they're contingent, temporary, and there's a mechanism for them to be rescinded.

I agree technically ... but Palpatine saying that he will return those powers once the crisis is over means it is his decision to do that, not the Senate's or somebody else's. Or at least it is the implication the movie is giving. It doesn't indicate that there is a fixed date for the end of the emergency powers nor that the Senate can just take them away with a majority vote or some other measure.

Granted, we also have no idea what 'emergency powers' mean in context and how they differ from the regular powers of the Chancellor. But then - this is Star Wars we are talking about, and not some subtle and complex political drama.

[DMC]

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

but Palpatine saying that he will return those powers once the crisis is over means it is his decision to do that, not the Senate's or somebody else's. Or at least it is the implication the movie is giving.

It really isn't.  Palpatine saying he will return the powers when the crisis is over is necessarily what any person in his position would say.  Like, it's literally anyone's justification for employing emergency powers or staying in power therein.  That doesn't suggest in any way the Senate can't rescind such powers.

[sologdin]

i love this thread now.  bravo.

[Lord Varys]

10 hours ago, DMC said:

It really isn't.  Palpatine saying he will return the powers when the crisis is over is necessarily what any person in his position would say.  Like, it's literally anyone's justification for employing emergency powers or staying in power therein.  That doesn't suggest in any way the Senate can't rescind such powers.

That seems to be exclusively your interpretation. And while I agree that a sane and normally operating political body would not give Palpatine blank check-like emergency powers ... the implication the movie as such gives is that exactly that happens. The movie doesn't establish that the Senate can demand that Palpatine return the powers.

Lucas could have easily have included a line like 'The powers you give me the Senate will take back once this crisis has abated.' But that's not the line in the movie, the movie uses a line where Palpatine is the active part, it falls to him to make the promise that he will return the powers, indicating it is his choice to do that, not the Senate's to demand that he return them.

And that fits very well with the cut scenes from ROTS where the Delegation of the 2000 just ask Palpatine to honor his earlier promise. They do not demand that he step down.

[DMC]

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That seems to be exclusively your interpretation.

That's not my interpretation, perhaps I'm being unclear.  Claiming you will return the powers once the crisis is over is effectively a prerequisite for holding/using "emergency" powers.  If the crisis is already over, then there's no emergency to justify said powers.  Therefore, Palpatine promising he will return the powers when the crisis is over is not an indication of anything.

Also, if we're counting Clone Wars the cartoon, IIRC there are a number of episodes where Palpatine justifying he still needs the emergency powers for this reason or that is touched upon.  The simple fact he needs to justify their continued use/remaining in power contradicts any notion that it's all up to him.

13 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Lucas could have easily have included a line like 'The powers you give me the Senate will take back once this crisis has abated.'

The Obi-Wan line - as well as Anakin's response - are lines he included that clearly indicate the emergency powers Palpatine were granted do not effectively make him a dictator.  If they did, then Padme would have complained about "how democracy dies" a whole hell of a lot earlier.

[sologdin]

seems to be exclusively your interpretation

this applies to everything any of us have said about these texts.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

How quaint.

 

[Heartofice]

5 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

How quaint.

 

Wait.. the movie opened in May in the US but didn't open in London till after Christmas?! What kind of cruelty is that?

[Rhom]

20 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Wait.. the movie opened in May in the US but didn't open in London till after Christmas?! What kind of cruelty is that?

Back then it took that long to ship it across the open seas!

[Myrddin]

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Wait.. the movie opened in May in the US but didn't open in London till after Christmas?! What kind of cruelty is that?

I was living in Puerto Rico when Empire came out, so we got the movie 6+ months later than the States. I was 8 or so so the wait was crazy (I remember a Time magazine "preview" issue, so that had to tide me over).

My best friend's dad took a trip back to the States and saw it first. He came back and said Vader was Luke's father. We didn't believe him though. He was still an ass, but 8 year old me thought there was no way Vader was Luke's father.

Even after I saw it, I assumed Vader was lying because he was such an evil person. TBH I don't think I really believed it until RotJ. Playground discussion boards were divided on the topic. 

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

That was not common as the big blockbuster, "release this everywhere all at once" scheme was being adopted. Jaws had a similarly staggered release. 

[Maltaran]

Even the Phantom Menace had six weeks between US and UK release dates

[RumHam]

This is interesting, I guess:

 

Quote

 

Director of photography Adriano Goldman revealed to a Brazilian news outlet that the upcoming Cassian Andor series at Disney+ series was “supposed” to run five seasons, but will now have “three [seasons], maybe.”

The series I worked on was supposed to be five seasons long, but I think it’s not happening. It will have three [seasons], maybe.