Star Wars- historia walki z Imperium soc-etatyzmu?

26.05.02, 21:38
Films on Liberty and the State...

www.mises.org/film.asp

Star Wars (1977, 1980, 1983, 1999, 2002, 2005)

The ambitious Star Wars films tell of the rise, fall into evil & ultimate
redemption of Anakin Skywalker through his son Luke. Set against the decline of
the Old Republic into an evil Galactic Empire and the rebellion against that
Empire, this tale has profound relevance for our time. Here's the top reasons
why the Star Wars saga, in addition to being an epic action-packed adventure is
a great pro-liberty tale:

The films claim to be pro-liberty! From the scrolling-off-into-the-distance
intro text: "...restore freedom to the galaxy" (Episode IV), "a group of
freedom fighters led by Luke Skywalker..." (Episode V), "the small band of
rebels struggling to restore freedom to the galaxy" (Episode VI).
The theme of the Republic declining into an evil empire is an ancient
libertarian theme going back to Cato's resistance to the onset of empire in
Rome. The portrayal of the bureaucratic/military empire vs. the "ragtag"
people's resistance is right on target.
"War does not make one great." (Yoda)
"A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense. Never for attack." (Yoda) How
many other movies can you think of that have such a clear presentation of the
libertarian doctrine on the use of force?
In the grand old Anglo-American tradition of continuing to provide goods even
when the government stupidly gets in the way, we have the heroic smuggler Han
Solo who specializes in outfoxing the Empire to do business. And don't forget
that Lando Calrissian is originally running a black market mining operation
when he is introduced.
No conscription for these freedom fighters! When the valuable pilot Han Solo
plans to leave the Rebellion his decision is respected: "He's got to follow his
own path, no one can choose it for him." (Leia)
Empire, accurately, is portrayed as a mass murderer in the destruction of the
peaceful planet of Alderan and everyone on it. As a symbol to represent this
past century of the killer State, I propose the dreaded Death Star.
That two generations have grown up with these films teaching them to hate
the "Empire" and it's plans to "bring order to the galaxy" bodes well for our
future.

See these reviews of Episode I, IV, V, and VI. Also, on Mises.org, see Mark
Thornton's review.

    • wild Star Wars Revisited 26.05.02, 21:39
      http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?record=277&month=11

      Star Wars Revisited
      by MARK THORNTON

      [NOTE: An earlier version of this piece stirred up controversy and comment on all
      sides. This longer version, posted August 7, 1999, addresses some of the points
      made by critics.]

      It was peace and prosperity versus taxation, inflationism, protectionism,
      imperialism, and war. The good guys win this one and people are applauding in
      theaters throughout the country. The movie of course is "Star Wars: The Phantom
      Menace," one of the finest allegories on classical liberal political economy to
      ever appear on screen.

      One has to wonder if George Lucas hasn't been reading Ludwig von Mises or Murray
      N. Rothbard during the long sabbatical that he has taken since his last major
      movie project. As a wealthy capitalist and businessman, Lucas certainly knows all
      too well what the government means to wealth and what the market means to the
      success of complex production processes like a major motion picture.

      As the movie opens, the Republic is falling apart due to taxation, protectionism,
      bureaucracy, and corruption. The Dark Side, accurately labeled the "federalists"
      (who were the centralizers in American history), is trying to enforce its
      franchise on trade taxes by trying to intimidate a small peaceful planet that
      believes in free trade, peace, and republican virtues.

      Queen Amidala refuses to pursue any path that might endanger peace and start a
      war. Her country of the Naboo was at first subjected to excessive taxation and is
      being blockaded; a path that she rightly fears will lead to war. She attempts to
      appeal to the central government for an end to the trade restrictions, but
      quickly discovers that the Republic's Galactic Senate is dominated by bureaucrats
      and yammering special-interest groups interested only in manipulating the system
      to their own benefit.

      When the legislature proposes to establish a commission to look into the claims
      that people are suffering, Queen Amidala realizes that established political
      channels are totally corrupt. She packs her bags for home and prepares to defend
      her country. What we are watching here are the telltale signs of a decaying
      empire, where the common good, peace, and liberty are no longer held at a
      premium.

      Along with that–-and consistent with the experience of Imperial Rome and the US–-
      we see the effects of currency depreciation. This depreciation affects all people
      who use the money, even in such parched, desert places like Tatooine, where a
      Jedi warrior tries to exchange credit-based money of the Republic for necessary
      supplies. He is turned down because the money is no longer valued on the
      periphery of the Republic. As a result they must resort to barter, which is
      exactly what Mises said is the final result of inflation.

      The critics complain that it was too much like the old Star Wars and that it
      wasn't enough like the old Star Wars. National Public Radio actually had two
      critics on the air making both these contradictory points. Others say the movie
      is filled with ethnic typecasting, and a media-arts professor has even said the
      movie is an "allegory for liberal white supremacy."

      This is nonsense. What the critics really resent is that this movie draws on
      existing character types in the real world to make the unfamiliar world it
      depicts connect more directly with audiences. For example, the Gungas, who live
      on the other side of Naboo, are caricatures of Jamaicans. Big-government liberals
      and black leaders have labeled Lucas and his movie racist despite the fact that
      the Gungas are portrayed as a peaceful, well-organized society who exhibit
      tremendous courage and a true zeal for life.

      "The Phantom Menace" doesn't wallow in politically correct obsessions with
      dysfunctional families and sociopathic prejudices. Instead, Lucas tells a story
      about the struggle between good over evil, a struggle well represented in the
      underlying classical-liberal politics of the movie.

      More troubling has been the response from conservatives and classical liberals
      who have mistakenly interpreted the role of the evil Federal trading association
      as an attack by Lucus on capitalism. Nothing could be further from the truth.

      The Federation is clearly made up of the bad guys. This group of interstellar,
      mercantilist businessmen blockaded the planet called Naboo and eventually invaded
      the planet and forced the government to sign a treaty. To some, the idea that
      entrepreneurs would blockade a solitary and insignificant planet in protest to
      interplanetary trade taxes just does not make any sense. What would that get
      them? It just is not rational and has no precedence in human experience.

      But the Federation had permission from the Republic to enact the blockade. The
      Republic only sent out its Jedi diplomats to help settle the issue, not to open
      up the blockade. The Republican government also did not seem to have much trouble
      with the idea of the Federation invading the planet and subjugating its people.

      [The book, which was not written by Lucas and is only based on the screenplay,
      has a difficult time explaining this curiosity, noting only that the Federation
      long complained about the taxes, but now had mysteriously taken this different
      tack of imposing the blockade.]

      While the details of political economy are sketchy, Lucus provides numerous
      details and clues which leave only one possible interpretation. The Federation is
      a type of East India Company that has been given a tax franchise by the Republic.
      A tax franchise is when a government gives a private entity or agent the right to
      collect taxes in return for a hefty percentage of the revenues.

      The tax franchise over interplanetary trade is an example of a "public-private
      partnership," the real "phantom menance" of the film. Throughout history this has
      been a very common practice when governments find it difficult to collect
      unpopular taxes in distant lands. It has also been a very lucrative contract to
      receive because the tax agent takes much more than they are supposed to. It is
      clearly one of the most evil forms of government because it combines private
      sector incentives and the monopoly privileges of the state to exploit the
      taxpayer to the greatest extent possible.

      Lucus sends a clear message that the Federation agreement with the corrupt
      Republic is based on the model of British Imperialism by filling the movie with
      historical imagery. The Federation is British Imperialism in the form of the East
      India Company, which controlled and taxed the British possession of the Indian
      sub-continent. Of course, entrepreneurs complained and evaded British taxes and
      regulations, but the British Empire gave out monopoly rights to control India and
      other colonial trading rights in return for tax revenue.

      The hints are all there. Naboo sounds like Hindu, the architecture looks vaguely
      Indian, and Queen Amidala looks and dresses like Indian royalty. The Queen speaks
      like an Indian speaking very deliberate English.

      The Gungas live on the other side of Naboo just as the Jamaica and India were
      British possessions on opposite sides of the earth. Of course, you might also
      note that the name of these underwater people, the Gungas, sounds like and is
      spelled suspiciously like the Ganges. Or how about Gungadin?

      Yet the real clincher that the Federation was based on British Imperialism lies
      in the title of the local leader of the Federation blockade and the one who will
      rule the planet for the Federation-Republican alliance--viceroy.

      Viceroy is of course the British title for colonial leader. British imperialism
      was largely based on the "company model" where a company, like the British East
      India Company would be formed and given exclusive trading privileges. The
      governm
      • wild Star Wars Revisited [2] 26.05.02, 21:41
        Viceroy is of course the British title for colonial leader. British imperialism
        was largely based on the "company model" where a company, like the British East
        India Company would be formed and given exclusive trading privileges. The
        government would get revenue and their proverbial foot in the door in exchange
        for the monopoly. Later, Britain would provide troops and other means of support
        and eventually takeover the colony from the company once the profitability had
        been proven and English-rule had been established.

        These public-private partnerships for the taxation and subjugation of the people
        are the worst of all possible worlds. It is the combination of the efficiency and
        incentives of a private company with the power and destructive capacity of
        government. Even Adam Smith, who held a highly lucrative position of tax
        collector himself, forcefully remarked that "the government of an exclusive
        company of merchants is perhaps the worst of all governments for any country
        whatsoever."

        Even Karl Marx was right that the wedding of private interest and government
        results in the exploitation of the people and the ruination of the economy.
        Conservatives, classical liberals, libertarians and anarcho-capitalists need to
        be leery of knee-jerk reactions to criticisms of "greedy entrepreneurs."

        The good guys win in the end, but not without a great deal of courage, ingenuity,
        and luck. The movie ends with peace and prosperity being proclaimed to the
        thunderous applause and celebration of the population.

        As the movie makes clear, the good society is based on the rule of law, sound
        money, free trade, peace, and virtuous leaders who care about the commonwealth
        more than their own power. Evil is represented by consolidated government and its
        penchant for corruption, inflation, war, and destruction. Unfortunately, this
        galaxy so far, far away bears an incredible likeness to one we know all too well.

        * * * * *

        Mark Thornton is O.P. Alford III resident scholar of the Ludwig von Mises
        Institute in Auburn, Alabama.

    • wild Star Wars (Episode 1): The Phantom Menace 26.05.02, 21:43
      Star Wars (Episode 1): The Phantom Menace

      movie-reviews.colossus.net/movies/s/sw99.html
    • wild Star Wars (A New Hope) 26.05.02, 21:44
      Star Wars (A New Hope)

      movie-reviews.colossus.net/movies/s/sw1.html
    • wild Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back :) 26.05.02, 21:45
      Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back

      movie-reviews.colossus.net/movies/s/sw2.html
    • wild Star Wars: Return of the Jedi! 26.05.02, 21:46
      movie-reviews.colossus.net/movies/s/sw3.html

      Star Wars: Return of the Jedi smile
    • wild "Attack of the Clones" Jedi walczy z niewolnictwem 06.09.02, 23:14
      www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?control=948
      Star Wars and Our Wars

      By Mark Thornton

      As we await the release of George Lucas's second Star Wars prequel, The Attack
      of the Clones, speculation builds on whether Lucas can return to the glory of
      the original Star Wars trilogy.

      While critics attacked Lucas for his leading-boy character, his young-girl
      queen, and his politically incorrect characters (Jar Jar Binks and the admiral
      with the Japanese accent), others such as myself celebrated Lucas's brilliant
      use of modern history (the experience of the British and American empires) to
      create an age-old saga in such an unfamiliar setting with characters and events
      that are familiar to us.

      Those who understand that it is not just fiction, but a real human story,
      easily forgive Lucas for his young, undeveloped characters--they had to be
      young for the story to make sense. Those who don't understand the message
      believe that Hollywood should make everything up as it goes along to ensure
      that all traditional expectations about movies are met. That's why Lucas has
      had to shun Hollywood and make Star Wars with his own money.

      The first prequel was based on British colonialism and the problem of
      mercantilism (the theory that nations benefits by protecting their producers
      from outside competition). Here the increasingly evil Republic uses its powers
      to tax trade routes, blockade, and invade in order to assert power and enforce
      mercantile economic policies on its subjects in Naboo.

      The Viceroy is the old title for British colonial rulers. Queen Amidala rules
      over a society based on British India, and Jar Jar Binks comes from the water
      people on the other side of the planet, who are obviously suppose to represent
      the island people of British Jamaica. In the 19th century, both of these
      peoples were slaughtered by British Viceroys.

      Thus can we see that Lucas is taking bits and pieces of our own historical
      experience to retell a battle between good and evil that also touches on themes
      in political economy, particularly the choice between self-determination
      (essential to freedom) and imperialism (linked to war and state expansion).

      In Attack of the Clones, due to hit theaters May 16, the Republic officially
      becomes the evil empire and sends an army of clones to destroy a group of
      separatists (secessionists) that want no part of this evil democratic empire.
      The main substantive point is that the Republic has willingly become an evil
      empire; it was not destroyed or conquered but simply gave in to evil despite
      its tradition and system of government.

      What are the real-life analogies? Most directly, it presents the transition of
      world dominance from Britain to America and the transition in America from the
      glorious Republic to a democratic empire. Both of these transitions actually
      began during the American Civil War. The separatists/secessionists represent
      the Confederate South that wanted to maintain original Republican ideals (not
      slavery!).

      The evil democracy is based on the Lincoln administration that sent an army of
      immigrants to crush the attempted separation. Lucas has Palpetine dub his
      invasion force the "Grand Army of the Republic," just as Lincoln did. What
      could be clearer? I suspect the clones will exhibit the habits of Lincoln's
      lawless generals, like Sherman, who killed and destroyed everything in their
      paths.

      If my interpretation is correct, the neoconservatives, the establishment
      Republicans, and the gang at National Review are not going to like this movie.
      (Another option is to attempt a tortuous spin on the movie’s otherwise clear
      message.)

      The original Star Wars trilogy planted within all of us the seed-notion that
      the "good" will always--eventually--triumph over evil. It’s not just a notion
      for philosophers and idealists; it’s something that everyone can believe
      because it is part of our nature.

      To be sure, matters will get worse in the third prequel. Perhaps we will be
      treated to some fascism, nationalism, New Dealism, Nazism, and communism. Lucas
      might even focus on Galactic War I, Galactic War II, and the Cold Galactic War.
      We might get some genocide, McCarthyism, and segregation, but things
      undoubtedly will get worse as the evil empire moves from democratic empire to
      outright dictatorship.

      People will no doubt eventually recognize that Lucas is writing a reflection of
      Western civilization, a reflection of our own experience. America is called
      the "world's superpower" by the media and many Americans, but in most other
      languages we are often referred to as an evil empire that imposes our will and
      policies by force of arms, propping up dictators, undermining harmless regimes
      for the benefit of big business, and stationing troops in lands against the
      will of the people who live there. The transition from a humble bastion of
      freedom to a global crusader state occurred, not through conquest or
      revolution, but within the form of constitutional government.

      Neoconservatives such as Dinesh DiSouza and William Bennett will openly admit
      that America has indeed become an empire in every sense of the word, but they
      will say that it is perfectly fine, because we are moral and always try to do
      the right thing and help other people. Such is the claim made by every empire
      in history, without exception.

      Someday we will recognize that there is no such thing as a good empire, because
      empires necessarily crush the right of self-determination, which Mises defines
      as follows:

      whenever the inhabitants of a particular territory, whether it be a single
      village, a whole district, or a series of adjacent districts, make it known, by
      a freely conducted plebiscite, that they no longer wish to remain united to the
      state to which they belong at the time, but wish either to form an independent
      state or to attach themselves to some other state, their wishes are to be
      respected and complied with. This is the only feasible and effective way of
      preventing revolutions and civil and international wars.

      Lucas might add that this is also the means of preventing galactic war. It is a
      message that needs to be heard, and persistently applied, in our time.

      May the force--not consolidated government--be with you.

      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Mark Thornton is a senior fellow of the Mises Institute. Send him MAIL. See his
      Mises.org Article Archive or his scholarly pieces in the QJAE, the RAE, and the
      JLS.
Inne wątki na temat:
Pełna wersja