I also don’t see how a story, that is about a politician/Sith Lord bringing down a democracy through manipulation is more similar to the OT, than the story of a group of rebels fighting an Empire, led by a former Jedi student, who betrayed his master, and destroyed the Jedi order. I think you are being very selective in what you focus on in the PT, namely a few delibirate similarities between Luke and Anakin (although I don’t remember Luke slaughtering an entire village), whilst ignoring the ton of similarities that exist between the story, plot, and the settings of the OT, and PT.
I mean you can be selective anyway you want. Both the OT and the PT are stories about young men from desert worlds coming of age, becoming Jedi, and choosing either light or dark with the balance of the galaxy at stake (with the outcomes being opposite, and the factions inverted). The story being about a “politician/Sith Lord bringing down a democracy through manipulation” is a fair bit inaccurate, considering it’s subtext at best in the first two thirds of the trilogy. Hmm, interesting, maybe we shouldn’t be claiming what an entire trilogy is about when we’ve only seen two thirds of it?
Regardless, I’m not sure what this has to do with the supposed topic at hand.
Well, I wouldn’t consider it subtext, given that Palpatine, and Sidious are obviously the same person, and Palpatine uses the first crisis to have himself elected Chancellor, and uses the second crisis to give himself emergency powers to create an army, that he will use in a conflict, that we learn by the end of AOTC, he himself has started, whilst controlling both sides. Darth Sidious is obviously set up as the main villain from the start, and so his machinations are integral to the plot, and thus hardly subtext. The factions also aren’t inverted, as there are still only two Sith in the OT, whilst the Jedi have mostly been taken out of the equation, such that the Jedi vs Sith conflict of the PT, has been largely replaced by Empire vs rebels with the Jedi vs Sith conflict reduced to a personal conflict between a father and a son. Anyway, as I said, this is probably a debate for a different thread.