I was just sitting here...

...thinking (yes, I know, I really should give that up, but it's so hard), and I realized that beside the bad acting and bad dialog and everything else there is to dislike about the second trilogy of Star Wars movies, the thing I disliked the most about them was the Midichlorians.  (I have not yet seen Episode III (ROTS), and probably won't until it comes out on DVD.)

(UPDATE:  welcome readers from The Truth Laid Bear!)

During the first trilogy--indeed, from near the beginning of Episode IV--we are given to believe that the Force is universal;  that it does not discriminate among those who seek it (not that there's anything intrinsically wrong with discrimination);  that anyone, even the lowly nephew of a moisture farmer, who sets his mind to learning its ways, can do so. 

Although, as in all things, there will doubtless be individuals with more talent and predisposition to using the Force than others, the only real limit for any one individual is his own determination.  In fact, this is one of the primary reasons we cheer Luke on in his quest to become a Jedi knight--this belief that anyone can make it if they work hard is embedded in the American mindset, and the movies used that fact well.

Then, in Episode I, we discover that it's all a matter of genetics, the luck of the draw.  Even individual choice has nearly nothing to do with it, as anyone who tests above a certain level is whisked away as an infant by the Jedi order to be raised as a Jedi-in-training, and knows nothing else.

Is this indicative of a change of mindset by the writer/director?  Has he decided to make his movies more of a political statement since he made Return of the Jedi?  And no, I'm not talking particularly about the obvious "anyone who isn't with me is against me" and "only a Sith thinks in absolutes" lines in Episode III (although Lucas evidently didn't realize that not only is the latter statement in itself an absolute, but that during Luke's training, much of what was taught him was phrased in absolute terms), but about the overall differences between the second trilogy and the first.

I'd be interested if you have any ideas.

UPDATE:  A few minutes after I posted this I realized that Luke was not the "son of a moisture farmer," but the nephew.  Sheesh, I knew that.  Corrected above.