• intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    10 months ago

    Each individual is facing the following choice in life:

    • sacrifice to save the planet, and fail
    • or not

    People want to immediately jump to “if everyone would just …”

    Nobody is looking at an “everyone does X” button. People only have their “I do X” button available.

    So that is literally the answer to your question. Very few people would sacrifice the civilization to eat a cheeseburger. But nobody has that choice or that power in their hands. Their choice is eat the cheeseburger or not, and the survival of civilization stays rigidly the same between those two choices.

    • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Best response. Almost everyone alive has a net negative impact on the environment. Maybe that one Indian guy who planted a whole forest by himself gets a pass. We can try to be less negatively impactful depending on our inclinations, resources, and other interests and priorities. Some people may choose vegetarianism, some might buy an electric car or install some solar panels, some might organize politically for a new policy. Some might spend their altruism improving social conditions rather than focusing on the environment. But being ever so slightly less of a negative impact on the environment than your neighbour who has a slightly different set of priorities is hardly a reason to feel morally superior.

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    Same reason we use electricity despite not being 100% green energy and thus being even worse for the earth?

    If you actually wanna guilt this question then the fuck are you doing using your coal and gas powered electricity to do it?

    There is no ethical consumption under capitalism, because the capitalists have seen to it that you will never be permitted to make an ethical choice that would dare compete with what they expect you to choose.

    Being a moralizing prick doesn’t send any message, what gets people to change is making that change easy, that’s why instead of being terminally online fuckwads, british vegangelists spread the good news by hosting free kitchens, volunteering to take people grocery shopping on their own pound, teaching vegan cooking classes, and all other sorts of actually addressing literally any of the actual concerns people have about going vegan instead of being a condescending snob about it.

    • Sizzler@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      So honestly, in your opinion, one of the only ways a vegan can change people’s minds is to take them shopping and PAY for their food for them. Amazing, this is a new level of shitty push the blame away behaviour. Pathetic.

      • CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        You’re saying that trying to motivate people positively to move on from meat is “push the blame away” behavior. But I think tut-tutting individuals who eat meat is pushing the blame away.

        While there are some people who believe that eating meat is an absolute moral wrong no matter where or when it takes place in human history, a lot of people who feel eating meat is immoral feel this way because of what the meat industry does, both to the animals and to the planet. Five thousand years ago, people weren’t supporting the meat industry and all its wrongs by eating meat.

        So considering it to be pathetic to try to effect real reduction in people’s meat consumption because the methods shift blame away from the individual meat eater seems really ironic to me, as well as completely counterproductive, if your goal is less meat consumption in the world.

        • Sizzler@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          There is no positive motivation to move people away from meat. Health maybe? Shame and forcing self-reflection is one of the few effective tools.

          Your last paragraph is just rubbish. That’s not what I was calling pathetic.

  • thezeesystem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    The real question is, why should we try to not eat beef for the environment, when corporations make 90% of all pollution in the world.

    Maybe focus on the 90% of the problem and not the individual people who but meat?

  • TypicalHog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    It’s very, very simple. It’s cuz shit’s tasty AF and most people care more about themselves and their tastebuds than climate.

  • then_three_more@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    In my country at least beef consumption peaked around 2012 (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/24/uk-meat-consumption-lowest-level-since-record-began-data-reveal)

    I think post WW2 there was a drive towards the idea that we’d never need to go without. This combined with lifestyle changes (more people working longer hours) gave birth to the rise of fast convince foods and the mass growth of places like McDonalds and Burger King.

    Why don’t people just stop? Ideas within society have a lot of momentum, they take a lot of energy to get started and a lot to turn or stop again.

  • Ceedoestrees@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Where I live the beef is local and cheap. I’m not able to obtain enough protein without meat, as confirmed by a doctor and a nutritionist when I tried to go vegetarian. With food costs so high it’s cheaper to buy cow than anything else, but when I have the money I opt for fish or turkey. I looked into hunting but it’s prohibitively expensive for me with permits, tags, guns, licenses, days off and transportation. I tried fishing for myself as well, but whenever I get time to do it, there are warnings about eating fish in the area. When there aren’t I never catch anything big enough to legally be allowed to keep. I’d like to get chickens if/when local government ever lifts the bylaws preventing it.

    • SmoothOperator@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m not able to obtain enough protein without meat

      How does that work? Isn’t egg white pure protein? Surely eating a pile of boiled eggs would give you the same amount of protein as a steak, not counting stuff like cheese and legumes.

      • negativeyoda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        I and others are over here with soy, egg and gluten allergies that restrict pretty heavily what I can eat. But go off since you have it all figured out, king.

        • SmoothOperator@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Sorry about your issues, I never meant to diminish them. I was genuinely curious about how one can become so limited in ones protein intake, but clearly worded my question poorly.

        • Sizzler@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          You know who else has restrictions on their food? Vegans. You’d have thought you’d be more sympathetic, but nah, you’re negativeyoda.

      • Ceedoestrees@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Oh gee I didn’t try eggs or dairy in the months I felt like shit after going veggie, and neither the doctor nor nutritionist suggested that either. You solved all my dietary needs and I can give up meat now after years of trying to figure out the most sustainable diet I can manage.

        • SmoothOperator@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Sorry, I was trying to ask a genuine question, I didn’t mean to come across in a negative way.

          I’d still be very interested in the answer.

          • Ceedoestrees@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Sorry about that, it’s the internet. I’m not a doctor, but it was explained to me that proteins from different sources are not all the same and, while I can process protein from a variety of foods, I don’t do it as efficiently as with muscle proteins. The nutritionist I spoke to - who was a vegan and a vegan activist - said people like me need about 1-2 chicken breasts per week. It’s not uncommon, a lot of people who try to go veggie and can’t hack it just go back to meat without trying to figure out why they felt sick and tired. Other people have said it’s genetic based on your ancestors, but I haven’t seen a lot of evidence to support that. Other sources point to evidence you can alter the way your body processes things by following specific diet plans, but I’m not prepared to feel that shitty again to figure it out.

  • nutsack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Because they’re lazy and comfortable and stupid and they don’t give a shit about anything.

  • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    This rage bait question could be reworded as…

    Why do people consume <anything> when we know it’s bad for the earth.

    • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think it’s valid that he chose the #1 food source problem to talk about first. Once we fix that, let’s discuss #2.

  • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    What a loaded question.

    Outside of the fact that a single cows life provides about 900 meals for humans, and the scraps left over make boots that last for a decade and also feed our cats and dogs. Plus, it’s delicious.

    • 7heo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yeah so, the amount of meals is correct. But that’s about it. I mean, I can’t say about the taste, to each their own, but one kg of cow meat needs two dozen kg of grain.

      That’s about as inefficient as it gets.

      As for the leather, the industry doesn’t like products that last a decade, so it isn’t actually using the leather in such a way. Industrial leather boots last a year tops.

      Finally, pet food is made out of discarded cuts of meat, the uglies, etc. But also lots of cereals, and vegetables.

      So we could really afford eating less meat. It isn’t good for anything. Not for us, not for the other species (certainly not for the cows, that get often half assed butchered in a hasty way because of quotas and profit), and absolutely not for the ecosystem.

      But I guess the taste is all that matters.