Vegan Caller Wants Sam To Be MORE Of A Soy Boy
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 жов 2024
- In this Majority Report clip, a vegan calls in to discuss veganism.
We need your help to keep providing free videos! Support the Majority Report's video content by going to / majorityreport
Watch the Majority Report live M-F at 12 p.m. EST at / samseder or listen via daily podcast at Majority.FM
Download our FREE app: majorityapp.com
SUPPORT the show by becoming a member: jointhemajority...
LIKE us on Facebook: / majorityreport
FOLLOW us on Twitter: / majorityfm
SUBSCRIBE to us on UA-cam: / samseder
I always see people agreeing that animal cruelty is bad, but then shrugging and applying logical fallacies like appeal to nature etc. Just accept we are all hypocrite when it comes to animal suffering, we all want to reduce it
yaaaaas
"Appeal to nature" is a great example of why the categorising of arguments as logical fallacies should be seen as a logical fallacy in and of itself. We have evolved to consume meat and the proof is that we can digest it and derive enough nutrients from it to live well past fecundity. If it kills you it'll kill you in your 50s onwards, unless you stuff your face with it but fruit and nuts will also kill you too f you do that. An appeal to nature is a perfectly sound justification for eating meat - especially as a shield against morality arguments - but of course it isn't a justification for rapacious capitalistic over production and I think it's unfair that you're kind of conflating the two.
@Muhammad Pope Humans are impulse driven creatures. I don't know what you even think you mean by saying a cow has more value in death than in life. If you're going to use currency value as a means of deciding what a creature is worth then it's kind of dumb to talk about life at all. Things you buy and sell are immediately stripped of non-material value once you give them material value.
@@wabznasm9660 wow, you just replaced the evergreen "appeal to nature" fallacy with the even more hilarious "possibility fallacy": it's possible to survive on meat, therefore we should eat meat.
I'm not a hypocrite at least.
This guy needs to really work out how to give his arguments to people who don't think like he does. I appreciate he cares a lot, though.
Going vegan does make jizz taste better so there's that 💁 lol
I feel the same way about Sam.
So he'd grossly exaggerate the facts like most vegans do?
@@deadams8905
wait... do you mean that if you're vegan you enjoy the taste of jizz more, or is it that your vegan diet makes your jizz more tasty?
Edit: and secondly... is jizz even allowed under a vegan diet?
Vegans are annoyingly preachy. Also The PC SJW's who force their beliefs onto others are a Cancer to the Left
We care about the environment, the animals, the workers, and public health, right? Veganism addresses all of our concerns fundamentally.
It really doesn't atm but it can
Intensive farming is the problem
@@DanielJones-xj9nt I may be misreading your comment but do you think that "I like meat" is a good argument against the violence, suffering and death imposed on dogs, pigs or other animals?
@@DanielJones-xj9nt ... (unless you live in a food desert or something of course)
@@mfpope7431
_"But I’m guessing your response is just to spout pseudo science, saying that humans don’t need meat and that we are actually herbivores"_
No, humans are omnivores biologically. But we are not obligate ominvores. To claim that would be making an appeal to nature fallacy.
_" I think humans need animal products to live healthy lives"_
Does that mean that vegetarians all in fact all unhealthy if not more unhealthy than non-vegetarians?
" risks associated with not consuming enough protein" there is no risk, unless you literally eat onions and watermelons exclusively
People pretend suffering doesn't matter until it's happening to them.
Anarcho Vegan bingo
It's their choice if they want to eat meat. You can't force them not to. Just educate them on veganism
"People pretend..." go debate a shark on that, it doesn't even pretand "suffering doesn't matter"
homo sapiens is an omnivore, like for ex. elk which is known to "consciously" (on purpose/not as an accident) eat rodents
As an anarchist I support you and your cause
@@westcoastrenegade8594 I educate plenty. Nobody has the right to exploit, cause suffering to, or kill other beings. The way of the cruel hairless ape is coming back to bight us in the ass causing the Anthropocene.
Get Earthling Ed on this show. He will have a genuine conversation with everyone on the importance of this issue.
Ed would destroy Sam's whole crew in a debate regarding this issue ...lol.
Nathan Edwards Ed is very good at talking to open minded strangers and making veganism friendly and appealing. He is less skilled at debating IMHO. I don't think he would fare well in a debate with Sam and crew.
Nathan Edwards I hope they don't
earthling ed is good at confusing unsuspecting pedestrians, havent ever seen him having a genuine conversation, where he doesnt just ask question after question to frame a discussion to his liking. tbh i find him quite annoying, similar to steven crowder. i do however very much support veganism. i think its good if we care for animals and the environment. i just doubt that confronting and confusing people is very effective in reaching this goal.
@@thestonylein I don't know if you've watched many of his videos? Any American with means has no real argument against going vegan. I'm a meat eater but I'm just weak 😂
I really wish the caller was better prepared and was able to articulate his ideas more effectively. I think he had good ideas, but I didn't really understand his points. "It's what we're supposed to do" is not an argument. The morality thing didn't make sense to me, there was nothing to back it up. I am a vegan too, and am still glad he called in. It's great Sam let him have this time on his show.
agreed. Being nicer and more convincing helps. I agree with what he said for the most part but he made eating no animals sound like a drag lol.
Lately I have been eating better... But guys like him sound like they would still yell at me and tell me I'm not doing good enough and it's kind of demoralizing. Baby steps! We'll get there. Sorry but you can't just push us too hard. It's like quitting smoking lol. Gotta ease off of it. Not just cold turkey.
Soyborne. Born, made, and undone by the soy. Exactly! Terms like « animal cruelty » should not be used lightly. Is fishing animal cruelty? Let’s say with nets and no fishing hooks. And eating eggs, is that cruelty as well? I’d be all for removing beef and porc from grocery stores. But what if poultry is dealt with in a human way, like no cutting their beaks off, and it’s not polluting much, what then? I think we should aim for balance with saving the earth and ourselves as the ultimate goal. I’m in the camp of less meat, and have it certified as meeting high levels in how its handled and processed. Few went on a rant there!
simuliid I actually think he made some pretty good points. I also imagine it’s not easy to call into this show, even when Sam agrees with you.
totally agree! i think sam and jamie were very open to the subject and didnt try to make the guy look like a fanatic. was kind of a refreshing discussion on the topic, since it wasnt very hostile.
Good comments guys. The caller is right about humans not really needing to eat the meat of a dead cow, or pig or chicken. And how a lot of that stuff is actually kind of bad for us in a lot of ways.
My brother almost died from diabetes recently. He was eating too much sugary stuff. Too much sausage stuff. Too much restaurant stuff... He always had a "I'm tough" attitude. Like he could handle it or something... Eyeah... Still bad for ya and if you're unlucky it will catch up to ya. As a result he had a mild heart attack, had to spend a week in the hospital, and they did surgery. It was fucked... He lived though and now he has to take pills all of the time and it's kind of a drag.
Ever since he's been eating less, lost 70 pounds, eating less carbs, less sugar, less red meat, less fat, less salt etc etc. He's gotten used to this new life change and he's saved a lot of money and looks/feels better. He's also taking walks every night for about 20 minutes. A lot of his meds are being reduced too because he's getting better.
So he's winning the shit out of this diabetes thing lol. Granted some damage from it will likely always be a annoyance for him which sucks but hey... All the more reason to shift from a unhealthy life style to a more healthy one.
Right now we cook things like spaghetti with ground turkey instead of hamburger. No sausage. Tons of onion types and bell pepper types. Low carb sauces. Low carb noodles. And it's not bad at all! That's the most unhealthy thing we eat probably.
Then you can do chili or tacos with ground turkey. Remember to purchase low carb stuff to go with it. They also sell many types of salt that's healthier too. Many other spices as well.
Chicken stuff aint bad. Certain cereals are healthier. Try to go to low fat milk and then to almond milk. Eat on a more scheduled basis. Don't over eat. Ever feeling hungry when you probably shouldn't eat? A little banana or some nuts of some kind can hold you over. Or just drink a ton of water to fill your stomach as that can help.
Try to do salads and eat greens. Surprising how many veggies can be made to taste better if you prepare them a certain way.
And you can still eat something kind of unhealthy once a week or every other week. Just don't go crazy. Keep this stuff up and it will be easier and easier to get into even more healthier habits than that.
And finally... Don't get bored. Have lots of hobbies. I'm really into video games, nature, pet keeping, science, reading, guitar, movies, shows, exploring, learning new things etc etc. If you're always busy with something interesting then you wont be sitting around hungry as often lol.
I know it's hard some times but these gradual changes are pretty good. And for those who don't want to because they are afraid they will never eat ice cream again or whatever. Just remember that that's just life. Some doors close at some point and then guess what? Other doors open : )
Sorry for the long one there... Just thought it was good advice on how to make a gradual shift to a healthier body lol.
"As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields." - Leo Tolstoy
As long as there are central banks, there will be both.
Lol
I am for the vegan guy's ideas about assuming responsibility and doing something.
Nope. Sam was right, sorry. Just think of how chattle slavery was abolished way back when: Surely couldn't've been done if it wasn't for those brave and wise people who saw how bad things are - and in response bravely sat on ther asses waiting for systemic change to happen for no apperant reason.
@Xela Flow is it possible that personal choice and collective choice aren't completely seperate things?
@Xela Flow I would suggest you watch "Why I’m No Longer Vegan" by our fellow comrade Mexie.
We're gonna assume responsibility for a problem we didn't create?
It's the corporations who are torturing animals and polluting, and I will be the one who will be punished for that? No thanks.
Unless we force the corporations to do something about the mess they made, nothing will change. You going vegan won't change ANYTHING. Literally useless.
I see veganism as a tool used by corporations to push the blame on us and divert.
@@NBST28 I would suggest you watch "Why I’m No Longer Vegan" by our fellow comrade Mexie.
Veganism is a political issue. We should be kind to animals because it's the right thing to do. The right thing to do is not to be cruel to others, not to disregard others' feelings and suffering. We want justice in all political arenas. Nobody asks why should we be against racism or mysoginy, we all know why. It's just hard for people to let go of their privileges so they make excuses, just like conservatives do. It's the same arguments - words that don't mean anything, silly excuses, copouts. As political creatures we should walk the walk in all political aspects of life.
Holy shit, you people are mentally ill. Dont breed and never say those things in public.
Agreed. A true progressive is a vegan, I would say. Who's more exploited than farm animals? They're like the ultimate underdog, oppressed group in society.
@@karangtavana1283 too late, I already bred and my daughter is vegan, mwahahahaha!!
@@AndreasDevig definitely. There's not a whole lot to learn from Israeli politics, but Israeli progressives who are serious about, are almost always vegan or at least have gone past the excuses stages and simply say that veganism is right and correct even if they are not yet there.
Anyone who isn't a communist isn't a real progressive. Your diet is fine and all, but you won't change a damn thing, and will manage to piss off about half the population in the process of accomplishing nothing. Keep attacking individuals though, I'll be waiting for the death of your enormous ego whilst eating bacon.
going vegan is a lot easier than most people think, I highly recommend it
🌱❤️
@Godspeed non issue. these animals are bred for the sole purpose of exploitation and murder. Reduce the demand, reduce the amount they get bred, reduce their overall food need. It scales
@Godspeed so do plants. And you don't have to torture murder and enslave sentient beings to eat plants
@Godspeed well ignoring the fact that they have no central nervous system and definitely don't feel pain, let's assume they did. Vegan diets contribute to far far less plant death than omni diets, so the ethical things to do would still be to go vegan.
@Godspeed like I just said, vegan diets contribute to far far less plant death than omni diets. The vast majority of farmed plants go to feeding force bred livestock. If this is an issue you care about you should go vegan
The comments for this video are thoughtful and educational. I love Majority Report viewers/listeners!
Check out Weston A Price.
@@lawrencebooth4279 a quack dentist from the 1930s whose foundation wants you to consume raw dairy, a major risk factor for all sorts of bacterial and viral infections? no thanks.
Weston A. Price Foundation is a dishonest lobbying group for meat and dairy.
@@keedt got it do not drink breast milk from your mother she will give you bacteria and viral infections. It could not be safe. What?
@@gyrate4 Ad hominem
If we can reduce suffering without hurting ourselves, we should.
Yes.
Okay how? In theory yes but in practice how?
@@kap1618 Are you serious?
I agree. I understand the moral argument and in many ways I want to help, but as a college student who is always swamped in work, it seems me switching to a vegan diet would be something I can't maintain in a healthy way. I don't have time to research and prepare foods, but if I ever find myself in the position post-college I would absolutely try it.
@@yScribblezHD It's simple, beans, rice, bananas, pbjs, etc. but if you struggle with taste cravings for some of the stuff we've been brought up into addiction on, it's becoming easier everyday in that regard too thanks to more animal product alternatives coming onto the market...
I just had some vegan mac 'n cheese (3mins) and threw in a few plant-based sausages (90secs) - all prepped via microwave (in times shown in parentheses) a few hours ago.
HappyCow (mobile app) is very helpful.
Anyhow at least you're not full of shit lol, that's step 1
Invite mic the vegan , dr Garth davis or the director of what the health to educate the audience please
Vegans need to start a movement of mass human suicides in order to save the rest of the species and biosphere
The one problem Mic has in discussing veganism is that he doesn't recognize that his core assumption is a religious belief. He believes it is obvious that animals have a right to life just as humans do. When a listener disagrees with him on that point, he just repeats it but slowly, using smaller words. It's painfully obvious that he interprets disagreement as an indication that his listener has misunderstood the point, and may be a bit dense.
@@stevethecatcouch6532 Hooboy. Look, vegans do not think animals have a "right to life." What they think is that the unnecessary suffering inflicted on animals cannot be justified by the short-lived mouth pleasure of eating them. For instance, we do not need bacon. But those pigs are living in the misery of extreme confinement for their entire lives just so people can enjoy the temporary mouth pleasure of a BLT for 60-90 seconds in the morning. That is unnecessary cruelty. It's not a religious belief that these animals live lives of extreme confinement and misery, it's a provable fact. The question is, do you have any empathy at all for their suffering?
@@kevinmckenna5682Unless you believe Mic thinks for all vegans, why did you interpret what I wrote,"Mic believes X" to mean "All vegans believe X"?
@@kevinmckenna5682 "The question is, do you have any empathy at all for their suffering?:
Why have you changed the subject from Mic's faith based beliefs about the rights of animals to the degree to which I empathize with pigs? There is no connection.
Sam telling that vegan not to make his argument about morality is incredibly hypocritical.
Not really when the world is largely hypocritical. We live in an amoral world. You can convince an individual based upon their own morality but convincing massive amounts of people based on morality is incredibly unlikely, especially if that's how they make money.
I don't see how it is hypocritical, since the caller didn't convince Sam. Sam was offering constructive criticism to persuade others to eat a plant based diet. I have been ineffective at convincing people, too. Some people don't want to be convinced, and some people are not yet ready to be convinced.
@@hematadopormenos Most vegans believe morality is subjective, just so you're aware. Objective morality is for religious zealots. Vegans believe in subjective morality because they wish to maximize the well being and minimize the suffering of sentient creatures. Well being and suffering are of course measured subjectively.
It was weird. All the arguments Sam makes about how society should work are moral arguments. Children should not be separated from their parents on the border? Moral. Medicare for all to make sure that everyone has access to medical care? Moral. And so on. This argument is as moral as all the arguments these people make on the show constantly. The caller missed the chance to give the obvious answer to the question of what humans are supposed to do. He should have said that humans, unlike other animals, have moral agency and the choice we can make, and the one we should make, is to lessen animal suffering. And when Sam talked about the difficulty of making moral arguments, and how humans are just animals, the caller should have pointed out that the same is true for things like ethnic tribalism. Anyway, I'm not a vegetarian, but I find the debate interesting.
@@joshmargulis3750 In other words, there is no convincing pro vegan argument. Why didn't Sam just say that?
In response to the comment, "our individual acts don't make a difference", I could not disagree more. I don't think she would have this response to any other issue- racism, sexism, climate change etc- it absolutely makes a difference to the person being oppressed. With this line of thinking, why stop a murderer- you can't stop all murderers, so why bother? This response is irresponsible and callous. Additionally, consuming animals is NOT A NEUTRAL ACT. Everytime we purchase animal products we a creating a demand and funding this industry. The environmental impact is NOT NEUTRAL. As the caller stated, animal agriculture is the leading cause of global warming (greater than fossil fuels). Lower estimates are 18% (per the UN Climate Report- only accounts for methane contribution). Upper estimates are 51% (per WorldWatch- includes methane, CO2, and nitrous oxide). The methane comes from ruminant (cow) digestion and manure decomposition. We are completely overpopulated by farmed animals. Scary statistic worth considering- of all the mammals in the US: 65% are farmed animals, 30% are human, and ONLY 5% ARE WILD ANIMALS. The CO2 comes from clearing trees (think Amazon Rainforest) for grazing and growing crops to feed farmed animals. The nitrous oxide comes from pouring heavy amounts of nitrogen fertilizer croplands (which makes its way to the oceans- leading to ocean dead zones). Additionally, we need to stop fishing and promoting pescatarian diets. There is currently 90% decline in predator fish due to advanced satellite technology to catch these fish. Prey fish are being caught in the wild largely by bottom trawling and longlines which destroy the ocean floor at a rate 150 times worse than rainforest deforestation. 70% of the animals caught in nets are not the target species and are thrown back into the ocean, dead. Even the more "responsible" fishing practices destroy fragile ecosystems. We need to take this (ALL OF THIS) seriously. If we don't it will be at the peril of ourselves, the animals, and our children, who will inherit the earth.
Interesting.
Stopping a murderer saves the life of that one person. No animal is saved from any one person going vegan.
In response to the comment, "our individual acts don't make a difference", I could not disagree more. I don't think she would have this response to any other issue- racism, sexism, climate change etc- it absolutely makes a difference to the person being oppressed. With this line of thinking, why stop a murderer- you can't stop all murderers, so why bother? This response is irresponsible and callous. Additionally, consuming animals is NOT A NEUTRAL ACT. Everytime we purchase animal products we a creating a demand and funding this industry. The environmental impact is NOT NEUTRAL. As the caller stated, animal agriculture is the leading cause of global warming (greater than fossil fuels). Lower estimates are 18% (per the UN Climate Report- only accounts for methane contribution). Upper estimates are 51% (per WorldWatch- includes methane, CO2, and nitrous oxide). The methane comes from ruminant (cow) digestion and manure decomposition. We are completely overpopulated by farmed animals. Scary statistic worth considering- of all the mammals in the US: 65% are farmed animals, 30% are human, and ONLY 5% ARE WILD ANIMALS. The CO2 comes from clearing trees (think Amazon Rainforest) for grazing and growing crops to feed farmed animals. The nitrous oxide comes from pouring heavy amounts of nitrogen fertilizer croplands (which makes its way to the oceans- leading to ocean dead zones). Additionally, we need to stop fishing and promoting pescatarian diets. There is currently 90% decline in predator fish due to advanced satellite technology to catch these fish. Prey fish are being caught in the wild largely by bottom trawling and longlines which destroy the ocean floor at a rate 150 times worse than rainforest deforestation. 70% of the animals caught in nets are not the target species and are thrown back into the ocean, dead. Even the more "responsible" fishing practices destroy fragile ecosystems. We need to take this (ALL OF THIS) seriously. If we don't it will be at the peril of ourselves, the animals, and our children, who will inherit the earth.
Also Sam's answer about "What we're supposed to do" can be put to any moral question.
Yes, that was sort of his point though.
PSA: Fish feel pain and dont want to die.
Nathan Edwards agree
PSA: Plants feel pain and don't want to die.
Anthony NonApplicable if you cared about plants , then you’d only eat them instead of the animals that eat the plants. That is the 10% rule in biology and why eating animals harms more plants. Will you go vegan as a plants rights activist?
@@andrewnguyen3312 You're wrong bucko. I only eat meat because I care so much about plants. I want corporations to stop torturing these poor defenseless plants, so I am voting with my wallet by only eating meat. I will not stop consuming meat until all plant predators have been eradicated. Join the fight for the purest life, eat more meat.
Anthony NonApplicable most of the plants we grow goes to animals lol , please do some research , ie. The 10% rule in biology
The ethical argument for veganism is sound. The environmental argument, within the context of our current food system, is irrefutable. I'm unconvinced by the argument that it optimizes individual human health.
Watch the film What The Health on Netflix. In addition to being enlightening, it is very entertaining.
The ethical argument may be compelling to you, and you can create a valid argument for it, but it isn't sound. I don't agree that humans are different than animals, we are just a type of animal. And a moral imperative within an ethical argument doesn't work (c.f. Spinoza). You would be hard pressed to prove that animals eating other animals for food is inherently wrong. And saying humans can think about it while animals can't is creating a scenario where humans are an exceptional, external class of beings outside of nature...which is a religious argument...hard sell for atheists and naturalists.
How is clear cutting forests and using up massive reserves of fresh water either ethical or environmental? Do a little research on how agricultural farming works before you put your foot in your mouth next time.
@@stevendohse That's not a hard sell at all. Morality is a human construct, of course you cannot talk about the ethics of animal behavior. Animals do a *lot* of things we as humans consider unethical for us to do. If anything this is a much easier argument to make to someone who doesn't believe in god because then you aren't trying to argue from objective morality.
BTW if you can make a valid argument for something, then the argument is sound.
@@Junebug89 About a valid argument vs. a sound argument, you are incorrect. They are not the same.
Interesting that Sam took the "it's subjective" approach. If that's the case, how would Sam argue about the moral superiority of progressive over the extreme right?
You're comparing meat consumption to far right extremism 🤔
Other progressive frame it that morally superior thing, but I haven't seen Sam ever do that.
His goal his to help as many people as possible, doesn't care how they get there, or if the people who help them out are morally superior or not.
Moralizing about meat is perhaps the most destructive and least effective way of bringing about change.
@@Onus6688 no, I'm saying that if the morality of eating meat is subjective, couldn't one argue that the morality of any position on any subject is subjective?
@@Onus6688 although, I could draw a few comparisons between the two.
@@monster762 yes but things have context 😛
I switched to a plant based diet and lost a crap ton of weight. Never looking back. Nothing wrong with cutting down on our meat consumption. Not only for the animals, the environment, or for health but for the workers in slaughter houses and the terrible conditions they work with. Even Sam has brought it up in the past.
what about all our pets that eat meat?
@@Jeminai77 lab grown meat would be a great solution for that but also we need to stop breading animals as pets
@@Jeminai77 Dogs can be vegan but cats can't. Vegan humans have been proven to have more years in their life and more life in their years, ie fewer health issues.
@@luv4vrv if the majority of people live longer that compounds over population. i mean, we are living longer anyway (although less so in the US depending on what stats u read, M4A!).
i havnt owned a dog since i was a kid, are they considered fussy to the point of starving if offered no meat diets? not like cats where they start hunting wildlife? just not sure how realistic it is for all dogs.
@@Jeminai77 Yes. I could kill myself to combat overpopulation. But I think I'd be more useful living and convincing as many people as possible to reduce their carbon footprint by becoming vegan.
Can anyone imagine how glorious it would be for someone like Dr. Michael Greger to be invited to the show?
Email Sam. He has booked so many guests from people's suggestions.
Especially if they have written a book or lengthy article about something recently.
@@andygreg293 thanks! I shall try.
His name popped into my head immediately for this show.
Yes! Greger would be awesome. Greger's approach is more likely to change people's diet habits than this callers. Greger focuses purely on health, which I think makes it an easier sell for people.
N S yea bc people are dogmatic about animal rights bc they want to be good people
Imo it would be more feasible & likely successful to get the populace as a whole to transition/incorporate "lab grown meat" in their daily diet in place of "real meat", than telling them to give up meat altogether. Guys heart is in the right place tho.
100% agree that is going to be the future of the meat industry and honestly nobody should complain with that the vegans should be pleased and the meat lovers should be pleased well as long as it tastes good
I think you could persuade more people to veg out based on health and self-interest rather than animal rights. I am reversing gout and hypertension by being vegan and I lost 35 pounds and counting.
Fanatical preaching vegans like are the worst. If their brains weren’t so damaged by this wonderful diet they would realize that it’s better to focus on finding a replacement to meat with lower price to make raising animals less profitable instead of shaming/forcing majority of population to give it up
luv4vrv no it wouldn’t help much. Only fat americans and other first worlders care about losing weight, people in the third world don’t and their population grows the fastest
Most of the vegans I know irl are awesome folks and great comrades. They have their convictions and I respect that immensely, and they are generally respectful of the consumer choices of others. I, myself, have been vegan before and may well be vegan again, and I generally agree with the all of the arguments for veganism. But the attitude of this caller, and many of the vegan crusaders in the comments here are extremely counterproductive to their aims. If vegans truly want to move toward a society free of animal exploitation/abuse/suffering and environmental devastation that threatens the viability of many ecosystems and species, including our own, it would behoove them to make the focus of their agitation the powerful and oppressive institutions which actually facilitate this widespread suffering and destruction, rather than other individual consumers who are largely powerless to create broad systemic change on their own; who may have a myriad of reasons, valid or invalid, for not already participating in veganism already, and who may likely be offput by attacks on their moral character and the expression of an all-or-nothing mentality which frames any consumptive changes that are piecemeal or gradual rather than radical and total as insufficient, when in fact such piecemeal changes would actually constitute, functionally, the same result that veganism aims to achieve (namely a decrease in consumer demand for products which necessitate animal exploitation/abuse/suffering and environmental destruction). By welcoming folks such as Sam and Jamie, who are making strides in the morally righteous direction, even if their consumptive habits are at present imperfect, vegan purists stand to achieve greater tangible gains for their movement as these allies whose consumptive practices are imperfect may feel encouraged to change more and more of their consumptive habits over time, and ad society itself could likely trend in directions that would facilitate the ease of engaging in vegan or vegan adjacent lifestyles, quite possibly decreasing the overall scale of animal suffering and environmental harm to a greater degree than a movement consisting solely of vegan purists who insist that everyone in the movement must practice exactly what they preach. Again, this isn't, by any means a criticism I have against or even most vegans. It's simply a recommendation for a strategy that could be more effective for a movement concerned for animal welfare/rights/liberation), given some of the rhetoric I'm seeing here in the comments section. Solidarity, comrades.
Vegans are respectful of the choices of others?? That is the exact opposite of my experience.
@@MrJonsonville5 Yeah, it appears my experience is unusual in that regard :-/
The question, "how do we know what we're supposed to do" is a very juvenile question because asking that question implies that you don't understand how we construct moral systems.
We know we shouldn't be farming and holocausting animals because we wouldn't want it done to us.
If there was anything on this planet that killed as much as we do, we'd call it a plague.
@Robert Johnson so your argument is "its ok to holocaust animals because we're superior and they can't do it to us."
You sure this is the kind of reasoning you want to go with?
That's literally the language of psychopathic personality disorder.
You may find it a "juvenile" question, but that's just a silly way to look at it. We construct moral systems in many different ways. Not just one. Which way is the right one?
"We know we shouldn't be farming and holocausting animals because we wouldn't want it done to us" is not a universal statement. It's an opinion of yours, of which I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you have some evidence or systematic logic to back up.
The fact of the matter is that we do NOT know what we are "supposed" to do. We make our systems and our societal norms, and then we live with them. If you feel like you have a perfectly constructed moral system that is universally efficacious and appealing, then by all means, share this magical formula with me and the hundreds of moral philosophers throughout the last 5 millennia so that we may finally come to a consensus on this topic.
@@bobbymccullough3210 this entire word salad can be summed up as "morality is subjective" which is a bit of a vacuous statement.
I'm not making a claim of objective morality. In our current society animal abuse is illegal. Even beastiality is illegal in most states and that's the act of exploiting an animal for self pleasure... kinda like the basis for eating bacon.
We agree that destroying the planet is bad and we shouldn't do that. Animal agriculture is a major driving factor for environmental destruction and climate change.
Based on what we already agree on, veganism is not much further from what we already agree on... subjectively.
@@TribeByNoire Well yes, morality being subjective is the entire point. You calling it a "vacuous statement" or a "word salad" (isn't every paragraph a word salad?) doesn't do anything but demonstrate poor judgment on your end, or an unwillingness to have a good faith discussion.
Yes, there are systems in place that seem to be based on morality. But have you ever stopped to consider why? On the one hand, you have a generally agreed upon standard that people in a particular socio-economic context at any given time will enforce. On the other hand, these standards are put in place **precisely because people want to do these things**. Moral systems do not become universal, which you agree with. We can stop there, because that's my point.
But you go on to say that given our systems, one more jump is... what exactly? There's a reason that bestiality and animal cruelty are illegal, but slaughtering animals for food is not. You should consider why this is, because according to your logic, it seems to me that we should have all seen reason and jumped to veganism long ago, and that hasn't been anywhere close to the case.
@@bobbymccullough3210 you've made a lot of basic descriptive claims here, but I'm not sure where the disagreement is.
We both agree morality is subject. I'm making an argument for the position of veganism based on the shared beliefs and goals we currently have in our society... which is basically what Sam does on this show everyday.
When Sam asks "how do you know what we should do?" He should already know the answer because knowing what we should do an arguing for it is what his show is based on... data collection, critical thinking, and debate.
That is my point.
Truly the best audience for a channel. No one seems to be offended or insecure by this. Speaks for the kind of message and values this show consistently expounds. Very proud subscriber!
Also, shout out to all the Vegans. An oddly attacked but much appreciated group in our species.
@AnimeInk Power thanks for your kind words! to everyone else: just ignore the racist swaggerer mad though. he has nothing to do with veganism.
@@thestonylein omg a leftist calling me a racist how will I ever recover!
A holocaust is slaughter on a mass scale. If you dont think the systematic slaughtering of Billions of animals a year isnt a holocaust, I would love to know what fits your definition.
most people who attack veganism or vegetarianism (not as common these days but was when I was growing up to pick on the veggie) do it because their trying to justify their own actions that they probably don't think are totally justifyable. Sam made a really good point about places where the people might own a farm and have a couple of pigs, rear them and kill them in october, or they go out and shoot a dear. But most people who eat meat don't kill animals, alot of people don't want to kill the animal they just want to eat it. Some people the pain thinking about it is too much and so mockering is the easiest way to deflect.
Not the best arguments. When talking about veganism ethics should be what is focused on, since it is an ethical stance, a moral philosophy.
Basically boils down to ‘if you could live in a way that avoids/reduces unnecessary killing or exploitation of animals, would you?’
If yes, congratulations you’re vegan at heart, please take steps to align your actions with your beliefs. If no, how do you justify continuing to contribute to the suffering of animals?
Gee Schwag of course you have to justify instinctual preferences when it infringes on the rights of others. What a ridiculous way to think. If someone’s instinctual preference was rape it would not justify it in any way.
It is immoral to kill an animal for the same reason it is immoral to kill a human; because they can feel pain and have a will to live.
Listening to this guy talk about Veganism is the worst endorsement for Veganism.
I'm disappointed in Jamie, trillions of fish killed a year, roughly 100.000,000 sharks killed in the by catch which dont get used, that's not including whales and dolphins, and let's not even talk about how chickens are treated.
I was a bit disappointed with her as well. She still eats seafood, but then acknowledged that fish are going extinct, which she helps continue via her consumption.
Did you notice she thinks people's personal choices don't make a difference? Almost like she wants to absolve herself from being part of the problem.
@@NS-uc3by absolutely, its was such a wierd back and forth. And Sam... well.... ☹
Yeah, people just don't get it. I get the argument for fish all the damn time. Our oceans are overfished, we don't even need to eat fish so why do it? Plus there's all kinds of pollutants in fish.
50% of all plastic in the ocean is fishing nets. Everyone should research this statistic.
I'm disappointed in you. Billions of bananas a year grown in monoculture fields reeking havoc on our environment. All the deforestation and dead animals, just so your dumb ass can eat a banana. How immoral of you. Sooo disappointing!
The reasons we value and cultivate human rights, should also apply to animal rights. And I'd go another step further in claiming that, the root of both human and animal rights, is 'sentient rights'. If a creature feels; then it has the right to be respected, preserved, and treated with dignity. It has the right to be free from violence. We can reason that every creature that feels, can likely feel pain - and logically desires to be free from pain. So why should we build a society that only preserves human rights? Aren't animals just as worthy to live in peace? Arnt all sentient creatures worthy of rights?
yeah thats great Daniel, and ill accept that on one condition: all the bleeding-heart vegans out there trying to "save the animals" apply these coveted "animal rights" to ALL animals no matter how big, small, ugly, or even parasitic
but you wont do that, therefore calling for animal rights is nothing but a contradiction
i mean i think Squid are fascinating animals, and while would never attempt to harm one myself, im not gonna turn down a delicious and healthy plate of sauteed Calamari either
Also, plants react to stimuli, send warning signals, and have defense mechanisms to prevent them from being eaten. They don't have the exact same neurological structures as animals, but they have some degree of sentience as well.
Sentience is an arbitrary distinction that doesn't improve your argument. You're just deciding on a standard, and plenty of people are going to simply reject it from the beginning.
@@Ematched i think you were replying to me. Im curious, why do you think human rights are worthy of preservation?
The things you mentioned are not inherent rights (such things don't exist). Your argument for sentience is arbitrary.
Zoo's need to be Abolished
Because you want all the tigers to die?
poponachtschnecke That’s what sanctuaries are for.
I agree with almost everything he said and yet after listening to him, I’ve never been less compelled to go vegan
He was nervous. Cut him a break. He had the courage to call and brought up an important topic.
@@bipedal675 I get it if you're nervous, but thats not the problem here. I just found his self-righteousness to be completely annoying.
There's a way to do this where you can speak to the sensibilities of average people and still get the message across. However, you're certainly not going to get a morality argument across to people who have been eating burgers their whole lives.
"What animals are supposed to do..." He says that with no irony as if we aren't also animals.
We are animals so why is it okay to rape and stab cows for burgers, but it’s not okay to rape and stab dogs and brown people??
Alfredo Gonzalez. Apparently it must mean that we’ve been learning some lessons though generations of living together. There still are people who behave like animals and will not think twice about doing the things you mentioned. All because the dog or person is different and doesn’t reflect the attackers race or gender. Animals will not learn the lessons of humans but they do understand that their meat consumption is a necessity. We have evolved our understanding of what food is down to the nutrients and toxins. Arguments that we are animals work in cases displaying barbarism but this is just an excuse because some people are unwilling to change.
@@nejolo9563 See, I meant it more in the sense that- whether we like it or not - we are part of a great weblike ecosystem which is really just an elaborate exchange of energy (from plant, to animal, to animal, to fungi and bacteria), and thinking that we are so above everything because we have "intelligence" (other animals have their own intelligence we just don't understand it) is ridiculous. Factory farming has taken us out of that connection (in the way a smaller, family farm wouldn't) and eradicating any animal consumption whatsoever would only further that severing. It would also mean the death of all of those domestic species since no one would need them anymore.
I think that we shouldn't aspire to an only plant based diet, but to a greater understanding of how to gain our food in a way closer to the functions of nature (as in: smaller farms run by people who care for the animals but also understand our relationship to them), and try less to act as if we are not a part in the great interweaving of life as death as we (in English-speaking, European-descended countries) seem to think we are.
@@alfredogonzalez8735 It's okay in the same way it's okay for a bear to eat a deer while it's heart is still pumping and is trying to get away with it's intestines hanging out of it's abdomen. At least we wait for the animal to die before we eat it. I'm not sure why you're comparing brown people to dogs, but we value human life over other species life because survival is hardwired into our genes, the same as any other animal on the planet. We tend to protect dogs because they are more valuable to us as work and protection animals than as animals used for food. Also, who the hell is raping cows and dogs? Do you mean breeding them? Letting them procreate so that their species survives?
@@alfredogonzalez8735 Can you provide a link to the rape to cows? Also, some cultures do eat canines. Are those cultures any less important or any more abusive than western or American culture?
When I saw the title; I was expecting a really aggressive Vegan and Sam and others to just make fun of him. Well pleasantly surprised. Good discussion.
Sam is a smart person. The vegan movement would really benefit from Sam going vegan. It matters what people do individually 100%. 50 billion land animals slaughtered annually.
Sam isnt very smart tho
if you’re against the death penalty you should be against eating animals. simple as that.
Australian Ranger here, most species extinction is not because of consumption and land clearing. 99% of species have gone extinct from a plethora of factors, genetic drift, inbreeding, invasive species etc. (bearing in mind 99% of species that have ever lived have gone extinct). We keep things like Pandas going who are evolutionary dead ends to acquire funds for non-poster animals. Yes, farming practices are inhuman and unethical a lot of the time. Farming has caused us to eliminate less "valuable" farming species and gentrified all of farming. I.e almost all of sheep farming in Australia is Merino sheep. But as Jamie said we need more than people who try to shame people into eating less meat. Its only one small part of the solution. How do you change poor farming practices? Regulations. How do you prevent illegal land clearing? regulations. How do you stop these things ultimately? You remove the 1% pushing for profits. Cut the head off of the snake. Or the pig. Might be a much more apt analogy.
I empathize with the guy but aim bigger. I don't need people to lecture me about animal ethics, when I'm out in the desert 15 hours from civilization saving animals this guy doesn't even know exist.
I think the caller is appealing to the people who are not 15 hours from civilization. The world is fucked partly because so few people do what you do but mostly because so many of us consume in a destructive way. Surely the first step is to reduce our impact as individuals.
What a load of bullshit. Australian Biologists and koalas would disagree.
Unfortunately, many people resent being shamed or made to feel guilty about their habits, whether it's food, substances such as drugs or alcohol, or around the issue of fossil fuel usage. Often it seems that trying to shame others into changing, causes a disproportional opposite reaction, even in those who would otherwise be supportive or indifferent. Nobody likes being preached to.
Yeah! Just be a groovy vegan and shut up about it.. osmosis works.
Mom and Granma used to feed us "corn on the cob" or "vegetable soup" or "peas 'n' okra" or "cucumber salad" or "hushpuppies" or "succotash" without ruining it by calling it "vegan" , thank God. We just went "yummee"!
Come on Sam, be a soyboy like the cool kids! Seriously, become vegan to save world.
Meanwhile Brazil farmers burning the the lungs of the planet to make more soybeans while Americans are being subsidized for the waste of all of the beans China won't buy.
@@divusartemis2045 That doesn't make sense. Over have the grain and soybeans produced each year go to feeding livestock. Most of the deforestation is to graze cattle or grow feed for them. Reducing demand for animal products will lead to fewer animals being breed and so fewer soybeans being grown to feed them.
Also, Lab-grown meat is technically vegan because no animals will suffer for it so just embrace it.
caller may not present his arguments in the best way but at the core of it he is correct. hearing the response deteriorating almost all the way down to "nothing we do matters" was embarrassing.
It's not. Politically it's suicidal to shame people to not eat meat.
Look what happened in France with carbon tax, which is far less intrusive than eat no meat.
What you are saying is we can push around poor people.
The answer is structural, not about individual habits, which is a capital and market way of viewing the solution.
@@andygreg293 In this case changing personal habits is a big part of working for structural change, and getting ready for what's next.
Absolutely no need to "push around poor people"! (why would you even say that?)
Vegan habits aren't more expensive than carnist ones in the personal acccount, in fact it's usually less expensive.
And for society as a whole it defnitely costs less.
@@andygreg293
To be 100% clear: in the USA there's a horrid phenomena called "food deserts". Noody is saying we should pressure ppl stuck in that situation to go vegan. Instead it is better to make sure people have more ability to switch to veganism in the first place.
(Same mindset goes for the carbon tax in France, that you've mentioned: maybe lets work for good quality public transport. Ge my drift?)
@@ShragaMatate So, we agree. Poor people have less choices. And once you establish certain tastes, then that becomes your way of life.
As a result, it becomes offensive if you start moralizing.
There are far better ways to work on that problem than use moral or personal choice arguments.
@@andygreg293 I don't think he was talking about shaming people.
So good to hear a respectful discussion of this subject. Sam, citing traditional farmers and hunters who use a couple of animals for food does not address the issue of how animals are treated on factory farms. These huge operations have grown up in the past 40 years and they keep themselves hidden. If the public knew how the animals are treated in these places, there would be no question that it should be changed. That's why the industry requires ag-gag laws. It's one thing to buy 2 pigs a year and slaughter them for your own food. It's another thing to create huge sheds where pigs are kept in misery from birth to death. This extreme cruelty is the motivation for my own determination to become vegan. It also just happens to be very good for health. Thanks again. I do love your show ever since Air America.
"Nothing you do on an individual level has an impact on a global scale" is an argument against voting, or joining the DSA, or doing anything. It technically does have an effect, just a proportionally small one, and it takes millions of small actions to change literally anything.
@thesparitan This. I buy local, but I know that it doesnt do shit for the enviroment or the mass farming of animals for processing, it just makes me feel more moral when I do it.
@@sudafedup So why should people be obliged to do things that make them feel moral?
Voting isn't nearly as big of a choice and changing one's entire diet, and joining an organization and helping their activities can produce a material, albeit small, difference. Giving up meat does nothing.
@@RayLRhodes 2 years later... Never said we should or shouldn't. It's as I said, it's what I do to feel better about my own purchases. You could always get into a debate on morality and ethics and why people should be moral agents or follow some ethical principle. I'm not gunna debate that.
I am trying to cut out beef to where I barely eat it.Same with pork . Still eat chicken though. I think if we can all at least reduce our meat consumption that will be good.
Reduce it by 99% maybe, ideally we'd all become more enlightened and just see it as immoral and unnecessary. But sure if humans reduce their consumption by a massive margin then I suppose that might help the planet's health, still doesn't address the ethical issues.
"We don't know, what we're supposed to do," is the worst defense for breeding, killing, and eating animals. We do know; we look at the consequences of that behavior, and we see that it's negative. The only problem, is that human-beings, are placed within a society, which is based on upon, Humans Oppressing Humans, as Bookchin put: "Our social relationships of domination, have layed the basis, for an ideological perspective on Nature world." It's the cruelty, and lack of love, between people, which lays the basis for the cruelty played out on the natural world. "We don't know," could never be, used however, in any other, moral situation. The only reason, it work here, is that we consider human-life, to be worth-more than the lives of animals. The limitations for empathy, can be change. But they can't change, by people justifying, their actions, through willful ignorance. There's nothing outside of pleasure, involved in a choice, to supporting, animal cruelty.
Individual choices and actions DO MATTER! Please stop perpetuating these arguments. You can’t encourage people to rally, to strike, to vote, to protest and then tell them their actions don’t matter. Please encourage fighting for structural change AND taking personal responsibility ✌️
Those are all actions that are fighting for systemic change. That was the point that is being made here.
Kolzi but they are individual actions. Individual actions can lead to change. What I chose to consume can lead to change. I can’t abdicate personal responsibility and wait for the system to change. Would you tell Rosa Parks her actions didn’t matter? ✌️
Kolzi the fallacy is that veganism is about "individual choice", when in fact It's a broad and growing movement for systemic change. The decision not to join that movement is an individual choice to abdicate responsibility in favor of convenience, habit, and taste preference.
@@hematadopormenos I'm glad to hear that you are in favor of systemic change. I would hope to be an ally in this struggle, and I would like to know what strategies you advocate for, in order to create systemic change.
Mickey Smythe the goal is total animal liberation. It's hard to believe anyone who makes a daily habit of consuming animals is actually an ally and is interested in achieving the same goal. Going vegan is a necessary first step.
As liberals it makes sense that we would eat to cause less suffering. Even to animals.
I do really sympathise with the vegan cause, but we should keep in mind meat production accounts for less than 20% of greenhouse gas emissions, and that humans are not metabolically adapted to follow a carb-based diet.
Carb based? What?
No, plants contain carbs, fat and protein and a vegan diet is perfectly healthy.
Just look it up. The science is very clear.
There's actually a big movement of vegans who do eat many complex carbs and do very well on it
Factory farming causes a great deal of deforestation to house the animals and too feed the animals there is a huge strain on resources....water, food etc...
this is a bad take sam. there's no good argument for animal cruelty
Going vegan just makes sense.
I am not a vegan, not even a vegetarian, but people, especially Americans, need to stay away from those fast food chains.
nope.
Do you believe it is ethically acceptable to kill an animal for food but not a human? If so, what ethical difference between the two, in your view, would make it okay to kill one for food but not the other?
I'm with Jaime on this, i was veg from the age of 15 to 26, and then went pescetarian as well for the last 4 years. But i still only eat fish on very rare occasions, maybe every other month. I'm doing what i can for the most part, but it does help me stay healthy and get my DHA omega-3.
But yeah, beef especially is horrible for the environment.
I also agree with her that the reduction of meat needs to happen on a systematic population level.
But I'm really glad to see that you all took a really positive stance towards plant based diets, even if some of you eat meat yourself. Especially since he was particularly pushy about the issue. Usually meat eaters get so hyper-defensive over it, even the ones on the left.
What will cause "someone" to decide that less production will occur?
You can get DHA and EPA from plant based algae supplements. Fish are pollution sponges, filled with Mercury, cadmium and every other heavy metal our power plants/ refineries are distributing. Most OB/GYN's advise expecting mothers to restrict their fish consumption so why should anyone else eat them? Even if fish weren't toxic, fish spikes your insulin just like any inflammatory foods that are killing us.
Factory fishing is awful, too. And you're pumping mercury into your body unecessarily. "Fish are friends, not food." 😊
Why not just eat flax seeds or algae oil...
@Dom Trussardi In what way are animals lesser and how does that make it okay to kill them in the billions every year.
The argument he should have made, is that Sam would have never used that "Animals in nature kill each other, we all end up in the soil" argument to defend human suffering, to defend vulture capitalism, etc. These appeals to nature can be made to defend all manner of things, but we like to think we're better than that.
I'm on the same side as the vegan caller, but cringed the whole way through that call. He seems like a really good person, also the living embodiment of the caricature the right makes of us.
Wolfgang VonHeilman he was very emotional but he was just nervous and really passionate I resonated with his sadness bc once you’ve been vegan for years it’s just so stupid that others don’t jump on board
sam trying to justify animal cruelty jfc dude stop
That's not what he did at all. He took a position that you presumably didn't agree with, but he said outright - several times throughout the video - that he agrees with the caller on his moral stance on the topic. If you're going to criticize, at least get it right.
There are ways to get meat without torturing an animal.
Self-righteous naivete doesn't work believe me I've tried it.😉 This well intentioned fella is like so many of us peeps out there. Hopefully that's why many of us are watching shows like the majority report to learn, grow, and hone our ability to understand and make sound arguements that will actually appeal to others we might be trying to convey our understanding of the world to.
you sound a little smug, sean. try to make a sound argument why it doesnt work in your opinion, instead of just being smug without presenting any argument at all.
@@thestonylein I guess it could be construed as a smug comment but I certainly did not mean it that way. It was meant as kinda empathetic humor hence the smiley wink. The caller though I know was well intentioned did the same thing I have done many times in the past and am still guilty of doing every once in a while when I'm not diligent in making an arguement from a place of empathy and my best attempt at understanding all sides of an issue. The caller seemed self righteous to me by scolding the cast of the Majority Report for not sharing or abiding by his absolute opinion on the subject of veganism and the positive and negative affects on the planet if you are or arent one. Now I certainly empathize with the callers arguement as did all of the Majority Report cast, I believe. However there were some logical and reasonable opinions that differed from the callers opinions and it just seemed to me that they were dismissed immediately in order for the caller to again tell everyone why his point of view was the end all be all and everyone needed to basically become vegan or the earth was going down in a hurry. And the way the caller seemed to simplify his opinion as being the only right way to be, came across to me as naive. Having identified myself as being both self righteous and naive as well as having been helpfully identified by others as being that way I could identify with my perception of the callers arguement path and chose to post the comment I did, as empathetically humorous constructive criticism.
@@duncdunc76 i see where you're coming from, thanks for elaborating on your point. personally, i don't really know what works, and what not. who really knows. if i am not successful with a specific strategy or angle, i wouldn't assume that other people couldn't be successful with the same or a similar strategy. but i also think that being more receptive to other opinions and not being dismissive is more fruitful and constructive.
Jamie is right. “No ethical consumption under capitalism.” This applies to animal products, electronics, clothing, etc. we aren’t going to stop the unethical production of these products by trying to reduce the demand on an individual level. I say this as a vegan.
No ethical consumption under capitalism? What are you talking about? Capitalism is the only ethical system out there.
TheWizardOfOsborne if the world went vegan we wouldn't continue to raise and kill animals for food. The question is, what is the best strategy to get us to that point. While individual consumer choices aren't the be all end all, the are a necessary first step in organizing around a movement for animal liberation which can then take broader, more radical actions.
We can make ethical personal choices. Won't change the overall system but will change our input. "The system is exploitive so my choices are irrelevant" is an assertion for those who just don't want to address their own personal contribution to another's suffering.
Bradley Smith I think being vegan is virtuous, but in the same way that I don’t shame people for buying products made in sweatshops, I don’t shame people for eating animal products. That’s applying blame to the wrong party, IMO
@@SnackMuay Why? If you can make other choices, but don't. We should focus on responsible decisions. How are we blaming the wrong party? We're "blaming" the person who chooses to make personal choices that exploit.
One thing that is important to mention is that if we want a non-discriminatory world, we need to cut out non-human animal consumption. Because everytime you eat non-human animals, you are a part of a discriminatory action. And the argument out of, we can't do anything individual, so therefore we should do nothing at all and wait for political change is just a slippery slope. For example you can use the argument for still being transphobic, because nothing matters anyway out of their own logic. Total liberation is for everyone and not just human-animals, but also non-human animals. Speciesism is just a hierarchical thinking that we can do whatever we want to animals on the basis of superiority, but people have used the same argument against gay people.
If you are watching this, please go vegan for the animals. It's alot of recourses out there to help you. Stay away from shitty "raw vegan" diets, because that is what making some vegans sick.
I have to say, this comment really seems like it's promoting cannibalism
@@micelimaxi Dont know where you are getting that from, but if that seems like it, then it's not my comment it's the justification speciests use to support the exploitment of non-human animals. There does exist a video where they showed the similiarity of logical thinking between a cannibal and a carnist.
You forgot to start that with "Dear diary."
@@endrehagen9406 from your unnecesary specification of "non human animal"
And your argument is just silly, if vegans want to make an impact in the world you need to stop acting like ebtitled brats, there are great vegan arguments, I even reduced my meat consumption because of them and would love it if meat replacements made it to my country, "everyone who isn't vegan is a cannibal bigot" isn't one of them, that's the kind of argument that makes people not listen to reasonable people
I was a vegetarian for a number of years, and most of my meals are meatless today. I don't think we were necessarily meant to be vegans because of the need for vitamin B12. I also don't believe that killing animals for consumption is necessarily wrong, but that factory farming is VERY wrong and unhealthy.
My hope is that we can move toward buying meat/eggs/dairy from local farmers who use humane practices and allow the animals to live as normal a life as possible (roaming pastures & eating their normal diets, getting sunshine and shade, etc.). It is more expensive, but that just means most of us would decrease our consumption.
The problem is that there are 7.6 billions of human population, people need food and factory farming helps to give these people food! Otherwise there will be starvation. Going vegan will not solve everything if everyone went vegan!
B12 is found in a natural bacteria throughout soil. Do some gardening like humans are supposed to do and get all the B12 you need. They feed cattle B12 supplements, it’s not like it’s something you only get from meat.
@@Katsura_ja_nai_Zura_da factory farming and the crop monoculture that feeds it are in a serious crash of unsustainability already. Input costs are outstripping yield. Depleted soils won't hold moisture or provide nutrient density. The world is, must and will learn to feed itself locally or starve via the monoculture crash now rapidly unfolding. Doesn't matter if it's for animal feed, ethanol, junk food or feeding vegans, monoculture for global distribution is a deeply flawed system that isn't going to work much longer.
Newsflash: b12 is supplemented to animals as well. Taking it directly is frankly the logical thing to instead of consuming just a fraction of it, stored in somebody else's flesh, bluntly put. B12 isn't a funtion of eating meat - it is a function of eating dirt. And nowadays we tend to not eat a lot of non-metaphorical dirt ;)
Another thing: a lot of people lack b-12 - most of them are NOT vegans.
@thesparitan the only people who say this are people who have not yet educated themselves on this topic.
11:53 "...all life..., is valuable"
I have a suggestion for caller:
go to africa and get infected with malaria, people are trying to eradicate plasmodium for decades now
you should go there and protect this "valuable" lifeform
What's with meat-eaters and their absurd hypothetical "arguments"? We don't kill these pigs, cows, etc. because they're infected and dangerous for us, we kill them because we like their taste.
@@AndreasDevig try to understand what I wrote:
1. caller said: "...all life..., is valuable" 11:53
2. ergo, plasmodium, a form of life that causes malaria is also VALUABLE (for the caller at least)
3. people are trying to exterminate this VALUABLE form of life
4. caller should protect it by making sure it has a host to feed on, preferably the caller
"We don't kill these pigs, cows, etc. because they're infected"
this has NOTHING to do with my point
@@AndreasDevig try to understand what I wrote:
1. caller said: "...all life..., is valuable" 11:53
2. ergo, plasmodium, a form of life that causes malaria is also VALUABLE (for the caller at least)
3. people are trying to exterminate this VALUABLE form of life
4. caller should protect it by making sure it has a host to feed on, preferably the caller
"We don't kill these pigs, cows, etc. because they're infected"
this has NOTHING to do with my point
@@papaunderwater3316 You're taking him too literally. You know what he meant. We're talking about killing other beings *when you don't need to.* We're not talking about preserving dangerous viruses. Jeez. You must be trolling.
@@AndreasDevig "You must be trolling"
no shit sherlock
I might be trolling, yet:
1 NOONE made him say what he said, If he spent 1 second more thinking about what he's talking about maybe his statements wouldn't be so idiotic
2 "You're taking him too literally"
contrary to you, I don't pretand that I know better what is in someones head, so FORGIVE ME for referring to his ACTUAL words, instead to what you assume he ment
PS: "preserving dangerous viruses"
1 viruses arent alive nor dead (as far as I understand scientific consensus on that)
2 plasmodium is not a virus it's an animal
Individual habits do help, just being vegetarian saves 12 animal lives a year. Going vegan saves 100 lives a year. And get this: One person who goes vegan can save approximately 219,000 gallons of water a year. It takes 1,000 gallons of water to produce just one gallon of milk.
Also, isn't telling somebody that what we do individually is useless in the big scheme like telling a voter they shouldn't vote? So weird that Jaime took that route. I expected better from her.
@UCEoSWH-Vc32imXOW1T7YuMQ Not sure what your argument is. A water company bottles water and we drink it, so what, to me then it's not being wasted. That's better than using it for a hamburger just because a hamburger tastes good.
Do you have a source on saving 12 animals a year?
@@RayLRhodes Google it. I think I was probably low balling it at the time. When I google it now the numbers seem to be much more higher than 12. But the numbers vary from source to source. So do your own research and decide for yourself.
I fully agree with animal rights and the end to industrial meat production.
However, lets see the perspective from another angle, imagine if you’re a family in some country thats not very well developed and your only means of living is raising chickens to sell and eat.
Do you think its morally good to tell that person to stop and somehow find another job or grow vegetables in their small farm?
There are too many variables about this topic that need to be thought out of and discussed, its not just about animal rights or the environment its also about food security and people’s livelihoods.
But that isn't the point. The goal of veganism is to stop unnecessary suffering and to do the least amount of harm as possible. We can do that easily in the USA. Your point about a poor family in a 3rd world country is a different issue.
let's say someone was using slaves to build a community for their family, don't you think that is slightly different form beating slaves for fun? because some people resort to unethical actions in extreme situations, it's always justified to kill animals? "going to war with Nazi Germany was justified, does that mean going to war with Germany in 2019 is currently justified" ?
Read: Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer
Watch: Earthlings
The problem with blanket moral prohibitions is that you can end up missing situations where said stopping every event (ie killing of animals) for "good" reasons creates bad outcomes.
Case in point. New Zealand , my home country.
Prior to humans arriving only about 1000 years there were no native land mammals (except 2 species of bat, one of which was evolving to becoming flightless). Humans introduced a whole range of animals which particularly in the last 150 years had driven dozens of native species, both fauna and flora to extinction. Deer, pigs, possums, Hedgehogs, cats, rats, stoats, wild horses have brought dozens more to the brink along with deforestation.
The comment at the end Jimmy makes about being on edge of a mass extinction event is right, and if you have a look at the list of some of the most threaten ones, a disproportionate amount of them are NZ native species.
NZ is making a real effort to stop this from happening. To do this we hunt, trap and organically poison those introduced animals I list above. But if we took the vegan "moral" choice to not kill any animal, then the most unique NZ native animals and tress, like Kakapo, Kiwi, Takaka, Tuatara, Wetas, Giant Snails and Southern Rata etc, will be wiped out for sure by this decision.
In fact there a classic example of this in regards to Australian marsupial possums in NZ. They were introduced stupidly into NZ in the late 19th century. Once some escaped their population boomed (its thought there something like 60 to 100 million in the country) because there is no natural predators to predate them. They indiscriminately eat native lizards, insects, and native bird eggs & chicks as well as kill massive native trees by eating all it leaves till they are dead, and then eat the young staplings which would replace them.
In a effort to control them we tried to establish a fur export industry (their fur is very fine and has high heat retention properties) to offset the high costs of trapping them (NZ forests are very dense temperate rainforests and trapping in them is very tough work). But the anti fur movement in the US & elsewhere meant the price crashed for possum fur and most Trappers left the work because they couldn't make a living any more. Now it means the NZ taxpayer has pay for much more mass airdrops of an organic poison to try and eradicate them.
So Jimmy's belief system that he believes is to stop extinctions from happening, would end up hastening lot of only found in NZ animals or vegetation not longer being on the planet.
Dave O veganism about not killing animals as much as reasonably and practically possible... we can discuss moral gray areas like invasive species and such that’s perfectly reasonable but what’s not reasonable is using moral gray areas to justify the eternal global torture and slaughter of cows and other animals for burgers ... this is so clearly wrong and unnecessary just stop dude
Great post Dave. A similar problem exists in west, rural Texas and its wild boar population. These boars have no natural predators, they are also unsuitable for consumption (apparently their meat is unpalatable). Even more scary, the domesticated pigs normally raised for meat will often escape (pigs are very smart and curious by nature). These domesticated pigs will breed with the wild boar population and essentially become feral. I have seen videos of Texan farmers riding around blasting these boars to death via shotgun, and it is a sad state of affairs. This is similar to what the legendary Stephen J. Gould talked about in his essays on the extinction of the tropical land snail (you can check Wiki links for more on that).
Extinction is a natural process. It is not in-itself wrong, although when spurred by human negligence or threat, it is a major problem in an ecosystem. I think the argument that vegans make (I am not a vegan myself mind you), is that the mass killing of animals raised solely for consumption is not necessary, and this argument differs in kind from the one you mentioned, which is about preserving a natural balance in habitats due to human interference.
@@bradleysmith681 I don't happen to think the survival of NZ native species is "marginal". Its big fucking deal deal to me and the bulk of New Zealanders. That you attempt to dismiss the issue and myself shows what happens under moral absolutism. Things which are inconvenient to the "larger truth" have to be ignored rather than taken on board.
Patrick , Almost all vegans I've met, are "moral" vegans first and foremost. The environmental reason they give is almost always a distance secondardary argument. Ask a vegan if they approve of sustainability produced meat and see what their answer is. Also if extinction is caused by human interference in nature then the extinction can't be natural unless you define every action humans create as natural.
@@user-uy6uc5ey5q Sorry, that comment was meant for the other poster.. I'll delete it because I didn't make my audience clear..
"The animal rights movement is the most important movement of the century" he says, while people are still starving to death and children are still being blown to bits in pointless wars. OK buddy, sure.
I don't think we can stop wars. Conflict is a part of life.
I agree, mostly. But I do find it strange how many of them seem to cry much easier for animal cruelty than human cruelty.
Meat-eating like sports is one of the American religions and is also political.
Sam asking "How do you know what we're supposed to do?" Is like Ben Burgois being asked "Where does logic come from?"
Any addendum to your answer?
Haha didnt know sam was in Bobs Burgers
Yeah, he's the health inspector.
All these arguments against veganism are bad. Broaden your perspective Sam and Jamie.
I want Sam to be more foxy. Wait.... that's imPOSSible. 😘
He is foxier with a 5 o'clock shadow
Sexy Sammy 😍
At this point eating meat is reckless, as to Jamie’s point what we do does matter: but the solution isn’t going to come from individuals.
If you have the means you have a duty to cut out meat.
I certainly don't agree with Sam that moral arguments aren't going to be effective. But i don't think guilt trips like this will be even slightly efffecttive
...and dairy.
Based on what?
Save the planet, go vegan!
Jamie, there is NOTHING more reactionary than telling people they can’t make a difference. Why should I join a union, canvas with a local socialist group, engage in anti-racist organizing if I can’t make a difference? And if I can make a difference in those ways, why can’t I make a difference in the vegan movement?
You're right, sir.
Hear, hear!
I wonder how you can simultaneously believe that voting matters and that individual action doesn't matter...
Voting doesn't matter but your individual choices do.
Voting is an attempt to make broad change in a way that individual consumption choices are not.
Kolzi veganism is no more an individual choice than voting. Once one goes vegan, then they begin to convince the people around them to be vegan as well. Since I've been vegan, I've gotten involved in activism, convinced family, friends and strangers to be vegan, who then have continued the ripple effect forward. None of that would have been possible if I continued justifying my refusal to change as just an "individual choice". The ripple effect would have died with me.
@@Junebug89 Voting is playing into the hands of the politicians that only want power and money. If you want something done, do it yourself.
I highly disagree that our personal choices don't matter. You are a part of the demand portion of the economic cycle.
be the change you want to see.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the how economics and our system in general work then.
Supply/demand is a total farce. They can manufacture demand for a supply, just as they can create false scarcity. Individual action does little to nothing, and you attacking people for dietary choices will only hurt all of our end goals. Get your head out of your ass, stop badgering people, and attack the system that breeds unethical behavior.
Anthony NonApplicable you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what vegans are arguing.
in a world where nobody eats animals, no animals will be raised to be killed. Between now and that future horizon, much broad systemic change will have to occur, but the first step is organizing a movement around animal rights and liberation. And in order to get people to care about animal rights, they first have to realize they can live without consuming them. Getting a mass of people to go vegan voluntarily is just the first step, not the be all end all.
Arguing that individual consumer choices won't solve anything is effectively a strawman.
Anthony Nonapplicable If it’s all a total farce and a manufactured then why concern yourself with the arguments being made. Seems like you got a bug up your butt. To use your argument against you it is futile to badger someone for their actions or opinion and demand that they attack a system. After all it’s all a waste of time.
@@anthonynonapplicable6045 also there's no reason to feel attacked from people stating a fact that you don't need meat to survive. It also isn't an attack to point out the impact factory farming has on our climate and environment.
Individual consumers not spending their money on a product is the most direct non-violent way to have an impact on an industry.
How do we know what we're supposed to do as humans? We could use our advanced education to figure that out. Every answer, from every angle, is to eat vegan. You are speculating based on your own limited education. Jamie thinks that her reasoning applies to the vast majority of people and she's incorrect about that. Sam, please, please read The End of Dieting.
As a vegan, i agree with Sam that the moral argument is the hardest route to convert more people to veganism. There are probably less people who care more about cows, pigs, chickens, etc than the environment, and there are probably less people who care more about the environment than their own health. And these other arguments are backed by objective hard science, unlike the moral argument that tends to appeal to subjective or philosophical values. So, my default line of argument for veganism towards other people is first health, then the environment, and finally ethics, even though i'm personally troubled more by the suffering of the sentient beings. I just have to come to terms with the reality that many people's brains are wired so differently as to not have enough compassion to begin with, and i have to be pragmatic and strategic about that.
And that is the problem. The moral argument is a winner--clearly, we shouldn't abuse or create suffering. That alone should change minds (changed me to veganism). But too many ppl just don't care, despite all the talk about the morals and christianity of this country.
@@bradleysmith681 Morals are subjective. It clearly isn't a winner, as it has convinced only a few people.
I really respect the efforts when it comes to promoting veganism, and I am a vegan myself. The "you know" and "like" just completely ruins it all. Don't people notice what they say at all?
And lot of people have verbal ticks they can't really help, especially when nervous, and honestly I hardly noticed.
@@mickeysmythe1403 It was all I heard.
Jamie's answer is such a cop out. Veganism is literally the easiest thing you can do to make a difference.
That's an incredibly privileged thing to say. While I absolutely agree that veganism is moral from the standpoint of animal treatment and ecological sustainability, as well as generally being a preferable diet in terms of health outcomes, it is far from easy for many working class people in the U.S., such as myself, to adopt and stick with a vegan diet. Vegan food is often expensive, it usually takes a long time to prepare, and can be difficult to access for those of us living in food deserts.
@@mickeysmythe1403 Jamie doesn't look like she's living in a food desert. Also vegan food is cheaper than meat, dairy, eggs. Beans, rice, potatoes, lentils, mushrooms, vegetables and fruit etc are often far cheaper and more nutritious. I get that fast food is more easily accessible in some places and I get changing your eating habits is a lower order priority when you're living day to day. But if you're not living day to day, meal to meal, then there really is no excuse for not being vegan.
@@marks5835 fair enough. I'm just saying that many of us are living day to day meal to meal, so saying it's the easiest thing one can do may not be the case for everyone. I didn't mean to imply that about Jamie's circumstances, however, I can see how that may have been misinterpreted. Again, I agree with the moral, environmental, and health reasons (so long as you're careful about getting all your micronutrients) for veganism, and if my life circumstances made it a more feasible option, I would likely be there. That said, I don't think solely advocating for individual consumers to make lifestyle changes is the best way to address the ecological impact and animal welfare concerns posed by industrial animal agriculture.
The companies should be held responsible for cruelty in how mass production of livestock occurs; of course. I cannot stress this enough though, we are omnivores by nature. Eating an animal in a humane respectful way is fine. No one should be shaming regular people how they should eat. I would rather see people cut down on fast food, fresh food be made more affordable and available, and not mass produce in a way that disrespects the animals. I have cut down on all eating honestly because of money problems haha but I think Climate Change is a bigger picture crisis and the companies behind it should be held responsible and society should demand their governments to go 100% renewable/sustainable energy.
Being omnivore means that we have the option to eat both meat and plants, as we are physically suited to digest both. A evidenced by the world's largest association of dietetics and nutrition, a balanced plant-based diet is perfectly healthy and may provide health benefits. Eating an animal in a respectful way doesn't make any sense for you are paying for an animal who wants to live to be slaughtered without a valid justification.
Donald Anderson Your last sentence makes no sense. I am talking in a way that doesn't deprive the animal like a chicken sunshine, a clean environment, clean water, or good food; you are making it seem like they are equivalent to humans and have a say in the matter.
I'm not sure if this guy cares that a lot of poor people don't even have the option to eat healthy, let alone eat special vegan dinners.
You can expect people to eat beans and rice there entire god damn life dude.
A lot of people including myself, don't consider animal cruelty because it's not a priority.
feeding PEOPLE and keeping PEOPLE happy and healthy is more important, sorry.
Things like Beans, Rice, and Potatoes are already staples amount the poorest places and countries while meat is one the most expensive "food" items worldwide... ;-)
@@RaceLever Yeah well I'm sure people are just delighted to eat beans rice and potatoes every fuckin day.
@@TheFatPunisher Wow! You know little. There are more inexpensive choices on a vegan diet..
@@bradleysmith681 like what? Soybeans and corn.
Yeah not even poor people can eat just that forever and be healthy
Can we also address the 'vocal fry' epidemic? The caller was so ROUGH to listen to I almost couldn't hear him out :l
have a vegan advocate as a guest on the show please
Glyphosate burgers? No thanks
i must have heard him say "you know" like a thousand times from this guy
If you equate suffering to evil, then yes, eating meat is morally wrong. I don't think most people would look a cow in the face and feel it a moral thing to kill it. Some will find it fine. Others will find it fine to kill people. But I do think there is real cowardice in people who cannot stomach to kill an animal, and yet will happily eat its flesh. The industrialization of livestock is undoubtedly the most destructive force facing the planet and mankind right now. If a person can't stomach the hunt, they shouldn't eat meat. If they eat meat that another man killed for them, it is undoubtedly a cowardly thing; also taking part in the most horrific industry in the world today.
I support the research of clone meat but that requires the funding of science.
The most effective tool to promote veganism (or at least the reduction of meat consumption) is to stop government subsidies of meat and other animal-based consumables. Simplest place to start. Move those subsidies to plant-based consumables.
I understand what this guy is saying, and while I love to eat me any kind of meat that someone tells me is delicious I do try eat a majority plant based diet. Listening to this guy is painful. It's the same story I've heard from countless vegans; an unearned moral authority to dictate what should be on your plate, and if only everyone thought exactly like they do the world would be a perfect utopia. People like magic solutions to vastly complicated problems.
If everyone on the planet stopped eating meat we would still be in the same climate situation as we are now. I understand his heart is in the right place, he can be as vegan as he possibly can be. As long as he is still wearing sweatshop child made clothing, and tweeting on an iPhone made from rare earth metals that horrendously pollute the countries they are mined from. Using any product with palm oil that was harvested from countries that promote the mass burning of entire eco systems to to make way for the farming of said palm trees. The damn near endless list of products that are consumed that are hazardous to the environment will make it impossible to make any real change if discarded individualy on a near global level.
I dont disagree with the fella, I just wish vegans would stop acting like thier so much better then the rest of us because they have a habit that amounts to not even a drop in the ocean of our current situation. Stop believing in magical solutions.
Bill Plman lol that it would make a huge difference if everyone on earth stopped eating meat
Bill Plman vegans wish you would finally grow out of your bullshit excuses.
@@hematadopormenos *sent from my iphone*
Bill Plman if everyone on the planet became vegan we would be in a vastly improved position in terms of climate. The lowest estimate of contribution to greenhouse gases by animal agriculture is 13%. That doesn’t include deforestation of the rainforests for raising beef. Also methane gases stay in the atmosphere much longer than carbon dioxide. On the high end it is estimated that animal agriculture, when all aspects are included, account for half of all climate change. Most inefficient use of land and water known to mankind. 660 gallons of water for a hamburger. If every one became a vegan tomorrow our chances of solving climate change have improved exponentially.
Eating meat is bad y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know y'know
I am a vegan.
The caller didn't phrase it particularly well i.e. what we're "supposed to do". It's more that we as human beings have a high capacity for empathy, higher reasoning and more importantly a _choice_ about what we consume. That sets us apart from animals killing each other to survive. In the western world we have this luxury of choice, so perhaps morally speaking we should exercise this ability and freedom by expressing empathy towards other sentient creatures. That is, if you have a moral code that is antithetical to suffering and exploitation.
Agree with this caller. It absolutely matters what we as consumers do. It comes down to supply and demand. Basic economics. If we demand less meat, production will decrease. Really bad take, Jaime. Disappointing!
Her point is that it's really difficult to convince one person to give up meat, let alone the degree of people it would take to affect the industry. You would have much more success taking the decision out of their hands. Reduce the supply, demand remains high -> prices increase -> demand lessens.
I read a similar article about environmentalism that talked about how spending thousands of dollars on ecofriendly products and hours on environmentally friendly products is great for your cred, but does very little to actually change your carbon footprint relative to someone who does none of those things. Instead, those thousands of dollars would be much better spent on environmental lobbying groups who have far more power to affect change.
The owners of production will always manipulate the market and government to extract as much economic rent as possible, regardless of what consumers actually want. Basic economics.
Thnkfully, we will never demand less meat and human beings will always be normal and sane meat eaters. And you people are a dying breed, thank god.
@@karangtavana1283 sure, Skippy. 🙄
@@redheadinjapan9872 prove me wrong, dickhead. The majority of the human population will always be meat eaters, despite whatever article you read on your left wing websites. You people are the minority, a bunch of sick fucks who can't act normal.
These fn soy boys. Animals are not your furry little pets infact most of them will eat you.
I feel bad for the animals, but a body's gotta eat. I'd like to get the meat I eat sourced locally from people I know, because I have medical issues that prevent me from really eating a plant-based diet.
The idea that if we stopped raising meat for food we would be able to stop species extinction caused by land use changes is ridiculous. Grazing fields would just be replaced with fields growing crops. You can argue non animal agriculture is a more efficient use of resources like water but not that it saves land
Actually they would replace the land used to grow animal feed with land to grow crops and all the leftover grazing land would be cleared up
If we cannot treat animals with respect how do you expect the 1% to treat us with respect?
remorse for animals but lack any sympathy for plants. sorry but eating animals isnt nessarily cruel or evil. We are not above animals, humans are suppose to eat what ever is available. plants suffer as much as animals when they are harvested, its just more observable by human senses in animals then plants. Instead we need to balance are production to the environment not only human needs.
Abel Abel your first point is two points, sentience is hard to prove becuase the definition is vague and hard to test. As far as plants feeling pain has already long since been proven by variety of scientific research it's just different then ours due to them not having animal like nervous systems. cumcumber is more like chopping up the dog's child then dismembering.
To your secound point what do plants eat? i can tell you it is not just sun light and earth's crust. Many plants need dead animal and plant matter sometimes in the form of fecal matter. Nature wastes not wants not, A strict veganist diet is not good for the enivorment any more then the current meat and grain focused one.
Squary circleboi worth is subjective there is no objective value for worth. So you can believe that if you wish but, its still a bias view of a world that niether exists to service us or meet our own subjective views.
Squary circleboi You mixing up worth with compassion, of course I care about people. Something doesnt need to have worth to have compassion for it. I have compassion for all things, but i also recoginize there is nothing compassionate about starving yourself or others. I am not pro meat industry but if you think current farming practices isn't also apart of the lack of compassion we have for the planet. Then I got a bridge to sell you.
Squary circleboi unfortunetly alot of humans can't maintian a vegan diet due to b12 deficency. but i do agree we eat too much meat in our diet and need to make more of weekly or every other week thing instead of daily.
@Squary circleboi And rather expensive, a lot of the supplements are made from animals anyways. But the yeast method is still fairly expensive.
I’m quite surprised at the level of pushback the MR crew gave this guy. Meat tastes amazing but the jury is in. It’s bad for our health, the environment, and animals (obviously). Saying that individual action doesn’t matter is the most bogus argument for not doing something. Obviously one person not eating meat is a drop in the bucket but it’s a drop in a larger stream. No significant change happens instantaneously. It takes the will of individuals to to create a movement. To shift the public opinion. And ultimately to drive the the change that is desired. The climate crisis is dire and the effects of daily meat consumption are so catastrophic that we have no choice but to act now. We can’t wait around for Impossible burgers to be federally mandated. We have to forgo meat as soon as possible. Yes, it’s hard for people to sympathize with animals that they eat so I probably wouldn’t use the ethics as my first argument. But once you consider the environmental and health detriment it’s easier to consider the ethical reasoning. But just because we’re humans we won the evolutionary race to dominance doesn’t mean we have to kill animals for for IF WE DONT HAVE TO. I totally get hunting and farming in rural or tribal societies. But let’s be real, the majority of meat consumers are people who live in cities who can easily choose not to eat meat if they want to. The problem is that they are so disconnected from the gruesome nature of slaughter and animal processing that that the thought of ethical rights for animals doesn’t even cross their minds. It’s just a faceless chunk of flavorful food that the just appears in their markets and restaurants. But if they were to consider that the animals that they love to consume have essentially the same cognitive abilities as their precious cats and dogs they wouldn’t dare consider consuming a being that is capable of sensing so much suffering. So we, as a civilized species are faced with a choice: to face the reality of the detriment meat consumption causes to all aspects of life or to continue to indulge in willful ignorance for the sake of pleasure. Again this is not so much a decision that is for the rural and tribal communities so much as it is for the people who have the luxury of choosing. So I encourage you as well as the MR crew to really consider that your resistance to go completely vegan might not be practically motivated but rather out of a selfish but deeply ingrained desire to consume meat for pleasure’s sake. I too struggle with the same battle as I love the taste of meat as well. But in this desperate time it is necessary to look deeply within ourselves and challenge ourselves despite the sacrifices we must make.
Every time he says "you know," drink.