People get mad when they have a problem and you provide a solution they can feasibly take part in. As soon as they have any agency/capability to take responsibility suddenly they are unable to.

You act like it's mutually exclusive, when it just isn't. And guess what? Not eating meat and consuming less animal produce is significantly easier than fighting injustice that happens in foreign countries.

As soon as you suggest people stop eating meat, suddenly they have no moral standing or their change won't make a difference. It's just sad. People will hide behind 'personal choice' as if it absolves them of supporting the industry and any wrong doing that comes as a consequence of it. You can't justify breeding an animal into existence for the sole purpose of killing and eating it when it is entirely unnecessary to do so. It's probably the biggest example of injustice in the modern world, next to slavery.

Bringing an animal into the world with the intent of later killing it when it is entirely unnecessary to do so seems a bit wrong no?

People don't want to learn or debate anything. They form an opinion and from that point on stop giving a shit. It's no surprise things end up like this.

All you need to know is most people don't give a shit about anything not directly threatening their way of life in immediate terms. Once you understand how pathetic people are, it becomes all the more obvious why things are allowed to be this way and not change. A lot of people don't even care to put in the effort to learn or expand their knowledge of things at all.

Try to tell people to stop eating meat and reduce their consumption of dietary animal products because of the moral/environmental disaster that it is, and suddenly it's too hard to have empathy.

Once you realise most people don't give a shit about anything that doesn't directly affect or implicate them, you realise why things remain how they are.

They are self-aware, willing to change and learn, and have a rational, logical view of things. It's rare to meet people like that, but they are by far the best people. Someone's philosophy on life is probably the best descriptor of a person.

Problem is, a lot of people don't have a lot of money because of how the world has been allowed to go. Everything is funnelled towards the worst people who go unpunished somehow. There needs to be an uprising or something.

'You are younger than me and therefore know nothing.' Can't argue with that there.

What is the metric for fairness here? And what version of 'capitalism' are we talking about?

Both. Most people who eat meat would say animal abuse is wrong, all while ignoring their own contribution. A lack of intellectual honesty and logical consistency that leads to moral problems is also anti-intellectual. They would say slavery is wrong because it is prejudice, and unjust for 'xyz' reasons, while also saying 'xyz' reasons aren't good enough to change their mind away from eating meat.

What do you mean to say? People should be allowed to escape from war always. But there are reasons you can just go live or stay anywhere.

Right-wingers are just disgusting beings. They can't self-reflect or have any intellectual honesty in their thoughts.

People who say completely ignorant shit and act like their opinion holds any weight need to learn that it means fuck all. Sadly, there are far too many self-centred people in our society for all of them to be humbled. And of all things, to care about trans people? Really, how often do you encounter them? I think the real cause when people hate on others unprovoked is insecurity of themselves.

Yeah, there are reasons to be anti-religion and even potentially anti-immigrant, those issues have actual logically and morally consistent reasons. Whereas racism and the others are entirely emotional and based on nothing. Religion is belief literally founded on nothing.

All forms of prejudicial arguments are wrong. Just don't talk about speciesism though, because most people will lose their shit 10x harder.

I've only found people who say really stupid shit get completely downvoted to the floor on Lemmy and there are almost always extensive responses. Anecdotes aren't the best evidence, I guess my experience was very different.

However, at least you can actually see if people upvoted or downvoted and not just the total, so people are less inclined to just hop the train straight away. Depends largely on the instance though. I'm pretty sure Hexbears can't even downvote.

Lemmy is far better than Reddit regarding the use of downvotes, but many people still use it as an emotional disagreement button rather than something used to hide useless/irrelevant content. I only downvote when somebody says something completely fucked or starts trolling.

I don't think upvoting funny comments is necessarily wrong, but there is a lack of meaningful engagement a lot of the time.