You're viewing a single thread.
hard agree, tho I would say that all exploitation that stems from humans should be opposed. Indiginous (or just generally conscious) hunting, however, is necessary in todays world to keep at least some semblance of ecological balance and I would not compare it to exploitation on an industrial scale
and ofc Veganism without class consciousness is like environmental activism without class consciousness: just privileged gardening
Don't forget so so much ableism too!
And just for shits and gigs, not that its anyone's business - I'm actually vegan myself lmfao I'm just able to realise that that doesn't give me any moral superiority over anyone and that what others eat isnt my business, destroying capitalism is.
I think veganism should be encouraged from a administrative level, but it's similar to the process of secularization. For example: You can't force people away from religion and it's abusive practices (or eating meat for that matter). Education campaigs and massive restructurings in all social fields to make it more accessible, be it in terms of the school system (,costs of food or adjustments in the health sector) are needed to further secularization (or veganization) imo
Practically, you can't literally force people to stop eating meat, but we should do everything we can.
I agree but there have to be alternative structures in place first. Structures on which people rely on during and after the adjument. You need that procedure if you don't want to hit less priviliged people disproportionally hard (as it the case with closing coal power plants for example)
Which structures are missing?
We already have plant based alternatives for everything and plenty of resources to help people transition.
readily available education ("just google it" is insufficient in the current SEO fuelled hellscape) and support to help people build their own plant based diets, combined with plant based alternatives that are just as cheap + easy + nutritionally balanced. IMO there's great progress towards both, but neither are there yet for becoming vegetarian/vegan to be a trivial process for those who want to.
I'm physically disabled and struggle with most meal prep, so I mostly live on frozen meals. On an especially good day, i can make a sandwich, or put some chips in the oven. Can't manage much more than that, and I've failed to find plant based alternatives to those things that i can both afford, and make myself. It could exist, but I haven't been able to find it, and the sheer volume of ableism in the vegan (etc) community is exhausting to sift through. The last time I tried had some guy talking down to me telling me that "foraging isn't that hard, actually", lmao. And i'm someone who wants to reduce how much meat I eat, and have been trying to do so despite all of this!
To be fair, there are a couple of veggie frozen meals at my local store (nothing vegan, though). But have you tried rotating the same 3 meals for a year and not completely losing it?
There's a lot of resources which aren't just "google it" tho, check out https://veganbootcamp.org/ for example, they'll help you through getting started.
Sustainable eating is cheaper and healthier - Oxford study
Your situation is unfortunate and if you truly can't afford plant based options which are practical for you then you can't afford it.
But a lot of people just refuse the cheap plant based options, rice, beans, frozen veggies, potatoes and so on aren't expensive.Able-ism sucks and people shouldn't be telling you to just go forage, I think part of the reason some vegans react negatively to it being mentioned is that it's often brought up by people who aren't actually disabled but just use other people's disability to excuse their own destructive and cruel habits.
There will ALWAYS be people who eat animals, for medical or cultural resons and they should not be excluded.
The cruelty is in the industry not in a practice that is as natural as nature itself.There's very few medical reasons to consume animal products and the few there are will hopefully have alternatives soon.
Bringing that up in the context of the general population going vegan is silly.Cultural norms is not a good reason to engage in exploitation.
The cruelty is absolutely in the practice, killing others is wrong.
Non human animals are living and feeling beings just like you and I, they experience the world, they have likes and dislikes, they have best friends, they enjoy chilling in the sun.
Just like humans, other animals also have the right to not be needlessly killed.> > > Just like humans, other animals also have the right to not be needlessly killed. > >
So when do you start a campaign to turn cats and dogs vegan? What's the plan for lions and bears living in the wild?
Cats and dogs can thrive on a plant based diet, so yes that's what we should feed them.
Wild animals don't have the capability to consider the consequences of their actions or the possibility to not eat other animals, humans do.
Do you normally base your morals on what wild animals do?
Cats and dogs can thrive on a plant based diet
That's flat out wrong. Cats are obligate carnivores, so feed them vegan diet only if you really want them to suffer horribly.
Wild animals don't have the capability to consider the consequences of their actions
If you consider the "capability to consider the consequences of one's actions" as the ultimate method of determining if killing is OK or not... then you should be equally fine with mentally disturbed humans killing other humans. Are you?
Do you normally base your morals on what wild animals do?
Let's not involve "morality" into this, since morality is a very subjective thing. The morality of abortions being an excellent example. It also puts the whole discussion about, say, euthanasia in a very peculiar spot.
Also: what about the morality of extreme deforestation to make room for farms growing vegan food? What about the morality of the increase in carbon emissions, the destruction of topsoil and reduction of biodiversity that soy farming brings?
The problem with meat industry is that, well, it became an industry. Excess is the evil here, not the ACT of consuming an animal. There are plenty of ways of giving animals excellent, pleasant lives and then ending these lives in a way that produces no fear, no trauma in them. Or even awareness of the fact.
We are all just life. Life starts, requires fuel, and then ends. Sometimes life kills other life in order to get the fuel, and that's fine. What we, as the most technologically advanced form of life on this planet can do, is do all in our power to ensure that while all the forms of fuel remain available to us, we do so without causing excess harm. Which also means things like growing meat in labs instead of obtaining it through the killing of animals, of course. I'm very much a fan of the concept of lab-grown meat, but that's just something that's not obtainable on a large enough scale in the nearest future.
Cats are obligate carnivores in nature because of taurine, cat food doesn't have taurine because the ingredients are shit so synthetic taurine is added to meet the cat's nutritional needs.
The same synthetic taurine is also added to plant based cat food so it meets the cat's nutriotional needs.
Dogs are omnivores like us and can easily thrive on a plant based diet.Yes let's involve morality, needless killing of animals is immoral.
Most farm land is used for animal feed.
only 20% of soy is used for direct human consumption, the rest is animal feed, so if you want less soy farming you should drop the animal products.Excess is the evil here, not the ACT of consuming an animal. There are plenty of ways of giving animals excellent, pleasant lives and then ending these lives in a way that produces no fear, no trauma in them. Or even awareness of the fact.
No it's the act that's wrong, needlessly killing other beings when we don't have to is clearly evil.
There is no way to ethically kill someone who doesn't need or want to die.
You wouldn't accept these condition for "human farms".We are all just life. Life starts, requires fuel, and then ends. Sometimes life kills other life in order to get the fuel, and that's fine.
Why be cruel when we can easily avoid it?
Cats are obligate carnivores in nature because of taurine
From the wiki:
Specifically, cats have high protein requirements and their metabolisms appear unable to synthesize essential nutrients such as retinol, arginine, taurine, and arachidonic acid;
There's another problem of the cat digestive system just being too short to handle most plant matter.
so if you want less soy farming you should drop the animal products
I want to. Well, not "drop" but rather "limit". That's exactly why I mentioned "excess" being the problem here.
You didn't answer the question, though - how do you feel about the morality of topsoil degradation, greenhouse emissions and biodiversity reduction caused by most vegan food alternatives?
No it's the act that's wrong, needlessly killing other beings when we don't have to is clearly evil.
Please reply to this question:
If you consider the "capability to consider the consequences of one's actions" as the ultimate method of determining if killing is OK or not... then you should be equally fine with mentally disturbed humans killing other humans. Are you?
You wouldn't accept these condition for "human farms".
Which conditions? The majority of farms - sure, the conditions are horrible and it's exactly what I'm saying we should eliminate. But there are modern farms that have conditions most of the human population would gladly sign up for. Damn, I'd be one of them!
Why be cruel when we can easily avoid it?
Precisely my point. That being said, there are a myriad of methods of killing an animal without being cruel.
There's protein in plant based cat food.
You didn't answer the question, though - how do you feel about the morality of topsoil degradation, greenhouse emissions and biodiversity reduction caused by most vegan food alternatives?
I did; Most farm land is used for animal feed., so plant based food uses way less farm land and thus causes way less degradation and emissions.
If you consider the "capability to consider the consequences of one's actions" as the ultimate method of determining if killing is OK or not... then you should be equally fine with mentally disturbed humans killing other humans. Are you?
Mentally disturbed humans who act violently are still humans and part of our pack, I think we should make sure they don't hurt others.
Which conditions? The majority of farms - sure, the conditions are horrible and it's exactly what I'm saying we should eliminate.
The conditions of "humane" treatment but still killing.
But there are modern farms that have conditions most of the human population would gladly sign up for.
You seriously think that humans would sign up to get needlessly killed for profit/taste..?
Precisely my point. That being said, there are a myriad of methods of killing an animal without being cruel.
How do you ethically kill someone who doesn't need or want to die?
You don't think avoiding animal abuse is better than engaging in and funding animal abuse?
That's like saying that you don't care about what anyone does in the privacy of their own home while talking about domestic violence.
Yes we should let people do as they please.. as long as it doesn't hurt others.
Eating animals definitely hurts others.
Hunting is not necessary, humans killed all the natural predators because we didn't want them attacking livestock.
If we stopped animal agriculture then natural predators could be allowed back.
And we can use non-violent population control methods.Also, deer are straight up bred and released just so people can hunt them.
Hunting is needless killing and cruel because we can easily thrive without.
What do we do in the mean time? You know that eco-system recovery is a veeery long process. Also idk if that is another case of US-exceptionalism but that would be the first time I heard of the practice of breeding deer just to release them for hunting (not smth I know from continental europe)
The model of requiring a license for hunting with a ~ a year of prior training (or some other proof of the necessary knowledge for those who grew up with it for example) and restricting it to certain times and species as long as we haven't introduced natural predators again (which is not always viable, mind you) is a good model imo
Animal agriculture will be gradually stopped till the problem is fixed.
Sure in the meantime is gonna be a mess but that doesn't make hunting ethical.I'm not American myself but yes I've heard it's done in the US, I believe I've also heard of it done here in Denmark tho.
No amount of prep, education or restrictions is gonna make needlessly killing others okay.
Am too much of a pragmatist to see veganism as morally superior tbh
Don't you think that being against animal abuse and refusing to participate in it is morally superior to directly funding animal abuse?
