Because Jedi aren't supposed to serve the Republic, they are supposed to serve the will of the Force. While this most often coincide with the same thing, not always. The Rule of Two wasn't made because Sith always betray each other, it was made to create constantly stronger Sith, probably until the One Sith, and by this I mean Palpatine, could live on as an eternal Sith Emperor. Jedi were never trying to do this. Finally, why would the chance of betrayal stop Luke from remaking galactic peacekeepers. A group that require more than 2 people.
Also, Luke thinks that there should always be groups to keep the Force in check, now that the Children are gone. Something I agree with.
Re: Why did luke recreate the jedi order?
Originally posted by PTforthewin
Why? If the jedi are always getting betrayed why would he recreate it? Why not have a rule of 2 jedi, and only luke and leia are jedis, and they serve the new republic as generals that oversee military operations.
Having a rule of 2 Jedi doesn't completely prevent falling... and two really can't do all that much peacekeeping operation. They'd have very little effect on the Vong war for example.
Jedi need to exist in number because that's where they help. Even a minor Jedi can help diffuse a dozen minor conflicts.
Also, 'always getting betrayed' is a bit of an overstatement. Yoda was born after a century of peace and lived for 900 years, and the Jedi were dominant for 880 of it. Any betrayals during that period were small and easily dealt with
Before the New Sith Wars, there was a two-and-a-half thousand years of Jedi dominance with only one minor Sith conflict caused by a betrayal (Darth Desolous) that lasted a handful of years.
About 2,500 years between the Hundred Year Darkness and the next big schism...
The early post-Empire era had a high degree of dark side falls due to, basically, aftershocks of Palpatine's reign and all the dark siders around, but it's fairly atypical.
Re: Re: Why did luke recreate the jedi order?
Originally posted by Q99I thought I was the only one who knew about darth desolous XD and yeah I see
Having a rule of 2 Jedi doesn't completely prevent falling... and two really can't do all that much peacekeeping operation. They'd have very little effect on the Vong war for example.Jedi need to exist in number because that's where they help. Even a minor Jedi can help diffuse a dozen minor conflicts.
Also, 'always getting betrayed' is a bit of an overstatement. Yoda was born after a century of peace and lived for 900 years, and the Jedi were dominant for 880 of it. Any betrayals during that period were small and easily dealt with
Before the New Sith Wars, there was a two-and-a-half thousand years of Jedi dominance with only one minor Sith conflict caused by a betrayal (Darth Desolous) that lasted a handful of years.
About 2,500 years between the Hundred Year Darkness and the next big schism...
The early post-Empire era had a high degree of dark side falls due to, basically, aftershocks of Palpatine's reign and all the dark siders around, but it's fairly atypical.
Originally posted by Q99
Yea, but Jedi aren't going to go around and train people and say, "But you aren't a *true* Jedi, not unless you can take the place of one of us two."The Jedi equivalents of Ventress and Opress would just be called Jedi.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
True but there were still only two true Sith.