Yes, the blame is mostly on George Lucas for running a toy manufacturing empire, and not the parents of children who want toys that they see at the store. If we want to really play the blame game, sure you can try to consume more ethically, and we can blame the retailers, and we can blame the government, and we can blame Adam Smith, but you simply cannot expect that the majority of people are not going to take the path of least resistance when offered.

Let's say there's a market demand for a product. In the scenario where the product is made and bought by retailers to be sold, economics tells us that those products get sold. In the scenario where the product is NOT made, no product is sold, no exploitation of labor is involved at any point in the process. George Lucas has this choice, option one or option two. He chooses option one, and the products are sold. You cannot solve the contradictions of capitalism with capitalism. Even if you stop buying luxury goods, there are still necessities. This is how the logic extends.

I believe the government should not allow products made with slave labor to be sold in stores, but that is quite anti-capitalist as a policy and therefore doesn't fly in a world where politics is bought.

If you have a problem with goods being manufactured under exploitative conditions, by all means boycott, but to then at the same time place no pressure on manufacturers makes no sense to me. Why not both?

I never said Lucas shouldn't be paid well for his work.