5 ms·
>Why can't it just be treated as a food in itself? It can but if the objective is to reduce the world's, and specifically North America's appetite for animal p
by woofcat 5y ago
>Why can't it just be treated as a food in itself?
It can but if the objective is to reduce the world's, and specifically North America's appetite for animal products. You need to either aim to replace the current products or await a culture shift away from what is easy and cheap today.
- throwaway5752 5y agoWe can also wait (not so long, either) for increasingly severe heat waves and droughts to harm the viability of the dairy industry in the US. That way scarcity and cost will take care of the job in a less gentle way, but there were be a lot of other incidental problems to cope with.
- captainredbeard 5y agoI bet it would just cause a change in production conditions which would be poor for the animals. It would be far better to find sustainable ways to use the livestock to sequester carbon (c.f. Allan Savory TED talk) and limit their environmental impact instead of giving up good eating.
- xdennis 5y agoYour objective is terrible. The ability to eat as much animal products as you desire is synonymous with living in a first world country. A future where we can no longer do that is backwards.
- ccmonnett 5y agoYour ability to eat as much food as you desire is synonymous with living in a first world country. The ability murder as many animals as you want is not the desired state I look for when thinking about the world in which my child to grow up. A future in which that is synonymous with status is backwards - to me.
- xdennis 5y ago> murder Please show me the law.
- ben_w 5y agoThey’re clearly using the word in the moral sense rather than the legal sense.
- xdennis 5y agoSo in the wrong sense? This squeamishness is a product of the infantilization western culture seems to be going through recently. Hopefully immigration from 2/3-world countries (e.g. me) helps fix it.
- ben_w 5y agoIt’s a perfectly legit use of the word. Words are not defined by God; they get their meaning though use, and Merriam-Webster records one such use is “to slaughter wantonly”.
- amusedcyclist 5y agoA 'squeamishness' that comes from the reality that we don't need to kill animals to live comfortably anymore. The morality of a rich society is naturally different from the morality of poor country.
- whynotkeithberg 5y agoYeah veganism is 100% a first world privilege.
- hombre_fatal 5y agoNot at all. I live next to a tiny shop in Mexico that sells fruits, vegetables, and some extras like oatmeal and beans and olive oil. I eat healthier (according to research reviewed by NutritionFacts.org) and more cheaply than anyone I know once I decided to limit my diet to only the things they have, incidentally vegan. I spend almost nothing on food in this shop. Same for all the poor Mexicans who live in the area. It’s quite obvious that ubiquitous access to cheap animal products is a first world thing.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]