Does Veganism have a place on leftypol or can we agree that veganism is a religion and must be ended?

...

wew

Go on lad. Explin to me how you'll feed more people with less meat. Jesus doesn't count.

That's not meat though. Vegans can already eat this shit if they choose to.

You leftists always fall back on this as your last resort. Ironic given the disdain many here show for the hard sciences.

Such as?

if you abolish the capitalist structure and need for mass production of meat and revert to locally raised animals as per the needs of the community, then you won't need to "cap meet consumption" will you ya dingus
read a book

technocrats pls go

base your politics on things that actually exist

if you're not a vegan or don't sympathise with veganism then you literally belong on 4chan or reddit defaults

there's that buzzword again. How can leftism not just equally be reduced to 'muh feelings', in so far as we are rich westerners envisioning a world where billions people aren't starving whilst porkies pay $100s for a starter dish?

However, on topic, I hope that future generations will be ashamed of how we treated animals as a species. It's long since passed the point where we had to inflict industrial scale suffering in order to feed ourselves, just another way for capitalists to grow fat from suffering.

youtu.be/Z5Z0IPVm3kk?t=4m53s

Ashamed of capitalism? Maybe.
Ashamed of eating animals because we are omnivores? No.

What

please fuck off

Well spooked my property.

nice liberal logic

While I generally agree, I do see this being impractical for urban areas.

Based retard.

Veganism is nice. Leftists should not only oppose economic exploitation, but also exploitation of other species.

If it was our only means of survival I would eat meat. But humans are now capable of causing less suffering and less resources. Therefore, you're actively choosing to kill and enslave animals.

I think that capitalism plays a part in people still eating meat, because the production process is abstracted. If people would need to hunt themselves, I'm sure that they wouldn't eat meat.

Would it be better if we dump fuck load of drugs in the lifestock their food to make them happy about it?

This, plus being raised on a small-farm I also have an ethical issue with the way animals are treated on factory farms.

Being omnivore doesn't mean that you *have* to eat meat, just that you can handle both. Not a real reason for eating meat tbh fam.

How about just eat soya

In b4 'but health' when most meat eaters are fat fucks

Delicious curry solves most of those problems. Quorn and soy protein solve everything else unless you're a seafood fanatic. People look at me funny when I tell them I miss eating squid. :D

I am vegetarian. Not only is it far better for the environment, and after a time I did end up caring about the animals (not why I started) but I feel far cleaner and healthier. I had a great diet prior too, now I have much more energy. I'd fully reccomend it. I don't think about meat at all, its just a completely different lifestyle. You can't focus on "meat replacements". People that hate vegetarians are losers honestly. Vegans can sometimes be assholes though.

B8 harder.

Nice ad hom

Cows are a HUGE contributor to global warming. What the fuck are you talking about?

That is not how omnivores work there is a scale you idiot, some lean more towards the carnivore side and need more animal protein to survive than others that lean more towards the herbivore side and could get more nutrients from plants.

People will eat animal protein(even if only eggs and milk) because we can't absorb enough from plants to survive, so most people won't be ashamed about so get over it.

Vegetarians are cool with me to be honest, it is the vegans which I find to be utter holier than thou cunts most of the time.

Might I ask why you didn't become pescatarian instead of just a vegetarian?

vegans exist and aren't all dead, so

You are an idiot dude. I'm an ametuer boxer and a vegetarian. I easily consume 130g of protein a day (I weigh 130). You can so easily get protein. One serving of tempeh is over 30 g. Step down boi

we're not even omnivores anyway
ur culturally indoctrinated and too mindless to be a proponent of leftism

Yeah they totally are, I understand that. To be honest its because I don't like how the fish are farmed and can often destroy habitats. None of it is sustainable to me in this day and age of industrial farming.

It only because of modern amenities, supplements and so forth

Most vegans are unhealthy.

Vegetarians can be healthy, I didn't say they couldn't be dumbass.

...

>youtube.com/watch?v=30gEiweaAVQ
my god you're in denial. anything for muh bacon strips it seems :^^)

How about you lying, mate ?

Kiddie continue in "Le human nature" fallacy

0-800-COME-ON-NOW

Intelligence=/=sentience

So prove it wrong.

Even if that was true, clearly it means not eating meat isn't a death sentence

Therefore, you don't need it to survive

literally you would not be able to catch prey and eat it raw in the wild without unnatural things like traps, spears, fires, etc. therefore we are not natural omnivores

care to source? The classic Okinawan diet was 99% plant based and they're the oldest living people on the planet. Similar story for vegans in the West (healthy weight, healthy blood, healthy cholesterol, etc. compared to standard Americans who have/are none of these)

Not the point. It's in our biology to be omnivorous to some degree and you can plug your ears about it all you want, look at your front teeth.

Kek. when you say something in an argument, it's your job to prove it is true, not mine to prove it wrong.

How do you prove that monster of Loch ness doesn't exist ? If you can, it means I'm right and that it exists !!!

Read a fucking book and stop using fallacy. And also, stop lying to yourself, it hurts to see this.

sentience among animals is LITERALLY one of the biggest scientific consensuses there is right now. The child analogy was just to further prove my point

I cannot believe you're denying this

Alright, you want proof we are natural meat eaters? Locate a mirror, any mirror. Found one? Good. Open that there mouth of yours. See those sharp(er) front ones? I'll give you a guess what those are for.

Good kind of teleology, mate.

Nice weasel words. Got any citations on this.

hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/protein/
You do know what a plant based diet is right?
It it does not mean vegan, it just means most of your diet is plant based.

for the twentieth fucking time, it's not because we have teeth that can be used to eat meat, that we HAVE to eat meat.
Nature have no purpose.

It's the dictionary definition of being omnivorous that we consume both plant an animal matter.

...

fuck me, these savage things?? shit son, I'm gonna go out right now and tear a pig to shreds with my mighty canines!! I never realised I had this power!!!1!

Are you fucking insane?

No. Catch and kill first, then eat.

It's because we readily absorb proteins, lipids and so in is why the grand majority of people need. It, to name but a few nutrients.

Fuck me, shouldn't you be on a reddit default gloating on about your bacon

...

10/10 best counter argument.

The only difference between me and a vegan is that I'll eat ice cream and whatnot from time to time
No eggs or milk protein for me

He is a shill for veganism who is known to cherry pick and exaggerate the healthiness of a vegan diet.

This link goes raises some very major problems that the video you linked has.
sciencebasedmedicine.org/death-as-a-foodborne-illness-curable-by-veganism/

I'm legitimately impressed by how retarded some vegans are.

Oh fuck yeah the proteinz!! LOL where do u get ur protons vegans??1 Checkmate omnis hahaha

(btw the recommended daily intake is 40g a day)

Ok, you're a bait.

What about fatty acids? Zinc? Come on now.

I specifically mentioned there were other nutrients. Fucking hell.

could it not be that the weight of science is on his side, so it only looks like he's cherry picking because - surprise, surprise - eating meat, dairy and eggs is in fact unhealthy

haha yeah so natural! Obviously we evolved those and they weren't a result of our opportunism and intelligence outstripping our biological progress!

In excessive quantities, anything is unhealthy. The key is not gorging, which many fail to grasp.

As a bioengineer, it's pretty disingenuous how people are simplifying the human diet to "carbs", "fats", and "proteins". Our diet is an extremely complicated arrangement of macromolecules. Many diets that exist today (including veganism) are often sustained by advancements in science and in globalization of food products. They would have been impossible in a strictly natural environment.

There's also nothing wrong with eating meat. As others have said, most of the problems with meat today are a result of how it's manufactured.

Curiosity:
Where does the animals get zinc from ?

Or, our sentience supporting said biological processes either directly, or not.

Eggs are among the healthiest things a person can eat.

this "balanced diet" shtick that you seem to be pushing is something the meat/dairy/egg industry has been shilling for years; they want to confuse the general public because the science is not on their side. It happened with cigarettes before

And once again the point goes sailing gaily over your head. So let me spell it out for you:
We have a much, MUCH more complex nervous system and brain than animals. Zinc supports said nervous system. Thus, we require a fair bit of the stuff. See what I'm getting at?

are you stupid

Because it's a legitimate point. Balance keeps things in order, too much or too little of certain isn't good

You're shilling your way of life on a backwater image board. Let that sink in.

but you admit it yourself - these things are not naturally biological and are evidence that we are not natural predators

Well done for not reading my link, not really surprised that you choose to ignore what goes against your dogmatic belief.
The link even says that one can be healthy and be vegan it just raises problems with the claims in this video, it is not really the good leftist thing to ignore things which may end up challenging your beliefs.

Again, eggs are among the healthiest foods you can consume. Where are you getting your information?

I shiggy. In the right quantity, it serves a very valid purpose of keeping the matrix which cells float in plentiful. As well as acting as a vehicle for proteins to get around the body.

Did you not read the post. Or do I have to make it simpler.

We can't catch many animals with out hands, so we with out superior intelligence devised ways of trapping and tracking which meant no matter how far or fast they ran, we would show up and ambush when they were vulnerable.

it sounds intuitively lovely, doesn't it. "Balance" - keep your body in a "zen"- like state. Big biz is so clever at convincing people.

This thread has made me deeply disappointed in leftypol though tbh. Literally the biggest porkies on Earth reside in the animal agriculture industries (and I'm not talking about the pigs)

It's a poor show when you can't argue your point, so accuse your opponent of being a shill.

No, like I said, they are among the healthiest things you can consume. I am a bioengineer. There is a difference between the cholesterol we consume and the cholesterol we naturally produce in our body. The biochemical pathway that leads to cholesterol production and coronary disease has less to do with external cholesterol production, and more to do with fat and carbohydrate consumption that cause our body to increase its production.

There is much more to eggs than the cholesterol content, you are just being dishonest. That said while eggs can be healthy due to the other nutrients they contain, they really should be had in moderation.
hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/eggs/

what the fuck was I gonna argue against? You reduced it all to some eastern Philosophy mantra

Huh? I didn't say nothing about cholesterol

I said balancing our intake is a good thing, how the fuck is that philosophical.

It was meant for the other guy.

Really, the worst thing to consume is a high carbohydrate diet. Depression, cancer, inflammation (heart disease), alzheimers, and diabetes are all intimately related to carbohydrate consumption. The fundamental energy source for cancer proliferation are glycogen pathways. A big part of why meats are causing so much illness in our modern diet is that (in the US) farm animals live on an almost exclusive corn diet (as corn is subsidized by the US gov). This has had profound effects on the meat and most notably increased the high ratio of omega6s in our diet.

bmj.com/content/346/bmj.e8539
Eggs are not healthy. Stop unconsciously shilling for big biz

I agree in principle that it's preferable not to eat animal products.

It's just prohibitively expensive/difficult for most people to eat a nutritional vegan diet. Shit, it's hard to eat a nutritional diet period for a lot of people. Most vegans are hipsters with no common sense. Lab-grown meat and shit would be great but it's a while away and even when it's out only wealthy people will be able to afford it regularly. Realistically humans need protein and getting the necessary amount from plants is highly inefficient.

I don't understand how that is a good argument. It's circular. "Everything in moderation because balance is good!".

This is what the cigarette industry said in the 50s. "You'll be fine if you smoke in moderation! Balance is all that matters". It's a feel-good mantra that you want to believe.

Let me correct that for you: "eggs are unhealthy if you stuff your face with them long term"

?????

Because tobacco is no tied directly to our biochemistry, nor do we take essential nutrients from it. Shit comparison.

Did you even read the abstract? Again, I'm a bioengineer, in a master's program. I read scientific articles everyday.

Way to make yourself look like a retard.

Did you even read your link? Its sad that you have to rely on facts of people over eating to get any of your points.

I eat a healthy vegan diet and have halved my weekly food costs. Rice and other grains are so fucking cheap in bulk, as are most vegetables.

What does getting all your nutrients you need in your diet and not over eating(becoming healthy) because of it have to do smoking?

The article didn't even state that. The reason most articles are reframing from talking about higher egg consumption is because they don't know what it does yet. Back in the 70s, when the present ideas of nutrition were really being formulated, the idea that high cholesterol in eggs led to high cholesterol in the body seemed to make sense. Now that we understand the pathways more intimately, this is looking to not be true. It's the same for how "fat" used to be bad for you. it's not at all. In fact, it's carbohydrates which are bad, and lead to "fat".

I really think you need to learn to read before you end up posting in the future, clearly you are both too dogmatic and stupid to be a leftist. The right is more suiting for someone with the intellectual ability and dogmatism you have displayed in this thread.
I would not be surprised if you are just a troll trying to make other vegans look retarded.

Rice and grains are cheap, yes but you can't live off them alone without a more varied diet.

What the fuck are you talking about? You've been sold the paleo/keto meme. Literally look at the countries that consume the most carbs and see the prevalence of those diseases you listed.

okicent.org/docs/500s_willcox_okinawa_diet.pdf

Fortunately, there are spinach, carrots and other vegetables to fulfill other needs.

I'd caution you against it.

nature.com/nrd/journal/v4/n6/full/nrd1751.html

I'm talking about this actually.

Got to love the nice selection of vegetables which contain B12.

Our opportunism and intelligence IS our biological progress you retarded fucking faggot.

Yeah I fucked up by quoting the wrong study.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021915013002438

funny that they're also the ones that love meat and despise vegans the most

the porkies at the head of the meat, milk and dairy industries are spreading confusion about nutrition and also perpetrating vegan-hate. Why do you want to act as a proxy shill for them? That's very un-leftist

Fortified breakfast cereal is also cheap but living off it isn't a good idea.

There is always nooch.

Well that doesn't answer the points I brought up but OK. The oldest living people on earth ate basically 80% sweet potatoes (aka carbs)

The lesson you should take from this is nobody likes preachy vegans except your own ilk.

I've read that paper. The most critical part of their diet is not their carbohydrate intake, but their consumption of fish, which is rich in anti-oxidant and anti-inflammatory property. Also, the very title of the paper says "low glycemic index". Rice doesn't have a low glycemic index. Okinawan's don't eat like you're clearly stereotyping them to eat.

Well I feel personally feel great and the same goes for all other vegans I know. Switching from a diet high in animal fats I feel so much better

Its not good enough, not everyone can adsorb or get enough they need from it.

You finally made a good point in the argument.
Eating a little of meat for this vitamin (or eat complement) seems necessary.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1196/annals.1396.037/full

fish literally made up one percent or less of their diet

What the fuck are you on, nigger? Humans are omnivores, and most foods are not particularly dense with nutrients. The healthiest diet is the most diverse diet (absent carcinogens and anti-nutrients obviously). No food provides everything your body needs so it's best to cover your bases and eat as many different things as possible. We are learning new shit all the time about how the body works, and there are probably a lot of things we should eat that we don't know about yet. For instance, as a /fit/izen, I'm aware the benefits of creatine supplements are a fairly recent discovery. And it's not just good for building and maintaining muscle - it has cognitive benefits. You know where you can get a moderate amount of creatine naturally? Meat.

Go to pol, your bone headed ignorance will fit you right in.

Sweet potatoes are awesome. My apologizes for not being more technical earlier. Like I said it's about glycogen pathways. Sweet potatoes hav ea low glycemic index, that's why they are healthy (also allowed East Asians to survive multiple rice famines). Grains are usually the biggest factor in high glycemic index, but that's what most people consume in Western countries, so I was speaking from the perspective of carbohydrates. Also, I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I remember potatoes having a higher GI than sweet potatoes (which are the preferred potato in the west.

come on. I was serious, faggot.

...

I know, and it concerns me how dogmatic you're being.

How in the fuck does opportunism relate to our biological composition? My point is we are not naturally omnivores, but moving away from our natural habitat in the tropics food became scarce and so we had to rely on our intelligence rather than our natural evolutionary traits (dextrous fingers for picking fruit, nuts and seeds). Meat was only necessary because what we naturally ate was in short supply in colder regions.

In what way have I been dogmatic ?

...

By refusing to so much as consider my arguments and instead lashing out with bullshit which could be debunked by the man on the street.

They still ate meat regardless.
plant based=/=vegan or vegetarian, everyone should have a plant based diet.

Truly a master debater.

You can't be fucking serious
We are ABLE to CREATE TOOLS due to OUR INTELLIGENCE, which is a factor of our BIOLOGY.

Yes we are. If we weren't, we would not be able to digest meat. End of fucking discussion. You are retarded.

excuse me not to accept fallacies and not trusting you without argument.
B12 argument is a good one, the others are seriously self lying.

I bet he thinks it's a social or worse linguistic construct.

I think he's referring to the fact that our ancestors were herbivores and we transitioned to being omnivores. Which is retarded because you could say the same thing about any species that eats meat, because we all evolved from single-celled autotrophs if you go back far enough.

What a master debater.

They're only bad because lack of B12 has rotted your brain :^)

Where does it say that? I read the entire paper and I saw nothing that said 1% of their food intake was fish. In fact there's an entire section called

They mention fish less, and talk about "seafood" so forgive my mistake. I meant general seafood when i said fish, but fish still applies.

nvm you're just retarded. i'm having fun laughing at you.

Why are you quoting me? I don't even understand what you are trying to argue against.

If ED is correct, you should be suffering from catastrophic rectal bleeding and moment now.

Aaaaaaaany second now.

...

The necessity for tools tells us that we were not biologically adapted to eat meat, because tools are not a part of our biology. If nothing in our body is NATURALLY adapted to catching meat (and we so need tools), then surely nothing in our body is NATURALLY adapted to consume meat? (this is why we cook and season meat)

If this somehow still doesn't fucking convince you, here's an analogy:

Imagine there's a chicken and an apple before you. Which one has you salivating? The biology of your mind and body should direct you toward the one you want to eat in its natural, wild state. No one's gonna kill and eat a chicken raw, uncooked, you fucking spastic. They're gonna pick up the apple and eat it.

Animals don't smell good to us in the wild. Fruit does. Fruit also has distinct colours to us. Natural carnivores are virtually colourblind because their diet isn't composed of fruit, and instead they react to movement (of prey). We are attracted to the bright colours of fruit because our biology has dictated that is what is right for us to eat.

This discussion is very bad. I'm a vegetarian myself but don't let myself fooled by fallacies. Lets analyze this discussion.

This is done by both sides. Some here say that humans are omnivore and therefore should eat meat. The vegetarians or vegans say that we aren't naturally meant to eat meat.

The truth to this is that it doesn't matter what our nature is. Whether it is meat eating or not.

To be fair, most of us are probably not capable of determining how good something is based on research papers. Again, I see both sides cherry picking their favorite research that supports their claims. The scientific consensus is the most trustworthy and prevents you from cherry pick studies from your preference.

A vegetarian or vegan diet can be perfectly done without any problems to your health. However, vegans can get a shortage of Vitamine B12 if they don't choose specific products that contain this or don't take supplements. Vegetarians can get their Vitamine B12 from milk. Iron is found in most meat replacements and can also be found in some vegetables, especially leguminous vegetables.

You don't need meat for your nutrition, but you have to watch your iron and Vitamine B12 a little bit. If you're unsure about your diet, contact a trustworthy dietitian. You can also measure your blood values for shortage of certain nutrition.

This study seems to really only suggest that there is a problem with excess egg consumption not that there is a problem with egg consumption in moderation.

Really the best thing to do now would be to stop desperately linking studies in order to validate your incorrect beliefs and just accept your loss.

There are also porkies which profit off the vegan food industry and spread misinformation about nutrition in order to seek higher profits. Why do you want to act as a proxy shill for these porkies? that is quite un-leftist of you tbh.

Converting 20 pounds of food into 1 pound of food is pretty bourg.

If you gave me a dollar, and in return you were given a nickle, you would feel cheated.

Bracketed numbers represent the percentage of the diet. Left column is traditional Okinawan diet.

I can't believe I'm saying this but
READ DAWKINS

We weren't biologically adapted to farm grains and vegetables either. This pretty much shuts down your entire argument. If you want to go and gather wild plants, good luck, but in the meantime shut the fuck up until you do.

It was for this guy.

You seem to think that waiting for a carnivore to be done with it's meal and then scooping up the leftovers takes a highly specialised biology.

Actually, fruit is bright because it attracts animals that will eat it and spread its seeds (shit out the seeds usually). What a fucking anthropocentric view of biology. You're wrong on so many other things, but I don't have the patience to deal with you.

fuck me
are you really comparing the multi-trillion dollar animal agriculture industry to the fucking vegan food industry, an industry about as niche as they get

anything for the bacon it seems

We eat raw fish. We've adapted to not at raw meat due to more cultural and recent biological events, such as disease and parasites.

I'd love to see you go catch and eat a raw fish with nothing but your bare hands

So they are pescatarians, it is quite commonly known that pescatarianism is a very healthy. This only really proves that pescatarianism is healthy and does not in the slightest prove that veganism is healthy.

We cook meat to get rid of diseases and parasites you colossal retard. There are plenty of fruit and veg that are inedible without preparation too.

I'd like to see you go and find wild plants (without knowledge of what plants are safe to eat) and not die from poisoning.

Some argument there, laddie. I'd sure like to see a domesticated dog try to hunt wild game as well.

Tools are part of our """"nature"""" as much as our hands. They're a byproduct of our intelligence.

It's literally our adaption of tools which defines us as humans.

If I was in the natural humanoid environment (the tropics) then yes, because fruit is in abundant supply.

you literally made the argument for m

but it doesn't define what we are biologically adapted to eat

you cannot tell me that the recent historical phenomenon (we're talking thousands of years, not millions) - the advent of tools - is at all evolutionarily significant.

where is that figure in the paper

Is it in the references? This is the only figure that's showing up for me.

You know there are humans (and human fossils) everywhere but antarctica right?

Yes I am, while it is not as large it is growing at a very fast rate and the truth is that they are both run by porkies, the current size of the market does not really change that fact. However I don't really expect a feeble minded liberal like yourself to understand this fact.
theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2014/nov/28/business-and-entrepreneurs-seize-opportunities-in-rise-of-veganism

Also veganism is no longer as niche as you people really believe, it is starting to become mainstream.
foodnavigator-usa.com/Markets/Vegan-is-going-mainstream-trend-data-suggests
latestvegannews.com/plant-based-food-named-top-trend-2016/

Also the last link I posted has an interesting section I would like to quote.

This is confusing, the left column doesn't even com close to added up to 100%. Where are they getting the remaining calories?

yes, exactly. A byproduct of our intelligence and opportunism outpacing our biological adaptions

sorry, I cut off the rest to make it easier for you to find the fish section

our intelligence is literally are our biology

We are biologically adapted to eat whatever we are able to eat. How is this so fucking hard.

Okay, you're just going round in circles now.

Are you fucking serious.
Considering that our tool use has made it possible for our population to balloon out of control, outcompeting everything else in our niche? Considering that several species have been driven extinct directly because of our tool use (and many more close to extinction)?

Also,
This is just factually wrong. Tool use dates back a lot farther than thousands of years. Even other primate species use tools, and we diverged from them millions of years ago. For fuck's sake, some bird species use tools. Shit, some cephalopods use tools.

our intelligence allows us to do things that our biology (you know what I mean - outside of our intelligence) does not typically allow, like catching animals and consuming them

I think it's you who needs to fuck off back to reddit if you keep bringing up this fucking bacon meme

Fucking epic

This was not the argument, it was more about future generations being ashamed that we are omnivores and that a lot of people happen to eat meat.

Yes, it vegetarianism can work for most people(maybe all, we don't know), veganism definitely not.

Even if it can be done does not mean it everyone could have the same diet, there isn't a one diet for all because we don't adsorb nutrients the same(not completely anyways).

Well, I knew Okinawa was a huge fishing village, so I wrongly assumed they ate more fish, but thy still aren't really eating carbohydrates at the same magnitude and type as Westerners, just sweet potatoes.

I can eat fucking cardboard if I want to. Doesn't mean I should you spaz. Anyway, you try to live off raw flesh and you'll get sick fast (unlike literally any genuine carnivore)

our bodily functions - like hands, teeth, etc.
if these aren't adapted to catching meat then why should our body be adapted to eating it

No actually, I have no idea what you mean. You do realize that there are still tribes in Africa that chase animals to exhaustion? They don't use tools to catch them. You are absolutely retarded. Please read science, anything science! Maybe go back to school and learn something! Holy fuck

Fun fact 1: we're not a carnivore, but an omnivore
Fun fact 2: foodborne illness is due to contaminants in the food, not the food itself
Fun fact 3: the foodborne illness got there somehow
Fun fact 4: most wild animals have a lot of parasites and infections
Fun fact 5: wild animals have much stronger immune systems because they are not used to medical care to help fight disease

We are persistence hunters. We wear our prey out by a long hunt and chase rather than just one attack

When you next go outside, I challenge you to count all the advertising in some way pertaining to animal agriculture. So fast food, anything made with milk dairy, etc. Compare this to the number of vegan adverts you see

I'm so confused as to why leftpol is pulling out all the stops to defend animal agriculture, literally the capitalist devil incarnate

Because the majority of people are not vegan. Thus mass market appeal won't work. Is that so fucking difficult to figure out.

bacon redditors, can u answer this quick thought experiment:

there's a pig in front of you alongside a ripe strawberry

which has you salivating, which smells nice, which do you want to kill, eat and devour raw

And no one is saying you should.

No one claimed humans were carnivores.

Really epic post, keep it up!

Because it is.

I don't like pork so definitely the strawberry. But if it was a chicken I'd chase that shit down. I fucking love chicken. My grandfather has a farm too, I have chased a chicken down, it's not so bad.

Give me a knife, faggot.

Delusional.

...

The biggest porky industry is animal agriculture and you were defending it in virtue of the vegan industries being equally bad.

I'm not claiming veganism is somehow immune from porkies. It's just that animal agriculture is inherently exploitative in a very special way. If we were all to turn vegan exploitation wouldn't end but there would be a lot less of it, that's for sure

Eat both. I can do that, because I'm an omnivore.

ANTHONY FANTANO HERE

oh hey! the cancer thread again! I love cancer.

Pork medallions with a nice strawberry glaze :^)

you're not forced to eat shitty vegan products anyway. Just eat simple whole foods that don't necessitate exploitative porkies (rice, veg, fruit, etc.)

I'd ask for proof that it's the worst but I know as well as anyone else that asking this of you is deeply triggering and excellent

if we are designed to eat meat like carnivores then we should share evolutionary traits with them (that's the point)

Whether one buys meat or one buys vegan food they are both funding a porky of some kind. Liberals like yourself seem incapable of understanding that there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. You really should go back to reddit the place liberals like yourself belong.

At what point did anyone say we are carnivores

well,

literally what other industry can you say is this bad?

Nobody said we are carnivores. This is what is known as a "strawman".

In this situation I make breakfast.

omnivores eat meat
carnivores eat meat
we must then have in common evolutionary traits that allow us to catch meat

Do you even know what sentience is. Self awareness, intelligence. Farm animals are not like that, any simple observation will prove this.

And still not a shred of evidence to prove that it's the biggest contributor to global warming.

Yeah.
Evolutionary traits like the level of intelligence required to create tools.

In 1600 there were more pirates
In 1600 there was no global warming
Therefore, Pirates cause global cooling.

one can be less unethical, and in a socialist utopia everyone would be vegan so I'm just preparing for the future

you and other tankies in this thread are all so obviously recovering Holla Forumsacks unable to let go of their SJW boogieman

You are thinking of sapience. Sentience is when you have some internal perception of reality rather than just simple responses to stimulus.

Humans aren't "biologically" able to cure alzheimers, should we just toss all the research in the bin now too?

Full reddit

...

Nice false conclusion faggot

holy fuck it's like I'm on Holla Forums

the point is the utilisation of intelligence has outstripped our biological composition which is not designed to eat meat but rather fruit, nuts and seeds (like all our common ancestors - chimps, apes, etc.)

There is no ethical consumption under capitalism

100% effort rebuttal

the most inherently reddit thing is a love for meat and distaste for veganism

...

No it hasn't.
Our intelligence is part of our biological composition.
Arbitrarily separating the two is nothing more than an appeal to nature.

Explain how I ate tuna yesterday

fuck you're right. I mean the post I was responding to brought up some excellent points

You seem to know an awful lot about Reddit.

Nice try leddit liberal, please fuck off back to your homeland.

Arbitrarily separating the two is nothing more than an appeal to nature.
you're fucking missing the point
please just re-read my previous posts

Explain how a cow can eat meat
the point isn't about what our body allows us to eat, it's about what's best for our body

For every pretentious vegan there are at least a thousand people who make stale jokes about them.

Guess I should just go and fuck some child prostitutes then
I mean there's simply no way I can be ethical

...

...

No I'm not.
You're just reiterating your (fallacious) point over and over.

You're just proving my point.

brb spastic omnis
I will deal with your cognitive dissonance after I've cooked up my veg stir-fry

Nice blog, redditor.

how
your point was that because we CAN eat meat, that's an argument against what I said - that it's not what we optimally should
in the same way cows can eat meat but it's not their optimal food source

In non-landwhale portions, meat is perfectly healthy to eat, you fucking tard. And even if it isn't, you don't have authority over other people's bodily autonomy. Hell, you don't have the right to force somebody to stop smoking, and cigarettes are nothing but addictive poison.

it isn't, but I can see you're never going to awoken from the dogmatic slumber big biz has put you under

Where has this come from? I'm just arguing what I believe is right. I'm a fucking anonymous internet stranger, what authority do I have over these people anyway (other than my sound arguments)?

That's neither what my argument was, or what yours was.
Cows have a different biology from humans.

why does Holla Forums resemble Holla Forums to such an alarming degree?

WAKE UP SHEEPLE

haha good one
that's exactly what people say to those trying to perpetrate class consciousness though so your point is kind of mute

Just stop fucking posting

No it isn't. Only if they're being colossal retards like you are.

*moot :^)

what

So why I can't I say this when you retort "WAKE UP SHEEPLE" to my own arguments? Double standards tbh

rip

Confirmed for reddit.
Only redditors try to distinguish between themselves and "those other redditors".
Get the fuck off my board you cancerous wretch.

You aren't even making sense.

well I won't deny that I use niche academic subs (the discussion there is miles better than anything on here. Not as funny though), but they're a whole different world to default reddit which is essentially nu-Holla Forums

somehow WAKE UP SHEEPLE is a valid retort against a vegan, but not a leftist

This thread is bad. Both sides of the discussion are shit.

Why does this always happen in every vegs x non-vegs discussion I've even seen so far? Why does everyone has their heads so far up in their own asses?

Because vegans are inherently retarded

because it's primarily two extremes who are arguing. Those who think meat is murder, and then because they can't convince people of that, they claim it's incredibly unhealthy, it's inherently bourg, etc. vs those who think all vegans are retards, and should deepthroat a bratwurst.

There are far stronger arguments, both ethical and practical, in favor of veganism/vegetariansim than there are for any religion.
Also, religions don't need to be ended - they just shouldn't be given special treatment.

That image is ridiculous too. You won't find many vegans who would describe the first 15 images as non-violent.

It is extremely difficult for a meat-eater to admit that any of the ethical arguments in favor of veganism are sound because doing so would be an admission that they had caused suffering.

As with religious arguments, nobody is going to get converted to the other side. It's just going to be a series of accusations and counter-accusations.

This fucking thread…

Of course vegans have a place. If people don't want to eat animals who the fuck cares?

Anyway, tomorrow I'm going to celebrate the Norwegian constitution with a nice whale steak, roasted potatoes, and bearnaise sauce.

Jesus Christ, you are a fucking retard.
It's just as Zizek says, you must be forced to be free!

Glass houses. Stones.

P U R E
I D E O L O G Y

Why not just eat 100% pizza and soft drinks.

It is extremely difficult for vegans to understand that not everyone could be healthy on a vegan diet.

Okay.

no, I agree that vegetarianism is healthy (but not the only healthy diet, and people can eat whatever the fuck they want, healthy or no), but there seems to be a faction who think that eating meat is wrong, and make moralistic arguments against it. And when that doesn't work, they plead "muh human nature". In which case, they can fuck off to a tropical forest, give up tools and shelter, and try to live off the land with their bare hands.

The problem with all this NEOLIBERAL BS is that it's pure IDEOLOGY

And IDEOLOGY is one step past RELIGION

Veganism is all about the ultimate moral truth and how you can become a better person by following it.

And this exact fact creates Anti-Vegans, that don't want to be told "how to live their lives" and responed "offended" to Vegans. And Vegans don't like this, cause they cannot accept that their one and absolut truth cannot be accepted by everyone.

It's PURE IDEOLOGY

I agree somewhat, I was supposedly on the "crazy dogmatic meat-eater side" and was wondering why I was a extreme somehow.

Maybe not everyone, but a huge percentage of people can. Look at the China studies and tell me there isn't a health benefit associated with a primarily plant-based diet.

because it is wrong -

P1: You do not need to eat meat, egg or dairy to survive in a Western country (and in fact they may even be a hindrance to your health)

P2: Meat, egg and dairy cause unnecessary suffering and environmental damage

C: Therefore, it is morally wrong to consume meat, egg and dairy in the West

American Dietetic Association:

Dietitians of Canada:

The Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada:

Harvard Medical School:

...

whats your point

Do you know where you are? Moralizing has no power here. I see no reason why causing animals suffering in order to further my own interests, ie, meat, is "wrong". I do see factory farming and the shit some of the workers pull as unnecessary, in that it's unproductive suffering, and that is all.

this is the kind of rationale that makes capitalism so toxic

You cannot be a leftist and a moral anti-realist/nihilist. It essentially doesn't make sense. Your views are not self consistent.

animal agriculture is unproductive suffering, given that if we used the grains/food to feed humans instead of livestock we could sustain 10bil+ humans. Instead billions are starving and 10s of billions of animals are dying each year, for no real reason other than that the system is hardwired like this and capitalism is endlessly exploitative

Stop making these fucking threads

Agribusiness, like all business under capitalism, is inherently destructive

if you don't want to eat meat don't, it doesn't aid in the revolution at all and helps the environment as much as dividing your plastic and cans into recycle bins

it's a non issue that wastes time and causes pointless in-fighting

stop making these threads

fuck off god damn

...

A plant based diet does not mean its a vegetarian or a vegan diet, it doesn't prove anything.
Everyone should have a plant based diet if their goals is to be healthy.

Vegetarian
It can meet the needs for some people, they did not say all people, and I seriously doubt they have the evidence for that.
Vegetarian.
Vegetarian.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3662288/

Veganism is something I would class as separate from other forms of "voting with your dollar" (clearly something you have a problem with because it distracts us from the real problem, and I don't necessarily disagree).

It's different from abstaining from most things that involve exploitation in capitalism, because these things don't necessitate suffering but rather involve it as a result of 'increased efficiency' and so forth. The consumption of animal products, on the other hand, inherently necessitates suffering, and there is simply no way of avoiding this. A t-shirt needn't have involved the suffering of an asian sweatshop child (it's just this is most convenient), whereas bacon will always involve the suffering of a pig, no matter what.

The British National Health Service:

The British Nutrition Foundation:

The Dietitians Association of Australia:

The United States Department of Agriculture:

The National Health and Medical Research Council:

The Mayo Clinic:

cool

So?

End capitalism, then we can figure out who gets to say whether pigs suffer or not

You sound dogmatic, I don't think change is ever going to be that simple.

Even if veganism was fruitless (which it clearly isn't - a meat eater consumption results in the deaths of 7000 animals over their lifetime. You cannot tell me abstaining from this is essentially equal to taking out your recycling) - I still think it would be a moral pejorative. If you and 1000 other people gave a person £1 to torture someone to death, the act of removing your contribution would not change the outcome but you would still think of it as a moral duty.

How do I sound dogmatic? Cause I don't give a shit about wasting time shaming people for eating pigs (which is a tactic that backfires 99 percent of thes time yet vegans continue to use it almost exclusively) when there's plenty of other ways to get a dialogue started regarding socialism and capitalism?

Daily reminder that meat substitutes can taste pretty damn good.

Well it's nice they say those diets are possible, but they really don't say they that those diets are always healthy everyone.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3662288/

In vitro meat will be economical for mass production long, long before veganism expands outside of the tiny single-digit demographic niche it is trapped in right now. If you want to accelerate the liberation of livestock, reduce carbon footprints and help workers gain access to cheaper and more nutritious food, do what you can to support in vitro meat research.

for*

No dude because veganism is the only way to save le poor animals who are more important than chinese sweatshop children dying from overwork LMAO :^)

Dogmatic in the sense that you think the abolition of capitalism is something every other ideal should take a backseat for. It's a tankie rationale that allows them to brush aside genuine social movements like feminism and veganism.

How would you know this? Of course they're not going to change their worldview overnight, especially when its one as culturally and psychologically embedded as meat consumption, but exposure to these valid arguments is going to make them gradually more sympathetic to the movement (and I've seen exactly this happen).

Leftism is something which people seem to intuitively reject just as often as veganism anyway. "But what about the Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin?", etc.

technocratic
e
c
h
n
o
c
r
a
t
i
c

Why even bother peddling class consciousness? Just invest what you can in AI - when the singularity is finally reached it will organise us into a perfect sociality utopia because it'll know this is what's best for us.

*socialist

No it isn't. A tankie rationale is thinking that the only way to communism is through Stalinism and that anything outside of THAT line shouldn't even exist, not merely take a backseat. A Socialist advocates for a revolution where workers gain their means of production (or a process which leads to this) and in turn decide how the surplus generated is distributed while either abolishing the State or reappropriating it for the workers own ends. Not a single word about morality, animals, or whether or not they should be eaten is uttered here.

A Liberal :^)))) is someone who thinks class conflict and proletarian revolution should take a back seat (see not be discussed) to feminism, veganism, BLM etc

This is changing at a pace waaaaaay faster than people accepting veganism as an alternative

ur a cunt, the suffering of chinese sweatshop workers absolutely pales in comparison to the suffering of farm animals

The sad thing is so many vegans actually think this that I can't tell if you're joking or not

Maybe we should let people do waht they want

I hope your joking pham

I didn't mean to imply that you were a tankie, just that it's a line of argument that tankies have peddled in the past.

I generally oppose neo-liberalism of this form. But equally, I oppose your shtick which is just the other side of the coin.

I don't know about this. People seem to be increasingly sympathetic towards social democracy Scandinavian-style, but true leftism is still very consistently seen as too extreme or unviable. The growth of veganism is tangible and large; in 2009 >1% of the US was veg*n, now it's over 5%.

Synthetic meat is only a decade way so I don't care tbh

lol yeah I'm just joking

Pic related, it's what your brain looks like

It was fun playing with you but you're finished

this is the kind of abject moral apathy and incompetence that will forever stifle any push away from capitalism

you're part of the problem lad

You're right please lrn to speak Chinese/Taiwanese and go tell Nike workers how if they really wanted to change their conditions they should go vegan that would show their bosses

You only believe movements like feminism and veganism are genuine obstacles because that's what's most convenient for you

Go home, Reddit, you are drunk.

Even if I did that has literally no relevance to what we're talking about. If you can't prove me wrong sorry but don't start making unsubstantiated allegations because you're butthurt I pointed out how stupid your movement is

Also good job getting nervous and trying to call me an anti-feminist because I think veganism is stupid. They aren't mutually inclusive

ayy look fam, he pulled out his little fallacy checklist
do you know what proper noun means

lol I don't know what alleyway you've lead this argument
nothing I said related to their liberation or anything, just that I thought the suffering of farm animals outweighed the suffering of sweatshop workers

...

if you say so.

also *away

I can't prove you wrong when there's nothing to prove. Your last comment was vague and contentless, reducible to "lol you're such an idiot smh"

"ur a cunt, the suffering of chinese sweatshop workers absolutely pales in comparison to the suffering of farm animals"

"nothing I said related to their liberation or anything, just that I thought the suffering of farm animals outweighed the suffering of sweatshop workers"

???

wew lad

it is when it functions as some sort of "gotcha!"

...

if you made an actual error it isn't a "gotcha" it's just someone pointing out that you're being retarded

Veganism is way easier on the planet and our own digestion. Some people could benefit greatly from abstaining from meat, as well as processed sugar. Great bait, though.

When you're presented with an argument, whether you agree or disagree with it, the proper response is not to begin listing logical fallacies as if finding enough of them or finding the right one will provide a good comeback. It's also just so self-masturbatory and redundant.

Where was the adhom/adpop anyway? Incorrect uses of both those buzz-fallacies.

He listed at least two other things that were wrong with the argument before listing fallacies

also

Self-masturbatory is a redundant ass phrase tbh fam

Nice buzzword

why is it so hard for vegans not to contradict themselves?

End yourself, you useful idiot.

idk why he brought up proper nouns in a context that didn't make sense - clearly throwing around a word salad in the hope of getting some hits in

(mis)-quoting me is not an argument either

smdh

your irrational prejudice against vegans really makes me think none of your arguments have been made in earnest. Bacon's tasty isn't it :^)

We can be reasonably sure that in vitro meat is a decade away or thereabouts and that it can be tested and found safe for human consumption. Can't say the same for every last kind of tech out there.

I get it, technocrats are obnoxious, but nowhere in the study of class consciousness is it written that obviating class strife with technology is forbidden, especially since this particular technology assists with issues outside of class struggle like global warming.

veganism under capitalism is cancerous and narcissistic. no one benefit the most but the capitalists under capitalism.

I can sort of sympathise, but adoption of in vitro meat will still be a while away even after it's created, to the extent that advocating veganism (in my mind) is still one of many pejoratives.

I just find the idea of "we don't have to do anything, tech will fix it" intolerable because it fosters indifference both within and without movements. I've heard people use it to justify capitalism, along the lines of 'capitalism is exploitative, but the technological progress it creates will mean one day everyone will be living in luxury!'.

DOOD DA BROCCOLI INDUSTRY IS GUNNA GIT US

Oh completely agreed 100%, I can't bear techno-utopians who more often than not seem to be intimidated by the thought of stepping outside their STEM-lined safety zone and engaging in somewhat more abstract political theory. It's as much a semi-conscious copout as anything else.

Still, it's a bit of an overreaction to refuse the benefits of technology when and where they present solutions to class strife. The best example, if least urgent issue, is downloading music. People can still buy what music they want and so capitalism has hardly retreated from music, but there's a functionally zero-cost alternative for proletarians to access that can spare them at least some expenses and improve their emotional state a bit. If something analogous to music downloading presented itself in areas relevant to our nutrition or housing, who would we be to refuse?

I am curious as to how the advent of in-vitro meat will play out. Animal agriculture is an industry so massive, complex, multi-faceted, etc. that I don't see a shift to in-vitro being anything but very slow, even if it is significantly cheaper. And after the shift happens companies will probably use labels like "real meat" to sell.

Depends on just how much cheaper it is, frankly. If it isn't an order of magnitude cheaper, who knows, maybe governments will roll some subsidies into constructing in vitro infrastructure on the basis of CO2 reduction. Imperfect but welcome, I guess.

the issue is when technofaggots use that to say "well one day there will be downloadable houses anyway so why bother to bust the slum lords? :^)"

I'm getting really tired of this meme, first of all, what are goats, birds, and fish, second of all, these animals are going to exist regardless and perform a litany of positive functions to any farm. Third, I haven't seen any socialist alternatives to capitalist factory farming that is sustainable, everyone just say is, "lel go vegan hurrrr", as if you can't have factory farming with sustainable practices.

Also, this 20lbs of food meme is bullshit, last I checked, your ass can't eat grass and survive, and the grass still has to get cut in the fields, goats and cows are the best option for that, I know because I have goats, they eat fucking anything, pump out milk like crazy, and have almost zero maintenance.

Yeah, as a STEMfag I want to say for my part that I think the instrumentalist outlook of most STEMfags is unsophisticated and self-crippling, and I'm here in part not just because I want to offer reasonable tech-based proposals to help the class struggle, but also to round out the areas in which I am ignorant of it in the realm of political theory, and hopefully I can urge others to do that too.

Disappointing thread, comrades. What the fuck happened to Holla Forums?

What kind of expectations did you have with the OP

Given the right foods, anyone could be healthy on a vegan diet.

You're right that in reality a lot of people are in circumstances which don't permit them the time, money, or energy needed to have a healthy vegan diet. For example, that's why I'm not a vegan.

I think there's a very wrong idea held by a lot of people, especially vegans, that it's an all-or-nothing thing. Either you eat meat or you don't.
If the goal is to minimise suffering then the person who goes from eating 5 burgers a week to 4 is doing just as much good as the person who goes from eating 1 to 0. If everyone simply halved their meat intake, that would do a lot more good than the sum total of all the people who have ever become vegan.

Seriously this. The thread was destined to be shit from the beginning. The ideology game too strong.

I'm really poor and vegan. Unless you're that person who buys expensive fancy vegan food, being a vegan is much cheaper and less time consuming. People just can't manage to be simple in their diet, and that's the problem

The most efficient way to turn sunlight into food is to grow edible crops. That's simply scientific fact.
However, not all land is good for growing edible crops. Low-quality land where only grass grows is most efficiently used to farm livestock.
I don't know the optimal ratio of plant-farming to animal-farming, but I do know that we're using a lot of perfectly arable land for grazing animals at the moment.

You still need to put more thought and effort into a vegan diet, at least initially, else you risk fucking up the nutritional balance.
Maybe poverty isn't so much of a factor, but free time and mental energy certainly is.