• @weeeeum
    link
    English
    554 hours ago

    I feel like instead of a giant push for veganism, there should just be a push to eat what’s sustainable.

    Beef and dairy? Causes huge amount of greenhouse gasses and with current methods of production, it is not sustainable

    Blue fin tuna? These things have been way over fished and are endangered. Not sustainable, just try it once and move one with your life.

    Tilapia ? These things grow like weeds and can be fed efficiently. Go ahead, good source of protein for your diet.

    Honey? We need bees and they are an important pollinator for crops. Go nuts (just watch your sugar intake}

    Almonds? Takes huge amounts of water to grow and exacerbates droughts in the areas they are farmed. Eat less of these.

    Potatoes? Grow stupid easily in all sorts of conditions. Go nuts.

      • @weeeeum
        link
        English
        438 minutes ago

        Yeah exactly, people arguing whether dragon fruit or some shit is a “super food”. The super food is right in front of us, potatoes (and onions).

        What other food has been so vital to our survival that its disappearance could ravage a population (Irish potato famine)

        No offense to dragon fruit, blue berries or whatever exotic fruit, but if they went extinct, not that much could change.

        • @quicksand
          link
          English
          124 minutes ago

          Obligatory Irish potato famine was a result of British policy. But I agree with your sentiment

    • @Rob
      link
      English
      133 hours ago

      I’d already be very happy if everyone took your approach, but it’s not the entire story for veganism. Sustainability is an important factor for myself and many others, but so is animal welfare.

      It’s a bummer that animal welfare is pretty much inversely correlated with emissions. Packing chickens together and making their lives miserable is much better for the environment than having them roam free.

      Veganism happily aligns with environmental sustainability. But when you believe we shouldn’t exploit animals at all, just pushing to eat what’s sustainable ignores a lot of pain and cruelty.

      • @weeeeum
        link
        English
        331 minutes ago

        This is probably a hot take but I have the opinion that nature isn’t any more merciful than we are. Existence is suffering and every animal ends up as feed for another.

        Is it better to be raised in horrid conditions in a farm, or to spend every moment of your life scavenging for food, running for your life, while probably infested with parasites just to be torn to pieces, alive, by a wolf or other predator?

        Humans at least have the decency to sedate or knock unconscious our food. Wild animals have to experience being eaten alive.

        • @Rob
          link
          English
          424 minutes ago

          This is a false equivalence; the answer is “neither”.

          Veganism doesn’t seek to end all animal suffering, but not to exploit animals for humans’ sake. We don’t need animal products to survive, so we shouldn’t add to whatever misery already exists naturally.

          In the case of livestock, we should just stop breeding them. No vegan is arguing for dumping all cattle in the savannah to be hunted by lions.

    • Lord Wiggle
      link
      English
      83 hours ago

      About honey: we do need bees. But taking away their honey which they work really hard for to sustain their colony during the winter and replacing it with sugar water is really bad for them and makes their colony weak. They can get viruses, bacteria and fungi much faster, which they can spread to other colonies or when splitting up when their queen dies.

      Next to that, bees we use for honey are a very aggressive territorial species. They claim their territory and all the other bee and whasp species are killed and pushed out. There are many bee and whasp species who do not live in colonies but are very important for the biodiversity. Replacing them with our bees, which will die and get sick faster because we take away their nuteician rich honey, is a bad idea.

      We do need our bees, but in reduces quantities to keep the balance. But we shouldn’t take their food.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 hours ago

        I’d say the issue is that if honey isn’t vegan because you’re causing harm to bees, isn’t most of modern vegetable agriculture at least equally harmful to bees & other insects due to all the pesticides being used?

        Or is it just if we directly involve bees, it’s bad, but if we inflict greater harm in a less direct way, it’s acceptable?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          4
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          Every aspect of our globalised and industrialised world is causing harm. Veganism is about reducing the harm we’re responsible for as far as possible and reasonable. Renouncing honey is easy. So it’s possible and reasonable. No vegan thinks they’re responsible for zero suffering or even zero dead animals, we’re simply trying to reduce the number as best as we can without starving ourselves.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 hour ago

          isn’t most of modern vegetable agriculture at least equally harmful

          I’m a going with far more harmful.

          • @ZeffSyde
            link
            English
            12 minutes ago

            Yeah. The modern method of acres and acres of one species being farmed, with or without pesticides and other performance enhancing drugs is terrible for the environment.

            For many animals, you might as well build an asphalt parking lot for each acre of corn or soy you plant. Same goes for Western grass lawns.

            The critters that can’t adapt starve or move away.