When are we supposed to stop fighting?

[EaraGrace]

We’ve entered the Venat is “literally the devil” phase of this argument.

And that makes journey into destination.

Then the word destination is meaningless.

What's the real difference between Etheirys and all of those other stars? There was a great and mighty woman who used strength of arms to cow her own civilization, and transform them, causing them to take a "better" path.

More accurately, a group of dissenters led by a woman argued against the path being taken by broader society, and when they didn’t listen sought to ensure the future wouldn’t be doomed by their decision. They then dedicated their lives to protecting and fostering this life.

Why do I bring this up? Well, the idea that the story flirts with is that the individual supersedes society. It loses its merit instantly though, because we're operating through the, "Great Man" framework constantly and consistently. In ARR and every expansion we have forced change and decision onto societies via getting in bed with their leadership, without the consent of the governed. The ordinary folks in the setting struggle to remain relevant at every turn, so much so that Alisaie even has a line in early Endwalker that goes something to the effect of, "Is that what the common person is destined for? An obscure, cold death?!"

And yet it’s those selfsame common people that we continuously fight beside at their own peril.

Who was it that we supported in Ishgard?

Who did we lend our strength too in Ala Mhigo and Doma?

And who was it robbing the free will of the survivors in Norvrandt? Wasn’t the Scions I don’t believe.

Say what will, but the Scions and WoL repeatedly respected the right of self governance, only intervening to prevent an imminent harm or to free a populace from a oppression. Even the Garleans came to recognize that.

In short, it's better to not be part of a society in FFXIV, because if you are, even if you're a leader, then you're a wimpy stripling playing second fiddle to the Scions and the WoL. You couldn't take responsibility for yourself or your people if you tried, because the Great Man already did.

If the moral of the story you got from playing 14 is to wait for a hero then I’m not sure we’re playing the same game.

The wholesome life is worthwhile no matter what message is not lost on me, but in its twisted skein Endwalker wound up highlighting that with far more negative means than positive ones. It made Venat operate along the same moral lines as Gaius pre-redemption Baelsar.

The Great Woman's argument boils down to, "You are weak, so you don't deserve your lives."

Some might think to say, "But she said she believed in mankind's ability to find a way forward no matter what happens to them." But sadly, she immediately contradicts that stated belief with her actions, otherwise why take them?

Believing humanity shouldn’t choose for all life to walk off a cliff doesn’t mean you don’t believe they should have a choice. If you want to say there’s conflict between respecting the individual and protecting the collective then sure, but that’s evidence that Venats human, not that she’s the “Great Woman.”