What do you think Garlemald currently is?

As it stands, Garlemald is currently a military dictatorship with a love of conquest and the belief that anyone and everyone even capable of summoning a primal must be brought to heel or killed. Incidentally, this is pretty much Eorzea's entire population.

I'm not ruling out the possibility of there being any good within the Garleans or it being impossible to reform the system from within. As long as they hold onto their "Eorzeans are all savages that must be brought to heel" philosophy, I don't see it happening. There may be some good within the system, but the only good Garleans we've seen are two defectors (with a possible third) - as long as nobody within the system opposes it, things will remain as they are.

Oh, and...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

For all the criticism of Garlemald oppressing and killing those who boast different ideals to themselves...the WoL and their allies are prone to embracing the exact same mentality. I mean, think about it - how many lives have been snuffed out by the WoL and their friends? Did some have it coming? Arguably, but what about the majority who were just following orders or were loyal to their friends, family and causes?

---

... some people have actually pondered this, though more in regard to the Zodiac Weapon quest (where we go around slaughtering things wholesale to eat their souls and power up our weapon(s)... not exactly heroic, y'know?). The difference is that Garlemald is the aggressor in this case; we're only fighting in self-defense. There may be piles of dead Garleans... but there are also piles of dead Eorzeans who were only defending their homelands. War is a tragedy on both sides, not the glorious conquest Garlemald's leaders paint it as.

The idea of a long protracted war with Garlemeld isn't very appealing, imo. even if its the sort of thing to launch a new plot. I dunno, It just feels like such a thing would go pretty far in atrocities and the temptation to commit atrocities. If our character partakes, im not sure it'll be with the same blinders as most participants(at least I hope not)

If anything, we'll probably encounter more story similar to Drest's (The hermit living in Raincatcher Gully)

Quote:

---

Drest
Do...do you have any children? I've a...a son and a daughter. They were so little when I left... They probably think I'm dead.
Drest
I've been saving for years to...to buy passage back home somehow. But...still not enough. Maybe...maybe you could bring me some jungle coeurl skins? I...I can sell them. I just...I just want to go home...
Drest
Please... Even a few skins would help...
Drest
You...you helped me. Even after what my comrades and I did to your country...
Drest
We were on a reconnaissance mission when the Maelstrom caught us by surprise. We tried to escape, but the others... N-No one else survived.
Drest
I didn't ask for this, dammit! I'm not even Garlean! They conquered my lands just like they tried to conquer yours!
Drest
I...I don't want to die in some blasted jungle halfway around the world...
Drest
I just...I just want to go home...

---

In the end, he was a conscripted soldier from one of Garlean's conquered territory just following orders. I'd love to hear more stories like this, atleast more stories involving Garlean foot soldiers. Showing the tragedies of war on both sides.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

One of the biggest issues with these sort of things, however, is that a lot of people are prone to viewing stuff as either 'black' or 'white' even if they claim not to.

---

On that note this applies to a lot of things in history and in many other 'gray' stories. Some people will demonize x and y without taking context into account, since GoT became a tv show it happens even with that, people constantly praise daenarys without realizing the faults of her character while demonizing the lannisters and those who fight on their side without taking context into account. The show kinda paints it in a 'black and white' fashion more than the books would though. Same could be said with garlemald so far but even then that makes sense because we are in the country being attacked, we'll probably hear more about their side eventually. At least I hope we do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by myahele

It's been a while, but I remember years ago when I did the quests to rescue the scions and disguised myself as a Garlean soldier. I spoke with the npcs that I was stationed with ... they were all seemingly "normal" my memory is hazy, but I remember one had a family and would have returned to his homeland eventually.

---

Well ... there was that one guy who had the hots for Tataru over Minfilia. I thought that was a little strange, in a child molesting kind of way, but other than that I agree.

Most of the Garleans seem pretty down to earth. Their head leadership is a bit on the extreme side, but their way of going about things doesn't seem to be inherently "wrong" or "evil." To be perfectly honest, I can't even fault their methodology. Science and industrialism are not inherently bad things. Progress, understanding, unity and communal defense are pretty good principles to live by. Hell, even the idea of an empire is not necessarily evil (despite SE's running fictional trope which suggests otherwise). Several currently unified and successful countries were, in fact, founded on the ideals of an empire at one point in their respective histories.

The problem with the Garleans, as I see it, is that they are arbitrarily assumed to be evil, and that assumption is typically justified because of two reasons. The first is that they are an "Empire," which most people (SE included) seem to think is a synonym for "Evil" when it's really not. The second reason is that they (or at least their cabinet of leaders) are okay with committing genocide to fulfill their goals. That's a tad on the extreme side. If they were merely at war, then I could not fault them for this. Killing is part of the business. However, rounding up random populations of people and snuffing them out without so much as a declaration of war is a bit much (the Vanu, for example).

Logically speaking, they're not wrong. Eliminating the source of the primal is the most efficient way of removing the primal threat. We merely treat the symptom. The Garleans want to cure the plague. However, killing an entire species of people just because they have misguided beliefs is not a morally justifiable decision ... even if those people are frustratingly annoying, and backwards, and make you do dozens of monotonous quests like taking out their garbage or feeding their pets just to prove you're "friendly." They're still people ... albeit annoying people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Februs

Well ... there was that one guy who had the hots for Tataru over Minfilia. I thought that was a little strange, in a child molesting kind of way, but other than that I agree.


Most of the Garleans seem pretty down to earth. Their head leadership is a bit on the extreme side, but their way of going about things doesn't seem to be inherently "wrong" or "evil." To be perfectly honest, I can't even fault their methodology. Science and industrialism are not inherently bad things. Progress, understanding, unity and communal defense are pretty good principles to live by. Hell, even the idea of an empire is not necessarily evil (despite SE's running fictional trope which suggests otherwise). Several currently unified and successful countries were, in fact, founded on the ideals of an empire at one point in their respective histories.

The problem with the Garleans, as I see it, is that they are arbitrarily assumed to be evil, and that assumption is typically justified because of two reasons. The first is that they are an "Empire," which most people (SE included) seem to think is a synonym for "Evil" when it's really not. The second reason is that they (or at least their cabinet of leaders) are okay with committing genocide to fulfill their goals. That's a tad on the extreme side. If they were merely at war, then I could not fault them for this. Killing is part of the business. However, rounding up random populations of people and snuffing them out without so much as a declaration of war is a bit much (the Vanu, for example).

Logically speaking, they're not wrong. Eliminating the source of the primal is the most efficient way of removing the primal threat. We merely treat the symptom. The Garleans want to cure the plague. However, killing an entire species of people just because they have misguided beliefs is not a morally justifiable decision ... even if those people are frustratingly annoying, and backwards, and make you do dozens of monotonous quests like taking out their garbage or feeding their pets just to prove you're "friendly." They're still people ... albeit annoying people.

---

The Garlemand empire is a dictatorship. It's a military goverment crasy of power, where the citisens doesnt have any rights and any action or free speech is supreced. Look how they are treating their conquered lands. You serious?
Nop. Its evil in all ways, a dictatorship will always be wrong, no matter what. Then they are abusing of the poeple lifes and killing just beacuse the think they can? No. One thing is a War and another is thiis.

They arent curing the planet, killing is not the answer. They are making things worst not better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Februs

snip

---

Nothing about a negative portrayal of Garlemald is arbitrary. Well, okay, calling them EVIL might be a bit much, but seeing them in shades of black certainly isn't, and I think the biggest issue with your argument is that you're attributing our conflict with them to something that it isn't.

It has nothing to do with science and industrialism - those are simply the tools they use and, as Theodric has pointed out, we use them as well. It has nothing to do with the Primals - that's simply the current phase of a larger campaign. And actually, considering it's one that aligns with our own desires and goals, why do you think we're not teaming up? It's not because Eorzea's leadership is daft, it's because the actual root of our conflict with Garlemald is what they'll do after the Primal problem is cleared up. This war did not start with the Primals. It started with them doing what Empires do. Which brings me to your other argument.

Empires are bad news. That is a moral conclusion that our society has come to, after spending a significant time flirting with the concept. Yes, many former empires are now flourishing nation states, but you'll notice they have completely dropped all the trappings and holdings of their imperial ages. Literature and history are not kind to the concept either, despite the formerly Imperial nations being the writers of that history. Nobody looks back fondly on the days of the European empires, and even the ancient empires are largely viewed as products of their time rather than models for a modern society. Empires-are-evil isn't just some common trope, it's a reflection of our historical experiences and struggles with Imperialism and the states that would employ it.

And even though I will concede that you can intellectually conceive of a benevolent Empire, Garlemald is not that. They conquer because they can, and when they do, they enslave, brutalize, draft, and rule over the conquered populations as second-class citizens. That is bad. They are demonstrably not a benevolent Empire. So no, the view of them as evil isn't arbitrary. It isn't a lazy mis-read of the text, or a lazy application of a common fantasy device. It's a deliberate use of a sort of government that is by its very nature aggressive and threatening to those around it.

As an aside, 'human rights' and 'equal rights' are very much a recent, modern day affair. People need to be careful when applying their concept of morality to a fictional setting. A lot of the stuff that we find horrid is perfectly normal within Eorzea. It's also why a lot of people struggle to grasp the true complexities that exist in the likes of The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones. Yes, the Garleans are more morally dubious than Eorzea is - that doesn't make Garlemald 'evil'. Nor should they be forced to adhere to our sense of real world morality. That'd be pretty boring, right? Especially when Eorzea itself doesn't even adhere to the same concepts.

I agree in theory. But as far as we know, Garlemald does not need to conquer to ensure their own survival; as far as we know, Garlemald's dominion is not keeping some worse or equally dubious power at bay, or creating stability where there previously was none*; as far as we know, Imperialism isn't the status quo in Aldenard. Thus, I can't really see how "setting relativism" applies here, like it would in The Walking Dead or Game of Thrones. Their actions are VERY morally dubious, even by the standards of the setting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
*This is admittedly something I could see changing, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hinoto-no-Ryuji

But as far as we know, Garlemald does not need to conquer to ensure their own survival; as far as we know

---

Sometimes I feel like they conquer because they don't know else to do. They build this massive army of conscripts from countries they invade and as such need something for them to do, why not have them invade? Although thinking about how the Garleans enslave people to turn them in to soldiers to then send them out to conquer and enslave more people made me think of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave-making_ant