People who eat imported off-season fruits and vegetables…
People who have children…
There are thousands of personal choices everyone could make to make the world a better place, and none of them will be effective on their own. We’re all thoroughly fucked because the rich control the world and they think they will be able to ride out the collapse on their private islands and gated farms. Nothing you and I can do will stop the apocalypse, so stop being judgemental about choices other people make, and just enjoy the ride.
Beef farming has a massive direct impact on the environment, with rainforest being cleared to make way for cattle. It’s so bad that you don’t even have to give it up to make a real difference - just eat less of it. Eat a different meat instead, which has less of an impact.
Of all the things you can do to help mitigate climate change, reducing the amount of beef you eat is probably the easiest, healthiest and cheapest thing you can do. The fact that people don’t makes the OP’s point.
Sure, but one person not eating beef doesn’t have a direct impact on beef farming. People are already eating less beef now because prices have become unrealistic for most people, and yet it’s not having a direct effect on the environment. Cattle herds in America are at a 30 year low, but it’s mostly small ranchers going out of business. Factory farming is still destroying the climate, the conglomerates are just relocating their herds to better hide the damage and reduce overhead costs.
Personal choices are good. People should make good personal choices, because it is what they believe and how they want to affect the world. It is healthier and cheaper to eat less beef. It’s also cruel and disgusting the way factory farms operate, and the processing practices will probably make a lot of people sick.
But your argument that people should eat less beef because it will help the environment is flawed and hollow. Cattle farming is bad for the environment, but it is not true that eating less of it will help the environment. Oligarchs are clearing the rainforests because we’ve stripped the carbon from American topsoil, and it’s now cheaper to import beef than it is to raise cows in the Midwest. That additional damage to what should be protected forests, not to mention the global shipping and transportation, more than offsets the reduction in the total number of cows. And it’s not like pig farming or chicken farming or fishing is much better for the environment.
True change cannot be acheived with personal choices. We need legislative action, and we need to demand it of our politicians. It needs to happen now, and it needs to be drastic. We need strict environmental regulations and strict enforcement. And none of that is likely, so you may as well enjoy your cheeseburger.
Sure, but one person not eating beef doesn’t have a direct impact on beef farming.
In the same way that one person voting makes no difference, but people do it anyway. You are taking an extremely nihilistic and defeatist position that seems at odds with the effort you put into writing the reply.
And none of that is likely, so you may as well enjoy your cheeseburger.
At least if you cut down or give up eating them you can tell yourself that you are doing something to not actively making the planet worse for everyone. Is cutting down the amount of meat you eat really such an awful proposition? There are health benefits too.
There is also a massive difference in the CO2 produced for different types of meat - chicken produces 1/10th of the emissions of beef:
Not doing something that has been proven to be bad for the planet is making an effort to not make things worse. I’m not sure how you can argue against basic logic.
all you need to do is read the LCA references they cite, in which it is explained that LCA data should not be combined, due to using disparate methodologies
It’s difficult to avoid nihilism neck deep into an apocalypse. But you’re right, I was being glib and dismissive. Sorry about that.
The reason I objected in the first place is that the oligarchy has used the personal choices conversation to quash criticisms across the board, and it’s extremely effective. You can’t complain about American manufacturing jobs going overseas because you drive an imported car. You can’t complain about slave labor because you buy Nikes or KitKats or strawberries picked by illegal immigrants. It’s a thought-terminating purity test that doesn’t even hold up to scrutiny.
Factory farming chickens (or pigs or fish or reduces carbon output, but comes with its own environmental horrors, like diseases, water contamination, pest control, etc. Everyone in the world could go full vegan tomorrow, and the oligarchy would be clear cutting the Amazon rainforest to plant soybeans and lentils the day after, because the problem has never been personal choices. We need systemic changes to fix systemic problems.
By all means, reduce your beef consumption. But if you want to actually reduce human-drive climate destruction, we need to start eating billionaires, not chickens.
Yes, you are totally correct in all that, but I’m coming from a personal perspective - self preservation in what seems like a hopeless situation. Yes, it’s all fucked and don’t stop trying to eat the billionaires, but if you can not play their game, even in a minor way, that is a small win for you personally. Not dancing to their tune is a better feeling than hopeless nihilism as you bite into another one of their burgers, giving them a little bit more money and power.
And if enough people did that, who knows - it might actually make a difference.
People who fly in planes…
People who drive cars…
People who work for corporations…
People who eat imported off-season fruits and vegetables…
People who have children…
There are thousands of personal choices everyone could make to make the world a better place, and none of them will be effective on their own. We’re all thoroughly fucked because the rich control the world and they think they will be able to ride out the collapse on their private islands and gated farms. Nothing you and I can do will stop the apocalypse, so stop being judgemental about choices other people make, and just enjoy the ride.
I agree with you but you are also undermining direct action.
People should be cutting all of that shit where ever possible
Obviously life is life but drinking water out of plastic bottles when 95% of US has safe tap water is peak braindead consumerism
choosing to shop in a different aisle in the grocery store is not direct action
Killing a specific parasite is ;)
You can’t do all the good the world needs but the world needs all the good you can do.
Beef farming has a massive direct impact on the environment, with rainforest being cleared to make way for cattle. It’s so bad that you don’t even have to give it up to make a real difference - just eat less of it. Eat a different meat instead, which has less of an impact.
Of all the things you can do to help mitigate climate change, reducing the amount of beef you eat is probably the easiest, healthiest and cheapest thing you can do. The fact that people don’t makes the OP’s point.
Sure, but one person not eating beef doesn’t have a direct impact on beef farming. People are already eating less beef now because prices have become unrealistic for most people, and yet it’s not having a direct effect on the environment. Cattle herds in America are at a 30 year low, but it’s mostly small ranchers going out of business. Factory farming is still destroying the climate, the conglomerates are just relocating their herds to better hide the damage and reduce overhead costs.
Personal choices are good. People should make good personal choices, because it is what they believe and how they want to affect the world. It is healthier and cheaper to eat less beef. It’s also cruel and disgusting the way factory farms operate, and the processing practices will probably make a lot of people sick.
But your argument that people should eat less beef because it will help the environment is flawed and hollow. Cattle farming is bad for the environment, but it is not true that eating less of it will help the environment. Oligarchs are clearing the rainforests because we’ve stripped the carbon from American topsoil, and it’s now cheaper to import beef than it is to raise cows in the Midwest. That additional damage to what should be protected forests, not to mention the global shipping and transportation, more than offsets the reduction in the total number of cows. And it’s not like pig farming or chicken farming or fishing is much better for the environment.
True change cannot be acheived with personal choices. We need legislative action, and we need to demand it of our politicians. It needs to happen now, and it needs to be drastic. We need strict environmental regulations and strict enforcement. And none of that is likely, so you may as well enjoy your cheeseburger.
In the same way that one person voting makes no difference, but people do it anyway. You are taking an extremely nihilistic and defeatist position that seems at odds with the effort you put into writing the reply.
At least if you cut down or give up eating them you can tell yourself that you are doing something to not actively making the planet worse for everyone. Is cutting down the amount of meat you eat really such an awful proposition? There are health benefits too.
There is also a massive difference in the CO2 produced for different types of meat - chicken produces 1/10th of the emissions of beef:
Source: https://ourworldindata.org/carbon-footprint-food-methane
but it’s not true. if i told you jumping jacks reduced global warming, how many would you do?
Well, what I said is true. I don’t really know what else to say if you are just going to ignore basic logic and facts.
you can say it’s true but you haven’t actually provided evidence
Not doing something that has been proven to be bad for the planet is making an effort to not make things worse. I’m not sure how you can argue against basic logic.
you are claiming it’s proven, but you haven’t actually provided the proof.
that graph is from poore-nemecek 2018, and should not be considered reliable.
Unlike random internet dudes, who are always 100% reliable.
all you need to do is read the LCA references they cite, in which it is explained that LCA data should not be combined, due to using disparate methodologies
It’s difficult to avoid nihilism neck deep into an apocalypse. But you’re right, I was being glib and dismissive. Sorry about that.
The reason I objected in the first place is that the oligarchy has used the personal choices conversation to quash criticisms across the board, and it’s extremely effective. You can’t complain about American manufacturing jobs going overseas because you drive an imported car. You can’t complain about slave labor because you buy Nikes or KitKats or strawberries picked by illegal immigrants. It’s a thought-terminating purity test that doesn’t even hold up to scrutiny.
Factory farming chickens (or pigs or fish or reduces carbon output, but comes with its own environmental horrors, like diseases, water contamination, pest control, etc. Everyone in the world could go full vegan tomorrow, and the oligarchy would be clear cutting the Amazon rainforest to plant soybeans and lentils the day after, because the problem has never been personal choices. We need systemic changes to fix systemic problems.
By all means, reduce your beef consumption. But if you want to actually reduce human-drive climate destruction, we need to start eating billionaires, not chickens.
Yes, you are totally correct in all that, but I’m coming from a personal perspective - self preservation in what seems like a hopeless situation. Yes, it’s all fucked and don’t stop trying to eat the billionaires, but if you can not play their game, even in a minor way, that is a small win for you personally. Not dancing to their tune is a better feeling than hopeless nihilism as you bite into another one of their burgers, giving them a little bit more money and power.
And if enough people did that, who knows - it might actually make a difference.