It's possible that Venat's primitivist ideals are correct, and that every society will inevitably be destroyed through various means in pursuit of progress. My issue with this is that it's an idea presented through a bunch of distant alien races or ancient peoples long dead, it's not a notion that actually seems to bear any serious consideration for the peoples of Eorzea. We happily go along solving everyone's problems, uniting the continent into a nu-Global Community, saving all of our friends from death instead of having to suffer their true loss, and all around being a perfect hero surrounded by perfect friends who want to mitigate suffering and progress into a brighter future in every way they possibly can.
In that sense, the story is two-faced. It presents the idea, but cheats by not having it apply to everyone, instead suggesting that somehow we're so special and unique that we've broken past those issues and found a way that isn't a "Dead End".
And maybe that's all true. Humanity fulfilling her hopes and surpassing her is something she allowed for the possibility of, but her words and her extensive plans with the moon show that it wasn't the outcome she actually expected to happen. Maybe she hoped for it, maybe her plans accounted for it, but when it happened she couldn't really believe it. Again, exactly like Emet-Selch at the end of Shadowbringers.
I'm just going to say it: The Ascians are, in essence, Venat's controlled opposition. She knew what they would do, and paved the way for their existence, while they were unknowingly acting as agents of her plans. Even if Emet-Selch hadn't come out and said this in Ultima Thule, as many people have been pointing out in this thread their proclivities towards spreading chaos and resetting civilization through great destruction every few thousand years is exactly what Venat's ideals call for.And the Ascians aren't also?!
I know your next response is going to be "But the Warriors of Light, she was trying to stop the Calamities!", and you know my response after that will be "We don't actually have evidence the WoLs ever stopped any Calamities."
Yoshida himself said that Venat working very hard behind the scenes to ensure that the timeline proceeded in accordance to how it should is a valid interpretation of events. That is my interpretation of how it all went down, that Venat intended for all of this to happen and worked to make it so. Are you going to disagree and insist that this is an invalid idea?
Emet was dead, and it was WoL that brought him there.Emet killed himself rather than live longer by Venats magic.
Venat's care for her own people was itself contingent on a subjective and ultimately meaningless test. I also disagree that Emet's empathy for mortals was contingent on passing the test, but I doubt you'll ever accede to that.To say she didn't extend the same level of empathy as Emet, whose care for us was contingent on a subjective and ultimately meaningless test, is ridiculous.
But you would kill an innocent person in exchange for the theoretical life of someone in the future.Yep, I would never kill an innocent in exchange for the life of someone I care about.
I've explained several times the nuances that show their differences. But yes, I in fact do remember quite a lot of "backlash" in ShB, threads constantly reverted into arguments about Emet and the Ascians for years. The only difference is that at that time, the puzzle wasn't complete, so the avenues for how complex and contentious the conversation could get were more limited.So treat her as Emet then. I don't remember this level of backlash to him do you?