• @[email protected]OPM
    link
    fedilink
    18
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    There are large parts of the world where the big use of water is to grow food for cows. A decision to eat less beef instead of killing people is possible.

    • themeatbridge
      link
      1710 hours ago

      The population at large will never voluntarily choose to stop eating meat. Beef will just become prohibitively expensive, and the government will give more and more subsidies to try to reduce the cost of hamburgers until the market collapses and they blame immigrants/lgbtq+/atheists/whichever scapegoat is most convenient at the time.

      • Sunshine (she/her)
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -49 hours ago

        That’s not true, people would give up meat if they have to especially upon hearing it’s effects.

        • themeatbridge
          link
          12
          edit-2
          9 hours ago

          They’ll give it up if they have to, yes, but that’s because they have to. The tobacco industry is still doing $100 billion each year, and they print death threats on the packages. People who know meat is bad for the environment still eat it. People are stupid, lazy, and panicky. You won’t reduce the damage at the grassroots level. You have to win elections, frame the debate, and set policies. Anything less is pissing on a forest fire. You’re just going to singe your pubes.

            • themeatbridge
              link
              38 hours ago

              Of course it does, by doing what I said. It’s the only way anything ever changes. Win some elections, frame the debate, pass legislation. That’s how it always works, and it never works any other way (without violence).

              There has never been a movement that built up so much grassroots support that everyone just unanimously agreed to go along with it.

              • @glimse
                link
                36 hours ago

                …And that’s why I’ve set up this toll on The Meat Bridge