fantoozie

So veganism isn’t related to or affected by agriculture? The plight of farmworkers worldwide is invalid because it’s not as traumatic as slaughterhouse workers? You keep trying to frame my argument as anti-veganism, but it’s really not. At this point I can only consider that I’ve triggered you in some ridiculous way that has nothing to do with anything we’re talking about

I mean throwing up a study about how vegans in the UK produce less greenhouse gas emissions than high-meat eaters only proves that veganism is better at producing less pollution. I never argued that it’s not.

But the study you referenced doesn’t account for worker exploitation, inequity in food distribution, or trade asymmetries. I think plant-based diets are fine, but many vegan products occupy industries that still perpetuate monocropping and resource-intensive production lines that produce massive profits for executives while leaving farmers with the short end of the stick.

I don’t have a bone to pick with vegans, I just think being vegan is a stop along the way to a healthy planet, not the destination. I’m striving to be as nuanced as I can when I offer my critique, which is essentially we need to start discussing why slaughtering animals is morally bad but exploiting workers and agriculture in third world countries isn’t. Having a healthy planet and lifting people out of poverty shouldn’t be mutually exclusive goals.

Yeah still condescending. Whatevs

To be fair you haven’t even offered anything I can respond to; you’re just flailing.

I don’t see a need to be passive aggressive just because a stranger doesn’t agree with you. More the point: it’s only ignorant if you think you we live in a vacuum

If you can’t understand, then you’re proving my point.

Loved that movie. I guess I see where you’re coming from; but your rhetoric stinks of elitism and condescension.

My perspective is that forcing people to become organ donors feeds into a narrative that humans as physical entities are only significant in terms of the value they create (in this case, value manifests as the possible transplantable organs). This is a fundamentally Western perspective, informed by economic theories that promote the valuation of all tangible assets without considering exogenous variables that could adversely effect “value”, or otherwise writing them off as costs.

I’m opposed to your perspective because it creates the precedent for Westerners to continue rationalizing the dehumanization of people under the safety umbrella of good capitalist business practices. As I said earlier, I believe your argument lacks validity outside of a Western context.

So what’s the criteria: adherence to a socially acceptable set of values and ideals? Full development of mental capacities? Literacy tests? Psycho analysis? Eugenics extends beyond physical phenotypical characteristics.

Under extenuating circumstances your argument does hold true. However being religious doesn’t automatically mean you are not smart or somehow incapable of logic.

I think the issue for me is less about not harming animals but more about the massive infrastructure of resource extraction, exploited labor force, and resource-intensive production that directly contributes to pollution and the undermining of low-income populations to subsidize vegan plant-based alternatives to meat and dairy. Vegans that support this industry arguably cause just as much harm to animals (including human workers and beasts of burden) as your average Texas Roadhouse customer.

Yeah because everyone deciding on their own code of morals and ethics will surely contribute to social cohesion… :/

I don’t necessarily disagree, but this game is just sooo short-sighted.

Plant-basee alternatives are such a joke to me.Plant based meats and alternative milks are built upon an infrastructure that demands massive resource extraction from third world countries, buttressed by an impoverished underclass that suffers generational trauma to feed the transactional corporate machine. Just don’t eat meat; veggies, fruit, and legumes are all you need.

Full agree. People on here are spouting thinly coded eugenicist ideals and saying bodily autonomy ends when you die and makes you just another vector for resource extraction, but somehow enabling children to be who they want is an uncrossable line.

Your perspective is entirely based on Western views of autonomy and social utility. Diminishing other cultural perspectives on the sanctity of the human body doesn’t make you enlightened, you’re legit just ignorant.

How eugenics of you

I might also add none of the rights you enjoy are set in stone, so maybe when they throw you in a camp you can bring that up to them.

Beyond the thinly veiled xenophobia and eurocentrism, I find it actually ironic how many of you people spout this line of thinking since it shows your complete lack of mental capacity to engage with the reality that many of the people who flee do so as a result of Western involvement in other countries’ governments, and the rest are fighting a system that chooses racism and violence toward the poor over, and over, and over, and over…

tl;Dr: keep shitting on the Global South but don’t be surprised when you’re alone while Putin and Trump come for your children and your children’s children.

There’s a fundamental disconnect between people who live in highly developed nations and their awareness of how much populations from intentionally underdeveloped nations are subsidizing their ability to accrue material wealth. I believe this creates a scenario where the only way to continue maintaining the high living standards the West has known for 50+ years without incurring increasing costs is through the manipulative create of underclasses that allow capital accumulation to occur. Unfortunately now that globalization is out of fashion, many governments are shifting to bringing these underclasses much closer to home, which is adding to the resulting anti-immigrant, xenophobic political discourse we’re now seeing. Population growth could mostly be a flash in the pan, but if countries really do start shutting the door on immigration and have to also contend with collapsing fertility rates you can bet they’re gonna start rationalizing how to strip women’s rights away; have to keep the underclass there to feed the billionaires and scare the workers.

I like your sentiment but I have to admit I’m wary of perpetuating the narrative of personal responsibility, since it’s been used so often to excuse discrimination against people for perceived ‘deviant choices’. I would argue that the manifestations of individual behavioral dysfunction are a function of the corrosion of traditional social bonds combined with the unrealized societal effects of new communication technologies. Like a feedback loop of compromised people consuming media that validates their harmful or extreme worldviews.