• Jon_Servo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Correlation != causation. Left unchecked, production will inevitably see some increase due to WHAT?! Increased population. However, anticipated growth hasn’t met expectations. Gee, almost like there’s a reason…

    After that, I wonder how much production would decrease if we stopped giving animal agriculture their multi-billion dollar shot in the arm every year from the USDA versus the few million that plant alternatives gets. Wonder what would happen if we reversed that…

    • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      production will inevitably see some increase due to WHAT

      i don’t think it’s inevitable that population increase leads to increased production. this is another example of an assertion of a causal link where no such link exists.

      • Jon_Servo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, the “lesson” you’re trying to teach is that just because the movement isn’t popular, it isn’t worth doing. You’re making logical fallacies to equate our morality-based struggle to something like needing gasoline to get to work because you refuse to agitate for better public transit or buying a fucking bicycle. Not only that, but your methodology is flawed, and I merely stated as such in your irrelevant context just to make a point. Your apathy to change doesn’t mean it isn’t worth doing. Slavery was considered a normal part of everyday life until people agitated against it. People had no qualms destroying the environment until people agitated against it. Animal abuse was rampant in the past, and now we’ve enacted laws against it. Your argument is trash because you are so apathetic to non-human suffering, you couldn’t possibly fathom the notion that we could do things better and treat others better. Instead of being the ones exploiting, we can be caretakers. All social movements start out small and slow. Once they hit a threshold point, they explode into the collective conscience. So yeah, I’m going to keep agitating to remind people that they’re the ones propping up this veritable holocaust where we murder billions of land animals every year for sensory pleasure, when a better way of living has been available to us for well over a hundred years now. Just that people use your hollow arguments to bemoan that it sounds like it’s not worth doing because it’s “too hard.” It’s not too hard, you’re just selfish. OR, you could opt to actually dabble in empathy and get in on the ground floor. You’d get to say you were vegan before it was cool.

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          you are so apathetic to non-human suffering, you couldn’t possibly fathom the notion that we could do things better and treat others better.

          this has nothing to do with the efficacy of buying beans

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          we murder billions of land animals every year for sensory pleasure

          I’m pretty sure most animals are killed for convenience or profit.

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, the “lesson” you’re trying to teach is that just because the movement isn’t popular, it isn’t worth doing.

          I told you what I meant. don’t put words in my mouth

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          people use your hollow arguments to bemoan that it sounds like it’s not worth doing because it’s “too hard.”

          I didn’t say that. you are arguing with a strawman

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          you could opt to actually dabble in empathy

          implying I don’t have empathy is a personal attack, not evidence that buying beans would shrink agricultural emissions.

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          you refuse to agitate for better public transit or buying a fucking bicycle.

          you don’t know what I do

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Slavery was considered a normal part of everyday life until people agitated against it. People had no qualms destroying the environment until people agitated against it. Animal abuse was rampant in the past, and now we’ve enacted laws against it.

          none of this was solved by buying beans

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          you’re just selfish.

          this is a personal attack, not evidence that buying beans will save the environment