The Jedi Council should be Disbanded
Debate Rounds (4)
Only material from Star Wars Movies 1-7 should be used. No expanded universe or stuff from the animation.
Please use only general arguments and refrain from using too remote examples that regular Star Wars fans do not know. In other words, this is not a debate about who is more of a Star Wars nerd and knows one or two examples to just strike off the other person's arguments.
The premise here is the Jedi Council in Star Wars 1-3 since there is no Jedi Council in Star Wars 4-7. But you can use arguments from all the movies.
I will be arguing Pro; ie that the Jedi Council should be disbanded.
Stability...I'll let that word sink in a little. Why you ask? Because the Jedi Order is founded on the principle of stability in a universe filled with turmoil. But let's take a closer look.
1) For this section, I will be presenting my argument from the point of view of the future Galactic Empire:
The Jedi Order tries it's best to keep away from the inner politics of the Senate, but you and I know that the Order could be disbanded at any point if the Senate decides. The only reason (according to the movies) they are still in existence is because of 2 reasons: (1) Mace Windu tells us in Ep.III that, "The Jedi still have friends in the Senate" and (2) the infamous Order 66.
Yoda makes it very clear that the Senate is in control of the Council but not the Jedi individually. So with this statement that Yoda makes, it becomes very clear that the title of this debate is a doable option but if it truly was disbanded, it would have completely ruined the plans of Chancellor/Emperor Palpatine, which was to keep them all under one roof then storm in and kill them all in one go. If the Council was disbanded, that would have been quite costly and time consuming to find the Jedi and exterminate them one by one.
In Ep.III, the conversation between Yoda and Mace Windu sheds light on the growing suspicion among the Jedi towards the Chancellors choice to sign an amendment, giving him full power over the Council's actions. Yoda is unclear on the existence of this amendment and is evidently upset when he says that the Jedi don't simply follow orders. Windu reinforces the Masters' suspicions by stating that "I don't think he intends to control the Jedi, but by placing the Jedi under the control of the Office of the Supreme Chancellor, this amendment will give him constitutional authority to disband the Order itself." After all that talk, they finally come to a conclusion that the Chancellor is surrounded by the dark side of the Force. However their conclusion was decided on 2 episodes too late, and the Order 66 was on their doorstep.
In conclusion, the dissolution of the Jedi Order would make no sense, considering the plans Palpatine had for the Jedi. With the Order disbanded, it would be much harder to track the Jedi down because they will no longer have structure so they will disperse throughout the galaxy. Therefore the Jedi Order must be kept.
2) In this section, I will be presenting my argument from the point of view of the Jedi Order.
I mentioned above the word stability, and I hope that you understand why I mentioned it but I will explain regardless. Just like any religious organization, the peacekeeping nature of the Jedi Order had a very sophisticated structure that maintained galactic peace for thousands of years.. They abide by the Jedi Code, which was a set of rules that governed the behavior of the Jedi and explicitly commanded them to not succumb to feelings of anger and animosity toward other species. This in turn would help them resist fear and prevent them from embracing the Dark Side of the Force. Also similar to religions here on Earth (i.e. Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Baha'i Faith etc..), they had places of worship called Temples which was a place to reinvigorate their Jedi spirit and align them with their true purpose. So with all this brief overview of the Jedi Order's approach to the maintenance of peace, removing them from their positions would be an act of discrimination and just like any religion that is oppressed here on Earth, they would be part of that category but on a Galactic scale.
In conclusion, the Jedi Order's existence is a proof that there is good that can be done if lifeforms truly abide by the law of peace. The Sith seek to disband it and exterminate all remaining Jedi so that chaos may consume the Galaxy. Not cool at all.
Your turn :)
I also applaud my opponent on seeing the issue from both the Galactic Empire and Jedi sides. This is something admirable and out-of-the-box I think.
My opponent started off with how it was always possible for the Jedi Order to be disbanded. However, the Emperor was able to keep the Jedi Order under his power, weakening their grasp, foiling their plans and eventually killing all the Jedi (theoretically). Therefore, not dissolving the Jedi Order was a good thing since from the Dark Side point of view, keeping the Jedi Order intact under the Emperor was one of the chief reasons for enabling the Emperor to rule the galaxy.
Okay. This is certainly a good point. However, I think my opponent has made a grave mistake. The title of this debate is "The Jedi Council Should be Disbanded" NOT "The Jedi Order Should be Disbanded". There is a big difference between the Order and the Council. The Council are the leaders of the Order and they decide on all matters related to the Jedi; which wars they will take part in, which apprentices they will take up to train etc. Basically, the debate is about whether the Jedi should be able to decide their decisions without the overruling dictatorship of the small band of "wise and experienced" leaders.
This is something I feel my opponent has missed. He was talking more on the Jedi Order, and he did not actually touch on the Council. Just because the Jedi are free from their Council, does not mean that the Empire cannot put them under one roof and kill them, as my opponent describes. Politically speaking, being a Jedi means you have to serve the ruling government. So long as the Emperor is successful at concealing his real identity, he can still give orders to each and every Jedi individually without the intervention of the Jedi Council and the Jedi will follow his orders.
My opponent then argues from the point of the view of the Jedi. Again, he does not talk about the Council but he is talking about the Order. I would argue that the Jedi Order can always exist to enforce peace, just that they are not bounded by what their leaders tell them they should or should not do. In his example of a religion, the Jedi have their own codes to follow, but they deserve to be able to practice those teachings without a group of elders having to give them the green light every time they want to do something.
I will now bring up one argument. My argument is that the Jedi Council should be Disbanded because the Jedi should be free to make decisions they see fit without intervention. As long as no one is becoming a Sith and assassinating others, there is no reason why we should not trust Jedi to implement their teachings freely. For example, the council once failed to see the potential of Anakin Skywalker. They insisted they knew everything, but they don't. Qui-Gon should be able to interpret the Jedi teachings and take Anakin as apprentice anyway without the need to ask for their 'blessings'. The Council's blindness and arrogance eventually cause Anakin to fall into the Dark Side, and until the very end of their downfall, they still could not see how they were locking up such huge potential which is Anakin. They directly caused the birth of Darth Vader and they only have themselves to blame.
Before we begin, let's recap:
The future Empire & the Jedi want the unity of the Council to remain the same as it's been for thousands of years. But aside from the intention of the Empire & the want of the Jedi to keep the Council intact, I'll go through the logical reasons why the Jedi Council should maintain it's form.
A religion requires an administrative body so that the Laws & the practices ordained by God are taught properly & supervised closely so that a correct guidance may be shared from the administrator(s) to the adherent(s). The Jedi Council is exactly that. They're democratically elected members from among the Jedi, who are deemed the most fit to lead the Order & supervise the necessary steps any Jedi should follow when he/she are problem solving.
Here on Earth, structure is part of the foundation that makes us human. The parents both share a role as head of the household. Similarly, on a insect level, the Queen Bee is the head of the hive; on a animal level, the lead Wolf & his offspring are the head of the pack; & on a Divine level, God is the Head of all things. On a much broader scale, we have countries, tribes, universities, families, hospitals & so on, that all have structure in order to maintain command & prevent utter chaos. We must understand that each group that exists on Earth, has a ruling body so why would it be any different with the Jedi Council? If I were to agree with Pro then I would be agreeing with the elimination of the word "leadership" & the dismantling of a Council who's job is to maintain the unity of the Jedi family & implement the Order's teachings so that peace & stability may spread throughout the galaxy. Now that I have demonstrated the necessity of such a leadership, on Earth or otherwise, this leads into my next section.
(2) Bounty Hunter vs Jedi:
There is a clear & obvious difference between the 2 roles; while one collects bounty for his/her work, the latter views his/her work as his/her bounty. But what do I mean by this? Well, a bounty hunter is wired to think individually & solve a problem that will provide him/her with the greatest profit, therefore the amount of bounty he/she collects, rules their lives. For example, Jango Fett did the Jedi a service by providing his genetic make up in order to produce a Clone Army that will serve the needs of the Order, but he didn't do this for free. These things were done effectively but at a price that serve their individual needs, therefore the word unity or democracy does not exist in the mind of a Bounty Hunter; it's all me, me & again, me.
The Jedi on the other hand, take steps that benefit the cause they serve, therefore they are not "free" to make their own decisions until they have consulted the guidance of the High Council, who is elected in the position with the authority to clarify the criteria of problem-solving if the questioning Jedi requires it.
In conclusion, if the Council were to be disbanded & the Jedi free (as you put it) to act on their own accord & practice the Jedi Code on their own volition, they would be no different than the solitary bounty hunter who lives only to satisfy his/her needs. With access to the Force, a lightsaber, & the freedom to do what they will, they are more vulnerable to becoming Sith because they will undoubtedly generate their own unqualified & ignorant interpretations of what they believe is "appropriate" for any given moment. Therefore the Council's existence is very necessary for the maintenance & stability of the Jedi Order.
(A) Now I will touch on the point my opponent brought up regarding Anakin & the Council's "failure" to see his potential.
Just before the end of the Clone Wars, Palpatine forced the Jedi Masters to allow Anakin a seat on the Council. This was uneasily accepted by the Masters but they refused to grant him the rank of Master, regardless of his new seat. In the mean time, Palpatine manipulated Anakin by subtly saying that Council was not trustworthy & was plotting against him. Palpatine's manipulations were unintentionally & permanently planted in the mind of Anakin when the Council, through Obi-Wan, asked Anakin to spy on the Chancellor, something that Anakin felt was against the Jedi Code but was necessary given the disturbance the Masters felt. Note, that the position he was forced into was not earned therefore he did not have the right to intervene in the affairs of the Council but was more of an observer for the benefit of the Chancellor's supervision over the Council's every move.
(B) "They insisted they knew everything, but they don't"
When someone claims they know everything, that means that they have no more room for knowledge. As the Clone Wars progresses, they are learning new things & forced to adapt with the enemy's every move. They don't know everything but they know enough about Anakin's reputation to make inexperienced judgments & his inability to control his emotions, leading the Council to believe that he is not yet ready for the responsibilities a seat in the Council may hold. However this was overlooked & disregarded by the Chancellor, who forced the Council to accept Anakin in their circle.
(C) "Jinn's interpretations & Anakin"
My opponent says that Jinn is qualified to interpret the Jedi teachings & take Anakin as apprentice without the need of blessings. This is totally contradictory to the statement Obi-Wan makes in Ep. I when he says that Jinn could have been a member of the Jedi Council if he followed the Code. This statement shows us the attitude Jinn has towards the Order & regardless of his unqualified analysis of certain situations, he took a Padawan of his own, Obi-Wan. This shows us that Jinn didn't have the proper judgement to even be a Council member, let alone his ability to train a boy who is the Chosen One.
(4) "The Council's blindness & arrogance eventually cause Anakin to fall into the Dark Side"
False. It was not the blindness or the arrogance of the Council that dragged Anakin to the Dark Side but rather a succession of events that started from the manipulative remarks of the future Emperor & the death of Padme that lead him down that dark path. Palpatine made Anakin think that he was qualified enough to be a Master & the Council was discriminating him. Unfortunately, it was his evident immaturity & gullible nature that bought the suggestions of the Chancellor, which in turn molded Anakin into a pouty, lightsaber-wielding teenager who's constant whining about him being the Chosen One makes me believe that he is not ready at all to even assume the responsibilities of the title. The cherry on top in his final stage of transformation was his one question to Palpatine after his new identity as Lord Vader. He asked Palpatine "Is Padme alright? Is she safe?" & the Emperor simply "no because you killed her out of your anger". His loud yell proves the death of any good that existed in his mind, only to be fully replaced by anger & hatred.
In conclusion, everything that is in existence has structure. From the Periodic table to the dinner table, everything in between & including those 2, has a sort of organization & without it, chaos is the only thing that will happen. Coming back to the Jedi & their beliefs, the Jedi Code is a set of rules that governs the behavior of the Jedi & explicitly commands them to not succumb to feelings of anger & animosity toward others. Anakin clearly missed this class in Jedi school & it was his childish, sponge-like mind that soaked up all the things the Emperor said about the Jedi. Face it, the Emperor could have said anything ridiculous & Anakin would have bought it. With the necessity of structure & the organization of power, this is proof enough that the Council, like anything else, must remain intact for the sake of the Galaxy.
your turn :)
I would just like to recap that I felt that my opponents arguments in Round 1 were not actually touching on the Council rather the Jedi Order. My opponent said that the Order should be there both so that it would be easier to kill off the Jedi (from the Dark Side point of view) and also to have a proper structure (from the Light Side point of view). I argued by saying that's true, but it doesn't address whether or not there should be a Jedi Council. Yes, there would still be a Jedi Code and all just no Council to dictate the Jedi. With no Jedi Council, the Emperor can still kill off the Jedi by having the Jedi report directly under the government. On the other hand, the existence of a Jedi Code is still sufficient to maintain the discipline and guidelines of the Jedi.
Round 2 rebuttals
My opponent says that just like a religion, it is important to have supervisors for the Jedi to rely on for problem-solving etc. I would argue that that's certainly true. However, the role of supervisor and/or leader can be taken by any number of figures. The Emperor can fill in such role, or a senior Jedi master to the Padawan under his care. I would argue further that just as my opponent said, the Jedi's parents can also act as the support system to make sure they don't become 'radicalised' and turn bad into Sith. Before you say that these people are not Jedi and therefore, do not understand the Jedi Code etc., I would argue that the Jedi teachings have been drawn thousands of years before and should be educated to the Jedi. That is how they earned the title "Jedi" anyway. You don't necessarily need another Jedi to tell a Jedi right from wrong. If a religious person does something detrimental in the society you don't need another person with the same religion to tell them they are crossing the line. At the very least, the Jedi will still be an organization that has peer-to-peer support to make sure no one is up to no good. After all, that's how religions are for the most part. You don't need to be under direct supervision 24 hours from a priest or a religious authority. You know your teachings and you work on what you know. And other people are free to criticize you or advise you if they feel like they don't agree with you even though they don't have the same religion as you. I just feel that the Jedi Council is extremely restrictive and too controlling in making sure the Jedi stick in line. It is this attitude which causes the Jedi to rebel in the first place. Yes, you can have spiritual advisors, but they are there to interpret the teachings and advise you, not to DICTATE what you should or should not do. NOT to be a figure you have to ask for consent every time you feel like doing something.
My opponent then makes the argument that every system on Earth including the animal kingdom has structure and leadership. Firstly, I think that animals should definitely not be used as a parable to humans. One would argue that they are programmed to act as they are. Even from birth, they intuitively already know what to do. This is programmed in their genetic code. I would even say that God has created them to behave in those ways. Just as they are animals who rely heavily on packs and teamwork, there are just as many that live solo or rogue. Human beings are different because we have such a diverse range or personalities affected by nature and nurture. We don't know how to do almost anything since we are born and we have to acquire knowledge by reading and observing. Thus, the examples of the bees and wolves to me are not befitting to be used as a parable for humans.
My opponent mentions countries, tribes universities?? yeah sure. But in most of these things, you don't actually have to wait for instructions to do something. You are free to do as you please so long as you don't endanger others. Essentially, this is the spirit of my arguments.
The Jedi Council is not at all like this. For the most part, they decide how to live your life and will not hesitate to banish you if you put a toe out of line.
My opponents' final argument is about bounty hunters vs Jedi. Bounty hunters are selfish and if Jedi have no order they will too, become bounty hunters. Just using the material from the movies (as I have clearly set in the rules) you cannot say for certain the bounty hunters have no loyalty. I would argue Boba Fett loved his father. We also would be wise to feel that Jango Fett felt a strong connection to the cause of the Emperor by helping him with his clone army and trying to assassinate Padme. Just because they are bounty hunters by profession, it does not give us enough to say that they are evil or selfish. From their point of view, they too are doing what they need to do for the stability of the galaxy.
Also, I never said that the Jedi would be free to do what they can do without a Council. As I have said again and again if they do something which is damaging to the society, the Emperor if he chooses can order other Jedi to arrest him.
Please be aware that just because there is no Council does not mean that the Jedi will now disconnect with each other. They can still create a 'Jedi club' supporting each other. Also, they will always be under the jursditcion of the government just like everyone else.
This has been a long argument so I will end it here. Good luck to my opponent :)
(1) "Dictate vs Guidance"
My opponent seems to be confused if the Council dictates to or guides the Jedi. Earlier, I stated that the Jedi Code must have qualified individuals to lead the Jedi vision, but the qualification depends on works and not faith, therefore they are democratically elected into that position based on the experience they have from the works they have done. I had also mentioned that the Jedi will develop their own unqualified interpretations of the Jedi Code and which will lead to the creation of factions, as to who has the better understanding of the Code. Division is totally against the Jedi way, where as unity is part of the foundation that makes them Jedi; therefore taking away thing administration that holds the Jedi together, could potentially lead to a conflict of leadership.
Along with division, collective dictatorship is also against all Jedi philosophy according to the movies. The only thing the Council clearly does, is offer a clear and recommended guidance for a questioning Jedi. I will offer an explanation: The Order dictates the actions of the Jedi through the Jedi Code, and the Council is the democratically elected individuals that are qualified, in the eyes of the other Jedi, to interpret that Code. I challenge you to provide one reference from the movies, where the Jedi Council intentionally decides against the Jedi Code. It is also important to note that, (even though it is not in the movies) the Jedi civil war was the result that stemmed from such an action.
(2) "role of supervisor can be taken by any number of figures"
Define " any number of figures". The Council is a group of twelve Jedi elected to guide the Jedi Order, so are you saying that the number of Council members needs to be expanded?
(3) "Emperor can fill in such role"
By the time the Palpatine becomes the Emperor, the Jedi Council is technically killed off so you can't say that he will fill in the role of supervising something he sought out to destroy.
(4) "a senior Jedi master to the Padawan under his care"
By "his care" you mean the Emperor. Again the Emperor could careless as to what happens to the Jedi or the Padawan.
(5) "That's how they learned of the title Jedi anyway."
Everyone learns the title Jedi, but not everyone is qualified to become one.
(6) "You don't necessarily need another Jedi to tell a Jedi right from wrong"
It's not just any Jedi, it's a group of Jedi that have been elected for the sole purpose of running the affairs of the Order and guide the adherents in the vision the Order provides. So another Jedi telling another Jedi right from wrong isn't a bad thing; but if a Jedi hears different answers to a question he has, he will veer far from the Truth that he is unqualified to interpret.
(7) "religious person does something detrimental...no need for someone to tell them anything from that religion"
This is so wrong on so many levels. Is there any sense for a Mormon to be told right from wrong by a Buddhist? No! Because the Mormon has to seek guidance from another Mormon that his qualified to provide interpretation on a Mormon texts. So you're basically saying that Han Solo can provide qualified and respectable advice that is on par with the Jedi Code to a Jedi as powerful as Luke...just...no.
(8) "An organization run of peer 2 peer advice"
In an organization, not everyone is capable of everything, therefore they are placed into ranks based on the level of commitment that they have to the Order. Positions are earned and the only way one earns this honorific position is showing that he is ready for the ensuing responsibilities. Peer 2 peer advice is a very elementary way of understanding the Code and serving Order; this type of advice-giving may exist among Jedi younglings but even then, they have a teacher to refer to if they need help understanding something. There is no way to be sure that Jedi are making the right decisions with the p2p method, because there is no superior administrative body to regulate the Jedi's actions.
(9) "After all, that's how religions are for the most part"
False. I am religious and that is not how things roll.
(10) "You work on what you know"
Then there will never be progression, if there isn't structure in the belief system you belong to.
(11) "Council is too restrictive and too controlling"
They have to be! In a Galaxy that is riddled with chaos, dismantling the structure of the Council in charge of spearheading the peace initiative, simply adds to the chaos and creates disunity among the Jedi. In other words, if u think the Jedi shouldn't stick in a line as you say, then you're promoting the Sith desire to spread chaos.
(12) My point of mentioning the animals and such, was to show that leadership and structure exists in all things. I didn't mention them for you to analyze the example itself but rather relate it to the existence of leadership and structural command here on Earth and with the Jedi Council and the necessity of leadership.
(13) "You are free to do as you please so long as you don't endanger others"
But who regulates things if you do endanger people? What classifies as endangerment? Who oversees the the outcome of a trial if a Jedi were to break the law? The Council has the answer for all and dismantling it welcomes mayhem.
(14) "will not hesitate to banish you if you put a toe out of line."
Again, I challenge you to provide one reference from the movies, where the Jedi Council intentionally decides against the Jedi Code.
(15) "Bounty hunters = selfish & if Jedi have no order they will, become bounty hunters"
Therefore, Pro has proven my point that if the structure of things are taken away from the Jedi, then they will end up like the Bounty Hunters, i.e. Selfish.
(16) "I would argue Boba Fett loved his father"
Well his genetic alteration didn't give him much of a choice. When Jango Fett was hired to be the genetic blueprint for the Republic"s clone army, he made one request: to be given an unaltered clone that he could raise as a son. Boba Fett was that son, and through Jango, he learned the art of combat. So essentially, Jango Fett was raising himself. Boba loved his "father" because of the obvious genetic connection he felt with Jango. The fact the Boba calls Jango "father" does not prove that Jango is actually is father but rather a father figure in the raising of a specially designed clone.
(17)"felt a strong connection to the cause of the Emperor"
No, in fact he felt a strong connection to the Emperor's piggy bank if you know what I mean. But I will still explain that Jango Fett received a pretty penny from the Emperor for his services so he could careless for the emperors cause. Recall the battle of Geonosis, where Jango was killed while fighting against Windu. If you pay attention closely you will notice that he died among the droids, before his genetic copies even arrived. If you claim that he had a connection with the emperor, had he lived a few seconds longer to see his clones in combat, would he have changed his allegiance and fought against the Droids? I guess we'll never find out, so that leaves the explanation I provided with him being a money lover, and could careless for the Cause of the Empire.
(18) Bounty Hunter by profession
I never said they're evil but they are selfish. If a Bounty Hunter wasn't selfish, then money wouldn't stop him from doing good, but unfortunately it does. Boba could have easily fought against Jabba and freed Luke but he chose money over a human being, so they are selfish.
(19) they too are doing what they need to do for the stability of the galaxy.
They could careless what happens to the stability of the Galaxy. They care for their wallet more than a cause that could lose or win. what difference does it make? as long as their pockets are full they'll fight for anyone with coin
(20) "They can still create a 'Jedi club'"
What's the point of that when they already have fully functioning Council?
Your turn :)
My opponent says (yet again) that the order provided by the Jedi Council is integral to ensure the Jedi do not misinterpret their teachings thus misrepresenting the Jedi. Only this time, he ensures us that they just "guide" and not dictate.
Firstly, if the Jedi Council's role is merely to "guide" as my opponent is saying, there wouldn't be any need for Qui-Gon to seek their approval before taking Anakin as his apprentice. Clearly, they are not there just to be gurus. They are an executive authority and if you go against them it would be treason or at the very least, you would be expelled.
Secondly, just because you have your own interpretation of your code doesn't necessarily mean you are a lost cause. As I have said, you can have your own Jedi advisors who do not dictate your actions. In this way, you would still be adhering to the Code. There is no need for an authority to both INTERPRET and DECIDE what you can or cannot do. After all, what good is it for you to be a Jedi if you cannot even think for yourselves good or bad? What good is it to be a Jedi if you are just a lightsaber-wielding warrior sent here and there to fight other people's battles? Ironically, my opponent is making it sound like Jedi are bounty hunters themselves. I am sure also, that on the Council itself you have people with different opinions. Difference of opinions does noe equate to disunity nor does it necessarily mean you are turning bad.
My opponent challenges me to cite one example of how the Council decided on something which was against the Code. They did when they asked Anakin to spy on the Chancellor. Clearly, that was ok according to their interpretation at the time. My opponent's challenge has been dismissed easily.
My opponent makes a comment on how he is religious and that is not how they do things. The problem I have with this is "religiousness" is entirely subjective. To you, maybe you are religious. But to others, you may not be so religious as you think. Also, who's to say your interpretation of your faith is right or wrong? I think even you would find it uncomfortable if someone tells you you are wrong and you have been sinning all this while. What's worse is when they actually DICTATE what you must or must not do.
Sadly, I am on holiday and these points are all I can manage. I would like to thank my opponent for this debate.
Happy new year everyone!
Happy new year to you too my friend :))
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.