So this is total bullshit, right? But if it were true, I'm not sure what sorta picture they're trying to paint. They're making three claims:
There's an ongoing economic tailspin
The people with dogs are the wealthy
As a result of the tailspin and crop damage, there's food shortages
So if all their claims are true, Kim Jong-Un is forcing rich people to give up their dogs to alleviate a famine. Forcing the rich to give up luxuries to help others is a good thing.
Again, if this were actually true, there'd of course be (rightful) debate over the consumption of meat itself, but otherwise this story is bullshit, and makes the DPRK look based af
The story is from Chosun Ilbo which is a notoriously unreliable (but still very prominent) conservative tabloid in South Korea. They really do just make up these kinds of stories every couple of days to rile-up old people and to export it into the Western press who publishes this shit unquestioningly. Almost always they will get an anonymous defector to act as a "source". At best these stories are an extreme exaggeration of actual NK policy but more often then not its just made up.
Previous fake stories from Chosun Ilbo (edit. and other rightwing outlets in SK) include multiple reports of Kim Jong Un's death, North Koreans are becoming zombies becuase of nuclear testing, everyone in North Korea is forced to have the same haircut, North Koreans are forced to believe Kim Jong Il invented the hamburger, North Korea executed their Olympic soccer team becuae they lost ... and so on. Just a few I can remember off the top of my head.
Most people in South Korea (except for their version of Fox News grandpas) knows this is bullshit and don't consider Chosun Ilbo a legitimate news source. But invariably the Western press will repeat these stories verbatim and source Chosun Ilbo, who their readers don't know is South Korean Breitbart.
In a situation where the crops have been mostly destroyed for a season, and people are starving now, I don't think its much of a choice whether to eat meat or die watching crops grow.
But this is all far off in super hypothetical realm of what kind of famine there is, the scale, whats available, etc. Which isn't applicable to this article which just states they're taking rich people dogs to serve at rich people restaurants.
I just have an issue with moral arguments of veganism that disregard context. I agree that it makes more sense to grow crops, and that its much more feasible to feed large populations with plants. But I also won't put the value of an animal's life over the value of a human's life.
This is a really good example of where meat plays a crucial role. Some people on here would sooner tell some mongolian tribes to just grow beans than to understand not everywhere has a damn farmers market or organic co-op.
It definitely takes fewer resources to raise squash than it does to send the police to confiscate dogs from (almost certainly) belligerent owners. Like, there's a reason animal control wears bullet proof armor.
This is psychotic. This story isnt even true, you dont have to torture a rationale for how "it's actually woke to eat people's pets if you think about it."
So this is total bullshit, right? But if it were true, I'm not sure what sorta picture they're trying to paint. They're making three claims:
There's an ongoing economic tailspin
The people with dogs are the wealthy
As a result of the tailspin and crop damage, there's food shortages
So if all their claims are true, Kim Jong-Un is forcing rich people to give up their dogs to alleviate a famine. Forcing the rich to give up luxuries to help others is a good thing.
Again, if this were actually true, there'd of course be (rightful) debate over the consumption of meat itself, but otherwise this story is bullshit, and makes the DPRK look based af
The story is from Chosun Ilbo which is a notoriously unreliable (but still very prominent) conservative tabloid in South Korea. They really do just make up these kinds of stories every couple of days to rile-up old people and to export it into the Western press who publishes this shit unquestioningly. Almost always they will get an anonymous defector to act as a "source". At best these stories are an extreme exaggeration of actual NK policy but more often then not its just made up.
Previous fake stories from Chosun Ilbo (edit. and other rightwing outlets in SK) include multiple reports of Kim Jong Un's death, North Koreans are becoming zombies becuase of nuclear testing, everyone in North Korea is forced to have the same haircut, North Koreans are forced to believe Kim Jong Il invented the hamburger, North Korea executed their Olympic soccer team becuae they lost ... and so on. Just a few I can remember off the top of my head.
Most people in South Korea (except for their version of Fox News grandpas) knows this is bullshit and don't consider Chosun Ilbo a legitimate news source. But invariably the Western press will repeat these stories verbatim and source Chosun Ilbo, who their readers don't know is South Korean Breitbart.
deleted by creator
Placing more value on an animal life over a human life is liberalism.
deleted by creator
I think I actually meant to reply to the top level comment in regards to
deleted by creator
In a situation where the crops have been mostly destroyed for a season, and people are starving now, I don't think its much of a choice whether to eat meat or die watching crops grow.
But this is all far off in super hypothetical realm of what kind of famine there is, the scale, whats available, etc. Which isn't applicable to this article which just states they're taking rich people dogs to serve at rich people restaurants.
I just have an issue with moral arguments of veganism that disregard context. I agree that it makes more sense to grow crops, and that its much more feasible to feed large populations with plants. But I also won't put the value of an animal's life over the value of a human's life.
deleted by creator
This really depends on the environment. It's easy to put a bunch of goats on a mountainside that would take a lot of effort to prepare for crops.
deleted by creator
This is a really good example of where meat plays a crucial role. Some people on here would sooner tell some mongolian tribes to just grow beans than to understand not everywhere has a damn farmers market or organic co-op.
Its seriously frustrating.
Killing a bunch of dogs to stick it to the rich is psychopathic
Not saying spiteful dog killing is good.
I'm saying incorporating a lesson on veganism during a famine is bad. There's a certain privilege involved in choosing not to eat certain things.
It isn't incorporating a lesson on veganism during a famine, the story is fake and as far as I am aware, there is no famine in the DPRK currently.
It also isn't choosing not to eat certain things, it's choosing to kill members of someone's family for food when other sources are available
It definitely takes fewer resources to raise squash than it does to send the police to confiscate dogs from (almost certainly) belligerent owners. Like, there's a reason animal control wears bullet proof armor.
This is psychotic. This story isnt even true, you dont have to torture a rationale for how "it's actually woke to eat people's pets if you think about it."
deleted by creator