TK-8252 Posted March 18, 2006 Share Posted March 18, 2006 Only if you have something to hide Or maybe if you favor your Constitutional rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted March 18, 2006 Share Posted March 18, 2006 Or maybe if you favor your Constitutional rights. This may shock you but there is no right to privacy declared in the constitution or bill of rights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted March 18, 2006 Share Posted March 18, 2006 Well this is not the place to discuss this, but I'll just say that you should check out the Fourth Ammendment... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted March 18, 2006 Share Posted March 18, 2006 That would be search and seizure not privacy, but as the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written open to interpretation it would be up to the Supreme Court to decide what it means Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurgan Posted March 18, 2006 Share Posted March 18, 2006 Only if you have something to hide That's the thing, we ALL have something to hide. It's not just terrorists and criminals that have secrets after all. There's this thing called "blackmail." Everybody has some secret shame or something they're not proud of, that someone if they knew it all, could use it against you in some way if they really wanted to. It's part of dirty politics. Information is a weapon. Maybe you have somebody you trust, whom you share your secrets with. Your doctor, your attorney, your priest, your spouse, your mom, your dad.. how about a group of strangers in some back room some place? How about some government official you voted into office? What about somebody you didn't vote for? Some corporation or NGO? See, it gets sticky... Anyway, the point is that by invading people's privacy you can use dirty tricks to silence opponents, blackmail people or threaten them for favors, money, or just getting the heat off something they're doing that actually IS illegal, etc. If you have a right to privacy and its violated, then the violater is doing something ILLEGAL. If you have no right to privacy, what they're doing may still be UNETHICAL. Notice how the government keeps things top secret and doesn't let ordinary citizens check in on a lot of it with claims of national security and executive privilege. Is that fair? Especially when our taxes pay their salaries? So they get to spy on you, but you can't spy on them, that seems to be the double standard. And what have they done to earn your trust? It's one thing to tell somebody a secret voluntarily. It's another for them to just spy on you and get the secret just on a personal whim. There's that famous phrase we've all heard "who watches the watchers?" Plus it's just plain nosey. It's like if the government got to watch videos of you in the shower, bedroom and the toilet every day. I mean, what business is it of there's? It's one thing to be a celebrity and put your private life out in public, but the average person just wants to do their thing and be left alone. It's natural enough. The common "dream" of being famous is mostly because people assume they'd also be wealthy and universally loved, not that knowledge of their private lives would be used against them or that they'd be constantly viewed with suspicion, waiting for them to make some kind of mistake or blunder to pounce on. Anyway, sorry for the rant, let's try to stay on topic with regards the SW movies here. If you want to branch out and argue constitutional law or privacy rights or something, I suggest the Senate Chambers, which is our best place for debating and (non-star wars) political discussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted March 18, 2006 Share Posted March 18, 2006 I see your point, though I'm still in favor of the patriot act I do think it should be moniterd some how, how I don't know. Albiet the Allegory seen in the prequels could also be related to Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, who has held political power long past his time and silenced his oppenents, Strictly speaking the politics could be related to any government people see as totalitarian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redtech Posted March 19, 2006 Share Posted March 19, 2006 Hmmm, fair point, but it's very, very, very easy in our realitively soft governments to lay judgement, then complain of critisisms of ourselves. Ass for the patriots, well, guess it's 1-0 to team evil though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Point Man Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 I loved the political stuff in the prequels. How can you not be fascinated by the way Palpatine manipulated everyone into thinking they were acting of their own accord, when they were actually helping him? I mean, here you have the entire Jedi council in his office, they can't even tell he is the most powerful Sith Lord ever, and he is using them to advance his goals. I still get goosebumps when I watch those scenes again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 Well he didn't have everyone fooled, the Rebels for one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Point Man Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Well he didn't have everyone fooled, the Rebels for one Just goes to show that sometimes the Jedi Masters aren't as smart as ordinary folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Or they just have water on the brain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boinga1 Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Actually there is no evidence that the Rebels know anything about Palpatine being a Sith (except for Luke). There is considerable suggestion (in the EU) that the majority of the galaxy's inhabitants know nothing about Palpatine's Force abilities. This make sense, for how many people would knowingly make a Sith Lord their leader? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fealiks Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Very political yes, but thats good. Its also helping kids. The OT knowingly taught kids to be good, by making them try to get onto the "light side", the PT, in a way, is explaining politics to small children; kids love the star wars films so they really will take it in. Also, you cant have the PT (especially epIII) without politics, the political side of the movies is where the mainstream events lie so you cant really make movies like this without politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justus Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Your average joe in the Star Wars galaxy would probably have no idea or knowledge of Palpatine being a Sith lord, or even Vader being one. If you are a regular bloke in that galaxy you wouldn't even realize that Palpatine created the Clone Wars and was playing both sides, we the viewers get a unique perspective on events to progress the story. To an average guy Palpatine would probably 'appear' to be a great ruler, since he was getting things done -of course Palpatine was playing his cards rather well to get public support and sympathy and it worked. Other than maybe tabloids or rumors on the holonet (which would probably be quickly censored) no one other than maybe Luke and a small handful of others know of Palpatine's true power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redtech Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Fealiks, some of us don't live in the Matrix. Firstly, try explaining to children that thousands of people today are living in fear, terror and death because of the whims of a few people in Ivory Towers. Heck, tell them that their views and beliefs don't matter and that their lives are only as cattle for their elders and betters and that their deaths will be largely insignificant (and in the UK, a valuable source of taxable revenue). I believe politics are a fundamental evil of hypocrisy, but there you go.. And you can make movies without politics. I doubt that "Sauron's policy of anti-Elvism established in 1000 along with the Isengard/Morder alliance under the coalition of the Enemies of The West motivated the Gondorian-Rhohirrim alliance known as the Men of The West to begin pre-emptive assurtive millitary pressure on the allies of the EOTW via attacks on the Rhum-Morder millitary supply routes.." makes a good movie! ------------------------------------------- Justus, an interesting point really, I'm surprised how readily everyone accepted their "place" as lackeys to an emperor. I suppose there may have been some strong benefits that aren't seen. After all, Pharoh had some divine richees despite being a despicable monarchy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Actually there is no evidence that the Rebels know anything about Palpatine being a Sith (except for Luke). Although it is very possible that they might considering all the discussion between Yoda, Kenobi, and Bail Organa before they go their seperate ways. Bail knows that Yoda failed to defeat/capture the emperor and no doubt the events were passed to him by Yoda. Since he was a founding member of the Rebellion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.