What would Darth Vader have been like as a ruler, if he had overthrown emperor palpatine and became the emperor/ruler of the galaxy himself??

Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker, did want to be the ruler of the galaxy himself. Being a Sith Lord, the evil sith have a habit/tradition of overthrowing and killing their sith masters and taking their place, like a power struggle amongst each other. The sith are like a real group of backstabbers.

So, it's very safe to assume, very implied, if not explicitly told to the audience enough, during the films (episodes 3 and 5), that anakin wanted to overthrow Palpatine and become the galactic Emperor himself...

Episode 3-"I am more powerful than the Chancellor, I can overthrow him! And together you and I can rule the galaxy, make things the way we want them to be"! He asks his wife padme amidala to rule the galaxy with him by his side. He is a power hungry man. He even said, "My new empire".

Episode 5, "Luke, you can destroy the Emperor, he has forseen this, it is your destiny. Join me and together we can rule the galaxy as father and son"!

The entire plot of Episode 5 revolved around darth vader trying to lure luke skywalker into a trap so that he could recruit luke into becoming his new sith lord apprentice, (there can only be 2 sith lords at a time-the Rule of Two, mentioned by Yoda in episode 1), and that anakin could be the Emperor of the galaxy with luke as his apprentice and new Darth, the Sith ruling the galaxy, and overthrow Darth Sidious, his master.

Now, me, I aint really a fan of hypotheticals and what if scenarios in fiction, just for the sake of it, but when it pertains to the story and is relevant, I really am, and I enjoy speculating on what if scenarios. What kind of ruler would darth vader have been, if he succeeded and ovethrew Palpatine??

The first thing I am very curious about is what he meant by " we rule the galaxy together", what anakin had told his wife and his son. Did he mean rule as equals, ie, a diummvarate, where 2 people share absolute and equal power together, kind of like 2 dictators sharing the same power together over their nation, or, did he mean having Padme or Luke having high positions of authority, maybe even like a second-in command? What kind of role in government did he want to give his family?

More importantly, how would he have been as a dictator? Darth Vader was no fan of the Death Star. I believe that if he was the emperor, he would not have the death star. He wasn't all that impressed of the "technological terror", and that the ability to destroy planets was insignifcant next to the power of the force, he once said. So, in my opinion, he would have been an enlightened despot, a benevolent dictator, a more-or less harmless ruler that, his rule would not affect the trillions-quadrillions of galactic citizens and average joes in the least bit.

I'm actually suprised why padme didn't join him. OK, i know i sound crazy defending an evil famous villian-but really? The death star, the main reason that the galactic empire was so evil, was only because of palpatine being in charge, as the ruler. With Anakin as the ruler, with his own ideas, no death star.

I thought of it. If Luke joined darth vader and they ruled the galaxy together, without the death star, why would that be so bad?? Would the rebels still accept them?

More importantly, this is a page about speculation. We are just fans speculating on hypotheticals here. There may have been other reasons that darth vader/and or the galactic empire/sith rule of the galaxy would be evil. The death star plans was from episode 2, with the genosians, and  the idea may have been even earlier than that, during episode 1 TPM, I think the expanded universe says. It was a recent sith weapon...

Mace windu said that "the opression of the sith will never return" and darth sidious said that "once more the sith will rule the galaxy", those two lines of dialogue implied that the Sith Lords ruled the galaxy in the past as evil, opressive, dictators and tyrants, long before they ever had the death star. The death star may just be another evil thing that the sith do, among others, to opress the galaxy. What else did they do that made them evil dictators, other than the death star?? Remember, Revenge of the sith means revenge against the jedi destroying their galactic sith empire 1000 milllenia ago (they ruled fractions of the galaxy only, not an entire galactic empire-hence the first galactic empire, but they still ruled significant amounts). 

The point is, that if Darth Vader was the Emperor, he would have done other evil stuff, like the ancient olden days sith empires did, without the death stars. He seemed very intolerant of dissent among imperial officers too, so that would be a hint to his nature as the galactic emperor. 

Feel free to speculate on how Darth Vader would have been like as a ruler if he became the Sith Emperor of the galaxy, with either Luke or Padme at his side, if he ever did succeeded and overthrow Emperor Palpatine!!!!

He would probably abolish sand and ride on a giant flea on national holidays.

Other than that, he would be a pretty boring ruler, methinks.

Vader needed Luke to rule, because most people wouldn't be too fond of having a Big-Black Cape-Wearing-Part Human-Part Robot-Dude With a Creepy Breathing Apparatus being in charge of the Empire.  Luke would have been the pretty face that everybody would have been OK with, but while secretly being evil with Vader as the puppet master. 

This is also why Vader never was able to overthrow the Emperor himself, because he knew that the people would not get behind him at all.

Wexter said:

He would probably abolish sand and ride on a giant flea on national holidays.

 

Other than that, he would be a pretty boring ruler, methinks.

I believe that Darth Vader would not have used the death stars, any of them.... Who agrees with my observation??

The main reason that the Rebellion Alliance fought to overthrow the Galactic Sith Empire was because of the death stars. Without the death stars, what would darth vader do that would make him an evil dictator and tyrant??

Maybe he would've been a guy who opposed all dissenters-like imperial officers, soldiers, and admirals, that didn't agree with his decisions as the galactic emperor?? Hmm. Maybe he might've just had done purges, similar to the purges that Joseph Stalin did during the Soviet Union Russia in the early-mid 1900s.....

Star wars's awesomeness comes a lot from and through it's subtley. That's is the charm of those movies. They don't explicity show you why the bad guys are evil and bad;it's is just implied and you got to infer things that happen behind the scenes, especially by using the EU (the expanded universe...

Here's is one thing that I don't understand. Did Luke Skywalker refuse to join Darth Vader for religious/spiritual/philosophical reasons, or for other reasons???

Tyrphanax said:

Father Skywalker said:

Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker, did want to be the ruler of the galaxy himself. Being a Sith Lord, the evil sith have a habit/tradition of overthrowing and killing their sith masters and taking their place, like a power struggle amongst each other. The sith are like a real group of backstabbers.

Instantly stuck in my head.

I always like to see it as the Empire being good and holding the galaxy together, like the Republic did, and the Rebels being evil terrorists intent on disrupting the legitimate rule of the Empire in order to throw the galaxy into chaos and anarchy.

Good point, no, nah, great point you got there!!!!!!

Why was the Galactic Empire so evil and bad??? Was it worth it to start a galactic civil war in which millions of people will die in, just to get revenge at darth sidious for overthrowing/destroying the Galactic Republic and restoring democracy?? No. Wow, I know I sound like a crazy fool by saying that, but really, in the context of this situation and story, it makes perfect sense.....

The rebels really do seem like terrorists to me.... I mean, sure, don't let Darth Sidious (emperor palpatine) and Darth Vader's ugly, scary, black costumes and the physically attractive Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher and Mark Hamill's and Billy Dee William's faces fool you; they seemed kinda messed up too, they had a "war is glorious attitude"... They showed no remorse, regret, or even a hint or a tint of sadness for the stormtroopers and imperials that they killed, they said "great shot kid that was one in a million" and YEHAWW cowboy style when millions of people where annihilated and destroyed in a fiery explosion on the two Death Stars.

Besides, Obi-Wan Kenobi and Yoda wanted Luke Skywalker to kill his father Darth Vader, not because of the death star or imperial dicatorship and tyranny, but for religious reasons-he was a dark lord of the Sith who used the Darkside of the Force..... They were religious fanatics bent on waging a war on different beleifs and philosophical views on the Force..... Correct me if I am wrong on this point......

There are 2 types of dictatorships in this world-benevolent dictatorships/enlightened depotism, and evil, cruel, genocidal, mass-murdering dictators....... Palpatine and anakin were type A, until the rebels rebelled against them and they did evil atrocities in retaliation; just think about it!!!!

The death of the lars family, the destruction of alderaan, never would have happened without the existence of the rebellion alliance..... I don't care if one side did evil things, so did the other side, waging a war and taking people's families away from them......Darth Vader just wanted to end the destructive conflict...Grey morality here, both sides are evil, the rebels are waging an unjust revenge war, the imperials commit evil atrocities in retaliation, all just like game of thrones.......

Tyrphanax said:

Well the "Empire-as-Good" theory is just for fun or playing devil's advocate.

Star Wars as it stands alone is a very black-and-white film (which is proven in the opening scenes of Star Wars by the black contrast of the imposing, inhuman, armoured, obviously-evil Darth Vader against the stark white walls of the Tantive IV and the "soft", feminine, human, obviously-good Princess Leia in her white dress; because of that, you instantly know who's good and who's evil). It's very simple: the good guys are the good guys, and the bad guys are the bad guys. The good guys don't have to show remorse, because they're killing bad guys; it's like in movies where they kill Nazis, you don't have to show remorse, because Nazis are just evil, no other explanation is required.

Also there's really no cause for them to kill Owen and Beru, or to blow up Alderaan over some stolen plans; that's hardly an eye for an eye. Plus the Empire did the whole "Great Jedi Purge" thing which was pretty evil just to be evil, Anakin was murdering little children and stuff; that's not really a "good guy" thing to do.

Grey areas only enter into it when you get into the EU, but the films themselves are pretty cut-and-dried as far as who the good guys and bad guys are.

From my religious point of view, "bad guys" dying, even if they are evil Nazis or imperial stormtroopers, like the ones in Star Wars, is a very sad and tragic thing; because, exactly, they're are evil. Evil people go to hell and suffer for all of eternity, and THAT is the reason that I am against the idea of "war is glorious war is awesome, fighting bad guys is fun and awesome"!!!!!! If they had lived and repented of their evil ways, they would turn good and have a happy eternity in heaven......Anyways, religion, spirituality, isn't all that relevant to this topic, or the main point that I'm am trying to prove....... I just mentioned that, because, it was my opinion on wars........

I find that/it very hard to believe that the Rebellion Alliance is fighting the Galactic Sith Empire because "Darth Vader dressed in black armour and has a scary, imposing samurai helmet and a deep voice and deep scary breathing" and that the "Princess Leia is a very pretty feminine looking pretty young lady"........

Here's is your reasons on why the Sith, and/or the Galactic Empire is evil.....

Killing Owen and Beru Lars

Destroying Alderaan with the first Death Star

The Great Jedi Purge

And here are my responses to you.... Everything evil that the "bad guys" had done was a response to the Rebellion Alliance. 

True, yes, that was very evil. However, would that have ever happened if the rebellion alliance had never existed??? No.

Again, the same concept and idea as what I had written above..... If the Rebellion alliance had never existed, Alderaan survives and no destruction of billions of people!!!!! I will quote the official Star Wars website to prove this!!!!!

The Death Star was the code name of unspeakably powerful and horrific weapons developed by the Empire. The first Death Star was an immense space station that carried a weapon capable of destroying entire planets. The Death Star was to be an instrument of terror, meant to force rebel worlds into surrender under the threat of destruction.

While the massive station is evidence of the evil nature of the Empire, it was also proof of the Empire's greatest weakness -- the belief that technology and terror were superior to the will of beings fighting for freedom. The Rebel Alliance was able to defeat the Death Star threat, as well as a second battle station constructed after the first's destruction.

The Great Jedi Purge. Again, it was a response to the Jedi, who were perescuting the religion of the darksiders, and were a threat to his power, because they were persecuting him......

Maybe I'm am wrong on that last point. Didn't Darth Sidious want to exterminate the "Jedi" for revenge, for vengance??? What was that all about??? The movies don't say why they wanted revenge (like darth maul mentioned in episode 1, or the tite of episode 3 itself.... I don't get that!!!!! Can you please help give me some answers/explanation on the meaning of "The Revenge of the Sith"......

Besides, I'll will most certainly agree with you on that, Order 66, operation knightfall, and the great jedi purge were all not only evil atrocities, but would have happened anyways without the existence of the rebels....

However, that was 20 years ago, the quadrillions/trillions of imperial citizens don't want a war to be waged in which their millions of stormtroopers families member will die to enact vengeance on that, many of whom had nothing to do with that..... The Great Jedi Purge was done and over with, during the time of the original trilogy!!!!!!

They only destroyed one planet with the death star; they had no plans to destroy other planets on a mass scale, they never did that!!!!

He'd be difficult to get into a pencil case.

Tyrphanax said:

I dunno. Vader didn't seem too impressed with the Death Star as compared to the Force, but then he had a lot of respect for Tarkin, and the Death Star was really the pinnacle of The Tarkin Doctrine of "Rule by Fear". I feel like he would have used them had he had access to them.

 

Luke refused Vader's offer to join him because he was a stronger person than Anakin was when the dark side came a-callin'. Though they did share similar attachments (Anakin's visions of Padme dying in childbirth; Luke's visions of his friends being tortured on Cloud City), Luke wanted to fight for good for the sake of fighting for good, because that's what his father did, because Luke is selfless; while Anakin wanted to save Padme at the cost of everything else. In the end, his drive to do good and save her brought only evil and cost him her life, as well (this is why Lucas calls the story a "Tragedy") because Anakin is selfish.

Luke was always the epitome of the optimistic, incorruptible hero; whereas Anakin was the tragic figure who was doomed to fall, if you look at them from an "archetype" standpoint.

You have just contradicted yourself. If the rebels are evil terrorists, then why is darth vader so evil????

Tyrphanax said:

I dunno. Vader didn't seem too impressed with the Death Star as compared to the Force, but then he had a lot of respect for Tarkin, and the Death Star was really the pinnacle of The Tarkin Doctrine of "Rule by Fear". I feel like he would have used them had he had access to them.

 

Luke refused Vader's offer to join him because he was a stronger person than Anakin was when the dark side came a-callin'. Though they did share similar attachments (Anakin's visions of Padme dying in childbirth; Luke's visions of his friends being tortured on Cloud City), Luke wanted to fight for good for the sake of fighting for good, because that's what his father did, because Luke is selfless; while Anakin wanted to save Padme at the cost of everything else. In the end, his drive to do good and save her brought only evil and cost him her life, as well (this is why Lucas calls the story a "Tragedy") because Anakin is selfish.

Luke was always the epitome of the optimistic, incorruptible hero; whereas Anakin was the tragic figure who was doomed to fall, if you look at them from an "archetype" standpoint.

What exactly was the tarkin doctrine??? Rule by fear?? What does that even mean??

Besides, darth vader probably would've destroyed dissneting planets with the Force-storm.

You are assuming that he respected tarkin and his ideas, which, again, is just not true. You could tell from a new hope that he was annoyed with tarkin and his plans and ideas. 

The Sith were not evil just because they had a death star........

My theory is this. As the Emperor of the galaxy, Darth Vader would've been a stalinist-style dictator/tyrant, who force-chokes and kills any officer, commander, soldier, or anybody with rank or status that he feels is a dissenter or disagrees with him. And, he would have done other evil atrocities- for instance, the sith once ruled the galaxy even before the prequels, in galactic sith empires, before the jedi defeated them (hench the revenge of the sith), and that was long before the deaths stars even existed. So, emperor darth vader would've done many of the similar things that the ancient sith emperors did......

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Sith_Empire

Tyrphanax said:

I was not being serious when I was talking about the Rebels being terrorists, it's a common non-serious viewpoint in order to play the devil's advocate, and I regret ever giving you that idea.

It is incredibly obvious by watching the films, which are very black and white in their morality, that the Rebellion is good and the Empire is evil.

OK, let's get over that one silly joke......

By that logic, you can say that the world operates in a black and white morality and that the justice system is evil and that criminals are good. You see???

Did you even read my long post that had rebuttals to it, about the great jedi purge, owen and beru lars, and alderaan's destruction????

I haven't enjoyed this site this much for a while.  Welcome aboard, Father Skywalker!

Tyrphanax said:

Father Skywalker said:

Did you even read my long post that had rebuttals to it, about the great jedi purge, owen and beru lars, and alderaan's destruction????

Yes, I have been reading your posts and replying to what I see fit.

 

Father Skywalker said:

By that logic, you can say that the world operates in a black and white morality and that the justice system is evil and that criminals are good. You see???

 

It is different because unlike real life, Star Wars is a fantasy world where evil is always evil and good is always good. That's the whole point of a fantasy world like that; there is no grey area because there is only black and white. Anything the Rebels do to fight the Empire is good because the Empire is bad; while, conversely, anything the Empire does to fight the Rebels is bad because the Rebels are good.

It's very, very simple "black-versus-white" fantasy morality that has been used in countless books, movies, video games, and basically all other forms of fictional media since time immemorial.

The bad guys are not bad just because they're bad. They're bad for a reason (s). 

The main problem/issue here is not black and white morality. It's this idea that villains are evil just because they're evil and have to  be destroyed. That is BS, and just plain ridiclous........

Even LOTR, a black and white morality storyline, has reasons why sauron is evil; not because "hey im gandalf lets go fight a bad guy, he's bad just because he's bad and we need somebody to defeat today for fun'!!!!!!

Tyrphanax said:

Father Skywalker said:

Did you even read my long post that had rebuttals to it, about the great jedi purge, owen and beru lars, and alderaan's destruction????

Yes, I have been reading your posts and replying to what I see fit.

 

Father Skywalker said:

By that logic, you can say that the world operates in a black and white morality and that the justice system is evil and that criminals are good. You see???

 

It is different because unlike real life, Star Wars is a fantasy world where evil is always evil and good is always good. That's the whole point of a fantasy world like that; there is no grey area because there is only black and white. Anything the Rebels do to fight the Empire is good because the Empire is bad; while, conversely, anything the Empire does to fight the Rebels is bad because the Rebels are good.

It's very, very simple "black-versus-white" fantasy morality that has been used in countless books, movies, video games, and basically all other forms of fictional media since time immemorial.

What about the galactic sith empires that existed long before the death star???

"once more the sith will rule the galaxy"

"the opression of the sith will never return"

"at last we shall reveal ourselves to the jedi and have our revenge"

"Star wars episode 3-the Revenge of the sith"

I've got 12 inches but I don't use it as a rule.

Father Skywalker said:

What would Darth Vader have been like as a ruler, if he had overthrown emperor palpatine and became the emperor/ruler of the galaxy himself??

I think he would be alright, like

J

nightstalkerpoet said:

Vader would have plunged the galaxy into unending civil war, with a constant disregard to individual planetary sovereigns. Rebellions would rise to fight the Empire, but Vader's total lack of guilt for murder would make it impossible for compassionate people to win, especially diplomatically. Vader would be a black hole, enveloping ever star system and galaxy possible. Considering his origins, he needs a continuing driving force to maintain his evil. Without it, I think he would fall into a deep depression and be usurped by those working under him.

 Totally afree.

I think the long term escalation of Vader's need to oppress and destroy his enemies as his hatred and evil grows would have eventually led Vader, in his older age, to want something like a Death Star.

Like a junkie, he'd eventually need that level of sheer, near omnipotent evil, to get his fix.

TheBoost said:

nightstalkerpoet said:

Vader would have plunged the galaxy into unending civil war, with a constant disregard to individual planetary sovereigns. Rebellions would rise to fight the Empire, but Vader's total lack of guilt for murder would make it impossible for compassionate people to win, especially diplomatically. Vader would be a black hole, enveloping ever star system and galaxy possible. Considering his origins, he needs a continuing driving force to maintain his evil. Without it, I think he would fall into a deep depression and be usurped by those working under him.

 Totally afree.

I think the long term escalation of Vader's need to oppress and destroy his enemies as his hatred and evil grows would have eventually led Vader, in his older age, to want something like a Death Star.

Like a junkie, he'd eventually need that level of sheer, near omnipotent evil, to get his fix.

Opressing and destroying your enemies is not evil, if your enemies just happened to be armed wartime rebels, who are traitors that are commiting treason against the state.....

Well, yeah, but how would he have found out about the death stars in order to use them as the galactic emperor/ruler????