Should jedi stay out of politcal office

If the jedi wish to remain neutral in most affairs should we stay out of politcal officces of all shapes and sizes

We have several Jedi in office and it does not impact their path at all in a negative way. Further much of what you might wish to know has been covered here:
https://www.templeofthejediorder.org/forum/open-discussions/115554-split-off-jedi-for-political-office

I don't think so. I've run for office, after starting on the Path. One of the Council is an elected official.

I think it's an understandable misreading of the doctrine to assume that we cannot hold informed political opinions, and even act on them to effect powerful, positive change. But as with anything we do, we have to be mindful of our intentions and our motives, and the potential future impacts of our actions.

A person could probably mediate a dispute to an outcome while being neutral, if their reasoning is objective, relevant and logical and the process is fair, exhaustive and transparent. I guess it should actually be of vital importance to be neutral, so to avoid bias, if one has authority to make important decisions. But the apparent neutrality might appear differently between disputing parties, especially to the losing side
:silly:

In my opinion, absolutely not.

I would say it depends on the office -


Many places are (semi) democratic - The Official is elected, and acts on behalf of a group.

I do not see that as a problem - It is a duty, and carried out correctly is very in tune with the Jedi Path.


On the other hand, having executive power can lead to corruption, a Jedi must be aware of this (as alluded to by Atticus) and consider intentions, and outcomes, and consult advisors as required.

Many systems do (or should?) have some sort of Veto arrangement to prevent any individual going off on their own and making wild edicts.


Should a Jedi be in the Senate? Definitely.
Should a Jedi be Caesar? Probably not.






(inb4 Silas: Yes, Jedi should rule - They're the only ones sensible and mindful enough to make the right decisions for the right reasons. )

Being that this is a discussion within a federal recognized nonprofit (501c3 status), it might be noted that, while your personal beliefs and religious identity are yours to do with as you please in regards to public office, the TotJO cannot engage in supporting or endorsing one candidate over another, nor engage in lobbying legislation (there are some allowances; it comes down to a percentage of your overall budget). This is just part of the deal when you obtain 501c3 status. If you want to lobby, you create a 501c4, etc.

Religion is a part of who a person is, as much as their philosophy or their sexuality or their favorite food.

To refuse to live your life completely--in all its aspects--is contrary to the experience of Jediism. If you want to run for office, run for office, and you'll just be a Jedi in office. There's no need to abstain from political endeavors.

In fact, I would state that if genuine people moved by their genuine convictions stay out of politics but still want to better the world, they're actually hurting it. Politicians can make a large difference in the lives of many, and the ability to bring integrity, honesty, and compassion to such an environment is a power that cannot be understated.

Genoe Jhalam wrote: If the jedi wish to remain neutral in most affairs should we stay out of politcal officces of all shapes and sizes

I feel you are confusing "neutral" with "staying out of the way" or "not making a stance"...

I have not seen anything that says "jedi should remain neutral", maybe that is how you interpret this?

Intervention: To know when not to act.

A Jedi knows how inaction can have as great an impact as action and how some of the greatest lessons are self-taught. To be a victor is also taking that victory from those you protect. A Jedi intervenes only when a Jedi's intervention is required.

Which, to me, means that when we feel our action would be "right action", then we should act...

But, not to "be right", or "be the boss"...

Let me ask, how many politicians do you feel are not persuaded at least in part by their religious views and ideologies?

What we believe is an intrical part of our lives and directly effects affects many of the choices we make. I don’t know that there is really any way to escape that. Our religious beliefs has shaped our society for as long as I can think. Religious beliefs may not be cited as the motivating factor in a decision or policy, but those beliefs shaped how we perceive good and evil, right and wrong, good action, motivation and response. So, in short, it is almost impossible to really escape it.

So the question I ask is, would you rather have someone making policy that was more inclined to be impartial? Or one that was more inclined to follow the teachings of their religious ideology?