• Tolc@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 days ago

    Veganism is such an elite issue like some people will fight everything except billionaires and the rich.

    Veganism cant be and shouldnt be promoted especially in global south where children are still malnourished. Veganism also leads to dehumanization of certain cultures.

        • Just_Lyin@lemmy.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 days ago

          I didn’t say it was feasible. Just knocking down an argument that meat is a better choice for feeding more people.

    • xxd@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      You know you can do both, right? Be vegan and fight billionaires. But I do somewhat agree that it is an elite issue, you do need to be in a somewhat privileged position to become vegan.

      But also… who is promoting the global south to go vegan? As far as I’m aware, most vegans just try to get the people in generally developed countries to go vegan, as you have plenty of choices there, and most people are not fighting malnourishment.

      And also, I think it’s perfectly justified and not dehumanizing to critique cultures that promote (animal) abuse. Culture is a terrible justification for anything, if that thing is actually harmful.

          • goedel@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 days ago

            they only compared retail costs. they didn’t account for people who get food for free or near free through poverty subsistence programs or hunting or fishing or farming their own. it basically didn’t cover poor people at all.

            • lalo@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 days ago

              Retail costs are still costs and plant based diets are globally around 30% cheaper than other diets. Where did I specify consumer (or any other particular) cost in my claim? Do you actually think the government giving free food means the food is cost free as well? Do you think self-sufficient people will affect the measure of the cost of food?

                • lalo@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 days ago

                  Specification is not needed, even you assumed these were retail costs from the get-go,

                  they only compared retail costs

                  on the next sentence you conflated retail costs with consumer cost

                  they didn’t account for people

                  which of course they didn’t, retail costs will be the same even if the person getting the items isn’t paying for them.

                  When someone says “this is 30% cheaper now”, any reasonable person would understand that they’re referring to the retail cost, not the consumer cost unless otherwise specified. Like “this is 30% cheaper on my food stamps”.

                  • goedel@discuss.tchncs.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    11 days ago

                    it seems like you understand exactly what i’m saying, but you need to somehow paint yourself as right and me as wrong. fine.

                    have a nice day.