Legion Appreciation Thread

[Dr Fallout]

I like the Legion because they're interesting and well written. I dislike seeing them as the typical evil villains, and go to long ways to argue against that. I do not think repressive dictatorships are fantastic, but I do think that democracy isn't much better, on a political view. Our actual lifestyle is pretty good.

 

[DVL]

Izzat so? Because people like Dr Fallout like to do nothing but make special case pleadings for how their faults really aren't faults.
This is the guy who thinks he'd have a decent chance of faring well in Warhammer 40k's imperium.

 

[DVL]

I like the Legion because they're interesting and well written. I dislike seeing them as the typical evil villains, and go to long ways to argue against that. I do not think repressive dictatorships are fantastic, but I do think that democracy isn't much better, on a political view. Our actual lifestyle is pretty good.

If they were morally grey they'd just be a somewhat benign constitutional monarchy, not a people who views themselves as specially superior who goes about enslaving people.

Hell, I've had people argue that slavery isn't actually what they do.

 

[Earth]

I like the Legion, but mainly because they scare me. Their style of rule is all too familiar throughout history. What annoys me is that people say: the Legion are silly, or unrealistic, or underwritten, all of which are judgements I think are incorrect. We can talk forever about whether the Legion is evil or not, or whether they're a viable power for the Mojave etc, etc. What actually bothered me was that people (imo) judged the Legion poorly on a critical plain.

 

[Vergil]

Izzat so? Because people like Dr Fallout like to do nothing but make special case pleadings for how their faults really aren't faults.
This is the guy who thinks he'd have a decent chance of faring well in Warhammer 40k's imperium.

Please provide some arguments that aren't A: Strawmen/ad hominem and B: You trying to make comments on the person you're arguing with, with baseless conjecture.
I'm finding it very hard to take you seriously when you deflect conversation of the Legion with
"WHY DO YOU LOVE SLAVERY AND OPPRESSION SO MUCH!??!"

 

[Dr Fallout]

Izzat so? Because people like Dr Fallout like to do nothing but make special case pleadings for how their faults really aren't faults.
This is the guy who thinks he'd have a decent chance of faring well in Warhammer 40k's imperium.

Ugh, do you really have to make ad hominem attacks?
It's possible! I'm pretty sure there are tons of powerful inquisitors, generals, space marines and planetary leaders but let's ignore them.

If they were morally grey they'd just be a somewhat benign constitutional monarchy, not a people who views themselves as specially superior who goes about enslaving people.

Hell, I've had people argue that slavery isn't actually what they do.

Really? A constitutional monarchy does not equal 'shit' which you seem to imply. Who have other beneficial factors such as law and order.

Ever heard of Christians? Yeah apparently the Israelites never had slavery.

 

[DVL]

Really? Are you the same guy that said that "guilty until proven innocent" wasn't so bad?
It's not an ad hominem when you yourself admit that living in 40k wouldn't too bad. Because you know, it's okay to have privileges at the expense of others and be shot for heresy for arbitrary reasons by a literal Inquisition. Or really, anybody who thinks they ought to.

The automatic assumption that you'd be that guy doing the dicking says too much. It explains why you have no problem with a military caste having all the power and why you can't see that as innately corruptible. Your best objection to this is that, well uhh, that they have a law. You think morality is best enforced by being draconian because being a pussy is impracticable in a harsh wasteland.

I don't remember who it was, but I had to actually point out that slavery wasn't some special case exception of the "speartip" for the Legion.

Yes, I've heard of Christians. It says a lot that I'd rather live in Utah than in Legion territory.

 

[Vergil]

Your argument is so misplaced. Nobody here is calling for the world governments to abandon any and all freedoms and start up the slave trade. We're discussing the pros and cons of Caesar's regime in a fictional world that has been blown to hell by nukes. Whether you like it or not Caesar's Legion has made a considerable contribution to the people of post-war America and bears discussion instead of just dismissing them as "100% evil if you even try to say anything positive about the legion, like, omg ur literally a nazi". The Legion exists in a world much different than ours. You have to stop trying to imprint your beliefs and experiences in the modern would with a completely different one. It's the same with history. You have to consider the entire situation of the time. I don't support slavery but I'm not going to deny any of Washington or Jefferson's accomplishment and accuse those who list their positives as "evil oppressors who support slavery"

EDIT: Also yes, saying things like "YOU have no problem with a military caste having all the power" or "instead of trying to view them in the most rose-tinted light."
"People who like the Legion secretly like the idea of a repressive dictatorship. THEY think it's a jolly good idea."
"YOU see when you point out that the President doesn't have term limits, I think it's a jolly good idea to have term limits instituted. You know, not invade them and enslave everybody." are ad hominem. You're making very weak assumptions and trying to delegitimize the opposite opinion by saying that anyone who says anything positive about the Legion love them 100% and "secretly love repressive dictatorship".

 

[DVL]

I don't believe that obviously.
Not when people are making apologia for Legion practices and trying to invent assumptions about how they actually work in direct contravention of the evidence. (But maybe they have water! Sooooo not the point.) I shouldn't have to explain why "guilty until innocent" is a terrible idea. I shouldn't have to explain why deflecting criticism from the Legion by pointing at other factions's problems doesn't make the criticism invalid. I've done all those things in this thread.
Hell, there's plenty of evidence that the world as it exists has higher standards without being a detriment to survival but I keep getting Big Brother morality from people.

And I have to agree with Earth on this: The Legion isn't unfamiliar as a form of government at all. I've compared them to North Korea before. The real Romans kept slaves and even they didn't treat their women as badly. We've had monarchies that abolished slavery.

Come to think of it, I'd still rather live in Fallout Utah than in Legion territory.

 

[Vergil]

I don't believe that obviously.
Not when people are making apologia for Legion practices and trying to invent assumptions about how they actually work in direct contravention of the evidence. (But maybe they have water! Sooooo not the point.) I shouldn't have to explain why "guilty until innocent" is a terrible idea. I shouldn't have to explain why deflecting criticism from the Legion by pointing at other factions's problems doesn't make the criticism invalid. I've done all those things in this thread.
Hell, there's plenty of evidence that the world as it exists has higher standards without being a detriment to survival but I keep getting Big Brother morality from people.

And I have to agree with Earth on this: The Legion isn't unfamiliar as a form of government at all. I've compared them to North Korea before. The real Romans kept slaves and even they didn't treat their women as badly. We've had monarchies that abolished slavery.

Ok, I'm going to break this down piece by piece.

Not when people are making apologia for Legion practices and trying to invent assumptions about how they actually work in direct contravention of the evidence.

Who? Almost everything we bring up are things stated or directly shown in game. Your blatantly dismissing any evidence you don't like as "invented" while making assumptions of your own. (will get to this later)

I shouldn't have to explain why deflecting criticism from the Legion by pointing at other factions's problems doesn't make the criticism invalid.

No one is saying something it inherently invalid. But when YOU bring the other faction into the argument and try to use that against the Legion it warrants discussion when it is a weak and invalid point. You've brought up the NCR on your own multiple times to try and counter-act the acts of the Legion and have been met with rebuttal of those points. Don't try to brush off talk about other factions when you're the one who brought them up.

Hell, there's plenty of evidence that the world as it exists has higher standards without being a detriment to survival

Try actually listing them instead of saying "they totally exist guise" that that it matters because the evidence I'm assuming you're going to bring up (other peoples like the NCR and BoS) are not cut from the same cloth as Caesar's Legion. The Legion is formed from former tribals who were poorly infighting and pillaging eachother constantly. Not civilized settlements like the start of the NCR or have a military background like the BoS.

The real Romans kept slaves

So now you're saying that slavery can be ok? Then why are you bringing it up as a reason that the Legion is totally negative if you are willing to do the opposite for Rome?

they didn't treat their women as badly

Show me examples of the treatment of female Legion citizens (pro-tip, there are none. Thus your comment on Legion treatment of all women is you guessed it, assumption). Not that all assumption is bad, but you seem to have something against it.

We've had monarchies that abolished slavery.

But they had slavery to begin with. Also this is a weak point for very many reasons. This implies that the Legion could not and would never abolish slavery which is conjecture based on other empires doing the same. The real Romans which you were implying were better than the Legion never abolished their slaves. And you're trying to apply the morality and history of real life to different setting.

 

[DVL]

I tell superdude that everybody else in the wasteland has higher standards of morality.
He replies.

"You know, I'm not talking to you if this is your level of reasoning.

Derp, Caesar is worse than his neighbours and a lot of tribals. But it's okay because he's only just as bad as slavers of the logically incongruous East Coast."

There is nothing incongruous about them. You are excluding one part of a universe and focusing on the other part to suit your argument.

The slavery is the same, the points on the map do not matter. People consistently pay attention to the Legion for slavery. It is not the only organisation.

So you are going to ignore completely an entire game and DLC pack? (The Pitt, full of slavery)

You claim.

I'd also like to remind everyone that slavery is still permitted in NCR territory.

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Slaver's_Guild

But you're both wrong.
Slavery is illegal in the NCR. Nice try to both of you. Nobody else in the Mojave practices it.
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Free_the_slaves_in_the_slave_pen,_for_the_Rangers

Here I claim that Caesar uses people as a means to an end.

As I've stated, Caesar is contemptuous because he sees people as a means to an end, little caring about what he is making them in the process. People are tools to him. When I really think about the things he says, he's only doing what he does because he's a megalomaniac. He cares more about playing Roman Emperor and being remembered as such than what his legacy will actually do to people. If this is for the good of the people under his rule . . . well it isn't. He already has that half-accomplished but is just going to leave it up in the air on the off-chance he gets bumped-off.

Here are the responses to that:

Your arguments are flawed. allow me to explain why


"people are tools to him". people are tools to the NCR. House uses you as a tool to further his goals. maybe he gives you caps and a penthouse, but you are obviously still his tool. He uses you as a means to an end. people use people as a tools in real life too. Other people are not exempt. Its not just Caesar


"megalomaniac".this is untrue.A person who has an obsessive desire for power.People who have large amounts of power are always called megalomaniacs. A employee could call his boss at work a megalomaniac. Pupils call their teacher megalomaniacs. Kimball could be called a megalomaniac. Mr House has the honour of being called megalomaniac.

You must understand, just because he is immensely powerful does not mean he is a megalomaniac.

Yep, that's deflecting criticism.

I never noticed Caesar's egotism. Maybe he is, but he never got around to me that he was into himself. He just knew what worked, and used the devotion to him as a deadly weapon. He knows he's seen as a god by some but instead of taking it in as if he is actually a god, but more as if it's useful to his aims and goals. Perhaps I'm blind to his flaws due to bias.

Annnnd cognitive dissonance. Dr Fallout admits as much and it's only okay when Caesar does it.

Emphasis mine.

Is that so bad? Innocent till proven guilt can work but not always, especially in chaotic regions, and the Mojave is very chaotic.

Actually it's because the trader is in every right to complain to Lanius however Lanius will... kill the trader. The only real sign of being favored by Caesar is because he's a great war leader. Hence it can be assumed that after the war Caesar will terminate him due to being not necessary and counter productive. That happens in the NCR to an extent... they're too weak and corrupt to follow it through though.

Emphasis mine.

More cognitive dissonance along with special ad hoc pleading. We have no evidence that Caesar has those plans. It also doesn't matter.

Caesar set Joshua Graham on fire. I don't think he's the type get too het up about whether one of his officers inconvenienced a trader.

 

[Vergil]

*completely ignores my post and pulls posts from already finished topics way back in the thread to try and salvage some sort of argument*

 

[DVL]

Oh I'll get to you.

 

[Vergil]

Oh I'll get to you.

Doesn't really change the issues with your post such as accusing them of deflecting criticism.... and then not backing up your claim at all lol. Since you make the same fallacies in that post I'll just wait for your follow up to mine.

 

[Risewild]

J.E Sawyer said this about the people and communities that exist in the Legion territory:

The general tone would have been what you would expect from life under a stable military dictatorship facing no internal resistance: the majority of people enjoy safe and productive lives (more than they had prior to the Legion's arrival) but have no freedoms, rights, or say in what happens in their communities. Water and power flow consistently, food is adequate, travel is safe, and occasionally someone steps afoul of a legionary and gets his or her head cut off. If the Legion tells someone to do something, they only ask once -- even if that means an entire community has to pick up and move fifty miles away. Corruption within the Legion is rare and Caesar deals with it harshly (even by Legion standards).
In short, residents of Legion territories aren't really citizens and they aren't slaves, but they're also not free. People who keep their mouths shut, go about their business, and nod at the rare requests the Legion makes of them -- they can live very well. Many of them don't care at all that they don't have a say in what happens around them (mostly because they felt they never had a say in it before the Legion came, anyway).

So living under Legion rule has advantages and disadvantages, but it is unquestionable that it is safer to travel and even live in Legion territory than anywhere else (unless one disobeys the Legion of course):

Those living under the Legion's control are considered subjects, not members of the Legion proper. Lands under Caesar's protection enjoy stability and security far greater than lands outside its sphere of influence. Traders that have to cross NCR's territories with a guard contingent can safely travel on Legion trade routes alone, without any fear or danger of being attacked by raiders or other criminals. Caesar is considered a harsh, but benevolent lord by those who reside inside his domain but have not been enslaved into his army.

About slaves in the Legion:

The Legion is first and foremost a slave army, the sole owner of which is Caesar. As Caesar conquers the peoples of the wasteland, he strips them of their tribal identities and merges them into his forces. There is no other tribe than the Legion itself.

As a slave army, the Legion maintains a very strict hierarchy or division of roles. All able-bodied males become slave soldiers with a singular purpose: to fight for Caesar until they fall in battle. This reason for being is imprinted into each legionary during his reconditioning, or, if one was born into the Legion, upbringing and training. Legionaries become unconditionally devoted to their leader, living to fight. Contrary to expectations, experience and veterancy has no bearing on one's position in the Legion. While some may receive better equipment and more dangerous tasks to fulfill, at the end of the day, all soldiers remain slaves, disposable human tools that are discarded the moment they stop fulfilling their purpose.

Women are given the role of, essentially, support corps. Caesar specifically forbids women from fighting, instead using them as caretakers, healers, midwives, and breeders to support the Legion's continuous campaign of expansion. Almost all members of the Legion express condescending and downright misogynistic opinions of women and their non-combat roles. While the portrayal of female slaves in Fallout: New Vegas follows standard stereotypes, it is important to reiterate that both females and males in the Legion are fully subjugated by Caesar - though women have the distinction of being considered 'sub-human' instead of merely slaves, due to the Legion's perception of their sex.

So everyone in the Legion is a slave except for Caeser, and there is no retirement for Legion soldiers, once they stop being able to fight they get discarded and probably get rid of.

An interesting distinction is that the Legion is only the slaves (although only the lowest ones are called "slaves" in the Legion, but everyone is a slave of Caeser, no matter what rank), which make the entirety of the army, no settlement inside Legion territory is part of the Legion, and yet anyone on the Legion can still boss around anyone that lives in their territory, so that means that slaves have higher power than normal people that are not part of the Legion, in my opinion it is quite interesting.

 

[DVL]

No one is saying something it inherently invalid. But when YOU bring the other faction into the argument and try to use that against the Legion it warrants discussion when it is a weak and invalid point. You've brought up the NCR on your own multiple times to try and counter-act the acts of the Legion and have been met with rebuttal of those points. Don't try to brush off talk about other factions when you're the one who brought them up.

I haven't. I actually criticized the NCR and you actually said that I criticized them.

Show me examples of the treatment of female Legion citizens (pro-tip, there are none. Thus your comment on Legion treatment of all women is you guessed it, assumption). Not that all assumption is bad, but you seem to have something against it.

Ever talked to Melissa from the Great Khans? The way you convince her to break alliance with the Legion is to tell her that she's lucky to be an officer's wife at best. Women are chattel. The burden of evidence is on you to prove that there are actually women citizens at all.
(EDIT: Risewald confirms that there aren't. Everybody is technically a "slave." But that doesn't apparently keep Legionaries from owning money and selling slaves out of Cottonwood Cove. So I can only interpret that as Caesar essentially leasing slaves to other slaves.)

I'm not completely skeptical of the idea, but I seriously doubt it's anything other than in chartered settlements as a case-by-case exception, where Caesar couldn't be assed to completely induct them into his army.

The reason prostitution doesn't exist is because you can fuck all the slaves you want as long as you're a card-carrying Legionary.

But they had slavery to begin with. Also this is a weak point for very many reasons. This implies that the Legion could not and would never abolish slavery which is conjecture based on other empires doing the same. The real Romans which you were implying were better than the Legion never abolished their slaves. And you're trying to apply the morality and history of real life to different setting.

Fair enough. But as I've said already, it was already abolished.
Caesar brought it back. Why re-institute a thing you're just going to abolish anyway? Why leave that to chance on the hope that the Legion will maybe "get better?"

 

[Vergil]

I haven't. I actually criticized the NCR and you actually said that I criticized them.



Ever talked to Melissa from the Great Khans? The way you convince her to break alliance with the Legion is to tell her that she's lucky to be an officer's wife at best. Women are chattel. The burden of evidence is on you to prove that there are actually women citizens at all.

I'm not completely skeptical of the idea, but I seriously doubt it's anything other than in chartered settlements as a case-by-case exception, where Caesar couldn't be assed to completely induct them into his army.

The reason prostitution doesn't exist is because you can fuck all the slaves you want as long as you're a card-carrying Legionary.



Fair enough. But as I've said already, it was already abolished.
Caesar brought it back. Why re-institute a thing you're just going to abolish anyway? Why leave that to chance on the hope that the Legion will maybe "get better?"

You're the one who brought up the NCR with this post:

NCR doesn't torture its enemies to death. In point of fact, there are laws preventing Boyd from assaulting a Legionary prisoner. And that's a hell lot more consideration than The Legion gives its enemies. Now she's a dirty cop, so she doesn't mind paying a freelancer to do the assaulting.

NCR citizens don't uniformly accept the faults of its governments as good. Cassidy doesn't. Boone doesn't. Hanlon doesn't. Dissenting opinions can exist without fear of corporeal reprisal. NCR's average citizen-soldier doesn't take slaves, doesn't rape or pillage. Hell, they have relief efforts in Freeside. And the woman in charge there is willing to fudge the rules just to give food provisions to non-NCR citizens. Their failings lie in their inability to live up to their high moral standards, not because they lack them.

Boone is actually very conscientious and highly moral. He doesn't believe that, but he is. He knows that people complain about the NCR, but will tell you that security was worse without the NCR. The evidence bears him out. Most citizens of the NCR share a similar idealism and naivity, but I hardly find that repugnant in itself. What was the worst crime of his wife? That she was prissy? That hardly merits a hanging.

I don't know what your point about the frumentarii is. That maybe they're a secret police? A gestapo?
Ultimately, they're going to take their orders from whoever is in charge and have no accountability.

Talking to Melissa is not a credible source because as far as we know the Courier has never seen a Legion settlement before so how would he know what they're like for women? Also he has an ulterior motive for telling her this as the Courier is trying to get the Khans to break off with the Legion. Not to mention the Khans are considered an outside tribe and not a member of the Legion so why would Legion women rights apply to them anyway?
The "burden" is not on me. You're making concrete statements about non captured women in the Legion when there are 0 shown in the game.
I never mentioned prostitution but alright. Also from dialogue from people like Aurelius freedom to do whatever you want with slaves is inferred to a privilege of those in higher positions of power. (and theres nothing sayiing that its a privilege given to them by Caesar himself but we're getting into assumption territory).

Caesar didn't "bring it back". For him to "bring it back" there would have had to have been a precedent set beforehand. Caesar's Legion never abolished slaves in the first place so he's not bringing them back. Also I'm not saying I have any belief that it will be abolished, just that if you're going to use examples of past, unrelated regimes abolishing slaves it goes without saying there was a point where slaves were an unquestionable part of society like they are in Caesar's Legion.

 

[DVL]

Talking to Melissa is not a credible source because as far as we know the Courier has never seen a Legion settlement before so how would he know what they're like for women? Also he has an ulterior motive for telling her this as the Courier is trying to get the Khans to break off with the Legion. Not to mention the Khans are considered an outside tribe and not a member of the Legion so why would Legion women rights apply to them anyway?

I dunno, how about actual Legionaries you talk to? Take a female character to Caesar's camp and talk to the NPC's.
There's also the one lady that dispenses healing powder and the various non-interactable female NPC's hauling around heavy loads.
Cassidy also is a trader who tells you that Legion territory is great for trading, with one major exception. She's a woman. She's not happy about this.
There are NCR propaganda posters that specifically says that serving as a woman in their armed forces is a slap to Caesar's face.

They aren't exactly subtle about the Legion's attitude towards women.

Caesar didn't "bring it back". For him to "bring it back" there would have had to have been a precedent set beforehand. Caesar's Legion never abolished slaves in the first place so he's not bringing them back. Also I'm not saying I have any belief that it will be abolished, just that if you're going to use examples of past, unrelated regimes abolishing slaves it goes without saying there was a point where slaves were an unquestionable part of society like they are in Caesar's Legion.

Are we arguing semantics now? The point is that Caesar has the power to build the society however he likes and that he could very well have picked any other model of government. Or at least actually been more like the Romans if he so chose. They kept slaves, but there was such also such a thing as being a citizen with rights. You might also be a woman in such a society and still have rights as a citizen as well, even if it's hard to imagine that they were anything other than a patriarchy.

 

[Vergil]

I dunno, how about actual Legionaries you talk to? Take a female character to Caesar's camp and talk to the NPC's.
There's also the one lady that dispenses healing powder and the various non-interactable female NPC's hauling around heavy loads.
Cassidy also is a trader who tells you that Legion territory is great for trading, with one major exception. She's a woman. She's not happy about this.
There are NCR propaganda posters that specifically says that serving as a woman in their armed forces is a slap to Caesar's face.

They aren't exactly subtle about the Legion's attitude towards women.



Are we arguing semantics now? The point is that Caesar has the power to build the society however he likes and that he could very well have picked any other model of government. Or at least actually been more like the Romans if he so chose. They kept slaves, but there was such also such a thing as being a citizen with rights. You might also be a woman in such a society and still have rights as a citizen as well, even if it's hard to imagine that they were anything other than a patriarchy.

Those women at the Fort are all slaves, not citizens. I'm never claimed that the Legion has equal rights for women, just that not all women are slaves. I'm sure theres plenty of "sexism" in the Legion. I really hope you're not seriously quoting NCR PROPAGANDA posters as credible?

Caesar's choice to continue using slavery could be due to many reasons but they are all speculation as he never outright says exactly why. It could be that he merely saw the pragmatism in the use of forced labour or he just really wants to larp as Rome to full capacity.

Also women couldn't vote in ancient Rome and lacked rights. Not going to elaborate anymore because I've already established that we have almost 0 info on female citizens of the Legion.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Wow, so much to respond to! Let me try at some areas...

First, NCR doesn't have slaver per say, but I say it again, is serving under incompetent leadership while being forced to fight, barely trained and not even given standard gear against tough warriors with expectations to kill even civilians (Bitter Springs massacre) any better then slavery? Also travel to Westside and the New Vegas Square. I hear they love the NCR.

More cognitive dissonance along with special ad hoc pleading. We have no evidence that Caesar has those plans. It also doesn't matter.

Caesar set Joshua Graham on fire. I don't think he's the type get too het up about whether one of his officers inconvenienced a trader.

Now we see hypocrisy. You state that the lack of evidence with Caesar killing Lanius means it doesn't matter, ignoring that many of your arguments are baseless assumptions. In fact due to the limited timeline the entire argument on the Legion is based on assumptions, with the biggest in my opinion is 'The Legion's military aspect= the Legion's civilian aspect' This is inherently flawed reasoning, as the military aspect of pretty much all nations, countries and empires are different to the civilian areas and life. You're reasoning is used by many people in the Middle East, who assume that the Americans/Russians/West are decadent, corrupt and evil BECAUSE THEY WERE BOMBED by them. The UN is tainted in the eyes of locals because some of their men raped girls, and this causes distrust and hate. The Nazis, while still an oppressive dictatorship didn't go around killing entire towns of Germans because they could (one of the 'Legion are evil' argument was based on the assumption that the Legion went around killing, raping and doing whatever they pleased whenever they wanted to), however this was widespread on their front lines.

Hence we have no real knowledge of how civilian life is, and we cannot use their soldiers as a great example because in real life, the army acts differently in war time.