Darth Vader: Alignment

[Felix]

This discussion began as a talk about the alignment of Harry Potter characters. Cameron suggests that Voldemort is CE because he kills people who displease him. I point out that Darth Vader, someone I thought clearly to be Lawful Evil, kills people who displease him all the time. To my suprise, Cameron retorts that Vader is not Lawful.

Here's the conversation to this point:



Cameron

He (Lord Voldemort) is practically classic CE, to be honest, killing people that displease him, doing what he likes without regard for Good or Evil, etc.​

Felix

"He's as clumsy as he is stupid."
...
"Ah, Lord Vader, the fleet has moved out of lightspeed and we're preparing to---aaagh!"
"You have failed me for the last time Admiral."

"Apology accepted, Captain Needa."

"If this is a Conuslar's ship then where is the Ambassador?"

"He's no good to me dead."
"He will not be permanently damaged."
...
"What if he doesn't survive? He's worth a lot to me."
"The empire will compensate you, if he dies."

"You do not know the power of the Dark Side. I must obey my master."

"We can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy!"​

Killing people that displease you is not monopolized by Chaotic Evil.​

Cameron

Vader is Anakin, and Anakin was Chaotic as all heck. And a whinger to boot. He is only kept in line by Palpatine's Dark Side mastery. Hence the "You do not know the power of the Dark Side. I must obey my master." quote.​

Felix

There was a reason all those quotes were from the first Star Wars movies. Lord Darth Vader was Lawful, and no amount of hack George "Morality Revising Greedo-Shoots-First" Lucas should change that.​

Cameron

Even before the second trilogy came out, Vader was portrayed as having violated his Jedi creed, and that it was his impatience and impetuousness that got him nailed by Palpy. He was basically a Chaotic person in a Lawful tradition and that was why he fell (it was less a Good vs Evil thing, more of a Law vs Chaos thing).​

Felix

And betrayal is always and everywhere a Chaotic trait? So what have all those Baatezu been doing all this time schemeing and betraying each other for?

Exactly what evidence from the first three movies are you thinking about here?

Admiting the prequils, you allow that Ani was turned from Good to Evil, but can't accept a shift from Chaotic to Lawful? Uh, why?​

Cameron

Impatience and impetuousness are Chaotic traits, not betrayal. Betrayal without regret is Evil.

Didn't Yoda remind Kenobi about it when they were discussing Luke's training?

The last paragraph makes no sense. Please reiterate in a different manner.​

------

I hope that catches you all up.

To answer Cameron, you requested I clarify this paragraph:

Admiting the prequils, you allow that Ani was turned from Good to Evil, but can't accept a shift from Chaotic to Lawful? Uh, why?​

I don't disagree that Anikin was Good or that his alignment was twisted to Evil by Palpatine. I also agree that he was capricious as a child and a young man. However, Darth Vader's actions in Star Wars Episodes IV to VI show, I believe, very lawful behavior. So if you allow that it is possible that Palpatine perverts Anikin from Good to Evil, would you not also allow the possibility that his alignment may also have changed to Lawful?

Does this clarify my question?

I used Darth Vader to show that killing subordinates may easily be done by Lawful Evil characters, so my point isn't concerned about what the Ani of Episodes I to III was like (disregarding the moral revisionist tendancies of George Lucas).

So, folks: Darth Vader. The original trilogy. He's Evil. Is he Lawful?

 

[I'm A Banana]

He's trying to RULE the galaxy. To impose the will of the Sith, as an organization, upon all of known space.

I think he stopped being Chaotic or even Neutral by the time Padme was killed. He lost himself, and lived only for his master, and his dark side...he lived to serve. Subservience to a higher authority. Talk of high and low, ruling, being the head of organizations...all very lawful.

When Luke brought him back from Evil, he brought him back from Law, too. He was a one-man uprising, suddenly very aware of his personal needs and obligations, of his individual wants and desires.

But the original saga, at least, is strongly anti-authoritarian in tone, and so is quite pro-Chaos itself.

 

[DM-Rocco]

I think he is Neutral evil or chaotic evil. He does not care for the law. I think he was chaotic evil during the revenge of the sith but moved to neutral evil during the whole of the last trilogy.

 

[LoneWolf23]

Definetly. He's essentially the Emperor's Mailed Fist. He acts to enforce Palpatine's will, and to fell his enemies. Note that he only kills when it serves the Empire... ...And yes, that includes his random killing of underlings. Removal of worthless underlings, allowing better ones to take their place, can only benefit the Empire.

 

[Vigilance]

I think he's lawful, because he clearly is comfortable existing in a hierarchy.

He has people below him, and people above him and he takes orders (such as his obvious deference to Tarkin in the first film).

I also think his power plays WITHIN that organization (trying to off the Emperor and take his place) are consistent with my understanding of a LE alignment.

Also, turning to the first trilogy, if you listen to what the adult Anakin says, it seems consistent with this. He thinks the Senate is too noisy, too inefficient, too corrupt.

He thinks one man, a powerful man, should have all the authority to govern.

Again, this seems perfectly Lawful to me. The fact that he thinks that the most powerful man should rule, and rule with absolute ruthlessness, is where the evil comes in.

CHuck

 

[Umbran]

The Dark Side, in general, is not lawful. It is quite explicitly about giving into emotion, letting go of constraint.

Don't confuse the alignment of the Empire with the alignment of those at the helm - the Empire is lawful, but Palpatine and Vader are above the law.

 

[Thurbane]

I think his allegiance to the Emperor, desire for universal order, and willingness to use any force he deems necessary to achieve his goals all point to Lawful Evil.

 

[Felix]

The Dark Side, in general, is not lawful. It is quite explicitly about giving into emotion, letting go of constraint.

Don't confuse the alignment of the Empire with the alignment of those at the helm - the Empire is lawful, but Palpatine and Vader are above the law.

Can Lawful people not put themselves above the Law?

Also:

Together we can end this destructive conflict... bring order to the galaxy... rule the galaxy as father and son!

Sounds lawful to me. *shrug*

 

[Doug McCrae]

Anakin in Episode III becomes textbook lawful evil by the end of the film. Not so sure about Vader in Ep IV-VI though. Think his alignment is 'pulp villain'.

 

[Thurbane]

In some ways I think the Sith/Jedi divide is as much about Law and Chaos as it is about Good and Evil...