Introduction
“Rebellions are built on hope.”
When many of us think of ‘revolution’, we think of radical social change, upheaval, even violence. It is an innately subversive, bottoms-up phenomenon that is powered by ‘the people’, and separated from terms such as ‘coup d’etat’, concerning the seizure of power by a small, elite group.
But why does revolution occur? Typically, it is due to poor social conditions – whether that is extreme inequality, poverty or injustice.
Charles Dickens once protested the social conditions of the working class in his novel Oliver, and warned that such inequality and injustice would inevitably lead to violence in ‘A Tale of Two Cities.’ A Tale of Two Cities followed the events of the French Revolution, a historical event that has inspired real and fictional revolutions alike.
The idea of revolution has regularly been covered in fiction. You have read it in the works of Les Misérables, Animal Farm, or in more modern works such as The Poppy War, and Mistborn. These works often highlight the moral conundrums that accompany such change; do rulers use violence to keep order in line? How do they deal with the inevitable counter revolution?
Star Wars, first released in 1977, followed a revolution from the eyes of Luke Skywalker, a farmboy unaware of his family’s long, and complicated history. It saw our band of heroes take on an Empire, reminiscent of guerrilla movements like the Viet Cong/Minh, who fought the French and Americans in the 20th century.
Today, at Soul of the Story, we will discuss the Star Wars Franchise (films 1-6), and how a tale of rebellion against tyranny grew into a nuanced analysis of how weak democracies can fall to authoritarianism.
“History is the trade secret of science fiction, and theories of history are its invisible engine.”
Ken MacLeod
Timeline of Revolution
For centuries, storytellers have drawn on the past and present to inspire their fiction. British writer Ken Macleod famously said, “History is the trade secret of science fiction, and theories of history are its invisible engine.”
A story’s foundation can be bolstered by history – real events that connect our roots into a story, giving it validity. Making it feel real.
Revolution is no different. People love the sweeping narratives of plucky underdogs defeating evil. But ‘revolution’ is not always viewed this way. Sometimes, disrupting the status quo can be presented as villainy. But why is this?
I believe it is largely due to the French and Russian Revolutions. In 1789, the Jacobins breached the social order, seeking radical change. They believed that all people had ‘natural rights’. These rights could don’t be taken away, by any government, any monarchy, any church. Sounds good, right?
Historian Dan Edelstein argues that the French Revolutions thought so too, believing it so vehemently that their opponents were ‘enemies of the human race.’ It dehumanised them, with this mindset convincing the revolutionaries that their enemies did not deserve these rights. During the Marxist Leninist Russian Revolution, Lenin and others described lesser socialists and the bourgeoisie as parasites, rats and blood suckers. It was this dehumanisation that facilitated the mass executions across Soviet Russia, and for the French it was seeing their enemies as monsters that sparked their desire to sever their enemies from the national body.
Revolution is complicated, and many writers know that. They cover the ‘day after’ revolution, and how difficult it is for revolutionary movements not only to enact their changes, but to do so without descending into violence. We have seen that in stories throughout the modern age. From Victor Hugo’s Les Miserables, to Animal Farm, to a Place of Greater Safety, Mistborn and the Poppy War.
Star Wars
During the original Star Wars Trilogy, George Lucas sought to reconstruct the idea of revolution as a fairytale of good vs evil, light vs dark; the same absolutism that occupied the minds of the Bolsheviks and the Jacobins.
Lucas captured the anti-authoritarian attitudes of the time, while deliberately omitting the brutal realities of modern revolutionary movements. Like the Viet Cong, the Rebellion was fighting against a larger, seemingly invulnerable ‘Empire.’ But unlike with the Viet Cong, Star Wars was not concerned with the political realities of revolution, more so the mythical lens that revolution and rebellion could present.
The rebels sought to restore a better past – that of the democratic republic, where the mystical Jedi lived freely, and the Empire did not exist. Our rebellion is a moral one, and while it seeks to enact real change, there are no moral questions posed to our characters, not really. Luke nearly falls to the dark side, of course, but our heroes are good people, and circumstances does not test them like they have Cassian Andor, for instance. There is no Reign of Terror, there is no radical pursuit of governmental change. Luke Skywalker is not Mao, and Leia is not Robespierre. It is the idea of revolution that is important, the subversive edge that makes a mainstream story feel a little more real, a little more gritty.
It was not until much later that Star Wars sought to deconstruct its own legend. Before Andor depicted the moral compromises of underground rebellion, the original hero’s journey had to subverted. With the prequels, George Lucas added weight to the rebellion, and hinted towards failures our heroes could make if they did not heed the lessons from the past.
The Prequels, The Phantom Menace
The prequel trilogy attempted to tell an ambitious, nuanced story within the Star Wars Universe. Until the Phantom Menace released in 1999, the Jedi of the Old Republic were presented as a mystical, ancient order – and users of the mysterious ‘force’.
However, by the time the opening crawl comes on screen, we learn some important truths: for much of the Republic’s long history, they have relied on the Jedi to keep peace and order throughout the galaxy; there has been no standing army, no collective force. It has been them acting as peacekeepers in a universe where that is not sufficient. As a result, the Jedi have become the arm of the Senate, focused on diplomatic negotiations and enforcing the status quo, rather than acting as they want to: as the independent guardians of the force.
The prequels aren’t trying to capture the mythic lens of rebellion – it is showing the slow, eeking rise of authoritarianism within a weak democracy.
Now, before we go any further, I believe it is important to understand George Lucas’s inspiration for this story. The parallels to Nazi German and the Fall of the Weimar Republic are clear – the manufactured crisis used to seize autocratic power over a democracy; the weak republic that sees a private entity attempt to influence policy through aggressive means. There are also parallels to the Fall of the Roman Republic. In both, Senators grew corrupt, focusing more on appearances rather than ruling and implementing effective policies. Augustus did not destroy the Senate – he simply stripped it of its power. Palpatine did the same.
During the Phantom Menace, it is clear that the Republic has failed in many aspects. During one powerful moment, Shmi Skywalker tells Padmé Amidala that slavery remains in Tatooine, although the Republic had outlawed it. To her “The Republic doesn’t exist out here.” They do not have the power, or influence to enforce their laws.
The Republic’s power is waning, and although our Jedi save the day during the Phantom Menace, it is evident that the current system is not working. George Lucas deconstructed the myth; now, he was showing how a democracy dies.
The Attack of the Clones
Attack of the Clones (2002) put the republic in a weaker position. Several years after the Naboo crisis, the Confederacy of Independent Systems (CIS, or Separatists for short) are arming themselves in secret, hoping to deter the republic from interfering with their planned succession. But why? Economic interests mostly – the Phantom menace occurred because of taxation, after all.
I will not go into the nitty-gritty of this story – because I imagine many of you know the story inside-out. In short, Palpatine is playing both sides, both as a popular Nabooian Senator and as Darth Sidious, a Sith who seeks to use fear and chaos to cement his power over the republic. Realising that the Separatists pose the Republic an existential threat, Jar-Jar Banks – quite possibly the greatest politician of all time – offers a proposal that will give Palpatine emergency powers to face this growing threat. Palpatine uses this opportunity to adopt a Clone Army as the new Grand Army of the Republic.
Now, as we discussed earlier, authoritarian leaders like to produce (or take advantage of) crises to strengthen their own position. George Lucas actively drew a thematic parallel to the Reichstag Fire – an arson attack on the German Parliament in 1933. In the aftermath, Hitler convinced President Paul Von Hindenburg to sign the Reichstag Fire Decree, suspending civil liberties and giving the Nazi government the power to fight a feared communist uprising. Both Hitler and Palpatine presented themselves as humble protectors of the people, and only accepted power to bring ‘order and stability’ to their nations. And while Palpatine was directly responsible for the Clone Wars, theories have persisted that Hitler and the Nazi’s were the true culprits of the fire, and did it to take power for themselves.
Anakin is one character who is open about his dissatisfaction with the Republic. During a conversation with Padre, he even admits that he would be open to a dictatorship if it worked better than the current system. This is effective storytelling for multiple reasons.
Firstly, as seen during the Phantom Menace, Anakin has experienced the failure of the Republic firsthand. He and his mothers were slaves, and when Qui-Gon-Jinn took him to Coruscant, his mother could not join him. She was still bound by her servitude, and not even a respected Jedi Knight could uphold the laws of the republic to save her. Now, Anakin is surrounded by politicians who were indifferent to the concerns of their constituents.
Anakin is a human representation of the Republic’s failures, and his desire for politicians to ‘just get work done’ exemplifies how when people lose faith in democracy, they turn to other options. This was clear during the Weimar Republic, the Roman Republic, and in other autocratic regimes that were born from democracy. In my opinion, this is one of the best conversations Padmé and Anakin have in Attack of the Clones, and it reveals just how fractured their political system really is.
Because by the end of AOTC, the Jedi are no longer peacekeepers. They are not the monasterial, mysterious order we had heard about during the original trilogy. They have been tasked with upholding peace, paired with a new Clone Army that was built by their enemies. But they will not uphold peace – because of circumstances, and a weak republic, they will normalise war.
Following years of conflict, Revenge of the Sith opens with galaxy much changed since AOTC. It is one that has been ravaged by war. One where billions suffer, and public opinion turns against the Jedi. But why? Because they have transitioned away from being revered peacekeepers into warriors – just as we discussed above.
After Anakin and Obi Wan rescue Palpatine from Count Dooku, we learn that Palpatine has still not relinquished his emergency powers, rather, they have grown through a succession of constitutional amendments. Palpatine has remained in office past the expiration of his term – and went against policy by appointing governors over each star system. Only a minority protests this, namely Padmé Amidala, Bail Organa, amongst others.
Given everything we know, I’m sure you are thinking – why is Palpatine so popular? Why is he still in power, loved, while the Jedi are distrusted?
Since the release of Star Wars in 1977, George Lucas has been open regarding his disdain for President Richard Nixon, and argued that he was a ‘power hungry politician who subverted the Senate.’
To Lucas, Nixon ‘pretended’ to support the democratic process, while secretly desiring to tear it all down. It is this belief that bled into Palpatine – a believable, machiavellian leader who played humble while eroding democratic norms. And although Nixon never ended up seizing power, Lucas’s opinions on Vietnam influenced how he perceived the events around him. Following 9/11, the Patriot Act saw 98 Senators vote in favour; one against. 420 voted for the President to act without congressional approval for groups involved in 9/11, one against. The Patriot Act expanded US Federal Surveillance and Investigative Powers; it aimed to enhance national security by monitoring electronic communications, freezing financial assets, amongst other strategies.
While the Patriot Act may not have been the same as Order 66 – the figure of 420-1 is significant. History has taught us that people are willing to give away their civil liberties in times of chaos. Following Mace Windu’s attack on Palpatine, Palpatine calls for the eradication of all Jedi, the dissolution of the republic and the establishment of a Galactic Empire. But there are no protests within the Senate. As Padmé Amidala famously puts it, “So this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause.” Thus begins a new era, one of authoritarianism and repression.
With the prequels, George Lucas sought to deconstruct his own legend. The Republic was not a ‘perfect, mystical government. It was deeply flawed, with Palatine’s manipulations only working because the republic was already failing. Regardless of what you think of the prequels – the dialogue, the romance, CGI, it was political and narratively ambitions. And with Revenge of the Sith, it hinted towards an interesting future – one where the aftermath of a revolution was just as difficult as the struggle to overthrow the Empire.
Conclusion
Rebellions are complicated phenomenons. Their association with social upheaval – and the use of violence to achieve it, is fundamentally controversial. They are subversive in nature, often requiring its revolutionaries to sacrifice their morality for ‘the cause’. We saw that in France, in Russia – when people believe they are acting on behalf of humanity, and their enemies against it – it can lead to intense spouts of violence.
In Star Wars, our rebels are the good guys. They are good, while the Empire are bad. We see that in the Nazi-esque aesthetics of the Empire, adoption of white, black and red, and the use of a weapon of mass destruction to destroy entire planets. Yet Star Wars is not concerned with the nuances of rebellion; it is a mystical tale of hope, love and compassion. Lucas believes that goodness exists in everyone, and it is this love that can triumph over hate and fear. And although this is an analysis of Star Wars, history and politics, I think that is lovely. It is a universal truth draped in a science-fiction fantasy, where villains can be redeemed and exploiters be defeated.
The prequels adopted more nuance – deconstructing the myth of the Jedi while explaining how the galaxy could become so totalitarian, so horrible for our band of heroes in A New Hope. Anakin’s story is ultimately a tragedy; the Shakespearean similarities with Othello and Hamlet are clear, and the pain of his upbringing is largely a by-product of the Republic’s failures.
By drawing upon these themes in Star Wars, it gave legitimacy and weight to the story. The universe felt real, and lived in. And in our upcoming articles, we will discuss what happened with the sequel trilogy, its differences with earlier plans for these films, and how the reality of rebellion is tackled in Rogue One and Andor.
References:
R. R. Palmer’s The Age of the Democratic Revolution: A Political History of Europe and America, 1760–1800 (1959, 1964)
The Terror of Natural Right Republicanism, the Cult of Nature, and the French Revolution Dan Edelstein.
Liz Declan, “Star Wars Fact Check: Did George Lucas Base The Rebellion On This Real-Life American War?” Screen Rant, March 1, 2025, https://screenrant.com/star-wars-george-lucas-vietnam-war-inspiration-explainer/.
John Arminio, “From a Certain Point of View: Examining the Politics of The Star Wars Saga,” Film89 January 24, 2020, https://www.film89.co.uk/from-a-certain-point-of-view-examining-the-politics-of-the-star-wars-saga/.
Leave a Reply