Is anyone else dying to get to Garlemald?

[Klonoa7]

The hell? She didn't "commit genocide". She performed a strike that hit the people under her command, sure, but neither that nor what the skulls were doing suggest she was performing a genocide. In fact, genocide probably would have resulted in her turning on the empire, since the Ala Mihgans cannot be free if the Ala Mighans are all dead.

Yes, she did. Her and her skulls had no problem whatsoever killing Ala Mhigans such as shown in Ala Gannha, Rhalgr's Reach, and Specula Imperatoris (which also killed her skulls and several imperials as well).. Your logic is so very flawed. You say "genocide probably would have resulted in her turning on the empire, since the Ala Mihgans cannot be free if the Ala Mighans are all dead." yet her every action leads further and further towards that end.

[Theodric]

Perhaps you should look up the definition of genocide.

If Fordola is guilty of 'genocide' then so, too, is Aymeric given that he put a lot of his own people to the sword as well.

[Klonoa7]

Perhaps you should look up the definition of genocide.

Mass Murder which is indeed what Fordola and her skulls were doing to their own people

[Kallera]

Mass Murder which is indeed what Fordola and her skulls were doing to their own people

That is not the definition of genocide, and it is not what Fordola did. And i hesistate to call fighting the Ala Mighan RESISTANCE "genocide", as they do not comprise of all Ala Mihgans. Even the resistance gets in on killing Ala Mighans when they suspect them of not resisting with the empire along with them.

[Klonoa7]

Perhaps you should look up the definition of genocide.

If Fordola is guilty of 'genocide' then so, too, is Aymeric given that he put a lot of his own people to the sword as well.

The only thing Aymeric is guilty of is Patricide which could not be helped considering his father's ambitions made him just just as bad as Garlemald.

[Klonoa7]

That is not the definition of genocide. And i hesistate to call fighting the Ala Mighan RESISTANCE "genocide", as they do not comprise of all Ala Mihgans. Even the resistance gets in on killing Ala Mighans when they suspect them of not resisting with the empire along with them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_definitions

1982: Genocide is the deliberate destruction, in whole or in part, by a government or its agents, of a racial, sexual, religious, tribal or political minority. It can involve not only mass murder, but also starvation, forced deportation, and political, economic and biological subjugation. Genocide involves three major components: ideology, technology, and bureaucracy/organization

1984: [Genocide is] the planned destruction, since the mid-nineteenth century, of a racial, national, or ethnic group as such, by the following means: (a) selective mass murder of elites or parts of the population; (b) elimination of national (racial, ethnic) culture and religious life with the intent of "denationalization"; (c) enslavement, with the same intent; (d) destruction of national (racial, ethnic) economic life, with the same intent; (e) biological decimation through the kidnapping of children, or the prevention of normal family life, with the same intent…. [Holocaust is] the planned physical annihilation, for ideological or pseudo-religious reasons, of all the members of a national, ethnic, or racial group

1987: Genocide is the deliberate, organized destruction, in whole or in large part, of racial or ethnic groups by a government or its agents. It can involve not only mass murder, but also forced deportation (ethnic cleansing), systematic rape, and economic and biological subjugation.

1988: the promotion and execution of policies by a state or its agents which result in the deaths of a substantial portion of a group

1990: Genocide is a form of one-sided mass killing in which a state or other authority intends to destroy a group, as that group and membership in it are defined by the perpetrator

I stand by what I said

[Kallera]

An Ala Mighan killing other Ala Mighans is not genocide, they were being ruled, however poor that rule was, they were clearly not being exterminated. The idea to train Fordola and the skulls would not have been considered if wiping them out was the plan. and Zenos is too stupid with his "I'm off to hunt me some game!" shtick to consider wiping out his enemies.

[Alleo]

@Kallera

And if they find out that their technology is hurting Hydaelyn they could simply change their way or do it less. Exactly how nobody in their right mind would say that we should kill of all modern real world people because our life style is hurting the planet. No there would be no genocide involved. (And unlike Garlemald we do know that the death of a lot of people would just destroy another shard and cause a calamity. And on top of that none of the current city stated showed any kind of sign that they want to kill any living Garlean.)

Also its all on Garlemald itself. If they went back to their own continent and leave the beast man alone, they would not need to summon their primal again. (A lot do it out of fear for their lives) Also leavin Eorzea alone means, that the city states could finally concentrate on getting better with their own situation thus they could finally try to get better with their neighbors beast tribes. All of this would lead to less summoning thus less suffering for Hydaelyn.

So I am not sure how you came to the idea that this would mean Genocide. Especially since none of the current city states showed any ambition to conquer the world.

--

Anyway I still have not heard about the true positive things that Garlemald did? I mean you have one soldier that called is underlings away before Eorzea came, so the civilians suffered less for this (but the village is not really positive about Garlemald itself) and you have some told stories about some unknown countries that have it great under their rule. But as long as we were not there and talked to people I will remain skeptic about it. The points Cilia used are really not that positive because Garlemald uses most of it to conquer the world that does not want it. And even in the worst dictatorship you will find kind and good people that are doing the right thing. So not sure if the actions of some side NPCs are truly showing the good side of the empire itself.

You also have two "honorable" important Garlean enemies (Gaius and Regula) but they are definitely not "many". In this expansion alone we had no single good Garlean (that is in any way important).

Please I am just really curious and since I am biased towards disliking them, maybe I cant see the good things but it would be nice if people finally wrote why they want to side with them, or why they are Grey and not black. (And I mean the government, not the citizens itself)

All that I see is people trying to say how bad Eorzea is, yet we already said that we know that no country is without bad stuff. But in the end they also have done lots of good stuff, thus they are way more balanced (or nuanced). Garlemald is really looking quite black at the moment.

@Klonoa7: Please stop with this talk about wanting to kill every single Garlean person..if we went with something like that we would be no better than them and you also would kill a lot of innocent people. Also Fordola was not committing Genocide. The situations in Rhalgrs Reach was simply a war situation. And sadly you will have to kill in war. She is a bad person but she definitely did not mass kill people.

[Kallera]

To Klonoa's point, if it is all their fault, as in everything in the setting, and truly as black as you say, then why let them live? Wasn't Zenos enough of a lesson, of letting your enemies live long enough to foster the strength to come at you again. Are you going to be satisfied with them coming back into governance after they are inevitably crushed? Are you willing to let them choose a decision that you may not agree with?

If you cannot find something to relate to, either you do not know enough about them, or you know all you care to. It sounds like you are arguing that they are irredeemable, while at the same time sparing these irredeemable people for traits you don't believe exist in them... Is that the case?

I do not see it as all their fault, especially with the primal problem given the setting and their limitations, so the point is pretty much moot to me. I'm aware that there are facets about that society that need to change, much like Ishgard when we first went there. I'm waiting for the sane representations of Garlean government to appear on screen as well, as I know they exist, and that npcs from the empire have discussed about them. Indeed, they couldn't have an empire without it.

But if you cannot see anything worth relating with them and do not see it in the future then calls for their annihilation are bound to exist.

Edit: I'm thinking (hoping really) that we are arguing the same point. I haven't looked foward to this conflict.

[Cilia]

Let me preface this by stating I do not like the Nazi comparisons. They are both trite and distasteful. However, I will not deny that the similarities are self-evident. That is all I will say on the matter.

-snip-

1. I don't blame the rest of the world for disliking magitek due to, yes, the Allagans, Mhachi, and Garleans. However there is nothing inherently wrong with embracing technology. Quality of life could be vastly improved and, as the Ironworks have shown, there are benefits to technology.

2. The world is a harsh and unforgiving place; the Garleans just make it worse than it already is. This is why they are the villains. Even without the Garleans things wouldn't be sugar and rainbows - Eorzea has its social, political, and territorial struggles even without them. (I played all of Stormblood and only skipped a couple cutscenes here and there because of not wanting to miss DPS queues. Even before then I made no effort to hide my distaste for the Empire.)

3. The Garlean military, the only part of their society we've seen thus far, is supposed to run on merit. However during Stormblood it should have become painfully clear this only applied to Gaius' XIVth Legion. They kill a lot of people - their own countrymen, even - but that's the military for you. And the Garleans. I never said they were nice.

... Fordola labors under the false belief that by proving the Ala Mhigans equal to the Garleans they will be given a degree of autonomy back - in modern terms she wants Ala Mhigo to become a state within the Garlean Empire rather than an occupied territory. Gaius' relative progressiveness probably instilled this belief in her, and back then it might have had some truth to it... but under Zenos? No way.