You're viewing a single thread.
Permanently Deleted
But, that does not mean that veganism is an invalid movement. Far from it. It simply means that the onus to become vegan is because it empowers a social movement that can end this horrific industry, rather than because of a individualistic consumer choice.
This is why I have a hard time morally judging my friends and family for not being vegan, but are vegan myself. Veganism is a political position, and I treat it similarly to the people I care about being . I should correct them when I can, but they are not individually terrible people for having the wrong political opinions (and, to a degree, behavior).
so much this!! it’s odd so many leftists don’t seem to understand it
Permanently Deleted
For this reason the only way we're going to get out of this mess is a technological solution (or society collapses to the point that we forget about animal husbandry)
But many vegans here have had very antisocialist views about how we must simply eat beans and need not improve food technology (re lab grown and plant meats, helping people with certain digestive disabilities) to increase adoption of veganism.
veganism is very interesting, because i thought it was more of a diet but now I see its got a political complexity akin to an actual ideology. Many different facets of the ideas. Not all are good. I can't wait until a day when we are free to experiment with and implement these ideas.
The worst fucking take is when vegans compare minority groups to animals. You can make an argument for veganism without sounding like a fucking fascist. I want to see admins start banning this fucked up behavior that apparently gets a pass.
Thats exactly what i mean. Its literally my only critique of the vegan arguments made, but no apparently animal husbandry is the same as genocide of trans people and the Atlantic slave trade. Saying otherwise makes you a reactionary, a bad faith arguer, and actually probably a wrecker.
It is literally so easy to argue veganism, why do you have to go with the ones that are heavily discriminatory against people you say you want to protect. Just drop it, its not helping anyone at all, if anything it hurts the credibility of the whole thing.
I mostly agree but think its strange to dismiss the individual part of it. Although a social movement is the goal being worked towards, I feel its a bit harmful to state the goal as 'global vegan movement' instead of 'stop exploiting animals' because that difference provides wiggle room to do harmful things if you don't expect it to affect the odds of the movement succeeding, which gets yourself thinking in unhelpful utilitarian terms. Easier to get intersectional-understanding benefits of connecting veganism to other issues, and be a better voice for that movement, when you're an abolitionist vegan who doesn't care if what you're doing might not be worthwhile according to an arbitrary metric.
The movement is of course the vitally necessary action to end the industry, but I'm also sick of carnist leftist friends excusing individual carnist actions because of it 'not really changing things', which I think is driving my thoughts here.
Permanently Deleted
I think I just couldn't tell if you were suggesting 'buying or not buying harmful products doesn't make a difference' to mean supporting carnist stuff is fine, cause it felt like an odd inclusion but I getcha now.
But yeah I was, in response, arguing the importance of still considering consumption habits in your veganism, which comes from my mechanistic worldview thinking that everything has an affect on something, so what should instead be the limiting factor for these decisions is stuff like privilege (instead of util priorities), which ends up at the same stance as you (I think). Anxiety over my political alienation making me min-max my veganism lol.
Permanently Deleted
That's a good summary ill have to use it
