3 ms·
It won't be accepted. If anything it probably will be treated like veganism, which is mostly moral grandstanding. People who consume boutique products to show t
by Noos 5y ago
It won't be accepted. If anything it probably will be treated like veganism, which is mostly moral grandstanding. People who consume boutique products to show their virtue. A lot of us simply don't lose sleep over the suffering of factory animals, in the same way we didn't lose sleep over the starving kids in china our mothers used to berate us about when we didn't finish our vegetables. That doesn't mean we constantly try to make things like a hellscape, but you can try and treat everyone morally and not get in a tizzy over "someone is being oppressed somewhere! See! Our moral guardians of the media are showing us!" The idea of telescopic philanthropy and being a Mrs Jellyby needs to be remembered.
If it got to the point where it was mandated, we'd probably be in some form of dystopia where everything was in the pursuit of either survival (animals no longer exist or are possible to eat) or sort of a planned world where our governing or elite classes mandate their virtue on everyone, and it would lead to a lot more lifestyle changing that not eating meat. I think the latter is fairly likely, China for example seems to be doing pretty well at a basic form of that.
- ainiriand 5y agoYour comment starts presenting an interesting debate but you steer towards some kind of partisanism or tribalism that is quite stange to witness. You do not need to hear any kind of moral guardian to do and conduct yourself knowing that every single person is responsible of the actions they make and though I am not responsible for those starving children I am responsible for many of the atrocities commited for the burgers I ate. It is not about virtue, it is taking responsibility of your own actions and checking your own ethic to decide if it is correct or not.
- Noos 5y agoIt's not partisan in the sense of right or left, the "starving kids in china" was pretty much the same thing on the right. Jellyby was definitely a moral conservative, and victorianism is surprisingly bi-partian. Usually its the fashions of the rich, if anything. HN in particular is unaware of how they imitate it, with the sudden rediscovery of Stoicism and Aurelius a bit much. I don't agree that easting meat is an atrocity. I think it devalues words to use them like that. I think a lot of veganism is the same reaction to the existence of suffering a lot of religions have had or deal with; it's a form of going to the desert as a monk or mystic to escape the contradictions of the world. That is up to everyone, but the difference here is the monks want to make the entire world the desert now.