Perhaps there's some incomprehension going on here.
I don't get it. At the beginning, you were "confused" and accepted the new material, Disney's production.
Then you changed minds.
I agree that one could say they are two universes. After all, when an entire set of artistic material mainly comes out of the brain of one person and is produced under the supervision and influence of said person, one can easily say that this is the person's universe. We could look at comics for that matter.
The particularity with SW is that it started with Lucas, so that grants
his universe
in Star Wars a certain glory and respect.
The rest of Disney's productions will be an infusion of several minds brought together ad hoc and perhaps be disjointed to some degree in styles but not necessarily in story. Through Marvel, it has been shown that it is possible to produce a modern a vast encompassing cinematic universe such as the MCU that even bleeds into the TV realm.
Going back to your
former post, I'm hitting some rock on that part:
You wrote:
Now the issue is that, just as the EU didn't resemble the Star Wars of George Lucas, so too does the new EU-filled Disney Canon not resemble it. Thus, one's options are to follow it as the next best thing to real Star Wars or to consider the matter closed. Per Disney, the Lucas canon is immovable, so obviously efforts to modify it with new convoluted stories of intentional design flaws and contradictions with ANH are . . . well, suffice it to say that there are still two universes, in my opinion.
But they are
nnot modifying it. In fact, you even acknowledge that they keep that precursor Lucas-universe as an immovable core.
All they are doing is adding material around that core and building a whole new core too. In details, they are forcing interpretations, perhaps new interpretations, of what has happened in the original Lucas canon, to the detriment of fan theories and random headcanons. But they surely are not modifying it. The only way they could do that would be through remakes.
As for the irony, what stoke me was your reference to a statement from the Disney company, which meant that you had to grant said company an authoritative voice in defining what is canon or not. Otherwise you'd be treating their words as nothing more than opinions. The thing is, if you recognize the new authority, then said authority has also made it clear about what is canonical now.
I think the stance of only Lucas' works are canonical is something of the past now.
Besides, at the risk of repeating myself:
Subscribing to the Disney Canon is no more a sin than subscribing to the Expanded Universe back in the day. Indeed, one could argue it is the same thing. The problem back then was when certain people tried to claim their preference of treating the EU as Lucas canon equivalent facts as an objective fact. I demonstrably and unequivocably won that fight at CanonWars.
They are not the same thing. Lucas' opinion about what is canon or not has become a headcanon,
his headcanon, the day he abandonned all privileges regarding that topic for a nice big cheque of more than four billion dollars.
What does that mean? Anyone is free to focus on Lucas' works only (headcanon, creator canon, purist canon, whatever you call it), but the only current supreme authority to have a say in what is canon and what isn't has spoken: Lucas' canon is only a part of the whole canon now. It may suck, but that's the way it is.
So you cannot limit yourself to Lucas' works
on the basis of canonical statements because you'd then have to accept the latest official statements and those are absolutely clear. You can only reject new official canon by rejecting Disney's authority on said matters. That's the simple technical truth.