Veganism and Voluntaryism Part 2

• published: 21 Nov 2014
• views: 61

I respond to user becke137's message below. I also produce a comic at http://volcomic.com (Portion Removed to Fit) O.k., first of all let me clarify some things: 1) I’m NOT claiming that veganism goes hand in hand with anarchism/voluntaryism, etc. as I actually know what anarchism/voluntaryism both are. (I consider myself an anarchist and voluntaryist actually.) NOR was I trying to make the claim of universal ethics, but just trying to make practical, common sense points. I was just observing, (even though I’m NOT part of the punk scene myself,) just parallels in anarchism/voluntaryism to the idea of truly letting humans be free to choose whatever life they want, who they want to help, what they believe, etc. and that of veganism EXTENDING such ideals to other species. Again, I was NOT saying these ideals were all one and the same, or mandatorily related, but it’s not surprising for some people to hold these ideas for themselves to see them as being connected PERSONALLY. That is all what I was trying to say (!) and was wanting your perspective on it. 2) If you know anything about vegetarians/vegans, (unless they are completely delusional,) they do NOT ever claim that they don’t cause suffering. They just claim to alleviate as much suffering as possible. I know very well, believe me, that x-rays have animal products, IV has animal products, tires have animal products, and so on and so forth. I know that even just plain existing when I breathe, I may kill some microbes in the air. Duh. To me, that does not mean because I can’t prevent all suffering, that I should attempt to do so at all. That’s like saying, “Oh, there are too many starving people in the world, so I won’t even bother volunteering at the food harvest bank, even though I can” 3) You make it sound like animal suffering is essential to human prosperity, or even human survival. It sounds like you’ve been brainwashed the meat and dairy industries, (as was I at one point,) who do everything they can with their money and monopoly power to spread lies. This can be seen in advertising and how nutrition is taught in schools and med school, since much money is donated by these industries as well as by pharmaceutical companies. (Also notice in the media how whenever someone is vegan/vegetarian and commits a crime, often they state that that person is vegan/vegetarian. Yet when a non-vegan/vegetarian commits the same crime, there is no title. It’s as if subliminally stating that vegan/vegetarian has to do with/adds some essential information to the crime. For instance, compare the headlines of omnivore parents who have starved/neglected their infant to death versus parents who happen to be vegan/vegetarian who have.) Humans have created much technological process, and you don’t think that if we put as much effort into finding non-animal ways of testing, (yes, including no human testing,) as we do in placing effort into finding cures/new research, etc. that we wouldn’t find a way to do so? Sure, much or most of what we have today has been done through animal use, but that doesn’t mean the past must perpetuate into the future, especially when it’s no longer necessary. And if you’re really into health, I suggest you read The China Study by T. Colin Campbell, which will address non-biased studies of health in regards to animals and their animal consumption. Also, check out Brendan Brazier and Robert Cheeke, who clearly don’t need animals and animal consumption directly to live the lifestyles they do. If you are so confident in your arguments, then it will do no harm to look at the other side and won’t feel uncomfortable in doing so. 4) Plants do NOT have feelings. Yes, they can react to stimuli, but reacting to stimuli is different from having a central nervous system, the very things that gives us feelings. Plants do NOT have central nervous systems. When you poke a pig with a hot rod, he/she squeals in pain. Last time I sautéed Spinach, I did not hear my spinach squeal. It was a ridiculous argument you were making about green blood vs. red blood because o.k., let’s just say hypothetically you were right about eating plants as a form of speciesism. Then, it would actually still make sense to eat plants directly rather than being an omnivore, because meat production requires these animals to have food, meaning primarily from crops, plants. So actually there would be less “green blood” by being vegetarian/vegan. Like I said, I thought that was quite a silly argument, but I just wanted to show you that yes, I can think from your point of view, and entertain your idea, even if I disagree with it. However, if I’m the ignorant one, and there indeed has been a valid study done upon plants having feelings, then please, give me a link. Enlighten me. If there are any other points I’m not addressing, let me know. I would be happy to address them. "