Well, I'm of two minds on that particular point. Like Blaxican, I can see the merit of what he's trying to say, but I'm not impressed nor amused with his apologist attitude towards the worst the Empire has to offer.
On the one hand, the idea that the Galactic Empire ruled through blatant force is a myth. The truth, provided by dozens of EU supplement works, was that the Empire was ridiculously, obscenely popular. Palpatine was viewed as a demi-god by most of the galactic population, with even Biggs Darklighter in the A New Hope novelization crediting the Empire's perceived tyranny with "the new people in charge." Palpatine cleverly distanced himself from most of the atrocities committed by monsters like Tarkin.
Likewise, he's also correct in that the Empire was, in some ways, a stabilizing force. While I'm not a Palpatine apologist, and I recognize that the man is likely the most vile and inhumane of all literary creations, I also realize that since he was a narcissist who wanted to dominate the galaxy, he didn't want it being destroyed by petty civil wars amongst planets. And so the Hand of Thrawn duology confirms that the Empire put to rest dozens of wars and infighting amongst planets and systems; whereas the Republic could not.
So in terms of actually enforcing the law and protecting its citizenry, the Empire is better than the Republic.
However, the Imperial hierarchy was deliberately designed to allow maniacs like Tarkin and Trachta and Motti and Pestage to ascend to power. Palpatine was fully aware of their evil deeds when he allowed (and in some cases orchestrated) their rise to power. He signed off on the destruction of Alderaan and other planets. According the TFU databank, countless civilizations had been destroyed by Palpatine's Empire.
And as for Palpatine himself? The man is inexcusably evil without any redeeming quality. There can be no apology for his sins.