Not sure I understand. My point was that fake meats were seen as a great stealth solution. If only the meat was completely realistic, meat lovers would switch to it. Like smoking and electronic cigarettes, basically. No, it was never a solution that would please purist vegans. But personally I just want people to eat less meat, even tech bros if possible. So I was hopeful.
And it turns out it’s not enough. Both Impossible and Beyond are tasty and pretty damn realistic, I have tried them. But the revolution did not happen. The cost differential and dropped and doesn’t fully explain it. The psychological resistance is just tougher than expected.
Also just not subsidizing the overloving shit out of it in the first place to make it profitable at the scale it’s done. The meat industry would all but collapse if subsidies were pulled and pushed elsewhere, and even just slowly removing the subsidies would tank the industry. Not going to happen anytime soon, of course; just pointing out that subsidies are what keep this luxury industry afloat.
You mean a tax. Yes I agree that would be the fairest solution. Let’s say 1000%.
Any government that tries that will be voted out within about 3 minutes. The USA just elected a would-be dictator because inflation is 4% instead of 3%. Even if the tax is 10% you will have the farmers’ lobby on your back and things will get really ugly really quickly.
There is basically no way, democratically or otherwise, in any reasonable timeframe, to get meat to the right price. You would first need to do decades of campaigning to change the narrative.
Veganism is not really a technology issue, it is a philosophy of minimising suffering.
Veganism does not rely on trapping carnists, it relies on convincing carnists.
Burger patty taste does not excuse genetically modifying and killing a sentient being. If vegan burger patties taste 70-90% as good as carnists burger patties, that’s more than enough to live with.
Of course, improving taste can be good, but veganism is not a substitute.
Refusing veganism because vegan burger patties do not taste good enough is cognitive dissonance, burger patty taste is not an argument for carnism.
That’s all fine and I basically agree. But I think you need to be aware that you’re essentially talking to yourself. In your view, taste comes second or third among your priorities. Again, I somewhat agree. But this is just not the way most people see things. If we want to convince them, we have to acknowledge that fact. And you say explicitly that you do want to convince them.
I want to convince them and not trick them into a situation.
Yeah, vegan patties are tasty, if have no choice but to live vegan now is not how any of this works. This might be a joke colleagues or friends tell each other, but the argument and emotional belief system of its speaker is incomplete for veganism.
Veganism is one of the most binary philosophies - there are no consistent half-vegans.
“Veganism = Religion” is a thought-terminating cliché, a knockout argument.
There are no unfalsifiable entities (i.e. gods, prophets) in the vegan philosophy.
Veganism is not a diet, it is an ethical philosophy and way of life.
I’m not against vegan burger patties, their development and further market penetration. The absence of vegan burger patties on the other hand would not end veganism or rob it of any argumentative strength.
Again: I don’t question the arguments in favor of veganism, I agree with them (I have better things to do than come here to piss off vegans). I don’t question your right to treat your diet as an “ethical philosophy and way of life”, i.e. something very close to a religion (it sounds like Buddhism).
I’m saying: what is the best way to get the most people - including techbros and everyone else - to eat as little meat as possible? If you care about ending animal suffering and saving the environment as much as you seem to do, then you should be interested in the answer to that question. It sounds to me like you’re more interested in just holding the moral high ground personally. Would be delighted to be wrong.
What is the best way to get the most people - including techbros and everyone else - to eat as little meat as possible?
My opposition to techbros in the vegan context stems from the argument that posits tasty vegan burger patties specifically or “artificial meat” generally as some sort of prerequisite for personally adopting veganism.
Once artificial meat is ready, I’m going vegan. - This is a moving-goalposts argumentative fallacy.
My opinion is that the best way to get a maximum of people to eat less meat is to convince them of/for veganism, because once a critical share of a society actually holds a opinion, society-wide change canwill happen more rapidly and somewhat spontaneously. Society-wide change can then render carnist behaviour (i.e. animal product production chain, hunting etc.) impossible, undesired, deviant or illegal.
This social tipping point isn’t possible IMO, when the people behaving plant-based are not actually vegan (i.e. convinced by the vegan philosophy).
Solely going off their burger patties (haven’t tried other stuff) I wouldn’t call beyond realistic, though it is very tasty (imo moreso than actual beef). It definitely doesn’t taste the same though.
I think there’s also a cultural issue, some people at least here in germany still consider it weird if you order the vegan/vegetarian version of anything, especially if you aren’t entirely vegan yourself. If that sort of pressure exists it’s also less likely for anyone to try plant based alternatives, no matter how good.
I get that a lot. I order a vegetarian option, then immediately get asked in a confused way if I’m a vegetarian. I’m not, but sometimes I choose to not eat meat every meal.
Agreed on both points. I also found the Beyond burger extremely tasty, sort of too good to be real. The Impossible burger was more realistic but less tasty!
Of course you’re right about the social pressure. And it’s a crazy situation, given the ecological disaster that beef is. Personally I quite enjoy performatively ordering the vegan burger (I am not fully vegan) and making others squirm when they go for the beef version. I like to insist loudly that this is just my personal choice, that they should get whatever they want, no judgement. And that’s true, sort of. Not gonna win any converts by browbeating people. But humans are social animals. Someone has to show the way.
How is that not just a techbro problem?
Not sure I understand. My point was that fake meats were seen as a great stealth solution. If only the meat was completely realistic, meat lovers would switch to it. Like smoking and electronic cigarettes, basically. No, it was never a solution that would please purist vegans. But personally I just want people to eat less meat, even tech bros if possible. So I was hopeful.
And it turns out it’s not enough. Both Impossible and Beyond are tasty and pretty damn realistic, I have tried them. But the revolution did not happen. The cost differential and dropped and doesn’t fully explain it. The psychological resistance is just tougher than expected.
Ask any vegetarian and they’ll tell you it’s absolutely delusional to believe that.
And yet venture investors put a ton of money onto the bet. Mistaken, maybe. “Absolutely delusional” - that’s hyperbole.
Since apparently you think this is all a waste of time, what’s your solution for getting people off meat?
Price hikes to reflect the true environmental cost of „production” and all of the humane treatment overwatch which as of now doesnt fucking exist.
Also just not subsidizing the overloving shit out of it in the first place to make it profitable at the scale it’s done. The meat industry would all but collapse if subsidies were pulled and pushed elsewhere, and even just slowly removing the subsidies would tank the industry. Not going to happen anytime soon, of course; just pointing out that subsidies are what keep this luxury industry afloat.
You mean a tax. Yes I agree that would be the fairest solution. Let’s say 1000%.
Any government that tries that will be voted out within about 3 minutes. The USA just elected a would-be dictator because inflation is 4% instead of 3%. Even if the tax is 10% you will have the farmers’ lobby on your back and things will get really ugly really quickly.
There is basically no way, democratically or otherwise, in any reasonable timeframe, to get meat to the right price. You would first need to do decades of campaigning to change the narrative.
This is the rationale behind fake meat.
Veganism is not really a technology issue, it is a philosophy of minimising suffering.
Veganism does not rely on trapping carnists, it relies on convincing carnists.
Burger patty taste does not excuse genetically modifying and killing a sentient being. If vegan burger patties taste 70-90% as good as carnists burger patties, that’s more than enough to live with.
Of course, improving taste can be good, but veganism is not a substitute.
Refusing veganism because vegan burger patties do not taste good enough is cognitive dissonance,
burger pattytaste is not an argument for carnism.Removed by mod
I bet those cows wanted some parts of Maslow’s needs as well.
Why is your self-actualisation more important than a cow’s existence?
Taste is not argument for carnism because it isn’t just to compare taste to right to exist.
Removed by mod
So? Humans have the ability intentionally NOT to kill animals for consumption and the ability to make up rights.
The externality vs internality of rights discourse doesn’t externalise your personhood with rights.
Removed by mod
Is this SovCit meeting Stirner? Do I have to say the word?
Following questions:
Do you see yourself as human?
Do you value your life and body integrity? Do you value life and body integrity of other beings, like friends?
Do you avoid experiencing violence?
Removed by mod
That’s all fine and I basically agree. But I think you need to be aware that you’re essentially talking to yourself. In your view, taste comes second or third among your priorities. Again, I somewhat agree. But this is just not the way most people see things. If we want to convince them, we have to acknowledge that fact. And you say explicitly that you do want to convince them.
I want to convince them and not trick them into a situation.
Yeah, vegan patties are tasty, if have no choice but to live vegan now is not how any of this works. This might be a joke colleagues or friends tell each other, but the argument and emotional belief system of its speaker is incomplete for veganism.
Veganism is one of the most binary philosophies - there are no consistent half-vegans.
This sounds like a prescription for a religion more than a diet.
Being religious is fine. The problem is that this approach is clearly not going to be effective at getting people to eat less meat.
“Veganism = Religion” is a thought-terminating cliché, a knockout argument.
There are no unfalsifiable entities (i.e. gods, prophets) in the vegan philosophy.
Veganism is not a diet, it is an ethical philosophy and way of life.
I’m not against vegan burger patties, their development and further market penetration. The absence of vegan burger patties on the other hand would not end veganism or rob it of any argumentative strength.
Again: I don’t question the arguments in favor of veganism, I agree with them (I have better things to do than come here to piss off vegans). I don’t question your right to treat your diet as an “ethical philosophy and way of life”, i.e. something very close to a religion (it sounds like Buddhism).
I’m saying: what is the best way to get the most people - including techbros and everyone else - to eat as little meat as possible? If you care about ending animal suffering and saving the environment as much as you seem to do, then you should be interested in the answer to that question. It sounds to me like you’re more interested in just holding the moral high ground personally. Would be delighted to be wrong.
My opposition to techbros in the vegan context stems from the argument that posits tasty vegan burger patties specifically or “artificial meat” generally as some sort of prerequisite for personally adopting veganism.
Once artificial meat is ready, I’m going vegan. - This is a moving-goalposts argumentative fallacy.
My opinion is that the best way to get a maximum of people to eat less meat is to convince them of/for veganism, because once a critical share of a society actually holds a opinion, society-wide change can
willhappen more rapidly and somewhat spontaneously. Society-wide change can then render carnist behaviour (i.e. animal product production chain, hunting etc.) impossible, undesired, deviant or illegal.This social tipping point isn’t possible IMO, when the people behaving plant-based are not actually vegan (i.e. convinced by the vegan philosophy).
Solely going off their burger patties (haven’t tried other stuff) I wouldn’t call beyond realistic, though it is very tasty (imo moreso than actual beef). It definitely doesn’t taste the same though.
I think there’s also a cultural issue, some people at least here in germany still consider it weird if you order the vegan/vegetarian version of anything, especially if you aren’t entirely vegan yourself. If that sort of pressure exists it’s also less likely for anyone to try plant based alternatives, no matter how good.
I get that a lot. I order a vegetarian option, then immediately get asked in a confused way if I’m a vegetarian. I’m not, but sometimes I choose to not eat meat every meal.
Agreed on both points. I also found the Beyond burger extremely tasty, sort of too good to be real. The Impossible burger was more realistic but less tasty!
Of course you’re right about the social pressure. And it’s a crazy situation, given the ecological disaster that beef is. Personally I quite enjoy performatively ordering the vegan burger (I am not fully vegan) and making others squirm when they go for the beef version. I like to insist loudly that this is just my personal choice, that they should get whatever they want, no judgement. And that’s true, sort of. Not gonna win any converts by browbeating people. But humans are social animals. Someone has to show the way.