His best known role is as a living weapon of religious zealots intended to take out a brutal dictator. This was shown as having no real effect because the material conditions weren’t really changed so the people kept having to fight, sacrifice, and die.
His second most famous role was as a dangerously unhinged sadistic nihilist that canonically enjoyed the back and forth with his opponent.
His third most famous role was as the same kind of dictator that his first role would oppose. One that showed no qualms over killing anyone (kin included) in pursuit of power.
Just sayin’: Not only should we attribute the features of characters to their actors, but even if that were wise, I don’t think he’s the guy.
The material conditions did change significantly with the destruction of the Death Star, as it’s destruction created an insane economic vacuum, power vacuum, military leadership vacuum, and undermined the entire doctrinal approach of the Empire. Plus while it is a Anarchist Theory, there is a little merit to the “Propaganda of the Deed” as an unintentional consequence of revolutionary action.
Further, major turning points in a war don’t instantly end it, just like how the killing of the tsar didn’t instantly end the Russian civil war. The Bolsheviks didn’t get to just clap their hands and say “Yay! The dictator is dead! War over!” Plus the emperor wasn’t even on the Death Star.
I assume the big baddie from The Last Airbender who’s name I don’t remember?
