Oh look, typical carnist cliché is getting offended because someone criticized the weird shit you do.
I didn’t see anyone else pointing out how bizarre it is to fetishize bee puke.
And people hate vegans because most people want to believe they’re at least “pretty good people”, and the very presence of a vegan challenges that belief. If you’re offended, maybe it’s time to look in the mirror.
What’s unhinged is people who think they have the right to confine, torture, exploit, rape, murder, and devour the flesh and/or secretions of other animals just because they’re different.
Yeah I get that bugs are easy to dismiss because they’re tiny, often obnoxious and treated like a nuisance, and less intelligent than other animals. But we’re still talking about living beings who have their own subjective experience of life, individuality, and their own agenda. Like all animals they came into this life with us, not for us.
Commodifying living beings is unhinged. And even ignoring the moral side of things, having a preference for bee vomit is unhinged.
The point is that virtually anything is a better alternative to honey.
ITT: a bunch of stolen bee vomit fetishists. Why pay so much money for something weird, gross, and every bit as unhealthy as sugar and corn syrup? Maple syrup (while also unhealthy) tastes way better. And date sugar, whole blended dates, or molasses are healthier alternatives.
Veganism without some kind of conceptual framework of speciesism is not veganism. Your assessment is backwards, not only is the concept of anti-speciesism not fascist; speciesism is foundational to racism, sexism, and ableism.
"When you are laying down the groundwork for what it means to be human, that is what it means to actually create human as a political identity because scientifically what we actually know is that human is just one of many species of animal on this planet, but we don’t actually think of ourselves as animals. I’ve talked to countless people who actually balk at the idea, who actually say to me well, I’ve never heard of that; of course humans are not animals. I’m like wow, you definitely did not pass seventh-grade biology. It’s like, you know, but this is just — this just illustrates to me how deeply entrenched these ideologies are. Because of course humans are animals but when we create human as a political identity, what we simultaneously do is create animal as a political identity and not just a species classification.
When we set up this binary, everyone who does not fall into the neat little perfect box of what’s considered human, they exist on the spectrum as an animal. You see the animalization of black people. You see the animalization of any marginalized group or any group that we desire to marginalize and that’s occurred several times throughout history. Yeah, you know, that’s one of the driving things that I want people to take away from these conversations or what I want people to understand. Human was actually never something that was meant to include — in particular — us as black people. Human was just a distinction that was meant to be — that was meant to include primarily people who were white, male, straight, land-owning, heterosexual, and had all of their abilities.
That’s really what we are — that’s really what we’re talking about and if you don’t meet these qualifications, if you don’t meet these criteria, then you are somehow considered to be less-than. That’s when the animalization starts to creep in. Yeah, this sort of aspirational humanity is something that I see people working toward over and over again in black liberation movements. We’re always talking about I am a human being. You know what? I deserve these rights as a human without ever critically interrogating what it means to be human or why human was considered someone — a person who is deserving of rights and not all of these other citizens that we share the planet with. That is one of our fundamental problems. Until we actually include other persons in our frame of reference of who is a marginalized community, I think that is going to continue to keep us back. Instead of actually embracing solidarity with other marginalized species, we instead continue to perpetuate the perceived exceptionalism of human and why that’s so good."
Windows never breaks? Uhhhhh, that’s definitely not true. When I have to use Windows, I brace myself every time I have to update.
So are you meaning to imply that it’s racist to be vegan? Certainly like any other movement, veganism has a need for more intersectionality. And that outright nazi vegans exist is shitty. But to imply that the anomalous existence of a fringe nazi vegan community means that antispeciesism is in itself racist is completely false, and even misses the point of that very article you posted:
“White nationalist veganism can sound somewhat absurd, but it also shows how complex and deeply rooted this ideology is, and how it can appeal to a variety of different audiences. To combat these racist movements, we must understand them, including how they can incorporate beliefs we usually associate with liberal or leftist politics. The diversity of this movement should not be underestimated.”
Emphasis added. It is important not to allow bigots to hijack otherwise important movements for justice. If that’s something that matters to you, then you have even more reason to go vegan, because animal consumption is not only intrinsically racist, but it is demonstrably materially supporting the fascist institutions who are the largest threats to democracy.
I remember some years ago there was a “malware” going around that would flash OpenWRT onto people’s routers, and set them to have more secure default settings.
There should be another thing like that, but one that upgrades Windows into a Linux distro.
Vegan fascists? The people who are trying to put an end to the forced captivity, continuous torture, rape, exploitation, commodification, and perpetual holocaust-levels of slaughter of virtually every species of animal that is not human, are fascists?
Here’s the most commonly accepted definition of veganism:
“Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.”"
Emphasis added. The vast majority of vegans do not believe that killing a mosquito is exactly equivalent to killing a human, and even of the people who do, it’s intended to imply that all species lives are important, that the mosquito’s life is seen as equally valuable to the human’s. The only reason such a proposition seems abhorrent to you is because you’re looking at the mosquito through the lens of your carnist supremacist mindset, which is to see the mosquito as something worthless and thus conclude that a human’s life is considered by vegans to be equally worthless.
But again, like everyone else vegans take anti-speciesism only as far as is practical. We just do it better. The mosquito bite is easy. If you know mosquitos are around, it’s wise to wear repellent, and take other appropriate precautions depending on your circumstances. Maybe modify your environment if possible to be less of a breeding ground for them, if it’s bad enough. If you’re dealing with a particular mosquito, odds are they have already bitten you, so how is the lethal carnist reaction any more protective against a disease that may have already been transmitted, than simply blowing on the mosquito to get them to fly away?
Locust infestations happen because of shitty agricultural practices. If you’ve got a plot of land that’s full of nothing but copies of one tantalizing crop, then of course it’s going to be an obvious buffet for a vast amount of insects. Are veganic farming or veganic permaculture methods extreme? Or is it more extreme that our most common monocultural methods of farming are causing so much pollution that it’s bringing so many vital pollinators to the brink of extinction?
You make the same erroneous argument that many other carnists make, which is the idea that because vegan values can’t always be practiced perfectly, that somehow automatically means the entire ethical framework is without merit. But that’s obviously nonsensical. To the individual mosquito or mouse, it makes all the difference in their entire little lives, whether they incidentally pestered a vegan or carnist. It’s been estimated that a single vegan living their values results in about 200 fewer livestock animals being slaughtered every year. Is it extreme to live in a way that would end factory farms forever if we all embraced it, or what about the lifestyle that created them in the first place?
Nearly every half-baked gotcha that carnists try to catch vegans in has a common-sense practical answer. The example of predation in wild areas is a point of contention in vegan communities, whether we should intervene or not and ultimately make rather significant changes to the natural world, but presently it doesn’t really matter, because there are so many other obvious abuses that need to end.
Veganism only looks extreme from the deluded perspective of carnism. But in reality going vegan is like becoming sober, and recognizing how disturbing it was to live the way that so many continue to.
It’s because fundamentally you are still commodifying whole living, thinking beings who have their own wills and lives they want to live. We need to reckon with the fact that it is unjust for us humans to think we have any right to declare other species of animals as property.
How is it not cruel?
No, animal captivity, exploitation, rape, slaughter, and consumption are all things that are very much unnecessary, and are detrimental in many ways.
In vegan communities insects are very much extended the same moral considerations as other animals. What you’re advocating is a form of speciesism, which is something better avoided as much as possible.
Lookup veganic farming, and veganic permaculture. The idea that animal ag has any place in combating global warming is demonstrably false, and was nothing more than a greenwashed hijacking of the other various regenerative agricultural movements. There is no room in neither a just world, or a sustainable one, for the exploitation and consumption of animals.
Imagine thinking that telling people on the internet to not have kids is an effective strategy against climate change, while downplaying the importance of going vegan. Continuing to be an animal abuser is also more than a kick in the gut to all the animals who are born in extreme captivity, live a life of constant torture and rape, only to be slaughtered (usually in childhood) just so people can satiate their gluttony for a little sensory pleasure and delude themselves into thinking they need to do that because they’ve been trained by unscientific marketing teams into thinking it’s the only way they can get protein.
On the other hand there are a lot of antinatalists in the vegan communities. So if you went vegan, you’d be in good company.
As a basic end-user I have not been too happy with my experience with flatpaks. I do appreciate that I can easily setup and start using it regardless of what distro I’m using. But based on standard usage using whatever default gui “app store” frontends that usually come with distros, it tends to be significantly slower than apt, for instance, and there seems to be connection problems to the repos pretty often as well.
Okay dude. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I’m not trying to convert you, atheism is fine and has a lot going for it. So give the persecution complex a rest. Having to share a world where other people are granted their own rights, does not necessarily infringe on your rights. You think your freedom is infringed because people get days off on theist holidays? That’s like when straight people complain about gay marriage. Don’t like gay marriage? Nobody is forcing straight people to be gay. Don’t like theist holidays? Then don’t celebrate them.
And you say yourself that if God themself came down, you would still not belief in God? That’s like when a Christian says that no amount of evidence contradicting the Bible can shake their faith in the Bible. The whole idea with atheism is to be skeptical and evidence-based. And yet here you are with a faith so strong it cannot be shaken by anything.
Antitheists are as hypocritical and cognitively dissonant as carnists. Believe whatever you want, but here’s a reality check: there are as many religions as there are people. The world has always had a diversity of belief, and always will. You will always have to share this planet with theists. Any program that seeks the eradication of all but one religion will always be a hugely destructive and traumatic failure, because humans are always looking to disagree with each other and explore new possibilities. And yes, at a certain point atheism becomes a religion, particularly when it becomes dogmatic and institutionalized. You’re not special. You in particular have demonstrated a religiosity that is only comparable to the staunchest Christians.
You’re sounding rather manic here. Relax, the evangelicals are not coming to get you.
I personally would prefer it if we could shake off the last vestiges of christocentrism in our culture - the predominance of their national holidays, their stranglehold on government and taking away women’s and lgbtq rights, and even the documenting of history based on bc and ad.
But your assertion is illogical because religion is incidental to bigotry, sometimes used as a vehicle for it, but not inherent to it. For example I once worked as an intern for a summer camp owned and operated by a Lutheran church. It was run by a pastor and her wife, and much of their operations were specifically meant for sheltering and supporting lgbtq+ youth. They never once made any attempt to convert me, and only ever made me feel welcomed and accepted for who I was.
One of the core problems with most branches of Christianity, historically, and into today is the idea of religious exclusivism. They hold that the only valid belief is their belief, and everything else is false and must be done away with. This idea that only Christianity was valid is what allowed them to feel justified in the eradication of pagans in ancient Rome, forced conversions in Europe, and the genocides and cultural erasure of indigenous people on Turtle Island.
So for you and other antitheists to say that only atheism is correct and valid, is just another form of religious exclusivism. Clearly you are already calling for the cultural erasure of all these other competing beliefs, just as the Christians in antiquity did. And likewise, state-atheism already has a history of oppression under Mao and Lenin. Are you a tankie too?
As a sidenote, it would be more accurate to say agnosticism, or even agnostic-atheism are nonbeliefs or nonreligions. But the more proselytizing and dogmatic Atheism gets, the more religiony it gets. So yes you are religious, and yes you are hypocritically guilty of the same bigoted religious exclusivism that your oh-so-hated Christian brothers are. You want to be better than them? Then don’t be like them. Support a religiously plural world, a world where we can explore belief freely and still respect each other despite, or even because of, differences of worship.
Removed by mod