Skip to main content

star wars - Does the Rule of Two Serve any Actual Purpose?


I know Darth Bane came up with the Rule of Two to ensure the survival of the Sith, but, in reality (or in the Star Wars reality), does it (or any Sith rule) serve a true purpose? And why does each successive Sith bother with it?


Due to the nature of the Sith, Sith Lords tend toward arrogance and self-importance. Both the Sith master and Sith apprentice seem to regularly break the rule by training others. Deceit and personal interest over loyalty is a way of life for the Sith.


What is to keep any Sith from following the Rule of Two (or any rule, for that matter) if it is against their own self interest? If a Sith Master can stay in power longer by training a 2nd apprentice and pitting the two against each other, is he really going to worry about the Rule of Two more than his own plans and survival?


The Rule of Two also assumes that every Sith Master would place the survival of the Sith over his own survival, as opposed to attempting to ensure his own immortality in whatever way he could (like Plagueis). When you have a group that, by default, is arrogant and self-serving, as well as deceptive, why would they want the Sith to survive themselves?


I can see how the Rule of Two, and any other Sith beliefs would be possible guidelines, but it terms of the nature of ambitious people (and the Sith are ambitious), it's hard to believe that each new Sith Master would follow this rule faithfully.


So does this rule, or any Sith rule, actually work? Or is it more of a suggestion that is broken when convenient?




Answer



To rougly quote from Starship Troopers (the book, not the movie), The Rule of Two perservered because it worked.


Those Sith Lords who violated it by trying for >1 apprentice, seemed to have ended up worse off than if they only had one.


So the benefit to keeping to the Rule of Two was not to some abstract "Sith order", but to the specific Sith Master.


Case in point: Darth Sidious. Had he left Luke well enough alone, Vader would not have been strong enough to challenge him. When he started pitting Luke against Vader, the whole thing predictably backfired, and



Vader, conflicted over possible death of his son Luke, killed the Emperor (aka Darth Sidious).



And Darth Plagueis explicitly rejected Rule of Two hoping to live forever and not be killed by his apprentice. We know how that turned out for him.





A second, less important factor in keeping the Rule of Two was the influence of past Sith Lords. More specifically, the gatekeepers of the Darth Bane's Sith Holocron refused to give information to Darth Krayt, didn't help him and condemned him:



Darth Nihilus did not provide Krayt with helpful information, Darth Andeddu accused him of heresy, and Darth Bane warned the Rule of One would be the death of Krayt and the entire Sith.



Since learning from Holocrons is one way for a Sith to increase his power, that was a somewhat effective leverage.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed....

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...