Is anyone else dying to get to Garlemald?

[Cilia]

Questioning is one thing - dismissing is another. I do not like being strawmanned.

The one moderate Garlean we've met is Regula, who was still a racist. Forming an alliance of necessity... doesn't change that. Don't forget that he had personally tried to kill us three times by then. Yes, we killed some of his men - in self-defense, and without an option to show mercy it's not really fair to hold that against us. I'm not trying to downplay Regula's virtue - he was honorable, merciful (well, to little kids), and had his nation's best interests at heart, as shown by how he decided for himself that the Allagans' methods were too flawed to use. I'm just not letting his vice be ignored.

Gaius is not dissimilar. He had standards - he didn't want to glass Eorzea or use chemical weapons to kill its population, and had a very meritocratic philosophy - but don't forget he still tried to take away Eorzean sovereignty, twice, for no greater reason than because he considered its leadership inept and believed he could do so.

Morality is a very complex issue, and I don't and won't deny Garlemald is more complex than "muahahaha evil Empire come to take your stuff and kill your people 'cuz we can." Regardless of that, it has not attempted any diplomacy except at the point of a sword and has not been shown to do anything but tyrannize its non-Garlean subjects, with the minor exceptions of Rhitahtyn and Fordola (and maybe Grynewaht before we repeatedly defeat him). As somebody who leans very heavily toward Chaotic Good on a standard D&D morality chart when unbound by the laws of the real world... I can't really abide, because freedom is very important to me. (Seriously, I don't enjoy games like Grand Theft Auto because I don't see the point of doing all the... well, unnecessarily violent things you can do, despite having the freedom to do so.)

Having reasoning behind what you do doesn't make it right. As I said, I'll use Spider-man: Homecoming's Vulture (easily the best part of the film; the rest is pretty standard Marvel fare these days) to illustrate my point. Hide-boxed for spoilers.

In the film, Adrian Toomes (the Vulture) starts out as a pretty average man - demolition cleanup, specifically cleaning up after the Avengers' battle with Loki and the Chitauri in the first Avengers film. After purchasing a lot of equipment using debt to clean up the mess, a government agency comes in and relieves him of the work. After returning to his office, he finds one of his trucks still had a piece of Chitauri technology on it - and one of Spider-man's lesser foes, the Tinkerer, is part of his crew. So they set up a black-market version of what Stark Industries used to be - using scavenged tech to make weapons and selling them, making "Vulture" a very fitting moniker.

This continues for eight years until Spider-man brings him down.

Now, what makes him sympathetic is that he is doing this for his family. He claims himself a family man and, since Peter Parker's love interest is his daughter, we do see him in a civilian context and it is absolutely true. He is also very reasonable with his subordinates, only killing one by complete accident and otherwise listening to their advice while reprimanding them for being stupid. He was also flying under the radar and keeping his operation small enough to avoid government detection - it wasn't until the Shocker idiotically decided to demo some of the weapons in the suburbs that Spidey got onto his case, leading to his ultimate downfall.

The question is: at what point does it change from necessity to simple greed? Remember, eight years - that is more than enough time to clear his debts and find honest work. By the time of the film he has quite an opulent home for suburban New York.

The same question I would levy on Garlemald: at what point does it change from necessity to simple greed? They have long since reclaimed their ancestral homelands and gotten revenge on those who wronged them (though I don't encourage revenge - see 3.0) - why it it necessary to invade other nations? Is two and a half continents not enough? Do they not realize primals are summoned in response to their invasions, not the other way around? Is diplomacy not worth the effort? Do the lives of others not matter?

Also I'm just gonna take a moment to fanboy over the Vulture's design in the film. He's creepy and scary for a villain who normally poses very little threat. His wingsuit has glowing green eyes and freaking talons!

... having a reason doesn't make it right. Even Zenos had a reason - albeit a more self-serving one than any other Garlean thus encountered. (He still earns a twinge of sympathy though, especially from people who did not have many friends growing up. Varis is now getting close to being in the running for "Best Dad on Hydaelyn.") To fight - to kill - in self-defense, to preserve sovereignty, and/or to liberate from oppression is not wrong, I don't think.

[HReincarnate]

I just have to question why people defending the empire respond with only individual exceptions, and expect them to hold the weight of all the atrocities committed by the Garlean empire over the years. What does it matter that there are sympathetic people like Gaius, Regula, and that guy from Ala Ghiri when the Garlean Empire has razed cities, enslaved nations & otherwise been an absolute plague on the star?

Do they believe their actions are justified? I'm sure they do. And doubtless there will be some part of the population of Garlemald that disagree with the Empire's actions; but until we get to Garlemald & have first hand experience with it that is completely moot.

And to equate the injustices that occur in Eorzea to those wrought by Garlemald is something I find very confusing. That the city states have problems of their own is without doubt, and that Limsa's treatment of the beast tribes hasn't been addressed since 2.2 is something that really irritates me. But having certain wronged factions in Eorzea does not compare having to entire 'countries' be subjugated and be forced to bend to the Empire's self interested whims.

[Cilia]

---

The first is to point out that, while the Empire itself is pretty atrocious, there are individuals within it who are not. Therefore, calling for the murder of all Garleans is unjustified. Most people don't ask for that, but are often straw manned into it because that's easier to argue against and someone inevitably comes along who does ask for it. Other than that, it's an attempt to paint the protagonists in a negative light for not trying their hand at diplomacy with the Empire despite the fact every Imperial we have encountered thus far prefers aggressive negotiations to diplomacy (even the one who formed an alliance of necessity with us).

The other is using tu quoque ("you too;" appeal to hypocrisy) fallacies to avoid answering the question of whether or not Garlemald's actions are justified. "Limsa breaks their land treaties, just like Garlemald invades other countries. They're no better!" The problem is that what Limsa did there is minuscule in comparison and widely acknowledged as wrong, and this doesn't answer whether or not it's right for Garlemald to invade and subjugate other nations (or at least to the extent they have and continue to). The "Eorzeans don't try to engage the Empire in diplomatic relationships either!" falls pretty well into this too. (We're supposed to try talking to them, even though only one Garlean has tried to talk to us and this was after he tried to personally kill us three times. The others just try to kill us.)

[YianKutku]

I have several real-world examples that I'd dearly love to bring up, but since they're likely to result in further acrimony, I will reluctantly refrain from doing so. Just mentioning this to note that yes, I am aware of those examples, and I am consciously not bringing them up. (No, it's not Nazis.)

Other than that, it's an attempt to paint the protagonists in a negative light for not trying their hand at diplomacy with the Empire despite the fact every Imperial we have encountered thus far prefers aggressive negotiations to diplomacy (even the one who formed an alliance of necessity with us).

The Sharlayans tried diplomacy, but it didn't work out. No other details were given, since the overnight evacuation of their colony in Dravania was seen as much more dramatic.

The one time the Eorzean Alliance rejected diplomacy was when Gaius van Baelsar delivered an ultimatum to the Alliance leaders, effectively telling them to give up their sovereignty or else. While this technically falls under the definition of diplomacy, I think we can all agree that the Alliance is well-justified in rejecting this. Every other time, the Empire has been dictating terms, with no room for negotiation, or indeed any interest in what Eorzeans have to say.

(I don't know much about 1.0, so I don't know if diplomacy was attempted by or with Nael van Darnus.)

Part of the disagreement is because it's very easy to conflate Garlemald as the nation with Garlemald as a people, as well as Garlemald as the ruling authority. Everyone agrees that not all the people of Garlemald are bad; most people agree that the people of Garlemald do not deserve to be destroyed. (The exceptions are outliers, and can presumably speak for themselves.)

The ruling authority of Garlemald, as its current government, is unworkable for any other nation, as well as any territory conquered by them. The issues are not so much them being actively evil, but more a systemic problem that lets evil be committed. Gaius ruled Ala Mhigo with autocratic yet meritocratic authority, and the Empire lets him. Zenos runs roughshod over both Ala Mhigo and Doma (by proxy with Yotsuyu), and the Empire lets him. That implies both methods of governance are acceptable to the Empire's ruling body, and they see little to no difference between authoritarian rule and deliberately inflicting misery on the populace.

I mean, Zenos's treatment of Ala Mhigo and Doma are not even beneficial to the Empire. Any potential resources these regions have are suppressed, and the entire rationale is that Zenos wants a good fight, and is hoping for a rebellion he can slaughter his way through. And yet Varis, his father and the Emperor, does not care.

One can imagine a hypothetical Legatus being put in charge of Doma (or Ala Mhigo or both, but the point stands in all cases) instead, who rules fairly and with mercy, looking out for the welfare of the citizenry, and punishing any instances of brutality. I would suggest that the Empire will also not care if this was the case.

So the ruling government of Garlemald is guilty of being apathetic to the evils being committed in its name. This is especially damning, because they literally have the power to stop these evils. I don't even expect them to be perfect, but at the very least they should not tacitly condone Zenos's pointless brutality for brutality's sake. There is no reason for them not to intervene, just to make these subjugated regions more productive. As it stands, Ala Mhigo and Doma produce nothing but misery and rebellion.

That is why I believe the government of Garlemald must be reformed, if not replaced entirely. Varis at the least must be deposed, entirely for his apathy in acknowledging what his son was doing. We don't know how deep the rot goes, so it's difficult to speculate more than that.

As for the people, I am inclined to be more lenient in judging them. I do expect the vast majority not to be sinless angels. In fact, I would not be surprised if most Garlean citizens we meet turn out to be jerks. But that still does not condemn them to extermination, or even subjugation. For the most part, they do not have as much power individually to mitigate the excesses of distant colonial governors.

Therefore, when I say that Garlemald is evil and needs to be reformed, I mean the ruling authorities of Garlemald, as in the ones with the power to stop, commit, or condone evil. However, I notice people thinking I mean the people of Garlemald. (The third definition of "nation", referring to the land, is irrelevant here.)

Personally I'd be skeptical if Garlemald is reformed but continues as an absolute (not constitutional) monarchy. We may be able to install a more benevolent ruler (puppet or otherwise) to the throne, but that does not preclude another Varis appearing in the future. To be fair, Limsa Lominsa and Ul'dah have the same issues. I think only post-war Ishgard and Sharlayan are appealing to our modern-day sensibilities.

And since this discussion apparently requires some measure of snark, I am now waiting for this entire post to be completely ignored by everyone else, in favour of slinging fire at each other and attempting to douse them with pissing contests.

[Alleo]

Fine, "They are an enemy that should be destroyed", is that what you want me to say? That they are nothing more than a literary dragon to slay, and there is nothing that should be considered past that, since a goddess has selected us for victory?

Maybe there is nothing to look forward to regarding these people, maybe I am fooling myself, but If I see one more rebel group hiding in a sewer somewhere that we must elevate to power, I think I'm going to toss something.

Hien's idea of scaring the imperial provinces from rebellions their own territories, don't this sound a lot like sponsoring terrorism?

One of the problems I have with Eorzea is that I see the ultimate goal being not a world totally dependent on the character's strength to deliver it, but a world that can survive without them, I just don't see that future in the freedom that they so cherish.

No Garlemald itself should not be destroyed and most of us made it quite clear that we are meaning the empire itself as a government and not every single person in it. The empire as a government and those that are leading it, needs to be stopped if they dont change their view because their view means: Conquer all, kill certain races completely and destroy every kind of religion and culture they have. This is not freedom in any way. There simply wont be different kind of Xaela cultures for example under the Garlean rule because Garlemald does not believe in such things and thus nobody should believe in those things. These are shown a lot in the main quest but also in some class quests, where its said that the villages are not even allowed to do their festivals which had nothing to do with gods or summoning them.

Also lets not forget that a lot of the summoning that are the main problems for Eorzea and the world are done out of fear for their lives and because of the Ascians. If we help them overcome their fear and if we defeat the Ascian we would be one step further to peace in the world. But it would be utopia to think that there will never be a conflict again. But the empire and killing all those that could pose a primal treat is not the solution. Freedom always comes with the price that people can do wrong things simply because they have the means to do so. (Different belief and stuff like that) But this is a good price imo to pay if this means that we are free to think, speak and believe in what we want. (Within the borders of established rules)

And I just dont see that as terrorisms. First it depends on the actions of the rebells. If they go around and do alot of horrible things to all that are opposed to them, then yes this makes them not better than the Garlean empire but these are conquered lands and they want to be free again. Going against this has nothing to do with terrorisms.

@YianKutku: Thanks for your post, you bring my thoughts in way better words. Its exactly that: Most of us that oppose the empire see a problem with the government, and only a really small amount of people (I remember one) wants to kill every single Garlean person. Everyone else has in any way tried to argue about the government itself and I see a very big problem with Varis and other higher ups, simply because they have the power to change rules and yet they did nothing. (Just putting someone as the leader in two countries that are so far apart is not a good decision but using Zenos in those position was even worse.)

I do hope that if we ever go to Garlemald itself that we will see more positive characters like Cid or Lucia that want a change. And I do hope that most of them are not jerks or something because that would just be cliché as heck and not realistic. But I just cant see how we will come in good terms with the current government. Most of that I can see is short term working together but never long lasting peace with the current higher ups.

About certain people: Gaius was only against meteor and the poison because he saw the need to have people to rule over (this was said ingame) thus would be better for Garlemald. This had nothing to do with it being just morally wrong. He is the one that orders the raid on the scion base, a group of people that wants to do something against the primals themselves and that is in a way neutral. And he calls us savage and his diplomacy with Eorzea was pointing the Ultima weapon at them and wanting them to surrender completely..He might have not treated the people as bad as Zenos but that suddenly does not make him good. (And SE was surprised that a lot of people liked him)

Regula tried to shot us out of the sky even though we were in no war situation and this action killed Ysayle. Thus he did not even try to talk to us when we flew there. He also tried to kill us more than once. He was shown to at least have some moral conflict with his sacrifice and he seems to respect his men. He still calls us savages but at least he worked with us. He is probably one of the only non traitor Garlean that is shown at least more right but he also was killed off quite fast. (Which is sad because I would have loved more interaction with him)

Then in SB you only have that one soldier that saved the lives of the citizens because he orders his underlings away without a fight. The Garlean rule itself is still seen as bad from the civilians in the village but at least that soldier is seen in a good way. I do kinda wonder if that soldier is a forced conscript or someone that was born under Garlemald. He is the only one that is shown in a good light towards the people of Eorzea. (You might want to count these other two soldiers which one stood up to his underling and got killed and that one who was against the shooting but did it anyway. But those did not show concern towards Eorzea, only concern over their own people. So not sure if you can truly count them)

So if I am still missing someone else that was at least decent in some way then please post them. (I am just curious)

(And I am not sure if friendship between people is truly a good point for an empire itself. Even the most horrible person can have a friend. And Cilias doubt was more along the way that this was not truly shown ingame. IMO its bad story telling if you write this only in lore books and dont show it truly in game. There are some sentences about it in the story itself but it would have been nice to see more scenes with it. I still would have disliked Varis because there is nothing right now that makes me feel sympathetic for him.)

[Cilia]

---

Well at least I'm only slinging fire now. Last time it got this heated I had to break out the butter!

Ah hem. I uh... am not trying to ignore you, and stuff... it's just I concur and don't feel like there's much for me to add? (Gettin' a little embarrassed here...)

Anyway, while I didn't play 1.0 - 1.x either, we do have at least one record of an Eorzean attempting to engage Garlemald in diplomacy. Lolorito tried to convince the Garleans not to drop Dalamud down on us. He, uh... did not succeed, which is why the Monetarists paid to reignite the Immortal Flames. There were some Garleans against the Meteor Project, but in the end it still went through.

The rest I concur with. When I say "Garlemald," I'm referring to their leaders... or the collective nation's decisions, which given it's an autocratic military dictatorship basically means the same thing. The Garlean people I do not have enough information to make any sort of judgment call on... if the Imperial City is something like a snowy Midgar as I envision, with the elites and upper class living in safety and comfort on the plate while the lower classes freeze and starve to death down below, I'll still be pissed at their government while sympathizing with their civilians. I'd very much like to ask Nero what the Imperial City is like... Cid is of noble birth so he might not know, but Nero is heavily implied to be of common descent, so if we wanted information on Garlean civilian life he'd probably be the best person to ask. (Also, I want him to reinstall the weapons systems in my Magitek Predator.)

I also agree that Varis needs to do a better job of keeping tabs on his legates. Gaius can't be blamed on him because he died before Solus (though he did go rogue while the latter was on his deathbed), but Zenos was his own son and a legatus. I find it very difficult to believe he had no inkling as to what Zenos was doing. It's actually implied he was watching our battle with Zenos (as Shinryu) on his TV before Elidibus teleports in and starts talking to him. I think. If he really had no idea what Zenos was up to, the Frumentarium need to step up their game.

The Garlean people might be decent. They might not be. Either way I never have and never will condone killing them all... but at the same time, I am not going to tell people "Sorry you have to suffer and die, we're going to make peace with them real soon." We need to change their government in some way, but I won't let innocents be killed while that goes through.

[Kallera]

Well, after all this, i'm not moving from my original point, I would like to enter Garlemeld, but not as some conqueror. The semantics are just depressing and just make me not want to play.

[LalafellDown]

I know SE will never allow this, but I hope somewhere in a expansion far far away we can join the empire and help the empire take over the world. Why didn't you let me join you Zenos? I would of turned on all of my so called friends who only need me when there is a primal to kill.
T^T

[Alleo]

I know SE will never allow this, but I hope somewhere in a expansion far far away we can join the empire and help the empire take over the world. Why didn't you let me join you Zenos? I would of turned on all of my so called friends who only need me when there is a primal to kill.
T^T

Each to his own but at least I would like to stay on Eorzeas side where not everything is perfect and it is a bit annoying that they throw you at every bad thing (which is called out by Nero) instead of going to a empire where depending on the legatus you will be slain by having a different opinion, by failing to do your mission or by just being an echo user. And since they want to get rid of every beast man and primal you will be thrown at the beast races, kill every single one of them and if a primal appears you will be thrown at this too. Also depending under which legatus you are, being a non Garlean will also mean being treated like a savage.

(Dont believe the dark side they dont have cookies and the cake is a lie!!)

Oh and a bit more serious: I dont believe that we go into Garlemald as a conquerer because even as a WoL we should not be able to take down such an empire and Eorzea does not have the men power to do so too. So either we get there as a prisoner or something like that and might help out the people in there (or not).

[Kallera]

I know SE will never allow this, but I hope somewhere in a expansion far far away we can join the empire and help the empire take over the world. Why didn't you let me join you Zenos? I would of turned on all of my so called friends who only need me when there is a primal to kill.
T^T

Oh, that'd feel great.^^

They'd probably feel obligated to make some pressing commentary about the injustices and politics.

but it'd feel great.