3.5/4.0 Speculation & Discussion (Spoilers)

[Cilia]

Here comes a new challenger! Time to turn up the heat!

snip

Gaius' opinion of Eorzean governance is irrelevant. Taking away Eorzean freedom and independence is. Just because you don't agree with a nation's system of governance doesn't mean you have the right to take away their freedom and dictate how they should live. Yes, there are flaws in the Eorzean system - which is based on Hellenic Greece's city-state system, which was known for internal strife - but there are flaws in every system. Proclaiming your own system of governance superior is exceedingly arrogant, and oppressing them is a surefire way to earn their ire.

Eorzeans take the same approach to handling beast tribes and Primals the Garleans do - the difference is that Eorzeans are willing to negotiate with the non-tempered factions of those beast tribes, and put down the primal when it is summoned, instead of declaring genocide the end-all be-all solution along with imprisoning those Primals. While going genocide on the beast tribes would solve the issue of that individual Primal, and imprisoning those Primals will mitigate the threat of it, as shown by history those are short-term solutions at best. Furthermore, as we now know anyone and everyone is capable of summoning a Primal with enough aether and a fervent wish, so to completely remove the threat of Primals would require cleansing Hydaelyn of all life. I'm sure everyone doesn't need to be told how that isn't an acceptable solution.

The Garleans don't need to have confidence Eorzean methods. As long as Eorzea is handling its own problems and not causing danger or damage to Garlean people or territory, they have no right to military intervention, much less conquest. While I do agree that Eorzean governments should not rely on our power to solve their issues time and again (which I applaud Nero for calling them out on), it should not be forgot that they are capable and willing to deal with Primals without us - it just so happens that the Echo lets us save countless lives from being lost, making us a much more efficient solution than using human wave tactics. It should also not be forgot that a decent chunk of Garlean infantry is composed of forced conscripts from conquered territories, so half the time it's not Garlemald's "brave men and women" we're slaughtering but people who had no choice in the matter. As I've explored before that is a questionable thing to do, but the consequences of doing nothing instead are far too dire.

As the aggressors in every conflict we've seen involving them, Garlemald should be well aware and accepting of casualties resulting from their actions. Complaining about soldier deaths resulting from wartime actions, and civilian deaths resulting from insurgency attacks, is refusing to accept responsibility for the consequences of your actions. When you go on the warpath and then take away others' liberties, expect those sorts of things. (As someone who can play a very ruthless political game in Magic: The Gathering's Commander format, I am very well aware of how oppression makes others angry at you and exactly what kind of reprisals it inspires. I factor those reprisals into my plans and prepare for them, as well as accept losses as necessary instead of whining about how unfair it is that I'm being an oppressive douche and people are going after my throat for it.)

The Garleans don't need confidence in Eorzean methods, but unless Eorzean actions are being directly harmful to Garlemald or its citizens there is no justification for their repeated attempts to take away Eorzean liberty. Taking away others' liberties is a surefire way to get them pissed off at you, and you should expect and accept reprisals (and if you're really wise, anticipate and prepare for such things). The same holds true for each and every other region and nation Garlemald has conquered and plans to conquer.

[Balipu]

Well if Primals suck away the whole planet's aether, every primal summoning is directly harmful to Garlemald. Sure, their methods aren't that good either, but so far we have only seen the ideas of Eula, who was tempered by Bahamut, and Gaius, who had Lahabrea whipsering into his ears. Not really sure what Regula wants to do, on whose orders, but we will learn in two days.

In 4.0 we will see how Garleans deal with primals on their own turf. The Ananta do summon their Primal, so it will probably not perfect. Then again this will be the first time the 8 man raid is not a primal.

[Lauront]

Idk, Cilia just seems hellbent on making Garlemald out to be irredeemable villains, hence the long-winded rants to defend this narrative at all points, as if it will make one whit of difference what the developers eventually do.

I will await with bated breath her rationalisations for how Ala Mhigo does not qualify as an irredeemable villain, in spite of maintaining equally bad relations with its neighbours prior to Garlean conquest, and with Ala Mhigans apparently having learnt nothing from it since then, to the point that none of their hosts like them very much.

As I've explored before that is a questionable thing to do, but the consequences of doing nothing instead are far too dire.

"Explored"? Seriously? Are you writing a PHD on the topic?

[Cilia]

Well if Primals suck away the whole planet's aether, every primal summoning is directly harmful to Garlemald. Sure, their methods aren't that good either, but so far we have only seen the ideas of Eula, who was tempered by Bahamut, and Gaius, who had Lahabrea whipsering into his ears. Not really sure what Regula wants to do, on whose orders...

Primal summonings are indirectly harmful to Garlemald unless it's on Garlean turf. The Primal issue is not a short-term crisis, but a persistent problem that will eventually kill the planet. In overall effect it's probably comparable to the Mako energy problem of VII - it probably won't be tomorrow, or after breakfast, but a Primal being summoned for prolonged periods of time will eventually kill the planet. (Bismarck is literally summoned for ~75% of Heavensward's story, with no visible detriment to the material plane beyond consuming islands in the Sea of Clouds. That's bad, but far less severe than we've been led to believe - and is not a threat to Garlemald or Garleans in the slightest if they'd leave well enough alone. We solved the issue without using the Gration to blow Bismarck to bits or going genocide on the Vanu Vanu, so their intervention would have been unnecessary.)

We know that Varis zos Galvus, the new Emperor of Garlmald, would sooner genocide the beast tribes than try to make peace with them and remove the threat of primals that way. This isn't just a crazy / rogue legate, this is the Emperor's (and by extension nation's) stance on the issue. Given they now know non-beastmen can summon primals, or will very soon... how do you suppose they'll react?

The Garleans may handle whatever primals crop up in their own territory however they wish, so long as they are willing to accept the consequences of doing so. Do not dictate to Eorzeans (or Othardians, etc.) how to do so, and do not forcefully intervene if you deem their solutions inadequate so long as your nation is not being directly harmed.

[Theodric]

Ultimately what matters most is whether or not Garlemald is justified from Garlemald's perspective - when discussing whether or not Garlemald is justified and the lore book pretty much confirms that outright. The appeals to emotion based on real world idealism and modern day morality are largely irrelevant. That doesn't, however, suggest that Eorzea isn't justified in fighting back or that Eorzea isn't justified in its stance. Neither side is perfect but both have solid reasons to act the way that they do - and it's pretty much a given that it's all going to lead to quite an interesting and morally complicated mess as we move forward. Much like the situation between the Ishgardians and the Dravanians but even more dire due to dealing with both sides largely consisting of humanoids.

I must admit to being a little confused by Gaius' opinions being cited when it's convenient to paint Garlemald as lacking in justification but then suddenly being brushed off as 'irrelevant' when it comes to something that does paint a more morally complex picture. Oh well.

[Lauront]

Anything to keep the narrative up. Something to 'explore', I suppose.

[Anonymoose]

Here comes a new challenger! Time to turn up the heat!

I think you may have overcooked it a bit, lol.

The spirit I agree with; you answered a few counter points how I would have, for starters; but the defense seems to go a bit too far in that specifics seem to over-reach and contradict themselves.

Just because you don't agree with a nation's system of governance doesn't mean you have the right to take away their freedom and dictate how they should live.

The Garleans don't need confidence in Eorzean methods, but unless Eorzean actions are being directly harmful to Garlemald or its citizens there is no justification for their repeated attempts to take away Eorzean liberty.

The Garleans are convinced that the world is going to end. Garlemald is part of the world. They believe that invasion of other nations and eradication of things that put the world at risk is not only self-defense, but the responsibility of those strong enough to do so. It is a righteous calling. They're wrong, and they're going about it wrong to boot, but it's what they believe.

Taken in its entirety, Gaius speech has nothing to do with "disagreeing with governance". It's a warped chain of logic:

1. False gods kill the planet.
2. Eorzea worships false gods.
3. Eorzea's worship of false gods is due to its weak leadership.
4. By killing you, it will show that I am strong.
5. Without you in the way, I can overthrow Eorzean leadership.
6. With strong me in charge of Eorzea, Eorzea will have no use for false gods.
7. Without false gods Eorzea will be no threat to the planet.
8. I must conquer Eorzea to save the planet.

Furthermore, as we now know anyone and everyone is capable of summoning a Primal with enough aether and a fervent wish, so to completely remove the threat of Primals would require cleansing Hydaelyn of all life. I'm sure everyone doesn't need to be told how that isn't an acceptable solution.

Garlemald is already in the wrong; we don't need to misrepresent them by exaggerating their approach. Capability is not intent. The Garleans target those with intent, and then everyone associated with them gets taken along for the ride. That's a bit closer to "a few bad apples spoil the bunch" than "wipe out eveyone even remotely capable of doing the things we don't like."

The Garleans don't need to have confidence Eorzean methods. As long as Eorzea is handling its own problems and not causing danger or damage to Garlean people or territory, they have no right to military intervention

Who judges how well Eorzea is handling its problems? I mean, the Warrior of Light is doing a pretty great job and Garlemald would botch it, objectively. But do they have no reason to disagree with that sentiment? Look at the 4.0 previews.

LOTS AND LOTS OF NEW PRIMALS

They last time they didn't get the job done fast enough, the Seventh Umbral Calamity happened. Imagine if Louisoix hadn't cleaned that up. They think they can do better. They're wrong, but they do.

Primal summonings are indirectly harmful to Garlemald unless it's on Garlean turf.

I disagree. Primals are how the Ascians give power to the desperate and escalate conflicts. Conflicts lead to Calamities. Calamities have the potential to impact the entire world (and destroy entire other realms).

It's like saying the New World had no stake in the War of the Magi because it was on another continent. How many cities were destroyed all over the world by rising sea levels because of what has happening on someone else's turf?

That's not to say Garlemald isn't still wrong - they think they de-escalate conflict, but they just put a lid on it and let it pressurize. The inspire desperation and hate. Putting Ala Mhigo in a box didn't work any better than putting Bahamut in a box.

But being confident in your ideology doesn't make their ideology vanish. Both ideologies are worthless in comparison to the Warrior of Light actually de-escalating conflicts and attacking the roots of Ascian influence.

[Theodric]

As far as the genocide of the Beast Tribes go...let's not ignore the frequent trips by the Warrior of Light and other Eorzeans into the heart of various Beast Tribe's territory to slaughter and terrorise them left, right and centre for daring to summon a Primal/Eikon to defend themselves. This occurs even after 'peace' is made with branches of the same Beast Tribes who don't want to summon a Primal.

It's also stated in the lore book that Garlemald sought 'whatever means were necessary' to defend their interests back when they were being pushed around. It's very likely that they did seek more peaceful methods to survive yet it did not amount to anything.

Then, of course, there's also the matter of the Warrior of Light actively hunting down both Garleans and members of various Beast Tribes with the sole intention of sucking up their aether/souls to empower their weapon. This is often glossed over and yet if Garlemald ever does something like that I bet it'll never stop being brought up.

In short...it's far from 'black and white'. If those of us caught up in this frequent - and frankly tiresome - could admit as much then we wouldn't see threads led astray by such discussion points on a common basis.

[Cilia]

Idk, Cilia just seems hellbent on making Garlemald out to be irredeemable villains, hence the long-winded rants to defend this narrative at all points, as if it will make one whit of difference what the developers eventually do.

I will await with bated breath her rationalisations for how Ala Mhigo does not qualify as an irredeemable villain, in spite of maintaining equally bad relations with its neighbours prior to Garlean conquest, and with Ala Mhigans apparently having learnt nothing from it since then, to the point that none of their hosts like them very much.

Irredeemable? Of course not! I've never said anything of the sort - in fact I have repeatedly argued that Garlemald can be redeemed, but it would take major reforms since their present leadership is completely dismissive of the problems inherent with their philosophy. Their present course is... again, not evil, strictly speaking, but far too destructive and short-sighted to produce an acceptable, long-term solution to the issues plaguing Hydaelyn.

Many Ala Mhigan actions in the past were unacceptable, and the refugees of which often make boneheaded and morally questionable actions. However this ties back in with Heavensward's theme of not blaming the son for the sins of the father - just because the previous generation of Ala Mhigans were jerkfaces to the rest of Eorzea doesn't mean the present generation deserved to have their home taken from them by Garlemald. Without justification. While said present generation can be... belligerent, to say the least, what's driving them is pure desperation - they have no home and very few have been accepted into other Eorzean cities, let alone prospered. The refugees in Ul'dah are mostly wage slaves, very few are allowed entrance to the Twelveswood and Gridania, and the rest live in shantytowns like Little Ala Mhigo. The Garleans are driven by ambitions of conquest, while the Ala Mhigans are driven by a desperate desire for repatriation. It's significantly different.

The difference is the Ala Mhigans have no other real options save surrendering to despair, while the Garleans could always, you know... just stop their path of conquest and work with others to produce a solution that benefits as many as possible, instead of declaring their ideology supreme even though it comes at an extremely heavy cost to everyone (themselves included) and dismissing any arguments against it.

"Explored"? Seriously? Are you writing a PHD on the topic?

Haha... with the amount of debating I've done here, I probably could have!

But the truth is that it's political stuff, and political debates can get messy and complicated. And of course it won't change what happens in the end, but debates like this are entertaining to me.

Side note: I am a dude.

If senpai is going to tell me to knock it off, though, I suppose I ought to. I'm being dismissed instead of contested, so I suppose there's no point anyway.

[Belhi]

Garlemald as a people and nation isn't an irredeemable villain. The policies of its current leadership and it's general stance towards the rest of the world is both antagonistic and villainous. Neal/Eula's plan to drop a moon on Eorzea was supported by the then Emperor. Their leadership authorised dropping a moon on the planet. The last Calamity is very much due to their actions.

This is part of the irony of Garlemald's activities. They often make things much worse. The Sylph's keep trying to summon Ramuh because of constant Garlean Incursions from their nearby Castrum. The Sahagin are summoning Leviathan because they are now caught in a vicious cycle of war with Limsa after the last Calamity (caused by Garlemald) destroyed their spawning grounds and they had to take a suitable place by force. The Amal'jaa have also been said to have summoned Ifrit out of a sense of desperation though we have little information of their contact with Garlemald. Its sounds very much like the Limia are resorting to Primal summoning too thanks to Garlean oppression. For a group trying to solve the Primal threat they are just making things worse.

Garlemald are the aggressors. The people of Garlemald itself aren't necessarily evil people but the people in control are instituting a policy that is. Now maybe there is some unseen sudden twist that makes Garlemald's intentions far more noble but this looks very much like just a grab for power and control by a group that wants to emulate the Allagans.