3
Discussion Offer: Why we should be vegan
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
3 points (57.9% liked)
Leftism
2081 readers
14 users here now
Our goal is to be the one stop shop for leftism here at lemmy.world! We welcome anyone with beliefs ranging from SocDemocracy to Anarchism to post, discuss, and interact with our community. We are a democratic community, and as such, welcome metaposts that seek to amend the rules through consensus. Post articles, videos, questions, analysis and more. As long as it's leftist, it's welcome here!
Rules:
- Absolutely no fascism, right wing extremism, genocide denial, etc.
- Unconditional support of authoritarians will not be tolerated
- Good faith discussion about ideologies is encouraged, but no sectarianism
- No brocialism/sexism
- No ableism
- No TERFs/ anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric
- No racism
- No trolling
- No insults, dunking, or personal attacks
- No posting of misinformation, disinformation, or fake news
- Mods have final say
Posting Expectations:
- Comics/memes/shitposts/propaganda are only allowed on weekends
- Try to avoid liberalism unless discussing electoral politics. Even then, try to focus on tactical agreement towards leftist goals
- Only one meta post seeking consensus per person per day
- Posts about a particular ideology are ok, but remember the rules above
- Remember that there is no “right way” to implement leftist theory. This rule does not prevent academic criticism.
- Try to avoid extremely sensitive topics unless approaching them with appropriate care for intersectionality. Use your best judgement, and be prepared to provide respectable sources when having these discussions. Wikipedia is not an acceptable source in these cases.
- Post titles must be meaningful and relevant, except on weekends
Sister Communities:
!abolition@slrpnk.net !antiwork@lemmy.world !antitrumpalliance@lemmy.world !breadtube@lemmy.world !climate@slrpnk.net !fuckcars@lemmy.world !iwwunion@lemmy.ml !leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com !leftymusic@lemmy.world !privacy@lemmy.world !socialistra@midwest.social !solarpunk@slrpnk.net Solarpunk memes !therightcantmeme@midwest.social !thepoliceproblem@lemmy.world !vuvuzelaiphone@lemmy.world !workingclasscalendar@lemmy.world !workreform@lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Hunting still purposefully kills individuals who don't want to die. "Population control" wouldn't be necessary if hunting organisations didn't purposefully increase populations in order to have more to hunt. And eating their flesh is necessary in what way? Why not leave it to the wild animals then?
Not necessarily true. In Great Britain there is a huge overpopulation of deer because all their natural predators were hunted to extinction in the 1500s. And so deer population must be controlled by humans to protect forests as the deer come and eat the bark off of trees and the fauna wiping out biodiversity in forests. You couldn’t really leave the bodies for wild animals because it’s generally pretty polluting since most wild animals that eat meat generally don’t want to scavenge for food as it is much riskier to eat something that is decaying.
You could try and reintroduce the predators that were hunted instead of hunting more. And that doesn't address the point of killing innocents for what, the environment? If environmental damage is a reason to kill someone wouldn't humans be top of the list?
They do try and reintroduce predators like wolves into Great Britain, but there are 2 million deer in the UK and it’s not really viable to introduce enough wolves to combat that amount of deer in any kind of short time frame. As well as this, some of the most common deer species in the UK are non native so they shouldn’t be there anyway.
And your second argument is true but rather extreme since we should in general value human life over the life of other animals.
So you're saying that we shouldn't kill individuals based on how much they destroy the environment actually. Not being native doesn't warrant execution and neither does being numerous. Some places have programs for neutering certain problematic species and while I would be careful about condoning those programs it certainly beat being shot and bleeding to death.
Being shot by an experienced hunter should lead to an almost instant death. And it’s not like everyone would go out and hunt animals just so they can eat meat. You are hunting the animals to try and control population with a byproduct of meat that can be consumed.
I’m saying we shouldn’t population control humans in the name of environmental protection, because ultimately, the average human life is more valuable than the average deer life. I support going vegan, but we still need to clean up the mess we made in the past with population control, and our only feasible way to do this in most cases is by hunting, and if we have to kill an animal to protect the local environment, why wouldn’t we want the deer to be hunted by experienced and well trained hunters who can make the death of the animal almost instant, and why should we let their body go to waste if we have to kill them anyway.
You don't have to kill them to protect the environment and what you say about hunters as efficient and precise killers is incongruent with existing statistics. "I support going vegan" - are you vegan then? Clinging to a violent status quo while refusing to even so much as acknowledge the moral worth of its victims, because you feel as though they are so beneath you that you can take their lives and their bodies at will, is not something I would expect from a leftist, or even a decent person to begin with. Bad take.
You quite literally do have to kill them to protect the environment though. Deer are highly destructive. And your only other proposals are to reintroduce wolves so they can be torn to shreds or sterilise huge swaths of deer. You can care about animals and understand that sometimes you have to kill them. It’s the only practical solution in the case of deer in GB.
My original argument was that you can go vegan for environmental reasons and that’s a significantly easier sell to most people than trying to convince them that killing animals for any reason at all is wrong. You have tried to convince me that it is wrong for experienced hunters and foresters in Great Britain to kill deer to prevent some of the destruction they cause to forests, but you can’t convince me because your moral views have no room for leeway and refuse to acknowledge that sometimes animals must die.
I never said "for any reason at all". I said killing innocents against their will is wrong. I'm not necessarily opposed to all forms of euthanasia. A sterilisation program would not be worse than slaughtering countless individuals and neither would be reintroducing predators that you hunted to extinction.
But it’s not practical to sterilise hundreds of thousands of deer. It may be more moral to sterilise them than kill them. But you would struggle to implement that in anyway that could have an effect. The deer would reproduce faster than you could sterilise them without a cost in the billions. As well as that, reintroducing predators like wolves to a country isn’t as simple as dumping some wolves in a forest and hoping for the best, it takes decades of work to even get close to proper reintroduction of a species that was removed 500 years ago.