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.
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.
No one is telling mongolian tribes anything, mongolian tribesmen are not on chapo.chat (lets change that though, that'd be pretty sick)
The thing you don't get about vegans is that we don't give a single shit about people doing what they need to to survive far from the developed world. they're not the problem. the problem is people like you using the existence of those people as an excuse to keep supporting murder
Yeah, for real. It's also really gross when people who eat meat will be like "but what about x indigenous tribe" when cattle farming is quite literally destroying indigenous land in the amazon rainforest at this very moment.
Ya'll only care about the indigenous people when you think we're the ones hurting them, when if you eat meat you've done more damage to their homes and land than we have. 91% of the land deforested in the Amazon has been due to cattle farming and it's home to over 3,000 different tribes of indigenous people. Even if your beef isn't from there, maybe the soy that was produced for your burger was! (BTW only 3% of soy is even eaten by people) But people get mad at vegans for an imaginary take we have lmao.
I don't give 2 fucks what someone who is starving does to survive, i care that people who have the choice are choosing the more harmful option that hurts others for no reason. And i also don't like it when people use indigenous folk as woke tokens when they 1. can't even reference a tribe, it's just "this brown person i imagined" and then 2. ignore actual real indigenous problems, including the ones caused by large scale animal agriculture.
Animal agriculture on anything close to a big scale is straight up rich colonizer shit, it's historically caused deforestation and famines (cropland is converted to growing crops for the livestock, and then the rich people eat the livestock, leaving peasants to starve), anyone defending it because 'muh imagined indigenous tribe" doesn't actually give a shit and just wants their tendies. The person picking the crops that go to feeding your beef won't be able to afford a cut. Sorry ya'll but how is that not colonizer shit compared to just abstaining from animal products
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.
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.
No one is telling mongolian tribes anything, mongolian tribesmen are not on chapo.chat (lets change that though, that'd be pretty sick)
The thing you don't get about vegans is that we don't give a single shit about people doing what they need to to survive far from the developed world. they're not the problem. the problem is people like you using the existence of those people as an excuse to keep supporting murder
Yeah, for real. It's also really gross when people who eat meat will be like "but what about x indigenous tribe" when cattle farming is quite literally destroying indigenous land in the amazon rainforest at this very moment.
Ya'll only care about the indigenous people when you think we're the ones hurting them, when if you eat meat you've done more damage to their homes and land than we have. 91% of the land deforested in the Amazon has been due to cattle farming and it's home to over 3,000 different tribes of indigenous people. Even if your beef isn't from there, maybe the soy that was produced for your burger was! (BTW only 3% of soy is even eaten by people) But people get mad at vegans for an imaginary take we have lmao.
I don't give 2 fucks what someone who is starving does to survive, i care that people who have the choice are choosing the more harmful option that hurts others for no reason. And i also don't like it when people use indigenous folk as woke tokens when they 1. can't even reference a tribe, it's just "this brown person i imagined" and then 2. ignore actual real indigenous problems, including the ones caused by large scale animal agriculture.
Animal agriculture on anything close to a big scale is straight up rich colonizer shit, it's historically caused deforestation and famines (cropland is converted to growing crops for the livestock, and then the rich people eat the livestock, leaving peasants to starve), anyone defending it because 'muh imagined indigenous tribe" doesn't actually give a shit and just wants their tendies. The person picking the crops that go to feeding your beef won't be able to afford a cut. Sorry ya'll but how is that not colonizer shit compared to just abstaining from animal products
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.