>>39446027>"When something can't be shared, it will be fought over. And when something is fought over, some must survive without it. The only way to create a world where people live in beauty, a world without conflict or theft, is to reduce the number of living things."He seems quite straightforward about it.
>people aren't beautiful enoughWhile you already know this, I feel the need to mention it was more of a metaphorical beauty, he wasn't concerned about being stylish (unlike what his low ranking grunts thought. And that's a common trait among all grunts: following a leader without fully understanding his goal. Look at how Cyrus fooled everyone). His idea of beauty is repaying society, that's why he's a philanthropist.
>Plus, most of Kalos seemed to be fine in terms of resources. Maybe if the game showed some people/towns in poverty it could've given Lysandre a point.This is true from an exposition standpoint, but I don't think it's enough to debunk the seriousness of his thoughts. The game shows Lysandre fully believes what he's saying, so he doesn't have ulterior motives. And he's got money, prestige and respectability, so he could live a perfect life on his own.
I find it hard to believe that his words don't actually reflect the Pokémon world, no matter what we're shown (besides, we already know wars are still a thing, thanks to a veteran like Lt. Surge). Admitting that the world exposition was limited/"flawed" is much more plausible than saying "Lysandre, who's got it all, one day woke up and started seeing things that were never real in first place and based an entire human decimation/Pokémon annihilation plan on said fantasies".
