Star Wars fans might enjoy this. Weekly Standard backs Galactic Empire.

Yes this is completely nerdy, slight off-topic, and out of date, but someone just linked this in another forum and it is rather funny and creepy to hear the Right praising a totalitarian dictatorship, even if it is fictional. Here is the full link:http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/001/248ipzbt.asp Oh and here is a paragraph that sums it all up well I think. It is a direct quote:

"Make no mistake, as emperor, Palpatine is a dictator--but a relatively benign one, like Pinochet. It's a dictatorship people can do business with. They collect taxes and patrol the skies. They try to stop organized crime (in the form of the smuggling rings run by the Hutts). The Empire has virtually no effect on the daily life of the average, law-abiding citizen."

the Pinochet line kind of gives it away.

Pinochet, the "benign", fascist, murderous dictator; a true Republican role model.

The writer is also apparently a fan of Leo Strauss, one of the most malevolent figures ever to emerge from the dark bowels of the University of Chicago.

Good find; I think it reveals much about the conservative mindset in an offbeat fashion.

As I was reading it was thinking just how much these people would like the U.S. to become an Empire. Now their just looking for their resident sith lord. Though, they don't seem to have anyone quite that smart or manipulative just yet, but give them time and they'll find someone. The Pinochet line really kinda shocked me, too. It is hard to think they could consider him begin. I mean sure, there have been examples of dictators being benevolent throughout history, but Pinochet is not one of them.

Oh and the more I hear about the University of Chicago the more it scares me. First Friedman and now this guy. It seems like a breeding ground for the far right.

And that was back when the right was big on authoritarianism. Now they're back to preferring that version of Somalia that he claims the Rebel Alliance wound up causing by bringing down the Empire.

Strauss, a Jew, fled Germany in the 1930s for obvious and perfectly understandable reasons.

It is one of the ironies of history that he spent the rest of his miserable life trying to invent a a "soft" version of totalitarianism that amounts to Nazism shorn of its fanatical anti-Semitism but indistinguishable from it in most other ways. History, they say, has a sense of humor. True enough, it seems.

Lucas doesn't really go into what "daily life" is like under Imperial rule during the course of the films. I don't read expanded universe literature (and the author proclaims to ignore it) so maybe it's covered more in those books. But, the fact is that Star Wars films are constant action and constant focus on the main characters. We get a glimpse when Luke is still with his aunt and uncle, and there are actually deleted scenes where Luke's friend (I think it's Wedge) is worried about being drafted into service by the Empire. Additionally, Tattooine is pretty much bumfuck nowhere, so just because Luke and his aunt and uncle seem to live unimpeded by the Empire, doesn't mean that people in more important locations don't constantly feel the presence of the Imperial Army.

The guy also completely ignores the fact that the reason the Republic is both dysfunctional and intent on putting down the separatists, is that Palpatine is manipulating everything behind the scenes to bring about his own rise to power.

the Sith in the prequels, the Empire is a humans-only group (shades of eugenics). ROTJ made a point of showing non-humans in the Rebel Alliance.

What this article completely neglects is that the struggle between "the empire" and "the rebels" is essentially the ongoing struggle between the loyalists of the old republic and the conspirators who overthrew it. The rebels are the military wing of the old republic, so to speak. They are not the government. They seem like a chaotic band anarchic band, but their civilian leadership actually isn't at all. The empire, on the other hand, was never a legitimate government to begin with, and much in the Star Wars movies indicates that their main occupation is trying to eliminiate traces of the old republic, not actual governing. And we can see how ruthless they are in doing so. In some sense, the "rebels" are the legitimite government, or what is left of it.

We do not see in the Star Wars movies what the rule of the empire would be like, because they are never fully able to establish unchecked power. Starting from the day where Palpatine seizes "emergency powers" it is a slow descent, leading only about twenty years later (in Episode IV) to a complete dissolution of the old senate. It looks a lot like the war between "rebels" and "empire" has been going on pretty much ever since Palpatine seized power, or shortly thereafter, so one can argue that the rebels are not the attackers here, they are actually exercising self-defense, the self-defense of parts of the old republic trying to remain intact.
They are certainly not "outsiders" trying to overthrow.

As for the "meritocracy" argument: I don't buy it. The "rebels" (or old republicans) are very meritocratic. Han Solo comes completely out of no where and manages to rize to a top level position on skill and merit. And most importantly: Their civilian leadership are not Jedi. They are elected officials, while the Jedi are protectors and advisers without any political power. The Jedi are not much more than an elite branch of the miliary.

In the empire, on the other hand, while there might be some room for advance through merit in the lower ranks, the top level positions are exclusively reserved for "those with the right blood", i.e. Sith, people with Jedi powers. And they are not elected, they seize power by force, always, even from each other.

The battle between Sith and Jedi is essentially a battle between those who think that people who have "the force" should be servants and protectors of common people and those who think they should be rulers.

As for the "Darth Vader spares Luke's life" line: Well this is pretty obvious. There is a special relationship between them, and much of the story actually evolves around Luke being able to sway Darth Vader back to the "good side". Notice how after this encounter Darth Vader no longer executes generals? I thought it was obvious that Luke, by his mere presence, was bringing out the forgiving side of Darth Vader. This IMO is underscored by the conversation that Luke has with Yoda after the encounter. Yoda seems surprised that Darth Vader told Luke that he is his father, calls this "unexpected". Perhaps he didn't think that Darth Vader even remembers, and then calls it "unfortunate", maybe because he believes that Luke, had he been fully trained, might have been able to sway Darth Vader already then.

The Imperially Military might be, but the Empire itself is a theocracy ruled over by a two man cult. The Sith are a dark side religion just like the Jedi are a religion of light. The difference is that the Republic separated Church and State and the Empire did not. In the Empire all power was held by a priesthood that was so closed that the rules of the Order only allowed for two sith at anyone time, so your odds of joining were pretty slim and even if you did there is a good chance you might not survive the training.

He claims that if Leia had just betrayed the Rebellion than Alderaan would have been spared. He also says it was justified since Alderaan was likely a breeding ground for rebel terrorist cells. I guess that is how they justify all the civilian deaths in the War on Terror.

One is a little odd...
http://www.neatorama.com/2011/05/24/disneys-star-wars-weekend/

and the other is down right cool...
http://www.pbh2.com/astounding/incredible-star-wars-propaganda-posters/

Ho-lee see-it! Then again, it's the Weakly Stupid...

Benign... except for the mass torture and murder, and dismantling the economic system to create a state of abject poverty for the majority of the nation.