957
submitted 1 year ago by BlackRose@slrpnk.net to c/world@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SmolSweetBean@lemmy.world 82 points 1 year ago

OK, but what if instead of going vegan, I just don't have kids. Because adding more people to the world also creates more greenhouse gasses.

[-] Djennik@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago

The problem is not the amount of people but how much each individual consumes. Getting meat out of your diet is a simple and a small sacrifice. Besides the health benefits there is also the fact that you don't contribute to the culling of 70 billion animals per year (of which 40% is probably not eaten and thrown in the trash). Not only that but you don't contribute to the greatest cause of deforestation, antibiotics resistance, decline of biodiversity, water waste, ...

Besides the global population is steadily stagnating (Africa is still booming) as a lot of countries see population decline (less than 2 children per woman).

[-] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

You don't even need to cut it out entirely. Just not eat such a ridiculous amount of meat.

Stuff like this isn't helping. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH9VLihKm2g

[-] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Couldn't we just stop food waste? Most food is discarded before even making it to the store. Seems to me being more efficient with how we distribute food is more realistic that trying to convince everyone to go vegan.

Because I'm not going to stop eating meat and the amount of ppl like me is larger than you think

[-] r1veRRR@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago

Many people will also not reduce food waste, for exactly same reasons you won't stop eating meat. Convenience, habit, cost, time investment.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Djennik@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Both are true: reducing waste and adopting a plant based diet are great ways of reducing your footprint.

The number of vegetarians/vegans is growing quickly. I'm not convincing you of going vegan. You are convincing yourself to keep on eating meat despite the scientific facts and moral consequences.

[-] NotAPenguin@kbin.social 37 points 1 year ago

How bout both? :)

[-] Bipta@kbin.social 25 points 1 year ago

What if you don't have kids and just make an effort to reduce intake of animal products knowing it contributes to global collapse and also represents a modern holocaust.

Animal products don't have to be as all or nothing as having kids.

[-] kartonrealista@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That moment when your veganism goes so hard you commit a hate crime on the internet implicitly comparing Jews to cattle

Edit: I'm from Poland, the country where most of the Holocaust happened - this is where the Jewish population was the highest and where Germans build their death camps. We read about it extensively at school, including eyewitness accounts describing the atrocities involved in this horrific campaign of human extermination, from the home of the Jew, to the ghetto, to the transport train, to the camp, to the gas chamber and to the furnace. Many of us heard those stories from our grandparents, of their neighbors being humiliated and taken away, ghettos liquidated, and public executions. I don't know what kind of deplorable scumbag one has to be to equate factory farming with the Holocaust.

[-] Spzi@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago

implicitly comparing Jews to cattle

Yes, it's a tasteless comparison. I'm a German. Hello neighbor, nice to live in peace.

The comparison also falls flat because while the Holocaust was a genocide, meant to eradicate, factory farming is the polar opposite.

The population size of factory farmed animals is usually way above natural levels, because we farm them. A philosopher even called it an evolutionary win for the farmed species (which does not justify any harm done to individuals).

There are more ways to express 'very bad' than comparing to the Holocaust, and many reasons not to, if you understand it.

[-] NotAPenguin@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

holocaust
hŏl′ə-kôst″, hō′lə-
noun

  1. Great destruction resulting in the extensive loss of life, especially by fire.
  2. The genocide of European Jews and other groups by the Nazis during World War II.
  3. A massive slaughter.
[-] Spzi@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

This is just dishonest. The comparison is made specifically because of #2. It's the attempt to connect emotions and judgements people have about Nazi atrocities with animal slaughter. That's also why you quoted a Shoa survivor in defense of this wreck of a comparison.

[-] kicksystem@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

May I invite you to watch this video of Alex Hershaft. He is probably one of the first, if not the first, persons who made the connection between the Jewish holocaust and what he himself calls the animal holocaust. In this talk he talks about his experience in the Warschau ghetto, his family in Treblinka and his later experience with slaughterhouses. Drawing quite a few parallels between the two.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] NotAPenguin@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago
[-] kartonrealista@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

You can find any representative of any group with any belief. It proves nothing - it's just one guy, and plenty of Jews eat meat everyday and would consider his words insulting, the majority of Holocaust survivors included.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Primarily0617@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

*implicitly comparing the treatment of Jews during the holocaust to the treatment of cattle today

also, you can compare two things without equating them

I think if you actually cared about the words you wrote, you wouldn't have used them as the basis of a lazy strawman to win an argument on the internet against veganism

[-] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

The problem is agribusiness. They treat animals with no respect in a terrible a terrible manner, unlike most small-scale farms where the farmers often have a personal relationship with their livestock.

Factory farms whether it be chicken, hog or cattle often end up putting the animals on a feedlot or in a high density chicken farm with literally millions of birds under one roof. This leads to a slaughterhouse that is a horror show. It was a book written a hundred years ago called The jungle, look it up. It's been an issue for a long time and it is inhumane.

It's not to say that killing animals is pretty, but it can be done in a more humane fashion starting by respecting the lives of the animals while they are alive.

The flip side is that if we were to actually close down all of the farms and raise no livestock for me, there's a good chance that these species will functionally go extinct.

[-] NotAPenguin@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Small-scale farms still needlessly kill animals for profit.

We can just eat plants.

[-] kartonrealista@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't care about arguing about veganism. Just stop bringing up stuff like this. Also, do you think calling something a "modern holocaust" is not a comparison in terms of scale of harm? As opposed to every other time those words are used?

Edit: If you want to argue for veganism, stop bringing up Shoah. It's disgusting, downplaying the severity of the genocide, and earns you no favors with the general population. It has negative convincing power.

[-] r1veRRR@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's 90 billion every year. If their suffering is 15000 less significant, that's one holocaust a year, every year, since many years. Why are you using Shoah, if holocaust is so obviously only one thing? And why are the voices of holocaust victims/survivors/relatives totally fine to silence? Many have made that comparison, shouldn't they know best whether it's comparable???

You are correct however that this argument is utterly stupid and useless to make, esp. online, where there is zero context.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] r1veRRR@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago

Here are some quotes for you. From holocaust survivors and their relatives.

“I totally embrace the comparison to the Holocaust. I feel that violence and suffering of innocents are unjust. I believe that the abuse of humans and animals and the earth come from the same need to dominate others. I feel that I could not save my family, my people, but each time I talk about cruelty to animals and being vegetarian I might be saving another life. After knowing what I know about the Holocaust and about animal exploitation I cannot be anything else but an animal rights advocate.

-Susan Kalev, who lost her father and her sister in the Holocaust

“I believe in what Isaac Bashevis Singer wrote, ‘In their behavior towards creatures, all men are Nazis.’ Human beings see their own oppression vividly when they are the victims. Otherwise they victimize blindly and without a thought.” [tweet this]

-“Hacker,” Animal Liberation Front member & Holocaust survivor

“What do they know—all these scholars, all these philosophers, all the leaders of the world? They have convinced themselves that man, the worst transgressor of all the species, is the crown of creation. All other creatures were created merely to provide him with food, pelts, to be tormented, exterminated. In relation to them [the animals], all people are Nazis; for the animals, it is an eternal Treblinka.” [tweet this]

-Isaac Bashevis Singer, Yiddish author, Nobel Laureate, & Holocaust survivor

“I spent my childhood years in the Warsaw Ghetto where almost my entire family was murdered along with about 350,000 other Polish Jews. People sometimes will ask me whether that experience had anything to do with my work for animals. It didn’t have a little to do with my work for animals, it had everything to do with my work for animals.”

-Alex Hershaft, Farm Animal Rights Movement founder & Holocaust Survivor

“When I see cages crammed with chickens from battery farms thrown on trucks like bundles of trash, I see, with the eyes of my soul, the Umschlagplatz (where Jews were forced onto trains leaving for the death camps). When I go to a restaurant and see people devouring meat, I feel sick. I see a holocaust on their plates.” [tweet this]

-Georges Metanomski, a Holocaust survivor who fought in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising

“I dedicate my mother’s grave to geese. My mother doesn’t have a grave, but if she did I would dedicate it to the geese. I was a goose too.”

-Marc Berkowitz, Animal activist & survivor of Josef Mengele’s “twin experiments”

“In 1975, after I immigrated to the United States, I happened to visit a slaughterhouse, where I saw terrified animals subjected to horrendous crowding conditions while awaiting their deaths. Just as my family members were in the notorious Treblinka death camp. I saw the same efficient and emotionless killing routine as in Treblinka, I saw the neat piles of hearts, hooves, and other body parts. So reminiscent of the piles of Jewish hair, glasses and shoes in Treblinka.”

-Alex Hershaft, Farm Animal Rights Movement founder & Holocaust Survivor

"Jews have been, while animals still are, treated like nothing, as if their lives don’t matter. You can also compare the two holocausts this way. [...] Go to the nearest cow or pig slaughterhouse and remove the animals and replace them with humans. You have now re-created Birkenau."

-Gary Yourosky

[-] Screwthehole@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago

100 corporations contribute 71% of all emissions, and I'm supposed to stop eating the pork I bought from a local farmer? Fuck that noise!

[-] N0_Varak@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago

Those 100 corporations make materials that everyone else uses (mostly O&G) and the consumption and use of those materials (by we the consumers) is responsible for 71% of GHG emissions.It's not just 100 companies burning coal for funsies

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] EndlessApollo@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Vegans try not to compare agriculture to genocide challenge +don't compare poc to animals bonus round (IMPOSSIBLE)

[-] NotAPenguin@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago
[-] EndlessApollo@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Cherrypicking examples doesn't prove your point. I can find trans terfs people who think protecting trans kids makes you a groomer, that doesn't make it any less awful of a take. Stop being an obnoxious racist vegan on the internet pls

[-] NotAPenguin@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ok but try actually reading the arguments before you dismiss them? It's not bad takes.

Comparing two bad things doesn't take anything away from either, it's just a comparison.

[-] Spzi@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

So it's fine to say your comparison is like Trump spewing nonsense on social media? Since I didn't take anything away from either, it’s just a comparison.

While technically you are correct, I think it is important to notice and respect meaningful differences. Good comparisons have similarities in prominent attributes. Comparisons with dissimilarities in key aspects show something in between thoughtlessness and dishonesty, depending on the degree of awareness.

[-] NotAPenguin@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

Sure you can make that comparison, it seems a bit nonsensical to me tho.

There are similarities, that's the point, try reading the article.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] wozomo@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Kindly fuck off with your spammy “relevant” links and your sanctimonious “oh you’re almost there, sweetie” attitude.

We get it, you’re vegan and you think everyone should be. Unfortunately, that’s never going to happen, but what can happen is that people reduce the amount of animal products they consume, which would have a MASSIVE impact relative to how things are now.

That said, your attitude is actively harming the cause that you espouse. Nobody’s gonna want to go vegan if this is how you act about it, jfc.

[-] NotAPenguin@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Why are you so angry at someone simply providing sources and advocating that we stop harming animals?

You make it sound like I've been rude and condescending but I haven't.

[-] wozomo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

You’ve absolutely been self-righteous about it. I think this comment is a good example, as is spam posting the same links without really saying anything other than “or…you could go vegan :) tee hee!”

It’s not productive, and actively turns people off in a time when many of those same people are, for the first time, reconsidering their dietary balance.

It’s like criticizing an out-of-shape person at the gym. Maybe they’re not doing it the way you think it should be ideally done, but they’re at least trying and doing something rather than giving up entirely.

[-] NotAPenguin@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

I don't see what's self-righteous about that comment.

The links provide context to the discussion, giving people the data so they can verify is a good thing.

It seems like you feel attacked, I haven't attacked you.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Fortychops@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago

Right there with ya

[-] jsveiga@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago

Instead of going vegan or not having kids, I died when I was 5. Because living also creates more greenhouse gasses.

In fact, having a small footprint is just a matter of choosing how miserable you're willing to make your life.

Unfortunately the Earth cannot sustainably support so many people living COMFORTABLY, and eating WHATEVER WE LIKE. The more people, the more miserable is the globally sustainable way of life.

Curbing population growth - not Thanos-like, but through education and availability of contraceptive methods - is the only way we can all have the cake (and the meat) and eat it.

Many wealthy countries have their population declining. Maybe if we get to the same level of wealthiness everywhere, less people would engage in procreation.

In any case, if we just do nothing and the doomsday evangelists are even nearly right, extreme weather, plage and famine caused by climate change will indeed curb the population. Eventually it reaches equilibrium.

In this case, the faster we get to the edge of the abyss, the quicker the situation will solve itself.

[-] N0_Varak@lemm.ee 15 points 1 year ago

Be careful, you're wandering awfully close to eco-facist talking points

[-] Spzi@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

having a small footprint is just a matter of choosing how miserable you’re willing to make your life.

In many areas yes, but not when it comes to food. A plant based diet is in no way miserable. There are still too many places with bad kitchens making it seem that way, but that's just a lack of skill on their part.

I'd say my food experience rather became less miserable when I stopped eating meat, and my footprint decreased by a lot.

Eventually it reaches equilibrium.

In this case, the faster we get to the edge of the abyss, the quicker the situation will solve itself.

If you open the window to ventilate for 20 minutes that's different from replacing the air in your room in 2 nanoseconds. The violent shockwave of the latter will probably damage your stuff and harm your health.

Similarly, the speed of climate change matters a lot. It is required for plants and animals to migrate and adapt, for people to migrate and adapt, for infrastructure to be built. It makes all the difference between a devastating blow and adaptation, while the reached equilibrium is the same in both cases.

[-] derf82@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Exactly. Not having kids covers my any excess from meat and driving easily.

We’ve been eating meat for millennia, while climate change has only been an issue for a century, yet somehow meat eating is the problem, not the billions of people we have added.

load more comments (16 replies)
[-] ClockworkOtter@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Because if we don't have children then who are we saving the planet for? There are very clear and achievable ways to massively reduce our individual and collective emissions which we can pass onto our descendents for a sustainable future.

[-] Oderus@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Because if we don’t have children then who are we saving the planet for?

Because someone else will have children. Not every human needs to procreate to keep our species alive. We're at 8 Billion and going strong.

[-] ClockworkOtter@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

So if you're not going to have children anyway then it's irrelevant and why not go vegan?

[-] such_fifty_bucks@lemmy.one 6 points 1 year ago

So someone should only care about their progeny, everyone else is 'irrelevant'. That's certainly a take.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)

While that reduces greenhouse gasses, it's not sustainable.

God forbit we actually end up in something.

load more comments (4 replies)
this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
957 points (100.0% liked)

World News

38849 readers
2516 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS