Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2: Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind. My name
Speaker 2: is Robert.
Speaker 3: Lamb and I am Joe McCormick, and we are returning
Speaker 3: today with the second part in our Star Wars week series.
Speaker 3: In the last episode, we focused exclusively on the ice
Speaker 3: planet Hawth from the Empire Strikes Back. We took a
Speaker 3: close look at tonton physiology and how that relates to
Speaker 3: realities from paleontology in the real world, about theropod dinosaurs
Speaker 3: that lived in freezing Arctic and Antarctic conditions in the
Speaker 3: Cretaceous period. We also talked about the real world viability
Speaker 3: of the infamous Taunton sleeping bag. The whole segment there
Speaker 3: about you know, how long can you survive inside a
Speaker 3: gutted horse and a frozen environment? And then finally we
Speaker 3: looked at the ecology of the carnivorous beast of hawk,
Speaker 3: the Wampa. So if you haven't heard part one, i'd
Speaker 3: recommend go check that one out first. But for today
Speaker 3: we're going to be changing gears and focusing on some
Speaker 3: sith psychology topics or maybe a general episode on Sith science.
Speaker 2: Yes, yes, and you know I was thinking maybe I
Speaker 2: should have actually worn my black hoodie all the way
Speaker 2: for a Sith episode, you know, But you applied less
Speaker 2: I cream that sort of thing, do we. But it's
Speaker 2: too late for that. We have to go with what
Speaker 2: I got.
Speaker 3: It is too late for you, now, Okay, Well, why
Speaker 3: don't you take things first. I know we both have
Speaker 3: our own sort of Sith psychology topics we want to address,
Speaker 3: but you have a very good one that I'm keen
Speaker 3: for us to get to.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, I guess first we'll just briefly mention what
Speaker 2: the Sith are. I think everyone listening to this has
Speaker 2: a pretty good idea. But yeah, we're talking about the
Speaker 2: bad guys of the majority of the Star Wars films.
Speaker 2: This is the dark Side Force religion, dark Side Forlhilosophy
Speaker 2: and also an ancient warrior cult that long existed in
Speaker 2: stark opposition to the Jedi order. And while the Jedi
Speaker 2: stressed balance and equanimity, the Sith embraced the power of
Speaker 2: negative emotional states. Using those states is their key to
Speaker 2: force manipulation, harnessing this submerged power of the Force, and
Speaker 2: they seek both worldly and otherworldly power through violent oppression.
Speaker 3: That sounds about right, hate, anger, viciousness, selfishness. That they
Speaker 3: don't only practice these things, they conceptually embrace them. They say, yes,
Speaker 3: that's what I am, and it's what I'm for.
Speaker 2: Yeah, red light, sabers, black hooded figures, that sort of thing.
Speaker 2: You know, they have their own esthetic that they cling
Speaker 2: to as well. And you know, just as the Jedi
Speaker 2: are based in large part on a number of Eastern concepts,
Speaker 2: we can look to various examples of the Siths sort
Speaker 2: of dark magic and say Dallas tradition, where it might
Speaker 2: be portrayed as an imbalance of Yin and Yang, favoring
Speaker 2: the subtle, hidden darkness of Yen. Not in this context
Speaker 2: because Yen is evil, but because everything has to be balanced,
Speaker 2: and if you're presuming something that is lopsided, that is
Speaker 2: out of balance, well then it can become a dark path. Well.
Speaker 3: Not to get overly nerdy, but I do now recall
Speaker 3: some of the temptations offered by Sith lords in the
Speaker 3: Star Wars movies often are bids for balance, right like
Speaker 3: it doesn't At this point, Senator Palpatine explain his knowledge
Speaker 3: of the dark side of the Forest to the young
Speaker 3: Anakin by saying that we have to understand both sides,
Speaker 3: not just the dogmatic one side of the Jedi.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this is pretty fascinating, and this is also a
Speaker 2: trend or thread anyway that is discussed later in some
Speaker 2: of the sequel materials as I remember this idea that
Speaker 2: you know, maybe it's like the Jedi are not the
Speaker 2: ultimate answer either, but there's some sort of ultimate in between,
Speaker 2: a balance of forces that there has to be darkness
Speaker 2: in light, and you know, certainly would be more in
Speaker 2: keeping with with with Dallas philosophy, for example, but even
Speaker 2: in Dallas treatment of magic, you know, there's a lot
Speaker 2: of talk about, you know, what happens when your interests
Speaker 2: become increasingly driven by ego or or focused on harmful intent.
Speaker 2: And then you couple this with a desire for immortality,
Speaker 2: but not immortality for any noble reason, but just for
Speaker 2: selfishness or and hunger for power, and yet then it
Speaker 2: becomes a dark road. But yeah, there's there's an interesting
Speaker 2: case to be made, and perhaps it's exactly the kind
Speaker 2: of case of Sith Lord would make that the path
Speaker 2: of the Jedi is also one of imbalance, that if
Speaker 2: you ignore these dark paths, something else is out of line.
Speaker 2: And you know, certainly we see case after case of
Speaker 2: light Jedi that ends up falling into darkness, and maybe
Speaker 2: that because there's sort of a pendulum situation in place here.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that is interesting. So there is some truth to
Speaker 3: the idea of the narrowness of the Jedi. Yet at
Speaker 3: the same time, I think, at least within the prequel films,
Speaker 3: I know, this bid for balance that Palpatine makes is
Speaker 3: ultimately revealed to be a false temptation. Oh it is,
Speaker 3: you know, it's not it's not actually bringing Anakin or
Speaker 3: Palpatine to a place of greater, more harmonious understanding. It
Speaker 3: is a bid to like, no, why don't you try it? Come,
Speaker 3: come taste the dark side? Ya, that's really the operative
Speaker 3: thing there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Darthsidius slash Emperor Palpatine, you know, tremendous villain, but
Speaker 2: also absolutely a villain, Absolutely a murderous, hateful, mass murdering,
Speaker 2: genocidal ruler. So yeah, without any doubt he is the
Speaker 2: villain in the scenario.
Speaker 3: But there's never just one Sith villain, is there.
Speaker 2: That's right. Star Wars fans are well aware of the
Speaker 2: Sith rule of two, which, if you dig into the
Speaker 2: lore reportedly was instituted by Sith Lord Darth Bain after
Speaker 2: the Dark Force Order Slash religion was nearly eradicated by
Speaker 2: the Jedi Order during the Jedi Sith War. And as
Speaker 2: the part of this too is that the apparently the
Speaker 2: Old Republic era Sith, this is back when there were
Speaker 2: a lot of Sith. There's a whole full fledged faction
Speaker 2: like you might encounter in the Knights of the Old
Speaker 2: Republic games. They were apparently plagued by infighting, and this
Speaker 2: restructuring was also intended to provide increased stability as well
Speaker 2: as secrecy that would enable the Scith to not only
Speaker 2: survive long enough to regain their power, but also to
Speaker 2: eventually enact some sort of horrible vengeance against the Jedi.
Speaker 3: But so functionally, what is the Sith rule of two?
Speaker 3: All right?
Speaker 2: So basically it is that we're going to reduce this
Speaker 2: entire Force Religion, Dark Side Force Relie to a two
Speaker 2: person religious order, a two person organization for the most part.
Speaker 2: And as we mentioned in the last episode, you know,
Speaker 2: we're not going to be completely dogmatic when it comes
Speaker 2: to the law here. Realizing that within Canon Star Wars
Speaker 2: fandom and extended universe lore legends, if you will. There
Speaker 2: are going to be a lot of additional facts, and
Speaker 2: we're happy to talk about all of that in over
Speaker 2: email and we can get into it and listener mail,
Speaker 2: but we're going to deal pretty broad strokes for the
Speaker 2: most part here. Now.
Speaker 3: While we always do accept factual corrections, I will say
Speaker 3: if you're too pedantic about star Wars low, you may
Speaker 3: be in for some light ribbing if we address it
Speaker 3: in listener may.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, all right, so yeah, always too. There are
Speaker 2: a master and an apprentice from Bain onward the Sith.
Speaker 2: They're able to exist in near secrecy for roughly a
Speaker 2: thousand years. A master, the master of the two, holds
Speaker 2: absolute power, while the apprentice craves that power, eventually inevitably
Speaker 2: slaying their own master and taking on a new apprentice
Speaker 2: to continue the chain. So the apprentice kills the master,
Speaker 2: becomes the new master, finds a new apprentice, and this
Speaker 2: chain continues with various ins and outs. Tell the Sith
Speaker 2: apprentice Darth Sidius, slays his master, Darth Plagus, and takes
Speaker 2: on a series of apprentices himself, ultimately failing to pass
Speaker 2: the mantle of Sith Lord on to anybody else. However,
Speaker 2: of course, Sidius does largely succeed in the long term
Speaker 2: Sith goal of eradicating the rival Jedi order, So.
Speaker 3: From his point of view, he gets a lot done,
Speaker 3: but he does not successfully pass on the torch to
Speaker 3: an apprentice, right or pass on the torch? Well, okay,
Speaker 3: I actually have a question. I maybe you don't know
Speaker 3: the answer, but if you do, are the Sith aware
Speaker 3: they're like explicitly aware that it goes the apprentice, kills
Speaker 3: the master and then takes it takes the master's place, Like,
Speaker 3: do they have this in mind? It's like part of
Speaker 3: the plan.
Speaker 2: Well, I haven't, to my memory, I haven't read a
Speaker 2: novelization or or encountered any media that like directly gets
Speaker 2: into this. I'm sure they do. But my sort of
Speaker 2: gut read on all of this is that you're dealing
Speaker 2: with with very egotistical individuals, and I can easily imagine
Speaker 2: that as the apprentice, you know this is the way
Speaker 2: things go, and you know that the pattern has always
Speaker 2: been that the new dark Lord then takes on an apprentice,
Speaker 2: and that apprentice rises up and kills the paster. But
Speaker 2: you can easily imagine that once the individual becomes the
Speaker 2: dark Lord, they probably think they are the exception to
Speaker 2: the rule.
Speaker 3: I am different, Yes, very perceptive, Yes, that must be
Speaker 3: that way.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Or and in the same way that you know,
Speaker 2: you will have you know, various individuals throughout history who
Speaker 2: recognize the the basic power structure that allows them to
Speaker 2: take power, but then reject it as soon as it
Speaker 2: is also the means to their own exit from power.
Speaker 2: So when you see that time and time again.
Speaker 3: A standard part of the Tyrants playbook, and it is
Speaker 3: powered by Hubris. Yeah, thinking that I'm different, the rules
Speaker 3: don't apply to me like they do to everybody.
Speaker 2: Else, right, right, So I wanted to get into the
Speaker 2: rule to here a little bit, you know, to be clear.
Speaker 2: It fulfills its main purpose in that it is it
Speaker 2: makes for great drama, it makes for great lore, and
Speaker 2: you know, ultimately we're talking about Black Magic Space Wizards.
Speaker 2: So it's silly to get too serious about all of this,
Speaker 2: but I think it's also fun fun to in good
Speaker 2: faith do some computation on this question. Okay, so let's
Speaker 2: start with just the realm of secrecy again. The Sith
Speaker 2: want to stay very secretive throughout this rebuilding phase so
Speaker 2: that they can eventually carry out their vengeance, make sure
Speaker 2: the Jedi forget about us, and then we can rise up.
Speaker 2: So there is of course an old adage that reminds
Speaker 2: us that three can keep a secret if two of
Speaker 2: them are dead, And the logic is that secrets can
Speaker 2: only effectively be kept by parties of one. And I
Speaker 2: don't know that there's much to be gained by going
Speaker 2: into a lot of game theory on this one. I
Speaker 2: originally thought I might go in that direction, but at
Speaker 2: the end of the day, a lot of this comes
Speaker 2: down to the advantages gained by keeping or revealing secrets.
Speaker 2: And very broadly, the whole Sith rule of two depends
Speaker 2: on the master keeping at least some secrets of power
Speaker 2: to themselves, and then the promise of those secrets and
Speaker 2: power is the sole thing driving the apprentice, both their
Speaker 2: loyalty and their eventual betrayal of their master. But all things,
Speaker 2: I mean, all things considered equal, if you reduce your
Speaker 2: organization to just two people, you're probably going to have
Speaker 2: a much easier time keeping things secret. There's going to
Speaker 2: be fewer leaks that way, fewer people exiting the company
Speaker 2: and so forth.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it is hard for me to imagine a model
Speaker 3: by which adding more people to the conspiracy decreases the
Speaker 3: odds of being leaked.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, two people secrecy, two people conspiracy makes sense. However,
Speaker 2: coming back to that whole if two are dead, example,
Speaker 2: secrets are best kept when everyone is dead. And the
Speaker 2: kicker is that having us a secrets a secret society
Speaker 2: of two is in fact very close to the absolute
Speaker 2: secrecy that comes with death, which leads us to our
Speaker 2: next consideration, and that is stability of your organization, your
Speaker 2: two person organization moving across time.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: One thing I was thinking about is if there is
Speaker 3: only one master and one apprentice, and you consider the
Speaker 3: Master the expert in the dark side of the force.
Speaker 3: If the Master dies before the apprentice's training is complete,
Speaker 3: doesn't that mean that some expertise has just been lost? Yeah,
Speaker 3: like nobody else knows it, nobody has act it.
Speaker 2: There are so many ways that can go wrong. Like,
Speaker 2: another way I was thinking about is if the Master
Speaker 2: becomes hesitant to in some way let go of his power.
Speaker 2: And this is this is kind of difficult to hash
Speaker 2: out because like the Master traditionally only gives up his
Speaker 2: power when he is killed. But then the model is
Speaker 2: sort of a passing of the baton. But if the
Speaker 2: Master is too good at not being killed, he might
Speaker 2: eventually get bumped off by a rather undeserving apprentice, you know,
Speaker 2: like like he eventually like he's just defeated one apprentice
Speaker 2: is like fifth apprentice, he brings in a sixth apprentice.
Speaker 2: This guy's just as green as grass. But the Master
Speaker 2: is so old and so weakened from these various secession
Speaker 2: battles that he's just knocked off really easily. And now
Speaker 2: the whole order is left in the hands of someone
Speaker 2: who has no idea what they're doing.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a problem.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and then how are you going to build up
Speaker 2: your your, your, your, your momentum to take out the
Speaker 2: Jedi Order at that point? Yeah, So yeah, the ideas
Speaker 2: this chain of Master and apprentice has to continue undisrupted
Speaker 2: across the centuries, centuries again, during which the Sith are
Speaker 2: supposedly keeping a low profile. But you know, these guys
Speaker 2: don't mean they're doing nothing. They're staying isolated, but they're
Speaker 2: still going to encounter threats and dangers. You know that
Speaker 2: they're going to have their own adventures, and there's probably
Speaker 2: going to be one or two crackpot Jedi out there
Speaker 2: who are convinced that the Sith are still out there
Speaker 2: and we should maybe try and hunt them down.
Speaker 3: I mean, if we just take the case of Darth Sidius,
Speaker 3: I say, even within your own execution of plans, there
Speaker 3: seems to be a lot of danger. There's you know,
Speaker 3: all these ruses with being kidnapped by Droid separatists and
Speaker 3: things like that, placing yourself in an awful lot of danger,
Speaker 3: especially when you are the only repository of Sith knowledge. Now, well,
Speaker 3: I guess not the only one at this point, because
Speaker 3: when that happened, there was still a Dooku out there,
Speaker 3: wasn't there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, But always, you know, there's always the sense that
Speaker 2: he is holding something back. There are secrets he's not
Speaker 2: going to pass on yet, even though we do catch
Speaker 2: him more or less in a lie here with Anakin,
Speaker 2: because he's like, I know how people can live forever.
Speaker 2: I know how to bring the dead back to life.
Speaker 2: And then once he actually brings Anakin into the fold,
Speaker 2: he's like, we've got some work to do on this,
Speaker 2: but I have some great leads on the answer to
Speaker 2: this question.
Speaker 3: Who would have thought it that Sith lords will lie,
Speaker 3: they will sometimes make false promises.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, so well, one, there are obviously several problems,
Speaker 2: potential problems with this setup. So even if this is
Speaker 2: a stable system, so you know, at least you know,
Speaker 2: through these long centuries of not making huge swings to
Speaker 2: take over the republic, how much work can the sith
Speaker 2: get done given that they're an asymmetrical two person organizations.
Speaker 2: So again, not even like a full partnership, but a
Speaker 2: master and apprentice set up.
Speaker 3: Very good question. I actually just have some more questions
Speaker 3: occurring to me, but I'm want to let you go
Speaker 3: with this first.
Speaker 2: Okay, So, I mean, obviously corporations and governments they have
Speaker 2: a hard time keeping secrets, but they can also do
Speaker 2: things that at a much larger scale, at industrial scale.
Speaker 2: But you know, presumably one of the main reasons that
Speaker 2: a Sith lord takes on an apprentice at all is
Speaker 2: that they need a powerful underling. They need some help.
Speaker 2: It's not a one person job. And yeah, they may
Speaker 2: have a small network of less powerful minions, and some
Speaker 2: of these minions may have there's no idea of what
Speaker 2: their master's all about. You know, it may be a
Speaker 2: hidden identity like oh we don't we don't work for
Speaker 2: a dark lord. We work for a senator, or or
Speaker 2: you know, whatever the cover story may be. But yeah,
Speaker 2: it seems like you're going to be very limited in
Speaker 2: what you can do, and therefore any kind of like
Speaker 2: vengeance you're planning against, you know, a major interplanetary civilization,
Speaker 2: it's going to take some time building that up.
Speaker 3: Yeah, totally.
Speaker 2: We also might look at this greatly reduced and sustained
Speaker 2: reduced population of two as an extreme bottleneck for an organization.
Speaker 2: I've recently been reading about various new religious movements, and
Speaker 2: by and large you tend to find that a two
Speaker 2: person religion, which essentially is what the sith are in
Speaker 2: this case, it constitutes either the beginning or the end
Speaker 2: of a religion, not so much the heyday of it.
Speaker 3: I think I would have known even without looking ahead
Speaker 3: in the notes which examples you may be thinking of here.
Speaker 3: But it does strike me as common that at the
Speaker 3: beginning of a new religious movement, it's often not just
Speaker 3: one person preaching or crying in the wilderness. It's one
Speaker 3: person and another loyalist. There's somebody there to be giving
Speaker 3: the message and somebody else there to be saying that's right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Yeah, I think you can look at a number
Speaker 2: of new religious movements where you have a pair of
Speaker 2: individuals sometimes following into falling into the roles of visionary
Speaker 2: on one hand, an organizer on the other. Uh, and
Speaker 2: that between the two of them they're able to sort
Speaker 2: of codify the faith in its early goings. And also
Speaker 2: there might be even be in some cases a kind
Speaker 2: of like shared paranoia, you know, like the two individuals
Speaker 2: can really be a think tank for the creation of
Speaker 2: some sort of new faith, you know, and really enhancing
Speaker 2: whatever the kind of outside viewpoint or outside worldview is
Speaker 2: being nurtured in this in this partnership. So two examples
Speaker 2: that came to my mind. First of all, the Heaven's
Speaker 2: Gate religious group at its peak had hundreds of members,
Speaker 2: but initially consisted of just Marshall apple White and Bonnie Nettles,
Speaker 2: who developed and largely solidified the teachings that would gain
Speaker 2: masses of followers. A second example that comes to mind
Speaker 2: is that from twenty seventeen to twenty twenty five, the
Speaker 2: United Society of Believers in Christ's Second Appearing, or the Shakers.
Speaker 2: Some of you may have Shakers on the brain because
Speaker 2: it was the topic The founding of the Shakers was
Speaker 2: covered in the excellent film The Testament of Anne Lee,
Speaker 2: which I highly recommend, really good view. During between twenty
Speaker 2: seventeen and twenty twenty five, they were reduced to just
Speaker 2: two followers, and this was due, I believe, in large part,
Speaker 2: among other factors, to the group's key teachings against procreation.
Speaker 2: Hard to really build up your follower base whilst in
Speaker 2: the movement you're not supposed to have any offspring. Now
Speaker 2: I'm to understand they've subsequently absorbed a third member, but
Speaker 2: unless something drastically changes, it's hard to imagine that this
Speaker 2: group's stability is improving and that they're on the upswing. Incidentally,
Speaker 2: it has also been reported that Heaven's Gate is currently
Speaker 2: reduced to two members active and kind of a caretaker
Speaker 2: role for the movement's website and publications. But again also
Speaker 2: not a case where I think there's a strong argument
Speaker 2: to be made that Heaven's Gate has a big future
Speaker 2: ahead of them in terms of you know, building up
Speaker 2: those followers. Right. So, yeah, you could see the synergy
Speaker 2: of a two person religious movement as a great sort
Speaker 2: of consolidation engine, and maybe there's even against shared paranoia
Speaker 2: that helps cement a radical worldview, and I think a
Speaker 2: lot of that rather fits the Sith. You can imagine
Speaker 2: this loan Sith Lord and Sith Apprentice like out there
Speaker 2: in the galactic wilderness just getting like crazier and crazier
Speaker 2: and more overflowing with hatred, and it just you know,
Speaker 2: solidifies various aspects of their philosophy. But you know, if
Speaker 2: the Faith undergoes changes during these tenures, during these little
Speaker 2: think tank periods, well what happens if it undergoes too
Speaker 2: much change? One can easily imagine it doing so, and
Speaker 2: that would to put the whole like you know, multi
Speaker 2: generational enterprise in some sort of jeopardy, because on one hand,
Speaker 2: what if the Sith Lord and his apprentice begin introducing
Speaker 2: changes that make the Faith less desirable by others and
Speaker 2: you know, less combatible with a larger world, So it
Speaker 2: might be harder to bring on the next apprentice and
Speaker 2: allow the Faith to continue on into a new generation
Speaker 2: or reach the point where it is able to carry
Speaker 2: out its vengeance. Or what if it makes it like
Speaker 2: more palpable to a larger audience and in doing so,
Speaker 2: brings about the end of the secret small scale you
Speaker 2: know niche system that they've put in place.
Speaker 3: Now, I actually have a question. I wonder if you
Speaker 3: know the answer to this. In the prequel films, we
Speaker 3: see that Anakin Skywalker is lured into apprenticeship with Darth
Speaker 3: Sidius under false pretenses like this, This relationship begins, the
Speaker 3: mentorship begins without Anakin knowing that he is a Sith Lord,
Speaker 3: and they've already become pretty close and establish some loyalty
Speaker 3: before there is a revelation. Is that a standard recruiting
Speaker 3: pitch or are there a lot of apprenticeships that begin
Speaker 3: with full knowledge that I'm a Sith Lord. I need
Speaker 3: a Sith apprentice.
Speaker 2: How about you? I think I'm trying to remember exactly,
Speaker 2: but I believe it is more like that with Douku's apprenticeship.
Speaker 2: I think it's a little more out in the open
Speaker 2: like that, So, and you know, you could I think
Speaker 2: there's a I think there's a larger understanding that the
Speaker 2: Sith are not the only Dark Force users in the galaxy.
Speaker 2: So there may be a case where there's already someone
Speaker 2: who's been exploring the dark side of the Force, at
Speaker 2: least in an amateur fashion. Maybe with the even within
Speaker 2: the confines of another sort of dark Force religion, and
Speaker 2: then someone else comes along and says, hey, here, you're
Speaker 2: into this dark Force stuff. Let me tell you about
Speaker 2: the sith obvious. Would you like to go pro Yeah,
Speaker 2: because obviously we see this with a lot of different
Speaker 2: religious movements and religious groups. You know, where someone gets
Speaker 2: into say, you know, ufology and some sort of UFO
Speaker 2: religion before you know, changing up joining a different one
Speaker 2: starting their own. Well, I mean, and we don't even
Speaker 2: have to look to UFO religions. We can look to
Speaker 2: various Christian groups or you know, any group associated with
Speaker 2: any of the major long standing world religions.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: So yeah, the recruitment policy, you know, the actual details
Speaker 2: of the recruitment I guess could could vary. But we
Speaker 2: might even look at the recruitment of Anakin as being
Speaker 2: an outlier where he's like, hey, I have to admit
Speaker 2: something to you. I'm a Sith lord. And then Anakin's like,
Speaker 2: what what are you talking about? And you know, he
Speaker 2: has to remind him, well, I'm also I'm also your friend,
Speaker 2: and I've made you know, I've made sense on all
Speaker 2: these other points, so you have to continue to follow
Speaker 2: me into this.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, I guess you could look at that from
Speaker 3: a storytelling point of view as Anakin is a particularly
Speaker 3: high value apprentice and it is worth the risk of
Speaker 3: making this, you know, overture toward a potentially non receptive
Speaker 3: pupil because he's so so high quality, because he's good.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, I guess it's hard to imagine. I guess
Speaker 2: you'd have to deal with a scenario where you'd have
Speaker 2: to have like a very high profile celebrity that is
Speaker 2: being indoctrinated into a certain religion or a head of
Speaker 2: state or something like that. That would probably be the
Speaker 2: Something along those lines would be comparable to the scenario.
Speaker 4: Yeah, but yeah, again, I can't help but think, like,
Speaker 4: what are the risks to changes to sith doctrine, because
Speaker 4: presumably they have traditions, they have books, But then you
Speaker 4: end up with certainly one, maybe two individuals at max
Speaker 4: having a tremendous amount of control over how the religion
Speaker 4: is portrayed and interpreted.
Speaker 2: You know, I was reminded, for instance, something we've discussed
Speaker 2: in the show before, the example of the late eighteenth
Speaker 2: dynasty pharaoh Naughton, who elevated the solar deity Autan, and
Speaker 2: you know, above all the other gods of the Egyptian pantheon,
Speaker 2: and in this case, his successors and the religious establishment
Speaker 2: returned things to the way they were followed after his death.
Speaker 2: But you can imagine cases, especially with a small system
Speaker 2: like this, where that wouldn't be possible or desired depending
Speaker 2: on what one or two individuals end up coming in
Speaker 2: the wake of it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's right. So instead of there being a whole
Speaker 3: people to remember the old gods and then lead us
Speaker 3: back to the old ways, it could be that, like
Speaker 3: we've been saying it, with these other things, that the
Speaker 3: knowledge of the old ways are wiped out.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it only conceivably takes conceivably takes one sith lord
Speaker 2: to say, actually, we're not really all about getting revenge
Speaker 2: on the Jedi anymore. You know, we're a dark side religion,
Speaker 2: but we're peaceful and we don't believe in violence. You know.
Speaker 2: It's like those kind of changes could conceivably take place
Speaker 2: within one generation of the religion and then it gets
Speaker 2: passed on to the next. And then if there is
Speaker 2: any kind of like expansion of population or like you know,
Speaker 2: you know, clergy, then things could become solidified in a
Speaker 2: way that you don't easily backslide from now.
Speaker 3: There's one thing I was wondering about a minute ago
Speaker 3: that I wanted to bring up quickly, which is the
Speaker 3: Sith are very open in their embrace of moral vices. So,
Speaker 3: you know, the Sith, at least as far as I'm aware,
Speaker 3: maybe it's different in some of the books or something,
Speaker 3: but it seems like they're openly advocating of They openly
Speaker 3: advocate hate. Of course, negative emotions like anger and hate,
Speaker 3: but also treachery and deception and things like that. And
Speaker 3: that kind of makes me feel like it would it
Speaker 3: would undermine a conspiracy, because a conspiracy may be deceptive
Speaker 3: in its overall presentation to the larger struck sure of
Speaker 3: politics or to the outside world. I would think that
Speaker 3: within a conspiracy there actually has to be some level
Speaker 3: of trust, you know, some kind of like mutual trust
Speaker 3: and shared values. And so if the if there's a
Speaker 3: conspiracy of two people and they both openly say that
Speaker 3: lying and treachery and backstabbing are good, how do you
Speaker 3: effectuate enough trust to carry out a conspiracy together.
Speaker 2: That's a great point, and I think that that might
Speaker 2: actually be a point that is is difficult to to
Speaker 2: you know, come up with an answer to we maybe
Speaker 2: have to do a fair amount of mental gymnastics to
Speaker 2: make it work, because yeah, if if there if everyone's
Speaker 2: a backstabber, then how do you establish any kind of
Speaker 2: working trust? I mean, I guess the easy answer is
Speaker 2: that the apprentice needs the power and the knowledge of
Speaker 2: the Master, and so he's going to be They're going
Speaker 2: to be loyal as long as they can and in
Speaker 2: order to gain that information. And meanwhile, the Master needs
Speaker 2: the help of the apprentice to carry out you know,
Speaker 2: whatever you know, task and duties and plots uh, they
Speaker 2: have in mind, and so they're gonna have some sort
Speaker 2: of loyalty to them as well. But yeah, eventually you're
Speaker 2: going to get into some sort of a scenario where uh,
Speaker 2: that trust is going to decay. Uh. And actually, you know,
Speaker 2: we're we're about to get into that a bit here,
Speaker 2: because you know, again, the the the the passing of
Speaker 2: the baton pretty much exclusively. I think there may be
Speaker 2: some counterexamples if you get into the deeper like comic
Speaker 2: book and novel lore and the expanded universe and so
Speaker 2: forth in the legends, but for the most part, it
Speaker 2: has the transition has to occur when an apprentice kills
Speaker 2: the master, and you can tease that apart, like it
Speaker 2: to what extent is the Master letting go at that point?
Speaker 2: You know, at what point if they sort of like
Speaker 2: pushed it to the level where okay, I have a
Speaker 2: worthy apprentice because they can physically kill me, I guess
Speaker 2: you can sort of look at it that way. But
Speaker 2: but then you get into this question of like what
Speaker 2: happens when the Master doesn't want to pass the baton
Speaker 2: one way or the other. And I think we actually
Speaker 2: do kind of see an example of that, you know,
Speaker 2: in the Star Wars movies with Darth Sidius, because like,
Speaker 2: look at how it ends up going for him. He
Speaker 2: ends up running through at least what three different apprentices,
Speaker 2: tries to get a fourth essentially, and in the background
Speaker 2: is seems to be very devoted to the idea of
Speaker 2: long term rain and even some manner of physical immortality,
Speaker 2: you know, especially when you get into some of the
Speaker 2: Expanded Universe stuff and some of the stuff that they're
Speaker 2: cooking up with like the Mandalorian series now with the
Speaker 2: idea that he wants to continue his own physical existence
Speaker 2: through like clone bodies, like this is not a guy
Speaker 2: who's looking to actually have any kind of a successful
Speaker 2: passing of the baton? Yes, yeah, And so this leads
Speaker 2: to another I think I found really interesting real world
Speaker 2: analog that of the successor's dilemma. So the basic problem
Speaker 2: here is an ancient one in human society, and you
Speaker 2: don't need black magic wizards in order to crunch it.
Speaker 2: But a ruler or individual in some level of great
Speaker 2: authority and power eventually has to contemplate the continuation of
Speaker 2: the organization after they die or leave their post. A
Speaker 2: successor must be chosen. But as we know from countless
Speaker 2: human dramas, the most famous of which is probably King
Speaker 2: Lear complexities, complications often arise, yes, And of course there
Speaker 2: are plenty of successor dramas playing out in the political world,
Speaker 2: in the religious world all around us. But the kings
Speaker 2: of our modern age are of course sometimes the leaders
Speaker 2: of industry CEOs. And so for this next part here
Speaker 2: I wanted to turn to what was This is something
Speaker 2: that exists largely in the business world, so I wasn't
Speaker 2: really familiar with it, but there is something called the
Speaker 2: successor's dilemma, and it originates with Dan Champa and Michael Watkins,
Speaker 2: who introduced it in their November December nineteen ninety nine
Speaker 2: Harvard Business Review article of the same title, and you
Speaker 2: can pull this up in full on the internet, as
Speaker 2: I did so. The authors of this piece argue thatship
Speaker 2: leadership transitions in the business world being the main focus here.
Speaker 2: They often go awry with considerable frequency, generally due to
Speaker 2: an emotionally charged power struggle between the outgoing CEO and
Speaker 2: the incoming successor. And you can guess the basic typical
Speaker 2: factors here if you've ever watched even a single human
Speaker 2: drama about this sort of thing.
Speaker 3: And to be clear, you're not talking about this drama
Speaker 3: happening only in the case where like an old, older
Speaker 3: CEO is being in some hostile way pushed out and
Speaker 3: replaced against their will, like this would be the case
Speaker 3: even for voluntary handovers of power.
Speaker 2: Right, And really that's their main focus. Is not a
Speaker 2: situation where you're bringing in some sort of a you know,
Speaker 2: a hostile outsider like this is like best laid plans
Speaker 2: territory that we're talking about here. So this is the
Speaker 2: way they basically lay it out is happening. So a
Speaker 2: CEO realizes, as does the board or surrounding corporate structure
Speaker 2: that they need to lay the groundwork for someone to
Speaker 2: carry on leadership after the CEO leaves. CEO positions, after all,
Speaker 2: are not generally lifetime appointments. Sometimes they kind of work
Speaker 2: out that way for one reason or another. But you
Speaker 2: know at some point they're going to need to pass
Speaker 2: the reins on to a selected air and everyone rests
Speaker 2: more easily if there is in fact a plan for
Speaker 2: this and not just a mad scramble. Again, in the
Speaker 2: business world, you're can have a board to have you know,
Speaker 2: the entire corporate structure. You're going to have shareholders and
Speaker 2: everything else, and they barely are mentioned at all in
Speaker 2: this article. But you also have employees whose salaries and
Speaker 2: livelihoods depend on the overall corporation functioning in a healthy manner.
Speaker 3: Right, So having a planned handoff in place, or at
Speaker 3: least having the appearance of such, is not just for
Speaker 3: the actual functional value that it would provide when the
Speaker 3: handoff happens. It's also for appearances to calm people, to
Speaker 3: give people assurances.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly, And so through some combination of corporate world
Speaker 2: mysticism and politics, a successor is chosen an air appearent,
Speaker 2: often from outside the company, who now has the job
Speaker 2: of preparing for their eventual ascension to CEO hood or ceoedom,
Speaker 2: learning from the master while also making quote organizational and
Speaker 2: strategic changes to prepare the company for the time when
Speaker 2: he will.
Speaker 3: Lead it, okay, giving the appearance of both learning and
Speaker 3: also making their mark as the as the new leader,
Speaker 3: the preparation to say I'm in charge now and you
Speaker 3: will observe that because I'm going to do something right.
Speaker 2: And you know, this is often you're dealing with the
Speaker 2: sorts of people here that are generally going to be
Speaker 2: movers and shakers, and you're often dealing with some sort
Speaker 2: of like generational change, like this is the leader that's
Speaker 2: going to take us into the digital age, this is
Speaker 2: the leader that's going to take us into the AI
Speaker 2: age or whatever. You know, the argument happens to be.
Speaker 3: Going to manage our pivot to blockchain.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that sort of thing. And so you have initially
Speaker 2: a period where everybody feels really great about this. The
Speaker 2: CEO and the board, they're like they're really patting themselves
Speaker 2: in the back, saying, yeah, yeah, this is this is
Speaker 2: the guy, this is the this is the person this
Speaker 2: is the next generation, and they you know, they're they're
Speaker 2: all about the stability that they've engineered here. But then
Speaker 2: feathers begin to ruffle. The acting CEO ends up having
Speaker 2: a trouble letting go. This is very human. We can
Speaker 2: all get this, you know, fueled by ego, worried over legacy,
Speaker 2: and on varying levels, perhaps about mortality itself. They may
Speaker 2: be dealing with like the end of their career and
Speaker 2: that forces them to think even about the end of
Speaker 2: their life.
Speaker 3: Yeah, exactly, and not just at the CEO level. I mean,
Speaker 3: you know, you can read lots of accounts of people managing,
Speaker 3: you know, our retirement or late career transitions and thinking
Speaker 3: about thinking about mortality as a result. It kind of
Speaker 3: is inevitable that your thoughts go there, and a lot
Speaker 3: of people don't want to think about that.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, so you know, all this is very relatable.
Speaker 2: But meanwhile, the successor, uh, they there's there's actually a
Speaker 2: lot of a lot of weight on their shoulders as well.
Speaker 2: They're expected to deliver upon taking over, but they need
Speaker 2: the cooperation of the existing CEO to reach that point.
Speaker 2: And you know that there's they're they're they're risking alienation
Speaker 2: of that CEO if they push too hard from their end,
Speaker 2: and the relationship based basically begins to drastically sack at
Speaker 2: this point, and you know, it's just as the CEO
Speaker 2: is realizing that they need to leave on their own,
Speaker 2: they're hit with the threatening realization, you know, to varying
Speaker 2: degrees true, that their successor wants them to leave. And
Speaker 2: again that may not be with any heat. They're like,
Speaker 2: I was brought on to be the new CEO. You know,
Speaker 2: I'm ready to take the reins, Like I'm here. I'm
Speaker 2: a go getter. That's why they hired me. That's why
Speaker 2: they're paying me the big bucks. And this big this,
Speaker 2: this this begins to be a sour situation between the
Speaker 2: two individuals.
Speaker 3: I mean, you can imagine, even for the exact same person,
Speaker 3: it might feel good to believe you are voluntarily under
Speaker 3: no pressure handing over power, but feel very bad if
Speaker 3: if you think there's pressure on you to give up power.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, like even if it's as simple as like, well,
Speaker 2: I was gonna, I was gonna try. We're gonna do
Speaker 2: this baton passing next Friday, and now you want it Thursday,
Speaker 2: And now I feel you know, attacked, you know, and
Speaker 2: I think we can understand how that would be. So
Speaker 2: this is where the true dilemma sets in, according to
Speaker 2: the authors, Here, what's the successor supposed to do. The
Speaker 2: more they push, the more push back they're gonna get
Speaker 2: from the acting CEO and any loyal board members or
Speaker 2: members of the corporate structure, and they're gonna be left
Speaker 2: with two choices. Either they wage open war against the
Speaker 2: current CEO they begin to really push and try to
Speaker 2: push them out and take that top position, or they quit.
Speaker 2: They walk away and they say, you know, all right,
Speaker 2: if you're not gonna if you don't want me to
Speaker 2: be the new CEO, I'm gonna leave. I have other
Speaker 2: offers out there. And according to the authors, both of
Speaker 2: these choices are pretty bad ones. They stress that open
Speaker 2: war with this acting CEO, this can get really ugly
Speaker 2: and apparently rarely works. So the idea of a hostile takeover,
Speaker 2: it's going to be a very risky swing that likely
Speaker 2: is going to end in defeat. Meanwhile, stepping down and
Speaker 2: leaving the company, they say this and end up being
Speaker 2: like a high profile failure that could tarnish any any
Speaker 2: future prospects. So again, we're talking about, like, you know,
Speaker 2: really high achieving individuals that really want to be at
Speaker 2: the top of whatever company they're in. So I don't
Speaker 2: know that one thing to keep in mind here is
Speaker 2: failure for that individual still sounds a lot like victory
Speaker 2: for most people out in the world, where it's like, oh,
Speaker 2: you don't have you don't get to be number one
Speaker 2: in a company. You only get to be a high paid,
Speaker 2: high powered number two or three. But you know, from
Speaker 2: their point of view, it could be a colossal failure.
Speaker 3: It's kind of a classic Shakespearean or Greek tragedy point
Speaker 3: of view that, whether literally or just figuratively, the loss
Speaker 3: of power and kingship is death.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah. And the authors here argue that the situation
Speaker 2: is made all the more dire because relatively few individuals
Speaker 2: in an organization can actually help with the matter once
Speaker 2: it's reached this point. So not other board members, not hr,
Speaker 2: just the two individuals trapped in the dilemma. They're the
Speaker 2: only ones who can really act, and everyone has something
Speaker 2: to lose in the scenario, the board, the company, the shareholders,
Speaker 2: without mentioning the employees, and the CEO themselves, but the
Speaker 2: successor they argue has the most to lose and therefore
Speaker 2: has to be the one to manage the situation. And
Speaker 2: so the authors here they have served as professional advisors
Speaker 2: for situations like this, But their core advice in this
Speaker 2: original paper is four part. They're saying, these are the
Speaker 2: four steps that the successor in ours this scenario, This
Speaker 2: would be the apprentice can consider getting into the scenario,
Speaker 2: like even ahead of a potential dilemma. So first of all,
Speaker 2: they say, the successor needs to work ahead of time
Speaker 2: to better understand the current CEO and their emotional readiness
Speaker 2: to step aside, long before they even accept the number
Speaker 2: two position.
Speaker 3: Now we'll have to come back and kind of translate
Speaker 3: this piece of advice for our Star Wars scenario because
Speaker 3: of major differences in how the transition happens, Yes, how
Speaker 3: the power handoff happens, and usually in CEOs versus the
Speaker 3: Sith lords.
Speaker 2: But I think we can go ahead and handle this
Speaker 2: first bit of advice because I don't think it's particularly
Speaker 2: appliable to the Sith scenario because the Siths are such
Speaker 2: obvious liars and there's so much secrecy involved, Like what
Speaker 2: Sith apprentice is really going to be able to get
Speaker 2: a handle on their sith master's willingness to eventually give
Speaker 2: up power. I just don't know that there's any way
Speaker 2: that they could really move on that, but it makes
Speaker 2: sense from CEO standpoint.
Speaker 3: All right, what's the rest of the advice?
Speaker 2: Okay, So number two on the CEO level is the
Speaker 2: successor has to make regular communication with the CEO a priority.
Speaker 3: Okay, that seems valuable, maybe even for sith who knows.
Speaker 2: I think so. I think it is a basic human
Speaker 2: reality that the more communic communication to individuals have the better.
Speaker 2: Even if they're two sith just lying their faces off
Speaker 2: to each other, at least you have some sort of
Speaker 2: back and forth that can be read and interpreted. So
Speaker 2: I'm gonna stick with that being a piece of advice
Speaker 2: that does stand well.
Speaker 3: Let me iterate on that just one way, which is
Speaker 3: that we're all familiar with ways that communication can go bad.
Speaker 3: Communication like a you know, a text message or an
Speaker 3: email can be read the wrong way. It can be
Speaker 3: taken with more hostility or some negative emotion that wasn't
Speaker 3: really intended by the person writing it. Communication can of
Speaker 3: course increase tensions and problems, but I think in a
Speaker 3: lot of cases we I don't know. Maybe thinking about
Speaker 3: that aspect, we underappreciate how much tensions and problems can
Speaker 3: be created just by lack of communication. Yeah, that with
Speaker 3: silence can really amplify pre existing worries andbiguities, And almost
Speaker 3: any communication, as long as it's not overtly negative or hostile,
Speaker 3: can reduce those negative ambiguities. And I think this is
Speaker 3: true in all different kinds of relationships, from you know,
Speaker 3: family and romantic relationships, to work relationships to whatever it's
Speaker 3: it's just usually it's good to check in to like community,
Speaker 3: having some kind of communication is better than just radio
Speaker 3: silence and leaving people having no idea what's going on.
Speaker 2: Like in the CEO scenario, even if it's just getting
Speaker 2: together to play golf or to talk about golf, yeah yeah,
Speaker 2: or in the syth scenario getting together to play golf
Speaker 2: or talk about golf. Would that would that would probably
Speaker 2: do wonders for avoiding any unnecessary early violence between the two.
Speaker 3: This race is a great question. Do sith lords ever
Speaker 3: have fun? You never see them doing anything that make
Speaker 3: it seem like, oh wow, it would be great to
Speaker 3: be a sith lord. In all these movies about like
Speaker 3: crime bosses and stuff. Yeah, they leave. They lead these horrible,
Speaker 3: squalid lives, full of like sin and betrayal and and
Speaker 3: treating people poorly. But at least you usually get to
Speaker 3: see them having fun and enjoying their wealth. I don't
Speaker 3: remember any scenes like that for the Sith Lord.
Speaker 2: So if you love what you do, you never work
Speaker 2: a day in your life, I guess so. I mean,
Speaker 2: Palpatine does have a really swank, dark office towards the
Speaker 2: end of his days as a secret Sith Lords, and
Speaker 2: then I guess really gets into the aesthetics of imperial
Speaker 2: rule once he's out in the open.
Speaker 3: He just likes looking out the windows at Coruscond. No,
Speaker 3: that's true. I think he Palpatine probably does get a
Speaker 3: lot of genuine pleasure from commissioning monuments and like having
Speaker 3: things built in his honor.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, you should see the ballroom that he exactly. Yes,
Speaker 2: But anyway, coming back to the list here, they're number three.
Speaker 2: Bit of advice to an incoming CEO or the apprentice.
Speaker 2: In our scenario, the successor needs to lean on a
Speaker 2: balanced personal advice network to navigate any struggles or problems.
Speaker 2: I think that's a great bit of advice for the
Speaker 2: CEO scenario and probably for a lot of real world scenarios,
Speaker 2: doesn't really help the sith scenario all that much because
Speaker 2: given a secretive to individual structure, there's not really going
Speaker 2: to be a personal advice network that you can lean on,
Speaker 2: balanced or otherwise.
Speaker 3: I'm writing a story in which someone is a secret
Speaker 3: sith lord. What do you think they would do in
Speaker 3: this scenario?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I guess there might be some droids
Speaker 2: or uninitiated underlings he might bounce some ideas off of,
Speaker 2: but you know, they're probably not going to be great help,
Speaker 2: and you're just going to get them lightsabered by sharing
Speaker 2: anything with them.
Speaker 3: See, my main character, Schmannikin, is really trying to figure
Speaker 3: out if his sith lord will tell him the secret
Speaker 3: of life and death.
Speaker 2: Yeah. And then finally, the fourth bit of advice they
Speaker 2: have his they focused on professional goals, not be quote
Speaker 2: emotional traps that surround them. That's that feels like good advice.
Speaker 2: I think in the real world also probably easier said
Speaker 2: than done. There's probably a lot of coaching that goes
Speaker 2: into realizing that. Within the sith context, I would say
Speaker 2: they're probably quite a lot of emotional traps in the
Speaker 2: Sith master Sith apprentice relationship. But yeah, it might be
Speaker 2: it might be good to be able to figure out
Speaker 2: which ones are traps and work around them, you know.
Speaker 3: But they openly embrace emotional.
Speaker 2: Traps, they do, that's right. They're all about negative to hate.
Speaker 2: They're constantly messing with each other. So yeah, that's a
Speaker 2: good question. To what extent can you even navigate around
Speaker 2: those emotional traps. You've you've got to indulge them to
Speaker 2: some degree.
Speaker 3: This is like giving that advice to somebody at a
Speaker 3: corporation where their product is making their own executives angry
Speaker 3: and hateful. Like it's just not cannot be followed.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so yeah, I don't know. It's interesting to think
Speaker 2: about this transition as being like the CEO transition. But obviously,
Speaker 2: as we've been driving home, there are number of key
Speaker 2: differences for starters they would be CEO. I think it's
Speaker 2: gonna have a hard time just quitting this in the
Speaker 2: Sith scenario, because what are you gonna do Just gonna say, actually,
Speaker 2: I'm not a Sith anymore. That sounds like a great
Speaker 2: way to get lightsabered. They're probably maybe there are probably
Speaker 2: some expanded universe examples, but the only one I could
Speaker 2: think of where you have somebody sort of quit the
Speaker 2: Sith is by being left for dead. So like Darth
Speaker 2: Maul is cut in half, presumed dead, later re emerges
Speaker 2: as an underworld criminal figure.
Speaker 3: I didn't know that. Yeah, yeah, he comes back.
Speaker 2: He does. He comes back in first in the Clone
Speaker 2: Wars series, and then and then in Rebels, and then
Speaker 2: it makes a brief cameo in the Han solo movie
Speaker 2: that came out years back, and his storyline is really interesting.
Speaker 2: He's a much more interesting character after his death than
Speaker 2: he was before, but he never achieves the same level.
Speaker 2: So it's like, this is very much a guy who's
Speaker 2: never gonna make CEO again. I mean, he guess he
Speaker 2: kind of becomes CEO of Darth Maul Crime Incorporated, but
Speaker 2: a much smaller organization.
Speaker 3: Do you get to see him having fun now that
Speaker 3: you Herestrial.
Speaker 2: No, he is especially miserable for the rest of his life.
Speaker 2: Palpatine Sidius is having a great time compared to the
Speaker 2: Ma All okay, but you know he's working his way up.
Speaker 2: He's focused on his goals, let's see. And then, of
Speaker 2: course we already mentioned how there is the whole aspect
Speaker 2: of the thing where the sith Lord does have to
Speaker 2: eventually die in order for the transition to take place.
Speaker 2: And so you know that's going to add a certain
Speaker 2: amount of weight to the whole scenario. Anyway, interesting to
Speaker 2: think about all this again, I'm gonna say that, Yeah,
Speaker 2: I think it's a severe bottleneck for a two person
Speaker 2: religious organization to go about things like this. And I
Speaker 2: think that we can look to Palpatine's example as a
Speaker 2: downfall that is directly tied to the successor's dilemma, as
Speaker 2: he proves himself more concerned with holding on to life
Speaker 2: and power himself than to truly passing on the mantle.
Speaker 2: Probably I think, very much in his own mind, seeing
Speaker 2: himself in his own rule as the culmination of this
Speaker 2: system and not a part of the chain, which you know,
Speaker 2: given the egotistical nature of tyrannical rule, I think this
Speaker 2: is this is pretty common. You see this time after
Speaker 2: time through human history. Now I know that you watched
Speaker 2: and very much enjoyed and or as I did, and
Speaker 2: we never see the emperor in that he is alluded to.
Speaker 2: And there, you know, there's some great bits where I
Speaker 2: forget the spymaster's character's name, but he's like I spoke
Speaker 2: with the Emperor earlier today, and you know, if that's
Speaker 2: true or not, he still his name is invoked like that.
Speaker 2: And apparently at some level in writing the and Or series,
Speaker 2: they considered using the Emperor as a character, Like they
Speaker 2: had access to the character and the actor. They could
Speaker 2: have employed him to some degree, but they couldn't figure
Speaker 2: out the way to do it that they liked, you know,
Speaker 2: what was the right balance. So I am curious how
Speaker 2: they thought about portraying his relationship with his you know,
Speaker 2: more political advisors and you know, spy world operatives as
Speaker 2: opposed to you know, figures like Darth Vader and and
Speaker 2: you know, and rivals and so forth.
Speaker 3: I actually very much liked the way he does not
Speaker 3: appear directly in the story. I think that made the story.
Speaker 3: I don't know that that worked very well in the
Speaker 3: execution of Andor from my perspective that the ultimate villain
Speaker 3: of the story exists at a remove, and we only
Speaker 3: get there their will expressed second hand and third hand
Speaker 3: through all of these obsequious underlings who were all fighting
Speaker 3: each other trying to get you know, in the better
Speaker 3: graces of the Emperor who we never meet.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and again may not even really be in direct
Speaker 2: communication with him, right, So yeah, I think it was
Speaker 2: absolutely the correct choice for the series.
Speaker 3: Yeah, but I you know, I've not gone into a
Speaker 3: lot of the you know, Star Wars extended universe stuff.
Speaker 3: I haven't seen some of the more recent movies and
Speaker 3: shows and stuff. But I thought Indoor was fantastic though.
Speaker 3: It was really good. Yeah, absolutely, all right, folks, Well,
Speaker 3: we have just gone off Mike and looked at the
Speaker 3: time and said, you know what, we've got to wrap
Speaker 3: up this episode here. We had a whole other section
Speaker 3: we planned on doing today, but it's pretty pretty long,
Speaker 3: pretty substantial, and it would probably really just make a
Speaker 3: whole other episode worth that segment. By the way, I'll
Speaker 3: just go ahead and tease it is going to be
Speaker 3: called Palpfacts, where we just check it fact check some
Speaker 3: claims made by our beloved Emperor Palpatine.
Speaker 2: Yes, we may even at times say, you know, don't
Speaker 2: like that Emperor Palpatine, but he was right on.
Speaker 3: A few things. He tells it like it is, tells
Speaker 3: it tells it like it is sometimes. Yeah, so yeah,
Speaker 3: we're we're gonna come back with some Palp facts and
Speaker 3: some fact checking the Emperor in the future. But I
Speaker 3: think that's it for today.
Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, that'll be it for this our second episode
Speaker 2: for Star Wars week. But yeah, keep an eye on
Speaker 2: the feed because in the future we'll come back in
Speaker 2: and we'll finish up this treatment. Perhaps it's just kind
Speaker 2: of like a standalone episode, but you'll be able to
Speaker 2: tell it's the it's the essentially the third Star Wars episode. Right,
Speaker 2: all right, let's see in the meantime, what else suit
Speaker 2: should we tell you? Well, will just remind you that
Speaker 2: stuff to Blow your Mind is primarily a science and
Speaker 2: culture podcast, with core episodes on Tuesdays and Thursdays, short
Speaker 2: form episode on Wednesdays, and then on Fridays. We set
Speaker 2: aside most serious concerns to just talk about a weird
Speaker 2: film on Weird House Cinema. Indeed, tomorrow's episode of Weird
Speaker 2: House Cinema will be Star Wars related. I'll just go
Speaker 2: and let you know. I don't want to build up.
Speaker 2: Are not going to cover an actual Star Wars film.
Speaker 2: We are going to cover one of the many films
Speaker 2: that came out in the wake of Star Wars. In
Speaker 2: an attempt to ride that wave of commercial success and
Speaker 2: maybe artistic success, though I think these efforts were more
Speaker 2: about making money.
Speaker 3: I think the one that we're going to do this
Speaker 3: week is maybe the greatest of the Star Wars ripoffs arguably.
Speaker 2: All right, well, join us for a conversation on that topic.
Speaker 2: In the meantime, we'll just remind you that, hey, you
Speaker 2: can get stuff to blow your mind episodes wherever you
Speaker 2: get your podcasts. We've been around for years and years
Speaker 2: at this point, so there's a vast audio reserve of episodes,
Speaker 2: a stockpile. We are also in video form on Netflix.
Speaker 2: Those are just recent episodes only, however, so if you're
Speaker 2: watching on Netflix, we thank you for doing that. Certainly
Speaker 2: give us some thumbs up and so forth. Whatever the
Speaker 2: little bells and whistles are that you can click, but
Speaker 2: just remember that we have all these other episodes in
Speaker 2: audio format only, and you're going to find those wherever
Speaker 2: you get your audio podcasts.
Speaker 3: That's right on Netflix. You can click remind me to
Speaker 3: get future video episodes of our show on your podcast platforms,
Speaker 3: you just click subscribe, and we encourage people to hop
Speaker 3: across platforms as well. So if you discovered us on Netflix.
Speaker 3: Why not go subscribe to the audio wherever you get
Speaker 3: your podcasts, or vice versa. If you only know us
Speaker 3: on audio, go check us out on Netflix. Let's see huge.
Speaker 3: Thanks as always to our excellent audio producer JJ Pousway.
Speaker 3: If you would like to get in touch with us
Speaker 3: with feedback on this episode or any other, to suggest
Speaker 3: a topic for the future, or just to say hello,
Speaker 3: you can email us at contact Stuff to Blow your
Speaker 3: Mind dot com.
Speaker 1: Stuff to Blow Your Mind is production of iHeartRadio. For
Speaker 1: more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Speaker 3: Name