Animal liberation and the left.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

I just wanted to throw this conversation piece out there and see what the response would be. I've always wondered why animal liberation is not part of the program of alot of the left parties out there.

The fact that over 1 billion animals are slaughtered every year, a huge part being for the fast food industry.If we are going fight against exploitation and the suffering of the human species, I ask what makes the suffering and exploitation of animals any less important.

We suppose to fight for those that can't fight for themselves. And with these corporates pigs destroying the habitat of various animals around the world which is causing the extinction or near extinction of many species, it's up to us, in our many papers, to throw a spotlight on this issue.

One example of this is the building of strip malls. These corporate pigs destroy the hibitat of animals which destroys their food source. Now the animals begin to wander out on to highways, killed by cars, or tearing apart trash bags or trash cans of people who live nearby,looking for food. Now the animals are viewed as the problem, not man.

I don't know if you've viewed film of how animals are treated in these slaughter houses, but if one does not become a vegitarian for health reasons, one should do it for humanitarian reasons alone.

[Volcanicity]

I just wanted to throw this conversation piece out there and see what the response would be. I've always wondered why animal liberation is not part of the program of alot of the left parties out there.

The fact that over 1 billion animals are slaughtered every year, a huge part being for the fast food industry.If we are going fight against exploitation and the suffering of the human species, I ask what makes the suffering and exploitation of animals any less important.

We suppose to fight for those that can't fight for themselves. And with these corporates pigs destroying the habitat of various animals around the world which is causing the extinction or near extinction of many species, it's up to us, in our many papers, to throw a spotlight on this issue.

One example of this is the building of strip malls. These corporate pigs destroy the hibitat of animals which destroys their food source. Now the animals begin to wander out on to highways, killed by cars, or tearing apart trash bags or trash cans of people who live nearby,looking for food. Now the animals are viewed as the problem, not man.

I don't know if you've viewed film of how animals are treated in these slaughter houses, but if one does not become a vegitarian for health reasons, one should do it for humanitarian reasons alone.
The difference is the working class need to eat to live,and most cant afford to pick and choose.Whereas stripping trees and destroying habitats for the cosmetic industry is done by capitalist businessmen who couldnt give a shit about anybody or anything except profit.And lets not forget its not just animals affected it also affects local tribes people who are losing there way of life.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Not this lifestylist hippie-shit again. I think there's like a million threads on this already.




I don't know if you've viewed film of how animals are treated in these slaughter houses, but if one does not become a vegitarian for health reasons, one should do it for humanitarian reasons alone.

Ever wonder why it is called "humanitarian"?

Seen too many PETA propaganda videos? Not all slaughter houses are that bad. Oh, the suffering of the poor animals! And humans imagine animals in the shoes of themselves.

Strip-malls and their associated sprawling housing developments are a problem of their own insofar as they are wasteful in the sense of transportation, energy and so on so forth, so they should be avoided; and obviously excessive suffering, which is to say pointless sadistic torture of animals, should not be encouraged, nor waste in general, but some nonsensical absurd "animal liberation" is, to put it simply, profane.

[ComradeOm]

We suppose to fight for those that can't fight for themselvesNo, we're supposed to fight for the working class. Socialism (less so 'the left') is not some mast that every wacko or 'progressive' cause/issue can be pinned to. It entails a set of policies that are supposed to positively benefit the working class. Animal 'liberation' does not factor into this. Historically very few communist groups have embraced this cause because it is simply not relevant to the socialist milieu


If we are going fight against exploitation and the suffering of the human species, I ask what makes the suffering and exploitation of animals any less importantBecause they are not human. Simple as. Really, what sort of person considers the suffering of animals to be on par with the suffering and exploitation of humans?


The fact that over 1 billion animals are slaughtered every yearYou see this as a billion dead animals whereas I see it as countless fed humans. Which is more important? The fact that I even have to pose the question is problematic

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Not this lifestylist hippie-shit again. I think there's like a million threads on this already.



Ever wonder why it is called "humanitarian"?

Seen too many PETA propaganda videos? Not all slaughter houses are that bad. Oh, the suffering of the poor animals! And humans imagine animals in the shoes of themselves.

Strip-malls and their associated sprawling housing developments are a problem of their own insofar as they are wasteful in the sense of transportation, energy and so on so forth, so they should be avoided; and obviously excessive suffering, which is to say pointless sadistic torture of animals, should not be encouraged, nor waste in general, but some nonsensical absurd "animal liberation" is, to put it simply, profane.



hippy shit? not all slaughter houses are bad? sounds kind of like a right wing response. to think that the suffering of living beings should be viewed as being any less important than humans is profane.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

The difference is the working class need to eat to live,and most cant afford to pick and choose.Whereas stripping trees and destroying habitats for the cosmetic industry is done by capitalist businessmen who couldnt give a shit about anybody or anything except profit.And lets not forget its not just animals affected it also affects local tribes people who are losing there way of life.


to say that one can't live without eating dead animals flesh means you have fallen for the meat industries propaganda. I weigh 185 pounds. haven't eaten dead flesh for over 20 years.

2-do you realize how much top soil is destroyed by cattle being raised for the fast food industry, which is also responsible for the health crisis in this country.

[Thirsty Crow]

hippy shit? not all slaughter houses are bad? sounds kind of like a right wing response. to think that the suffering of living beings should be viewed as being any less important to humans is profane.
Is there any other sustainable way to feed the entire population of this planet (this presupposes complete, global vegan of vegetarian "hegemony")?
That's the question you should ask yourself if what you're getting at is the compklete and global abandonment of carnivore diet.

If that's not what you're getting at...what are you exactly getting at, then?

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

No, we're supposed to fight for the working class. Socialism (less so 'the left') is not some mast that every wacko or 'progressive' cause/issue can be pinned to. It entails a set of policies that are supposed to positively benefit the working class. Animal 'liberation' does not factor into this. Historically very few communist groups have embraced this cause because it is simply not relevant to the socialist milieu

Because they are not human. Simple as. Really, what sort of person considers the suffering of animals to be on par with the suffering and exploitation of humans?

You see this as a billion dead animals whereas I see it as countless fed humans. Which is more important? The fact that I even have to pose the question is problematic


IT DOES NOT FACTOR INTO THIS? SAYS WHO? YOUR PARTIES HIERARCHY. I really, really, for the life of me em SHOCKED to read this. I'll tell you what kind of person, the same person who calls himself/herself a communist that fights against the abuse and expolitation of the earth and it's resources that is being destroyed for profit, the same person that fights against the destruction of life, be it animal of human, for profit. And to think that their is any less meaningful means you better sit back and reavaluate your "revolutionary" politics

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

to say that one can't live without eating dead animals flesh means you have fallen for the meat industries propaganda. I weigh 185 pounds. haven't eaten dead flesh for over 20 years.

2-do you realize how much top soil is destroyed by cattle being raised for the fast food industry, which is also responsible for the health crisis in this country.

I don't want to live without DEAD FLESH. Is that some word you use to make it sound icky or something? Typical vegetarian supremacists, elitists and acting all morally superior.

A lot of top soil is ruined also by bad farming practices to grow your greens.

And right-wing response? Because I don't support animal rights nonsense? Animals are not comparable to humans. One cannot liberate something that cannot know liberty. Mostly just environmentalist and hippies and lifestylist leftists are the ones that go on about animal liberation this and that and get excited whenever the ALF terrorists strike again.

What about the plants? How do you justify the utter murder of plants which you commit on a daily basis? Plants have feelings too, why do they not deserve to be considered? Oh, they're different from animals you say. The human animal is also different from the other animals.

[Volcanicity]

to say that one can't live without eating dead animals flesh means you have fallen for the meat industries propaganda. I weigh 185 pounds. haven't eaten dead flesh for over 20 years.

2-do you realize how much top soil is destroyed by cattle being raised for the fast food industry, which is also responsible for the health crisis in this country.
I said not all working class people can afford to pick and choose what they eat.Fucking read the damn post properly. I havent fallen for anything,Ive been a vegetarian for 13 years. It must be cold up there on your high horse.

[danyboy27]

hippy shit? not all slaughter houses are bad? sounds kind of like a right wing response. to think that the suffering of living beings should be viewed as being any less important than humans is profane.

hating liberal hippies are not something reserved to ring wing folks.

and this''suffering'' is not that common, my father used to work in a slaughter house long time ago, and the last thing people working there want is torture and slow death, what they want is a quick kill so they can move to the next annimal.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Is there any other sustainable way to feed the entire population of this planet (this presupposes complete, global vegan of vegetarian "hegemony")?
That's the question you should ask yourself if what you're getting at is the compklete and global abandonment of carnivore diet.

If that's not what you're getting at...what are you exactly getting at, then?


1-only 70% of the land is being farmed. a huge % of it is for cattle grazing for fast food resturants. this grazing destroys the top soil which destroys any possibility of that land being used again.Now if you nationalize the land,convert the land to growing fruits and vegtables and grains and put the 30% into use, there will be plenty for all.

Right now farmer are paid NOT to grow, it keeps proces up at the store. The goverment orders famers to destroy a % of crops, it keeps prices up at the store, The buys back a % of crops to keep it off the market and store it in warehouses, it keeps prices up at the store.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

1-only 70% of the land is being farmed. a huge % of it is for cattle grazing for fast food resturants. this grazing destroys the top soil which destroys any possibility of that land being used again.Now if you nationalize the land,convert the land to growing fruits and vegtables and grains and put the 30% into use, there will be plenty for all.

You do know turning virgin land into farmland is also destructive to animal habitats, right?

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

I don't want to live without DEAD FLESH. Is that some word you use to make it sound icky or something? Typical vegetarian supremacists, elitists and acting all morally superior.

A lot of top soil is ruined also by bad farming practices to grow your greens.

And right-wing response? Because I don't support animal rights nonsense? Animals are not comparable to humans. One cannot liberate something that cannot know liberty. Mostly just environmentalist and hippies and lifestylist leftists are the ones that go on about animal liberation this and that and get excited whenever the ALF terrorists strike again.

What about the plants? How do you justify the utter murder of plants which you commit on a daily basis? Plants have feelings too, why do they not deserve to be considered? Oh, they're different from animals you say. The human animal is also different from the other animals.


ONE CAN NOT LIBERATE SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T KNOW LIBERTY? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? try living in a cage lately? tried living in complete darkness with your head locked between boards? that what a calf experiences so you can eat veal. tried living in a cage with dozens of other with no water or food, and from this they are eating their own shit, and begin eating each other. AND YOU SAY THEY DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE OF FREEDOM!!! HAVE YOU EVER SAW AN ANIMAL BEING FORCED, BEING BEATEN WITH A BOARD, FORCING IT TO WALK TOWARD A FAT JAR HEAD WORKER WITH A KNIFE READY TO SLICE IT'S THROAT. keep ignoring reality, just like the rest of the people. Ignorence is bliss.

[ComradeOm]

IT DOES NOT FACTOR INTO THIS? SAYS WHO?Pretty much the entire history of the socialist movement. Animal liberation is simply not something that has interested most of those working for working class emancipation. So I'm not going to sugarcoat it - the reason animal liberation is not part of 'the left's' programme is because almost nobody on 'the left' cares about it


And to think that their is any less meaningful means you better sit back and reavaluate your "revolutionary" politicsAnyone who considers the life of a cow, for example, to be of equal worth to that of a human should really sit back and consider their own opinion of humanity. It is a staggeringly misanthropic attitude to take and one that is completely alien to socialism

[howblackisyourflag]

I grew up on a farm but even I cant understand why their is such hostility among lefties towards those who support animal rights.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

hating liberal hippies are not something reserved to ring wing folks.

and this''suffering'' is not that common, my father used to work in a slaughter house long time ago, and the last thing people working there want is torture and slow death, what they want is a quick kill so they can move to the next annimal.

I'm sure the animals are happy about that.

[Volcanicity]

I grew up on a farm but even I cant understand why their is such hostility among lefties towards those who support animal rights.
Maybe because we value the human race a bit more.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Pretty much the entire history of the socialist movement. Animal liberation is simply not something that has interested most of those working for working class emancipation. So I'm not going to sugarcoat it - the reason animal liberation is not part of 'the left's' programme is because almost nobody on 'the left' cares about it

Anyone who considers the life of a cow, for example, to be of equal worth to that of a human should really sit back and consider their own opinion of humanity. It is a staggeringly misanthropic attitude to take and one that is completely alien to socialism



ooooh man, being a socialist means caring about life on this planet, PERIOD!!!!HOW CAN YOU VIEW CARING ABOUT LIFE ON THIS PLANET AS BEING MISANTHROPIC. this includes mankind.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Maybe because we value the human race a bit more.

being a socailist means caring about life period. stopping thev abuse and exploitation of the earth and every living being on it for profit.

[Volcanicity]

being a socailist means caring about life period. stopping thev abuse and exploitation of the earth and every living being on it for profit.
Does that mean you float in the air so as not to tread on an ant.You need to seriously look at your priorities.

[Thirsty Crow]

I don't want to live without DEAD FLESH. Is that some word you use to make it sound icky or something? Typical vegetarian supremacists, elitists and acting all morally superior.


Ach but you see, I could imagine a global network of communist societies in which hunting would be an option for us carnivores, and not mass scale slaughter.

Just for the record: I ain't one of them animal liberationist guys. I don't have an informed opinion on this issue, but I sympathize with some aspects of their concerns. However, I seriously doubt that they have done enough research in order to prove the sustainability of exclusively vegan/vegetarian diet. And their fervent dogmatism may sometimes be alienating for other comrades on the "far left".

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

The problem is that people, through their own selfishness, do not want to change their lifestyle, just as the rich who live off the exploitations of the worker, they, the meat eaters, do not want to change, and by paying their money for dead flesh, they are benefiting and helping to contribute to the suffering and exploitation of animals that feel love and pain.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Does that mean you float in the air so as not to tread on an ant.You need to seriously look at your priorities.


yours are typical far reaching rediculous responses which I will not honor with a response.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

being a socailist means caring about life period. stopping thev abuse and exploitation of the earth and every living being on it for profit.

No it doesn't. I don't know what rock you've been living under, but that's not what socialism is at all.

Profit is bad, yes, but eating animals, no.

[ComradeOm]

ooooh man, being a socialist means caring about life on this planet, PERIOD!!!!No. No, it doesn't. It means "caring about" the working class. Animals are not part of this constituency; they are not part of class struggle; they are not part of human society; none of these are adversely impacted by animal 'enslavement'. Ergo animal liberation has never particularly concerned the socialist movement


HOW CAN YOU VIEW CARING ABOUT LIFE ON THIS PLANET AS BEING MISANTHROPIC. this includes mankind.Because misanthropy does not mean 'hating life', it means 'hating mankind'. As in it only applies to homo sapiens (or anthrōpos to be classical about it). So to reiterate, anyone who considers animals to be the equal of humans must have a very poor opinion of the latter

[Vanguard1917]

You see this as a billion dead animals whereas I see it as countless fed humans. Which is more important? The fact that I even have to pose the question is problematic

They see it as 'a billion dead animals' rather than in the positive way you describe because, simply, 'animal rights' activists are elitist misanthropes. Their elevated view of animals is caused by, or at least goes hand in hand with, a diminished view of people.

Hence why 'animal rights' irrational nonsense is alien to the real socialist -- i.e. radical humanist -- tradition.

[Volcanicity]

yours are typical far reaching rediculous responses which I will not honor with a response.
:laugh::laugh::laugh:

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Ach but you see, I could imagine a global network of communist societies in which hunting would be an option for us carnivores, and not mass scale slaughter.

Just for the record: I ain't one of them animal liberationist guys. I don't have an informed opinion on this issue, but I sympathize with some aspects of their concerns. However, I seriously doubt that they have done enough research in order to prove the sustainability of exclusively vegan/vegetarian diet. And their fervent dogmatism may sometimes be alienating for other comrades on the "far left".


I'm glad that you mentioned that. I have never, ever been worried about taking a position and alienating people, be it comrade or not. because to do so means lowering your standards, your goal is to go against the grain, which we are doing by being a communist anyway, and raise others to your standards.

[Thirsty Crow]

Because misanthropy does not mean 'hating life', it means 'hating mankind'. As in it only applies to homo sapiens (or anthrōpos to be classical about it). So to reiterate, anyone who considers animals to be the equal of humans must have a very poor opinion of the latter
And what would "equal" exactly mean here?
I don't regard humans as some supernatural beings completely detached from nature (i.e. other species), and it seems that you do since you a priori posit the superiority of human beings (probably due to factual superiority in the food chain). In other words, your dilemma is false, in my opinion.
I regard both humans and animals as offspring of the same source. And if by technological advances human societies manage to avoid the necessity of carnivore diet (after a successful social revolution; that is a prerequisite)...maybe I would become an animal liberationist.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

ONE CAN NOT LIBERATE SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T KNOW LIBERTY? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? try living in a cage lately? tried living in complete darkness with your head locked between boards? that what a calf experiences so you can eat veal. tried living in a cage with dozens of other with no water or food, and from this they are eating their own shit, and begin eating each other. AND YOU SAY THEY DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE OF FREEDOM!!! HAVE YOU EVER SAW AN ANIMAL BEING FORCED, BEING BEATEN WITH A BOARD, FORCING IT TO WALK TOWARD A FAT JAR HEAD WORKER WITH A KNIFE READY TO SLICE IT'S THROAT. keep ignoring reality, just like the rest of the people. Ignorence is bliss.

OH MAN I WRITE CAPS AM I REAL IMPORTANT AND SHIT NOW? DOES IT GIVE MY INEPT ARGUMENTS MORE WEIGHT, DOES IT MAKE MY VOICE MORE LISTENED TO?

Animals have no understanding of freedom, they have no capacity to contemplate their situation in any meaningful way.

"FAT JAR HEAD WORKER"

People do what they have to do to get by. I notice some elitist anti-worker sentiment here, typical of you loud-mouthed dogmatic self-satisfied morally superior vegan/vegetarian animal rights people.

Your inane emotional arguments are unpersuasive, just makes you sound insane.

Regardless; no, I don't think the world should be exploited for profit, I don't think animals should be exploited for profit; but our perspective is different: I think this is the fault of capitalism, I don't think it is automatically bad to eat animals, whereas you are a delusional caps-locker who fancy that the life of an animal - well, mammal anyway, I doubt you feel the same compassion for fishes, molluscs and insects, or bacteria - is equal to that of a human being. Like many animal rights people you are putting an image of humanity, of human kind, into the bodies of the animals you so dearly care about, you idealise them as simple purity and inalienably "right" juxtaposed against the "wrongs" of modern humanity. Animal life is barbaric, sick and depraved, full of rape and abuse, even without the intervention of humanity.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

No. No, it doesn't. It means "caring about" the working class. Animals are not part of this constituency; they are not part of class struggle; they are not part of human society; none of these are adversely impacted by animal 'enslavement'. Ergo animal liberation has never particularly concerned the socialist movement

Because misanthropy does not mean 'hating life', it means 'hating mankind'. As in it only applies to homo sapiens (or anthrōpos to be classical about it). So to reiterate, anyone who considers animals to be the equal of humans must have a very poor opinion of the latter


You missed the point, being a communist means, also, to be an environmentalist, and with that, being an environmentalist means caring about life on this planet.

2-why do you feel the need to eat dead animals? why must an animal give it's life for you? there are certain parts of African that still practice canibalism. since it's legal in their culture, I guess if they wanted to eat you, you would say that they had a right based upon "it's their culture".

[Barry Lyndon]

It's not that animal rights is of no importance, but in the society I live in 'animal rights' seems to be primarily the vocation of moralistic elitist liberals.

It reminds me of this program I saw on CNN I believe, where the newscasters were reacting in horror to the fact that a provincial governor in China ordered all the dogs in his district killed because three people had been attacked by rabid dogs.
Sure, a pretty awful story, but do people who are horrified at this story ever react in a similar manner to the fact that human children in China are being worked in sweatshops, and are often killed in horrific accidents out of a Dickens novel? No, they don't.

This is what sickens me about 'animal rights' discourse in the US, is that it is based on the unspoken premise that the lives of animals are superior to the lives of whole categories of human beings. How else can you explain this in a society where many pets are better fed, receive better medical care, and live in more comfortable homes then millions of human beings within the US, never mind other parts of the world? This to me is repulsive beyond belief.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

You missed the point, being a communist means, also, to be an environmentalist, and with that, being an environmentalist means caring about life on this planet.

2-why do you feel the need to eat dead animals? why must an animal give it's life for you? there are certain parts of african that still partice canibalism. since it's legal in their culture, I guess if they wanted to eat you, you would say that they had a right based upon "it's their culture".

What the hell? :laugh:

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

OH MAN I WRITE CAPS AM I REAL IMPORTANT AND SHIT NOW? DOES IT GIVE MY INEPT ARGUMENTS MORE WEIGHT, DOES IT MAKE MY VOICE MORE LISTENED TO?

Animals have no understanding of freedom, they have no capacity to contemplate their situation in any meaningful way.

"FAT JAR HEAD WORKER"

People do what they have to do to get by. I notice some elitist anti-worker sentiment here, typical of you loud-mouthed dogmatic self-satisfied morally superior vegan/vegetarian animal rights people.

Your inane emotional arguments are unpersuasive, just makes you sound insane.

Regardless; no, I don't think the world should be exploited for profit, I don't think animals should be exploited for profit; but our perspective is different: I think this is the fault of capitalism, I don't think it is automatically bad to eat animals, whereas you are a delusional caps-locker who fancy that the life of an animal - well, mammal anyway, I doubt you feel the same compassion for fishes, molluscs and insects, or bacteria - is equal to that of a human being. Like many animal rights people you are putting an image of humanity, of human kind, into the bodies of the animals you so dearly care about, you idealise them as simple purity and inalienably "right" juxtaposed against the "wrongs" of modern humanity. Animal life is barbaric, sick and depraved, full of rape and abuse, even without the intervention of humanity.


that's right, focus on the caps, not the issue. Babble, pure babble. To say that animals have no capacity to understand their situation is really, really elitist.
2- animal life is sick and barbaric LOL LOL LOL LOL have YOU taken a good, good look at what the wonderful human race does to one another. wake the hell up.

[Sam_b]

You missed the point, being a communist means, also, to be an environmentalist, and with that, being an environmentalist means caring about life on this planet.

No it doesn't, if we're taking your definition of environmentalism as being that which necessitates vegetarianism and abstract notions of animals and 'rights'.


2-why do you feel the need to eat dead animals? why must an animal give it's life for you? there are certain parts of african that still partice canibalism. since it's legal in their culture, I guess if they wanted to eat you, you would say that they had a right based upon "it's their culture".

People often feel the need to eat animals because they are a good source of protein and taste pretty good, too. Why should a tree give up its life for wood? This is the same question you are really asking. Animals are a part of the environment that we can use, i'm not going to put an animal's life on an equal parallel of that of a human. For me, it shows a complete lack of priorities and direction. Right now we have imperialist wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, workers operating for slave wages across the world and endangering their lives by trying to provide for their families. Would you seriously suggest that the life of an animal is as important as this?

Its clasic lifestylism which des not root itself in any real class politics. By all means, don't eat meat. But don't go preaching as if this is somewhat a necessity of being a leftist, and jumping down the throats of some workers who have the choice of eating meat if they wish, one of the few choices some workers actually get under capitalism.


wake the hell up

I think rather, if you're going to preach how vegetarians are somehow 'better' and focusing your priorities on the animal rather than the human, you should probably shut the fuck up.

[Volcanicity]

It's not that animal rights is of no importance, but in the society I live in 'animal rights' seems to be primarily the vocation of moralistic elitist liberals.

It reminds me of this program I saw on CNN I believe, where the newscasters were reacting in horror to the fact that a provincial governor in China ordered all the dogs in his district killed because three people had been attacked by rabid dogs.
Sure, a pretty awful story, but do people who are horrified at this story ever react in a similar manner to the fact that human children in China are being worked in sweatshops, and are often killed in horrific accidents out of a Dickens novel? No, they don't.

This is what sickens me about 'animal rights' discourse in the US, is that it is based on the unspoken premise that the lives of animals are superior to the lives of whole categories of human beings. How else can you explain this in a society where many pets are better fed, receive better medical care, and live in more comfortable homes then millions of human beings within the US, never mind other parts of the world? This to me is repulsive beyond belief.
Dont forget the people who leave millions of pounds to there cat in their wills.the priorities of some people are so fuckin wrong.

[mykittyhasaboner]

If we take "animal liberation" to it's logical conclusion, then that would entail giving animals the same rights as humans. Or at least i would think so, right? What other kind of conclusion is left to be made? This would present all kinds of problems for how humans would treat animals; it would strain human productivity to the point where providing for all other animals and ensuring their safety would most likely lead to adverse affects for humanity.

Aside from the fact that we, as humans, have to give animals rights, because they cannot come up with such a concept on their own--how does one propose to provide all life on earth the kind of rights and benefits that humanity deserves? Are humans going to bend over backwards to feed and house every animal in the wild? I get the feeling that by bestowing animals with equal rights to humans, humans would knowingly enslave themselves to animals.

If the issue is simply ending animal suffering, and this is all one proposes instead of giving animals equal rights, then I would imagine many people today would arbitrarily starve. It would be hard to call oneself a socialist if you would support that. Besides, "animal suffering" takes place in the wild. I doubt a lion gives a shit about a gazelle's feelings.

[Barry Lyndon]

The irony of animal rights fanatics is that the animals they love so much are incapable of feeling the same compassion about them that they do about the animals. If they were dying and there were no other source of food around, many of those animals would simply eat them. That is because animal's are not moral or immoral, they are amoral- they do what they do to survive. To think otherwise is to reject Charles Darwin in favor of Walt Disney.

[Vanguard1917]

You missed the point, being a communist means, also, to be an environmentalist

Your communism might 'mean' this, but i think ComradeOm was talking about actual communism. The communism of people like Marx, Engels and Lenin and organisations like the Bolshevik party had no time for irrational notions like 'animal rights' or environmentalism.



2-why do you feel the need to eat dead animals?


The vast majority of human beings like to eat certain animals because their flesh provides them with nutrition and enjoyment.

But, of course, 'animal rights' activists, the minoritarian elitists that they are, don't give a shit about what the majority of humanity thinks or desires. They think that they know what is best for people and they want to enforce their idiotic views on to everyone else.

Meanwhile, meat production and consumption increases as a result of increased wealth, indicating that the vast majority of humankind in practice wholly rejects 'animal rights' irrationalism.

[ComradeOm]

And what would "equal" exactly mean here?As in 'of equal worth'. That is, that the life of a sheep is of equal worth of that of a human or that the suffering of an animal is of equal concern as that of a woman

Nobody 'likes' animal cruelty, nobody wishes that it continue for the sake of pain, but it takes a special sort of mind to raise the suffering of cattle to that of humans


I don't regard humans as some supernatural beings completely detached from nature (i.e. other species), and it seems that you do since you a priori posit the superiority of human beings (probably due to factual superiority in the food chain). In other words, your dilemma is false, in my opinionI can't believe that this is even open to discussion. Tell you what, when a sheep is capable of rebutting my argument then I'll concede that humans are perhaps not superior


You missed the point, being a communist means, also, to be an environmentalistNo it doesn't


why do you feel the need to eat dead animals?Because I like the taste. Nothing beats a large dripping sirloin or a nicely roasted duck. Although even the ham sandwich I made earlier (probably 90% water, 8% miscellaneous, and 2% pig) was pretty good


there are certain parts of african that still partice canibalism. since it's legal in their culture, I guess if they wanted to eat you, you would say that they had a right based upon "it's their culture". No, that's cultural relativism and not something that I've endorsed in this thread or elsewhere. By this stage you really are running out of ideas

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

that's right, focus on the caps, not the issue. Babble, pure babble. To say that animals have no capacity to understand their situation is really, really elitist.
2- animal life is sick and barbaric LOL LOL LOL LOL have YOU taken a good, good look at what the wonderful human race does to one another. wake the hell up.

Human barbarity and wickedness in many ways mirror that of animals towards one another.

So you think animals have equal power of thought and reason to that of a human being?

And lastly, you haven't explained why you are okay with eating plant matter but not animal matter? Do plants also not deserve the same rights that animals do, and if so, why do they not? And what about the molluscs? You only talk of mammals. You animal rights people are always like that. Focus on that which you more easily can somehow project yourself onto, i.e. mammals.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

As in 'of equal worth'. That is, that the life of a sheep is of equal worth of that of a human or that the suffering of an animal is of equal concern as that of a woman

Nobody 'likes' animal cruelty, nobody wishes that it continue for the sake of pain, but it takes a special sort of mind to raise the suffering of cattle to that of humans

I can't believe that this is even open to discussion. Tell you what, when a sheep is capable of rebutting my argument then I'll concede that humans are perhaps not superior

No it doesn't

Because I like the taste. Nothing beats a large dripping sirloin or a nicely roasted duck. Although even the ham sandwich I made earlier (probably 90% water, 8% miscellaneous, and 2% pig) was pretty good

No, that's cultural relativism and not something that I've endorsed in this thread or elsewhere. By this stage you really are running out of ideas


"Because you like the taste" yes, that means an animal has no say in it's life ending because some clogged artery meat eater can't control his desires, and he doesn't care how his desires lead to the suffering and death of another living being. yeah, real, real revolutionary.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

"Because you like the taste" yes, that means an animal has no say in it's life ending because some clogged artery meat eater can't control his desires, and he doesn't care how his desires lead to the suffering and death of another living being. yeah, real, real revolutionary.

An animal has no way of conveying how it wants its life to end (it's instinct simply tells it to avoid such) regardless of what cognitive abilities a pale ill-fed sickly-looking vegan might ascribe to it. You're soooo revolutionary, I mean you even more or less admitted on the past page that you're just a communist to "go against the grain", like it's some sort of obstinate opposition for oppositions sake, "oh, that's so mainstream, let's go against it!". Vapid lifestylism.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Human barbarity and wickedness in many ways mirror that of animals towards one another.

So you think animals have equal power of thought and reason to that of a human being?

And lastly, you haven't explained why you are okay with eating plant matter but not animal matter? Do plants also not deserve the same rights that animals do, and if so, why do they not? And what about the molluscs? You only talk of mammals. You animal rights people are always like that. Focus on that which you more easily can somehow project yourself onto, i.e. mammals.


being That I have to explain this amazes me, here we go, does a plant feel love? does a plant scream in pain while it's having it's throat slit open, would you eat your dog, and if not, why not? it a plant a companion, does a plant have a heart beat, does it bleed, does it have emotions, does it have mental processes? no, animals do.

[danyboy27]

being That I have to explain this amazes me, here we go, does a plant feel love? does a plant scream in pain while it's having it's throat slit open, would you eat your dog, and if not, why not? it a plant a companion, does a plant have a heart beat, does it bleed, does it have emotions, does it have mental processes? no, animals do.

actually, plant scream when they are hurt, its just not shocking enough to make kitten lover sad.

[Sam_b]

it a plant a companion, does a plant have a heart beat, does it bleed, does it have emotions, does it have mental processes? no, animals do.

...and?

[Vanguard1917]

"Because you like the taste" yes, that means an animal has no say in it's life ending

No, it really doesn't. I've never heard an animal say anything. Have you?



some clogged artery meat eater can't control his desires, and he doesn't care how his desires lead to the suffering and death of another living being.


Very openly displaying your utter contempt of human beings, the vast majority of whom eat meat.

Hence the point we're making: 'animal rights' is first and foremost motivated by a dislike of people.

[ComradeOm]

"Because you like the taste" yes, that means an animal has no say in it's lifeCorrect. Which is really the point - the animal is entirely unable to express any such opposition to the idea of being eaten. It doesn't even comprehend that my stomach is its final destination. This is not a matter of capitalism, or 'the system', or class consciousness, but simple biology. Animals are not human... amazing that this simple truth has to be hammered home so

The mistake you are making (one of them at least) is in believing that rejecting the above is somehow a prerequisite for revolutionary politics. Nothing could be further from the truth. 'Animal liberation' is, at best, a complete irrelevancy for the socialist movement. At worst, it produces the attitude that people are no better than cattle

Incidentally, I wasn't planning on it but all this talk of animals has made me hungry. I think I'll do a nice beef stew for myself tonight. It'll taste all the sweeter when I think of you shouting 'murderer' and 'dead flesh'

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

An animal has no way of conveying how it wants its life to end (it's instinct simply tells it to avoid such) regardless of what cognitive abilities a pale ill-fed sickly-looking vegan might ascribe to it. You're soooo revolutionary, I mean you even more or less admitted on the past page that you're just a communist to "go against the grain", like it's some sort of obstinate opposition for oppositions sake, "oh, that's so mainstream, let's go against it!". Vapid lifestylism.



No, it means that you have a movement that through party hierarchy, says, this is the position that WE WILL TAKE, and the automata go along, afraid to disagree and put forward an apposing postion. Well, no one should be intimidated to go against authority, if that's the case, why are you a communist? to be different?

And yes, going against the grain IS revolutionary. And untill people shed ALL capitalist ways of living and thinking, then all you are is another cog in the wheel, you are just like all the rest. just waving a red flag, but living like the rest.

[Thirsty Crow]

Nobody 'likes' animal cruelty, nobody wishes that it continue for the sake of pain, but it takes a special sort of mind to raise the suffering of cattle to that of humans
Suffering is suffering. But I agree - priorities are priorities. Human suffering should be in the spotlight. However, I'd like to point you to the rest of my argument which you didn't notice, apparently. You may like your sirloin or a duck, as I do, but what what about the possibility of "animal liberation" in the future? Would you consider it or would you dismiss it on grounds of your personal preferences when it comes to food?

But once again, I disagree with the emphasis which OP puts on animal liberation because the existing conditions under which humans live (if that's the right word; maybe it would be better to call it "barely survive if they survive at all").

One can disagree with this approach (i.e. animal liberation) on grounds of (revolutionary) strategy (my disagreement) and sustainability (I don't know enooguh on that point). But to dismiss the notion entirely is not conducive to what some users believe to be "true Marxism/communism/socialism", but something much different.

[Thirsty Crow]

Incidentally, I wasn't planning on it but all this talk of animals has made me hungry. I think I'll do a nice beef stew for myself tonight. It'll taste all the sweeter when I think of you shouting 'murderer' and 'dead flesh'
I'll go with pork steak leftovers from yesterday :D

[danyboy27]

No, it means that you have a movement that through party hierarchy, says, this is the position that WE WILL TAKE, and the automata go along, afraid to disagree and put forward an apposing postion. Well, no one should be intimidated to go against authority, if that's the case, why are you a communist? to be different?

And yes, going against the grain IS revolutionary. And untill people shed ALL capitalist ways of living and thinking, then all you are is another cog in the wheel, you are just like all the rest. just waving a red flag, but living like the rest.

for your information eating meat is not a capitalist thing, its a human thing, we been doing that for millenia in order to survive, our body need some nutriment that is located in meat, otherwise you have to rely on heavy medication and suplement to stay alive.

overconsumption of meat might be capitalist at some extent, but consuming meat is natural, Lion and other predatory species does it all the time for fuck sake.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Correct. Which is really the point - the animal is entirely unable to express any such opposition to the idea of being eaten. It doesn't even comprehend that my stomach is its final destination. This is not a matter of capitalism, or 'the system', or class consciousness, but simple biology. Animals are not human... amazing that this simple truth has to be hammered home so

The mistake you are making (one of them at least) is in believing that rejecting the above is somehow a prerequisite for revolutionary politics. Nothing could be further from the truth. 'Animal liberation' is, at best, a complete irrelevancy for the socialist movement. At worst, it produces the attitude that people are no better than cattle

Incidentally, I wasn't planning on it but all this talk of animals has made me hungry. I think I'll do a nice beef stew for myself tonight. It'll taste all the sweeter when I think of you shouting 'murderer' and 'dead flesh'

if you think that an animal doesn't know danger, fear, you are foolish. Animals have senses that are more acute than humans, which makes them supperior in certain areas.

You express this haughty attitude toward animals, animals which by the way, are supperior than you in certain areas. and yours is not a revolutionary attitude, you are part of the common, every day gluttonous crowd who can't control themselves, the same crowd that has the same I don't give a shit attitude toward the issues your care about. the way you don't care about the animals rights issue, they don't give a shit about working class issues.

[ComradeOm]

You may like your sirloin or a duck, as I do, but what what about the possibility of "animal liberation" in the future? Would you consider it or would you dismiss it on grounds of your personal preferences when it comes to food?Let me be clear: I see absolutely nothing wrong with eating meat and I see no reason why this habit should end in a post-revolution world*. People do not simply eat meat out of "necessity" and I would not sacrifice living standards (even to the degree of not being able to eat steak) in order to reduce animal deaths. To put it bluntly, 'animal liberation' is not a goal of mine and it is not something that I feel is remotely important. It could just-about-conceivably happen (see below) but for myself it is simply not a priority. I feel that I can say with confidence that this sentiment is shared by the vast majority of the socialist movement, past and present

*Unless of course we take the science-fiction scenario in which a meat substitute has been developed that is a) as tasty as the real deal, and b) as cheap as current practices. Then there would be no reason to consume animals. Ironically, this would probably lead to a massive drop in the number of sheep/cattle/pigs/ etc on this planet


One can disagree with this approach (i.e. animal liberation) on grounds of (revolutionary) strategy (my disagreement) and sustainability (I don't know enooguh on that point). But to dismiss the notion entirely is not conducive to what some users believe to be "true Marxism/communism/socialism", but something much different.I make no bones about the primacy of the working class to the socialist movement and nor have I been shy in the past to criticise so-called communists who I believe have little interest in working class emancipation. This thread is merely an extreme variant of this tendency


if you think that an animal doesn't know danger, fear, you are foolishCan they feel fear or sense danger? Of course. Are they capable of critical thinking, reasoning, or cognition? Nope. They are not human


You express this haughty attitude toward animals, animals which by the way, are supperior than you in certain areasYes, sheep are much better at growing wool. Still incapable of thought though


the way you don't care about the animals rights issue, that don't give a shit about working class issuesAgain, you suggest that the two are one and the same. They are not

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

for your information eating meat is not a capitalist thing, its a human thing, we been doing that for millenia in order to survive, our body need some nutriment that is located in meat, otherwise you have to rely on heavy medication and suplement to stay alive.

overconsumption of meat might be capitalist at some extent, but consuming meat is natural, Lion and other predatory species does it all the time for fuck sake.


we are not, I repeat, not ment to be meat eaters "for fucks sake" the digestive track of the meat eating animal is much, much shorter than a humans. that means it is easier for them to digest it, eliminate it. an animals digestive track is 6 to 10 feet. ours is 26 feet, which mean it takes up to two weeks to digest it. which means it is just lying in there rotting.which is why meat eaters have a higher rate of colon cancer "for fucks sake"

look at a meat eating animals teeth, they are sharp and more pointy. ours are not. their teeth are meant to grind up meat properly, ours are not. which is why meat eaters get colon cacer "for fucks sake" you have no idea "for fucks sake"

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Let me be clear: I see absolutely nothing wrong with eating meat and I see no reason why this habit should end in a post-revolution world*. People do not simply eat meat out of "necessity" and I would not sacrifice living standards (even to the degree of not being able to eat steak) in order to reduce animal deaths. To put it bluntly, 'animal liberation' is not a goal of mine and it is not something that I feel is remotely important. It could just-about-conceivably happen (see below) but for myself it is simply not a priority. I feel that I can say with confidence that this sentiment is shared by the vast majority of the socialist movement, past and present

*Unless of course we take the science-fiction scenario in which a meat substitute has been developed that is a) as tasty as the real deal, and b) as cheap as current practices. Then there would be no reason to consume animals. Ironically, this would probably lead to a massive drop in the number of sheep/cattle/pigs/ etc on this planet

I make no bones about the primacy of the working class to the socialist movement and nor have I been shy in the past to criticise so-called communists who I believe have little interest in working class emancipation. This thread is merely an extreme variant of this tendency

Can they feel fear or sense danger? Of course. Are they capable of critical thinking, reasoning, or cognition? Nope. They are not human

Yes, sheep are much better at growing wool. Still incapable of thought though

Again, you suggest that the two are one and the same. They are not



To say that animals are not capable of critical thinking and reasoning is examplifying in yourself the very qualities that you are saying animals are not capable of. for no intelligent, compassionate well read person would make a statement as ignorant as that.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

No, it means that you have a movement that through party hierarchy, says, this is the position that WE WILL TAKE, and the automata go along, afraid to disagree and put forward an apposing postion. Well, no one should be intimidated to go against authority, if that's the case, why are you a communist? to be different?

And yes, going against the grain IS revolutionary. And untill people shed ALL capitalist ways of living and thinking, then all you are is another cog in the wheel, you are just like all the rest. just waving a red flag, but living like the rest.

I'm a communist because I believe in socialism. Not because it would make me "edgy". Being obstinate for obstinacy's sake is childish and pointless. I've never been a member of any party...

The revolution is about change, but it's not change because change is so cool and it's so different and going against the grain. It's because it's progress and because it's necessary and a step forward for the future. Whether it looks "edgy" or is going against the grain is irrelevant. Your focus on such superficial nonsense only reveals your lifestylism.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

we are not, I repeat, not ment to be meat eaters "for fucks sake" the digestive track of the meat eating animal is much, much shorter than a humans. that means it is easier for them to digest it, eliminate it. an animals digestive track is 6 to 10 feet. ours is 26 feet, which mean it takes up to two weeks to digest it. which means it is just lying in there rotting.which is why meat eaters have a higher rate of colon cancer "for fucks sake"

look at a meat eating animals teeth, they are sharp and more pointy. ours are not. they're teeth are ment to grind up meat properl;y, ours are not. which is why meat eaters get colon cacer "for fucks sake" you have no idea "for fucks sake"

Humans are omnivorous animals, like most of our ancestors.

Colon cancer has more to do with chemicals in meat, which can also be gotten from certain fruits.

Two weeks? What kind of bowels you have?

[ComradeOm]

To say that animals are not capable of critical thinking and reasoning is examplifying in yourself the very qualities that you are saying animals are not capable of. for no intelligent, compassionate well read person would make a statement as ignorant as that.And I'm out. That's enough craziness and deliberate avoidance of the points raised for me today

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Humans are omnivorous animals, like most of our ancestors.

Colon cancer has more to do with chemicals in meat, which can also be gotten from certain fruits.

Two weeks? What kind of bowels you have?


It is a proven medical FACT. even by the mainstream doctors. if want to avoid a proven fact to keep indulging in dead flesh, it's fine.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

To put an end to this debate, it is one thing to claim to be a revolutionary, it is another to LIVE a revolutionary lifestyle. to be a revolutionary is to have a true compassion for all living, breathing creatures, not to cherry pick which you will or won't care about, because to do so means interfearing with your common, gluttonous ways.

The opinions on this board just shows how out of touch AmericanS are with other living, breathing, feeling forms of life. Another thread even stated that being a revolutionary doesn't mean being an environmentalist. HOW OUT OF TOUCH WITH REVOLUTIONARY IDEAS IS THAT!!!!

Being a revolutionary is to have an enlightened outlook to educate others, to shed their their lifestyle, the lifestyle that is hurting themselves, the earth and all forms of life on it. to live otherwise is to just be part of the gluttonous, over indulging out of control lifestyle that is all about , me , me, me that is killing people.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

To put an end to this debate, it is one thing to claim to be a revolutionary, it is another to LIVE a revolutionary lifestyle. to be a revolutionary is to have a true compassion for all living, breathing creatures, not to cherry pick which you will or won't care about, because to do so means interfearing with your common, gluttonous ways.

The opinions on this board just shows how out of touch AmericanS are with other living, breathing, feeling forms of life. Another thread even stated that being a revolutionary doesn't mean being an environmentalist. HOW OUT OF TOUCH WITH REVOLUTIONARY IDEAS IS THAT!!!!

Being a revolutionary is to have an enlightened outlook to educate others, to shed their their lifestyle, the lifestyle that is hurting themselves, the earth and all forms of life on it. to live otherwise is to just be part of the gluttonous, over indulging out of control lifestyle that is all about , me , me, me that is killing people.

Oh man you really put an end to that discussion, you more or less admit you're just a petty lifestylist. Your idea of being a revolutionary is rather warped, and somehow you fancy it makes you a better person, well, whatever you want.

Being a revolutionary does not mean being an environmentalist.

I'm not from the United States, either. :laugh:

[piet11111]

What i would really like to know is how he is going to prevent the carnivorous animals from "killing" other animals ?

How will he force them on a vegan diet ? :lol:

Or is a carnivore somehow exempt from having to go vegan and if so why am i not exempt from that ?

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

This thread makes me really hungry, and also, LETSFIGHTBACK, your opinons are very silly.

[jake williams]

I say something like this every time threads to this effect arise (a common occurence), but I think it's worth saying again.

Mammals in particular have a level of neurological, psychological and yes, even emotional functioning which, while nowhere near on par with humans, is quite high, often higher than is immediately obvious because they can't speak. The great apes in particular are very similar to us. When they react to certain phenomena in ways that in humans we take as evidence of emotion, it seems kind of silly to say it's not emotion. I don't think their suffering should be no concern of ours. It's also worth mentioning that harming animals can have psychological effects on people - something of which the experiences of workers in many slaughterhouses is a good example.

So I do think we should try to reduce suffering of animals, especially since in a lot of cases (eg. sane environmental policy, good working conditions for meatpacking workers, etc.) it's good for people too.

Should it be a priority? No. The other thing to keep in mind is that the reason "animal liberation" (a dubious concept in its own right because there aren't systemic barriers to "animal freedom" as there are for people, there are enviromental ones, environmental barriers which in the abstract can never be eliminated) isn't considered a part of the socialist project is that there's no way for it to be so integrated beyond human charity. The fights against racism, for workers' rights, for a lot of environmental policies (but not all of them), against homophobia, for the unity between younger and older workers - all of these are about building a working class movement capable of overthrowing capitalism. Animal liberation is not - there's no way that their "freedom" is going to help in the fight. It's not like if we "liberate" horses they're going to come along and help us take over factories. That doesn't mean that we should instead hunt them for sport, that just means that the social treatment of their wellbeing has a fundamentally different historical character than that of human rights.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Oh man you really put an end to that discussion, you more or less admit you're just a petty lifestylist. Your idea of being a revolutionary is rather warped, and somehow you fancy it makes you a better person, well, whatever you want.

Being a revolutionary does not mean being an environmentalist.

I'm not from the United States, either. :laugh:


"A petty lifestylist" I do fancy it, I fancy it alot. it's called living what you preach.go raise your red flag, acting like you are oh so radical, when all you are is oh so common.

[Fietsketting]

"A petty lifestylist" I do fancy it, I fancy it alot. it's called living what you preach.go raise your red flag, acting like you are oh so radical, when all you are is oh so common.

I can't stand the lifestylism that because people are anarchists they all have to refrain form eating meat. Being vegan is a personal choice, not a anarchist one!

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

"A petty lifestylist" I do fancy it, I fancy it alot. it's called living what you preach.go raise your red flag, acting like you are oh so radical, when all you are is oh so common.

Lifestylists arn't loved much by most leftists.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

I can't stand the lifestylism that because people are anarchists they all have to refrain form eating meat. Being vegan is a personal choice, not a anarchist one!


Based upon your reasoning, so is supporting a strike, talking part in grass roots movements and so is one shedding ones bourgeois out look and lifestyle to become a revolutionary. And if it's a personal choice, then stop your activism and let people think what they want. you see where I'm going? do you see the point?

[bots]

I say something like this every time threads to this effect arise (a common occurence), but I think it's worth saying again.

Mammals in particular have a level of neurological, psychological and yes, even emotional functioning which, while nowhere near on par with humans, is quite high, often higher than is immediately obvious because they can't speak. The great apes in particular are very similar to us. When they react to certain phenomena in ways that in humans we take as evidence of emotion, it seems kind of silly to say it's not emotion. I don't think their suffering should be no concern of ours. It's also worth mentioning that harming animals can have psychological effects on people - something of which the experiences of workers in many slaughterhouses is a good example.

So I do think we should try to reduce suffering of animals, especially since in a lot of cases (eg. sane environmental policy, good working conditions for meatpacking workers, etc.) it's good for people too.

Should it be a priority? No. The other thing to keep in mind is that the reason "animal liberation" (a dubious concept in its own right because there aren't systemic barriers to "animal freedom" as there are for people, there are enviromental ones, environmental barriers which in the abstract can never be eliminated) isn't considered a part of the socialist project is that there's no way for it to be so integrated beyond human charity. The fights against racism, for workers' rights, for a lot of environmental policies (but not all of them), against homophobia, for the unity between younger and older workers - all of these are about building a working class movement capable of overthrowing capitalism. Animal liberation is not - there's no way that their "freedom" is going to help in the fight. It's not like if we "liberate" horses they're going to come along and help us take over factories. That doesn't mean that we should instead hunt them for sport, that just means that the social treatment of their wellbeing has a fundamentally different historical character than that of human rights.

I agree with this. I think animal liberation can easily become a fetish. While I agree people should eat a lot less meat, I believe the way capitalism frames the relationship between people and their food is the big problem. Meat and animal products are big business and are promoted heavily ie "If you're a real man eat steak" or pretty much every fast food commercial you see. But when you look at more communal or indigenous societies their meat consumption is far less - unless you're dealing with northern peoples who don't have much choice due to lack of fresh vegetables. So the issue is really capitalism and its commodification of our relationship with food, not the feelings of animals. Beings suffer so that other beings can live. That's a natural fact of life. How we relate to the suffering of other beings, whether we take it for granted or give the respect that is due depends on material conditions that can only be remedied at this point in human history by the destruction of the capitalist system. That's the priority.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Based upon your reasoning, so is supporting a strike, talking part in grass roots movements and so is one shedding ones bourgeois out look and lifestyle to become a revolutionary. And if it's a personal choice, then stop your activism and let people think what they want. you see where I'm going? do you see the point?

No one cares about your idiotic conception of what "socialism" and "communism" or for that matter "revolutionary" is, because it's quite clearly pretty far from any sensible meaning of those, some deranged hippie concoction like the exotic new mishmash of a synthesised drug.

Your personal choices and activities are irrelevant. Your choice not to eat meat is irrelevant. Collective struggle is not irrelevant because it is just that, collective. Your dogmatic rambling nonsense about your fetischisation of animals does not amount to any worthwhile struggle and any sensible points that might hide in the forest of delusion you voluminously spew forth from your frothing mouth in the manner of water from a wrecked fire hydrant becomes too covered by this odorous ichor that it too becomes illegible and irrelevant.

You have no fucking point.

[Fietsketting]

Based upon your reasoning, so is supporting a strike, talking part in grass roots movements and so is one shedding ones bourgeois out look and lifestyle to become a revolutionary. And if it's a personal choice, then stop your activism and let people think what they want. you see where I'm going? do you see the point?

No your just proving my point. I try to bring forth my political agenda and you do yours. Fine. But i am not all of a sudden a 'bad' anarchist because i eat meat. Same as squating. Squatting is not anarchism, its perhaps heavily influenced by it but its not anarchism.

You critize some people here they (and your right) only listen to the party leadership, well, your not that much better as the whole vegan lifestylisme is as elitarian as hell and often refuses to think outside there own circles.

Tell that vegan stuff to a starving kid in Africa! Same with the whole primitivism business, letting people die because the earth is overpopulated! I mean.. gah...

No wonder anarchism lost so much of its ties to the working class, is it even on your political agenda?

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

No one cares about your idiotic conception of what "socialism" and "communism" or for that matter "revolutionary" is, because it's quite clearly pretty far from any sensible meaning of those, some deranged hippie concoction like the exotic new mishmash of a synthesised drug.

Your personal choices and activities are irrelevant. Your choice not to eat meat is irrelevant. Collective struggle is not irrelevant because it is just that, collective. Your dogmatic rambling nonsense about your fetischisation of animals does not amount to any worthwhile struggle and any sensible points that might hide in the forest of delusion you voluminously spew forth from your frothing mouth in the manner of water from a wrecked fire hydrant becomes too covered by this odorous ichor that it too becomes illegible and irrelevant.

You have no fucking point.


I seem to have hit a nerve, and the response that has been given is one in which one gives when their back is against the wall.Babble, just pure babble without addressing the point.go raise your red flag, try to convince others that you are so, so revolutionary, meanwhile you are nothing more than a selfish, self centered carnivore who cares more about your glutonnous desires than the suffering it causes others. now go and take a laxative and clean out all that dead flesh.

[Tavarisch_Mike]

Close the thread, restrict OP and lets all of us go out for some hunting! :laugh:

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

No your just proving my point. I try to bring forth my political agenda and you do yours. Fine. But i am not all of a sudden a 'bad' anarchist because i eat meat. Same as squating. Squatting is not anarchism, its perhaps heavily influenced by it but its not anarchism.

You critize some people here they (and your right) only listen to the party leadership, well, your not that much better as the whole vegan lifestylisme is as elitarian as hell and often refuses to think outside there own circles.

Tell that vegan stuff to a starving kid in Africa! Same with the whole primitivism business, letting people die because the earth is overpopulated! I mean.. gah...

No wonder anarchism lost so much of its ties to the working class, is it even on your political agenda?


The earth is over populated is so off base, let's time that one for another time.But as far as listening to leadership, Anarchists do not have leaders, they collectively have a say in the organization. I do not belong to ANY group. I do not feel that I have to be a part of a group to feel like I belong to something important. I live by what I beleave. it's a praxis, and that's what alot of people that belong to these groups are missing, a praxis.When you have people on this board say "being an invironmentalist is not part of being socialist" they are a joke along with their party. when people on this board say that "being a communist doesn't mean caring about the earth and all living things on it" they are a joke along with their party and when you have people on this board say that animals can't "reason or know what freedom is, they are not only a joke, they are elitist
fools that ANY, ANY animal scientist would laugh at.And the reason you people think this shit is because the workers think it. and since you are oh so worried about being accepted by the workers, that you will not think the opposit, you will live the same selfish, self centered carnivorous lifestyle of the workers, just to be accepted.how common.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

I seem to have hit a nerve, and the response that has been given is one in which one gives when their back is against the wall.Babble, just pure babble without addressing the point.go raise your red flag, try to convince others that you are so, so revolutionary, meanwhile you are nothing more than a selfish, self centered carnivore who cares more about your glutonnous desires than the suffering it causes others. now go and take a laxative and clean out all that dead flesh.

I have no need for laxatives, my bowels do that on their own every few days. :laugh:

You constantly seem unable to grasp even the simplest arguments, and if anyone is babbling, it is you.

The only thing that strikes a nerve here is your, frankly, imbecilic argumentation.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

The earth is over populated is so off base, let's time that one for another time.But as far as listening to leadership, Anarchists do not have leaders, they collectively have a say in the organization. I do not belong to ANY group. I do not feel that I have to be a part of a group to feel like I belong to something important. I live by what I beleave. it's a praxis, and that's what alot of people that belong to these groups are missing, a praxis.When you have people on this board say "being an invironmentalist is not part of being socialist" they are a joke along with their party. when people on this board say that "being a communist doesn't mean caring about the earth and all living things on it" they are a joke along with their party and when you have people on this board say that animals can't "reason or know what freedom is, they are not only a joke, they are elitist
fools that ANY, ANY animal scientist would laugh at.And the reason you people think this shit is because the workers think it. and since you are oh so worried about being accepted by the workers, that you will not think the opposit, you will live the same selfish, self centered carnivorous lifestyle of the workers, just to be accepted.how common.

Would you please shut up, you don't know what you are talking about.

Caring about all living things might have name for it, but it is NOT socialism.

Whether you eat meat or not has NOTHING to do with socialism.

Environmentalism as such has NOTHING to do with socialism.

Is this easy enough for you to understand? I even bolded and italicised for emphasis and tabbed shift a bit longer!

We don't want excessive abuse, waste, and so on; but the views here you espouse, they are not revolutionary as such, they have no bearing on the revolution, they are irrelevant side-issues you obsess about. Do you get it? The revolution is about the emancipation of the working class, not the emancipation of the grass eaters.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

I have no need for laxatives, my bowels do that on their own every few days. :laugh:

You constantly seem unable to grasp even the simplest arguments, and if anyone is babbling, it is you.

The only thing that strikes a nerve here is your, frankly, imbecilic argumentation.


every few days, CASE CLOSED!!!!!people that eat fruits and veggies and grains go at least 1 to 2 times a day.man o' man, you must stink up a house with your gas. you are killing the ozone.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

every few days, CASE CLOSED!!!!!people that eat fruits and veggies and grains go at least 1 to 2 times a day.man o' man, you must stink up a house with your gas. you are killing the ozone.

lol, what kind of fucking idiot are you? :laugh:

I was actually referring to my bowel disorder, not when I go normally, so...

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

lol, what kind of fucking idiot are you? :laugh:

I was actually referring to my bowel disorder, not when I go normally, so...


stop eating meat and it'll stop, you'll feel better.:D

[Fietsketting]

And the reason you people think this shit is because the workers think it. and since you are oh so worried about being accepted by the workers, that you will not think the opposit, you will live the same selfish, self centered carnivorous lifestyle of the workers, just to be accepted.how common.

Anarchism is a class struggle movement, and i think the whole primitivism part, wich i am pretty sure you participate in as well, is damaging to what once was the first line of defense against fascism and capitalism.

I agree we have to change but I will not let some elitarian group decide what is best for me. I be the judge of that, not you. And stop stating already that we are so common as within your personal circle veganism is probely as mainstream as eating meat for the rest of the world.

Fight Capitalism and things could change, dumpsterdiving and stuff like that won´t change the system.

[bots]

Would you please shut up, you don't know what you are talking about.

Caring about all living things might have name for it, but it is NOT socialism.

Whether you eat meat or not has NOTHING to do with socialism.

Environmentalism as such has NOTHING to do with socialism.

Is this easy enough for you to understand? I even bolded and italicised for emphasis and tabbed shift a bit longer!

We don't want excessive abuse, waste, and so on; but the views here you espouse, they are not revolutionary as such, they have no bearing on the revolution, they are irrelevant side-issues you obsess about. Do you get it? The revolution is about the emancipation of the working class, not the emancipation of the grass eaters.

Well to be fair you're being pretty dogmatic. Socialism in 1848 or 1917 had NOTHING to do with environmentalism but shit's changed. We now know that heavy industrialization has had a damaging effect on the environment and it is reasonable to extrapolate that any system based on the exploitation of finite resources - whether capitalist or "socialist" - will be detrimental to the well being of all humans and nonhumans on this planet, workers included. So a theoretical reorientation needs to take place. 5 year plans and pig iron pits are not the way to go.

[Fietsketting]

The corporate media, in its infinite wisdom, has often decided to present primitivism as "the new anarchism," blissfully ignoring the classical strand of anarchist thought that agitates for worker and community control within a stateless society. Unfortunately, this generous free advertising ensures that many new members of the anarchist movement will arrive through primitivism's feral gates..

Good luck with your return to a society of some type of idyllic, Garden of Eden-like existence. The idea of a noble savage at peace with himself, the pristine wilderness, and his fellow humans before modem civilizationruined it all.

[bricolage]

The corporate media, in its infinite wisdom, has often decided to present primitivism as "the new anarchism,"
When have they done that? More to the point when does the corporate media ever talk about anarchism at all?

Unfortunately, this generous free advertising ensures that many new members of the anarchist movement will arrive through primitivism's feral gates..
I've never met a primitivist, I think they exist in the way that lifestylists exist, as a very very peripheral entity that other anarchists like to make seem more important than they are to serve as a comfortable scapegoat for their own failings.

[fa2991]

Good luck with your return to a society of some type of idyllic, Garden of Eden-like existence. The idea of a noble savage at peace with himself, the pristine wilderness, and his fellow humans before modem civilizationruined it all.

That doesn't have shit to do with animal rights and you know it.

I don't know how socialists on here can so vehemently defend the meat/slaughterhouse system, considering that it's one of the most inefficient ways to raise food ever devised. You could feed the world on just the grain, corn, and water we currently waste on livestock - and save the environment just by demolishing those big pollution holes we call "slaughterhouses."

Obviously grow crops --> feed pounds and pounds of crops to animals for years and years --> eat the animals is pathetically inefficient compared to grow crops --> eat crops

Furthermore, those places have some of the most abusive employment practices in the world. See: "The Jungle" and "Fast Food Nation."

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Well to be fair you're being pretty dogmatic. Socialism in 1848 or 1917 had NOTHING to do with environmentalism but shit's changed. We now know that heavy industrialization has had a damaging effect on the environment and it is reasonable to extrapolate that any system based on the exploitation of finite resources - whether capitalist or "socialist" - will be detrimental to the well being of all humans and nonhumans on this planet, workers included. So a theoretical reorientation needs to take place. 5 year plans and pig iron pits are not the way to go.

Heavy industrialisation is good. The reason for the choice of words "environmentalism as such", was a reference to the fact that there should obviously be focus on doing this with as little as possible destruction of the ecology of the planet and as many strides as possible towards mitigating any environmental pollution.

But anti-industrialisation is repugnant as well.

Another point: no, no slaughterhouses as they exist in today's society, but there will be places were animals are bred and slaughtered for food. I do not see anything wrong with this at all. Today there is capitalism, and yes, there are many such places were animals are treated unnecessarily badly, as well as having bad working conditions, but this would hopefully be an area changed after a revolution.

[Andropov]

Your dead right "Letsfightback".
For years I have been argueing with these clowns here about Animal Liberation and Emancipation and the creation of a Democratic Animals Republic because lets face it the material conditions of animals and their subjugation at the hands of capitalist humans means that they are far more susceptible to revolutionary thought.
Once this society is established where the animal kingdown will live in harmony we will introduce a form of meat supliment for carnivores so the tigers can do the baby sitting for the lambs.
I also agree with you on lifestylism, look maaaan if you cant live the life dont preach the life, yano what im saying?
Ya so what I havent had a wash in 2 months, the Revolution has no sense of smell.
So what I dont eat meat man, stop oppressing the animal working class maaaan.
And actually fuck you letsfightback, your no revolutionary, not only do I not eat the meat of the proletariat mammels I also dont buy vegetables, I eat them out of dumpsters maaaan. Im not going to use your corporation shops, just your corporation garbage disposal.
So come on Letsfightback, lets find the nearest piggery and ignite the revolution, instead of "Bread, land and peace" its "Oink, woof and moo".

[fa2991]

Another point: no, no slaughterhouses as they exist in today's society, but there will be places were animals are bred and slaughtered for food. I do not see anything wrong with this at all. Today there is capitalism, and yes, there are many such places were animals are treated unnecessarily badly, as well as having bad working conditions, but this would hopefully be an area changed after a revolution.

Fine - leave moral arguments aside. Look at the practical elements. The work is inherently very dangerous, the very idea is inherently very wasteful, inherently a waste of space, inherently a waste of food, inherently a waste of energy and water, inherently unhealthy, etc. ....

I live in Nebraska, and we have a city called Lexington here. A slaughterhouse moved in and in an instant this average little town became one of the most polluted, filthy, crime-riddled, smelly, impoverished areas in the entire state.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Fine - leave moral arguments aside. Look at the practical elements. The work is inherently very dangerous, the very idea is inherently very wasteful, inherently a waste of space, inherently a waste of food, inherently a waste of energy and water, inherently unhealthy, etc. ....


I don't agree.


I live in Nebraska, and we have a city called Lexington here. A slaughterhouse moved in and in an instant this average little town became one of the most polluted, filthy, crime-riddled, smelly, impoverished areas in the entire state.

By which way does a slaughterhouse impoverish and make a place crime-ridden, without the interaction of something else - capitalist society and capitalist operations.

Anyway, as I explained in the previous post, I do not believe those to be insurmountable obstacles; safety can be improved, working conditions can be improved, treatment of the animals and the workers at such places can be improved, and the handling of refuse and pollution of such facilities can be improved, etc.

[fa2991]

I don't agree.

Do you have a reason for disagreeing, or is this just because you really like the taste of meat?




By which way does a slaughterhouse impoverish and make a place crime-ridden, without the interaction of something else - capitalist society and capitalist operations.

Anyway, as I explained in the previous post, I do not believe those to be insurmountable obstacles; safety can be improved, working conditions can be improved, treatment of the animals and the workers at such places can be improved, and the handling of refuse and pollution of such facilities can be improved, etc.Cows, pigs, etc. practically spew filth. The only way to even begin to neutralize the massive amount of pollution they create is to spread them out over very large areas of land - both inefficient and a waste of land. Not to mention all the fuel we waste transporting crops and meat.

Safety can never be perfect. The key instrument in slaughter has for centuries and will be for a while large knives and blades. Exhaustion and overexertion are inherent in such work. We can say that technology can fix this, but we aren't even close to having something that can do this. Besides, the work of slaughter is very, very dehumanizing and traumatizing -cutting throats, picking through organs, getting covered in blood. Growing crops is not.

The only way we could possibly have safe, sustainable meat is if we figure out some way to grow animal tissue in labs - and we aren't close to that yet.

[RadioRaheem84]

Because they are not human. Simple as. Really, what sort of person considers the suffering of animals to be on par with the suffering and exploitation of humans?I had the most annoying "anarchist" ex-gf that was nothing more than a petty, elitist, lifestlyist liberal. She would say stuff like how she would sacrifice a mother and child to save a park or a tree. Or something akin to giving me the ultimatum of killing a family of gorillas or killing a baby.

These types hate humans and are disgusting to be around. They think people are the scourge of all that it good and think it would be preferable to limit our breeding.

It's these whacko types that give leftism a bad name and why people think they have to tilt "right" to have any sort of sanity in their politics. The right wing use these mad people to defame all leftists and our struggle.

[fa2991]

I had the most annoying "anarchist" ex-gf that was nothing more than a petty, elitist, lifestlyist liberal. She would say stuff like how she would sacrifice a mother and child to save a park or a tree. Or something akin to giving me the ultimatum of killing a family of gorillas or killing a baby.

These types hate humans and are disgusting to be around. They think people are the scourge of all that it good and think it would be preferable to limit our breeding.

It's these whacko types that give leftism a bad name and why people think they have to tilt "right" to have any sort of sanity in their politics. The right wing use these mad people to defame all leftists and our struggle.

http://images.starcraftmazter.net/4chan/for_forums/strawman.jpg

[RadioRaheem84]

http://images.starcraftmazter.net/4chan/for_forums/strawman.jpg


I wasn't really addressing your posts. I didn't even know you posted on here til now. Sorry.

I was just pointing out how lifestlyism and thinking that animals need liberating does nothing for class struggle. It's actually counter-productive.

To be honest, I would not have become a leftist had I not figured out that the types I mentioned above and their ideals are fringe groups not the norm of leftists.

[bricolage]

The right wing use these mad people to defame all leftists and our struggle.
No they don't, they talk about patriotism, tradition and order, they talk about purges, labour camps and oppression. Not once do they mention vegans or crimethincers.

The idea that 'lifestylists' are what is holding back communism is the misguided fantasy of those who are unwilling to accept the complete failure of their tactics, ideologies, practices and historical legacies, are unwilling to accept the complete absence of their politics from the wider working class and who are unwilling to accept that everything they are currently doing is getting us nowhere.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, 'lifestylists' are an irrelevance, and, to most on 'the left', a scapegoat, they are not the barrier standing in the way of emancipation and they are nothing to be spending as much time talking about them as people tend to do.

[danyboy27]

every few days, CASE CLOSED!!!!!people that eat fruits and veggies and grains go at least 1 to 2 times a day.man o' man, you must stink up a house with your gas. you are killing the ozone.

i am common individual who eat meat in a regular basis, i dont have gas, and i go to the bathroom 2 or 3 time a day.

CASE CLOSED!!!!

[CleverTitle]

That doesn't have shit to do with animal rights and you know it.

I don't know how socialists on here can so vehemently defend the meat/slaughterhouse system, considering that it's one of the most inefficient ways to raise food ever devised. You could feed the world on just the grain, corn, and water we currently waste on livestock - and save the environment just by demolishing those big pollution holes we call "slaughterhouses."

Obviously grow crops --> feed pounds and pounds of crops to animals for years and years --> eat the animals is pathetically inefficient compared to grow crops --> eat crops
This is where the problem lies in my opinion. No matter how you look at it, you're spending resources on sustaining the animal population you intend to slaughter and feed to people. Seems to me that it'd be way more efficient to sustain people first.

I mean, we can't expect the world to suddenly abandon meat, but for the sake of efficiency, we should definitely shift emphasis away from it. It seems to me that the only argument against shifting to more efficient ways of doing things is "I like to eat meat... so there." It doesn't seem particularly rational to me.

[fa2991]

I wasn't really addressing your posts. I didn't even know you posted on here til now. Sorry.

I didn't really think you were (I didn't make that image and thus didn't modify the somewhat inapplicable subtitle) - but it doesn't change the fact that caricatures don't get us anywhere.


I was just pointing out how lifestlyism and thinking that animals need liberating does nothing for class struggle. It's actually counter-productive.

To be honest, I would not have become a leftist had I not figured out that the types I mentioned above and their ideals are fringe groups not the norm of leftists.One of the great failures of communist ideology is the inability to recognize that there are problems beyond class struggle... like this.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Meat's a good source of protein (and omega-3s, in the case of salmon), plus it tastes good. That's why I like it.

Capitalism as an economic process is always destructive...I don't think that it's a matter of "evil destructive meat production vs. safe, effecient crop production". The soybean industry for instance has benefited hugely from rampant deforestation and destruction of the Amazon rainforest. As far as I can tell the only real, valid criticisms towards eating meat are effeciency problems, but "effeciency" is a problem that plagues the market at all levels. (As the progeny of a long line of fishermen that stretches back as far as my family line goes, I can't really take the moral argument against eating meat seriously...perhaps that's my personal bias, or perhaps it really is because the argument is as absurd as I think it is.)

[RadioRaheem84]

No they don't, they talk about patriotism, tradition and order, they talk about purges, labour camps and oppression. Not once do they mention vegans or crimethincers.

The idea that 'lifestylists' are what is holding back communism is the misguided fantasy of those who are unwilling to accept the complete failure of their tactics, ideologies, practices and historical legacies, are unwilling to accept the complete absence of their politics from the wider working class and who are unwilling to accept that everything they are currently doing is getting us nowhere.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, 'lifestylists' are an irrelevance, and, to most on 'the left', a scapegoat, they are not the barrier standing in the way of emancipation and they are nothing to be spending as much time talking about them as people tend to do.

Hold the phone. I wasn't talking about the right using them as the ultimate purpose for defaming us but that they do use lifestlyists as a means to mock us, thus giving their ideology a monopoly on sanity. "Hippie, liberal, tree hugger" and all that junk. They then play up the macho card and insist that "meat is manly".

I've heard right wingers use examples of environmentalists sticking nails into trees so that when lumberjacks are cutting into the tree with a chainsaw, the nails will fly into them, stopping them from cutting down the whole tree. Tree spiking I believe it is called.

To say that the right wing doesn't use the lunacy of some of these lifestyle groups is false.

Ever heard of an old stupid right wing youth movement called Protest Warrior? I was the resident liberal of that little group and a lot of the threads were links to right wing articles about how anti-human the "left" really is. The "left" being really fucked up lifestlyists.

So yes it is an issue. A small one but still an issue.

[Wred]

I don't know if this has been said yet but you do realise you are supporting the death of animals even as a vegetarian? Think of the thousands of animals chopped up every year for the crops being harvested which you then go and buy, and support. Y'know maybe not all of them die instantly and are just there strewn across the field in agony. While with meat they are killed very humanely.

Seriously I admire your concern for the animals but we've got much bigger fish to fry (:lol:) at the minute. Austerity measures in Europe, and capitalism ruining lifes everywhere. The emancipation of the working class must come above everything, then we can look at the way we eat and the way animals are treated. Just chill a little and get your priorities right.:thumbup1:

[fa2991]

Meat's a good source of protein (and omega-3s, in the case of salmon), plus it tastes good. That's why I like it.

The same could be said of

Oats
Soy
Wheat
Beans
Tofu
Brown rice
Almonds
Pumpkin seeds
Practically all nuts & seeds
Potatoes, etc. etc. etc.

Cows, pigs, etc. are all vegetarians. Where do you think they're getting the fuel to produce all that protein in their bodies?


Capitalism as an economic process is always destructive...I don't think that it's a matter of "evil destructive meat production vs. safe, effecient crop production". The soybean industry for instance has benefited hugely from rampant deforestation and destruction of the Amazon rainforest.Would that need to happen if we didn't require so much land to raise so many crops only for animals that are about to be killed? Besides, deforestation can mostly be laid on capitalism's shoulders.

[fa2991]

I don't know if this has been said yet but you do realise you are supporting the death of animals even as a vegetarian? Think of the thousands of animals chopped up every year for the crops being harvested which you then go and buy, and support. Y'know maybe not all of them die instantly and are just there strewn across the field in agony. While with meat they are killed very humanely.

Talk about your major league fallacies. "Some animals may die during crop production, and billions die during meat production. Therefore you should eat meat, because what's the difference between supporting an industry that may kill some animals as a byproduct and supporting an industry that kills billions annually on purpose?"

And with meat, no, they are often not killed or treated humanely.


Seriously I admire your concern for the animals but we've got much bigger fish to fry (:lol:) at the minute. Austerity measures in Europe, and capitalism ruining lifes everywhere. The emancipation of the working class must come above everything, then we can look at the way we eat and the way animals are treated. Just chill a little and get your priorities right.:thumbup1:

Diversion. Nice tactic. Unfortunately, it's not a logically valid form of argument.

[RadioRaheem84]

When I was thinking about going vegan, I assumed it was mostly about a conscious effort to protest the way food is processed (i.e the treatment of animals), I didn't think that people really believed the meat = murder.

So it was embarrassing for me when I told a group of lifestlye anarchists that I would hunt for food if I had to survive.

They looked at me as if I had taken a giant piss in the middle of the circle. Apparently, to them meat = murder.

So, do any self professed vegans agree with hunting for your own food?

[Os Cangaceiros]

Cows, pigs, etc. are all vegetarians. Where do you think they're getting the fuel to produce all that protein in their bodies?

It's not a matter of "oh, you can only get protein from meat"; it's a matter of meat being just another good source of protein.


Would that need to happen if we didn't require so much land to raise so many crops only for animals that are about to be killed?

The point was that, if you're a vegan who eats soy products, you're indirectly responsible for deforestation. Just as you're benefiting from vicious wars in Africa over coltan & cobalt whenever you use a cell phone, or just as you benefit from military/economic imperialism whenever you fill up your car with gasoline, or any number of other examples. This society is filled with waste, ineffeciency and violence, and I hardly think that the meat industry is a top priority. At all. Choosing not to eat meat seems like just another pointless consumer choice to me...if it's what you want to do, then that's great, but a choice that's made out of genuine socialist principles? Nah.


Besides, deforestation can mostly be laid on capitalism's shoulders.

Just as the ineffeciencies of the meat industry can.

[Wred]

Talk about your major league fallacies. "Some animals may die during crop production, and billions die during meat production. Therefore you should eat meat, because what's the difference between supporting an industry that may kill some animals as a byproduct and supporting an industry that kills billions annually on purpose?"

And with meat, no, they are often not killed or treated humanely.



Diversion. Nice tactic. Unfortunately, it's not a logically valid form of argument.

I'm not saying that at all, I'm getting across that animals will always have some suffering because us, as humans, need to consume their flesh to stay nutritionally satisfied. :rolleyes:Not a diversion also, our goal as leftists should be to establish a society in our ideology, not for the freedom of animals. I wouldn't be suprised if in 3 years you're a raging neo-liberal, seriously guys get your priorities right.

[fa2991]

So, do any self professed vegans agree with hunting for your own food?

Not that I know of.

People who are solely upset about current treatment of animals during processing usually don't always go vegan - they often just buy free range beef, etc.


It's not a matter of "oh, you can only get protein from meat"; it's a matter of meat being just another good source of protein.

An unnecessary and undesirable source.


The point was that, if you're a vegan who eats soy products, you're indirectly responsible for deforestation. Just as you're benefiting from vicious wars in Africa over coltan & cobalt whenever you use a cell phone, or just as you benefit from military/economic imperialism whenever you fill up your car with gasoline, or any number of other examples. This society is filled with waste, ineffeciency and violence, and I hardly think that the meat industry is a top priority. At all.

If you partake in any industry under capitalism, you're "indirectly responsible" for something horrible, be it exploitation, pollution, deforestation, or murder. The meat industry is unique in that it's probably the only industry - aside from war - that consumes a ton of resources and puts them all towards unnecessary waste and killing while hurting people and ruining the environment. It's a special (and important) case.


Just as the ineffeciencies of the meat industry can.

Hardly.

[fa2991]

I'm getting across that animals will always have some suffering because us, as humans, need to consume their flesh to stay nutritionally satisfied.

I doubt that you could actually believe that in this day and age.


Not a diversion also, our goal as leftists should be to establish a society in our ideology, not for the freedom of animals. I wouldn't be suprised if in 3 years you're a raging neo-liberal, seriously guys get your priorities right.

I also care about gay rights, gender equality, civil liberties, and racial equality, none of which are class issues. Does that make me a neoliberal?

There's a difference between having priorities and being absurdly single-minded.

[Wred]

I don't know what you're on about with animals "often not being killed humanely" that's utter nonsense. I know there is a few horror stories and videos out there of barbaric slaughter, but that does not mean every slaughter house is like that, you'll find that the majority are humane, and I think here in the UK some places have to follow regulations, but I'm not sure about that, I'll take a look. they hardly feel a thing nowadays with stunning etc now implemented. Let's worry about things that matter.

[fa2991]

I don't know what you're on about with animals "often not being killed humanely" that's utter nonsense. I know there is a few horror stories and videos out there of barbaric slaughter, but that does not mean every slaughter house is like that, you'll find that the majority are humane, and I think here in the UK some places have to follow regulations, but I'm not sure about that, I'll take a look. they hardly feel a thing nowadays with stunning etc now implemented. Let's worry about things that matter.

Stunning, etc. are often ineffective, especially in the slaughter of pigs. Please do your research about slaughterhouse conditions before talking about them.

[Wred]

I doubt that you could actually believe that in this day and age.



I also care about gay rights, gender equality, civil liberties, and racial equality, none of which are class issues. Does that make me a neoliberal?

There's a difference between having priorities and being absurdly single-minded.

Why not believe it? the human race has developed over time thanks to the consumption of meat, and alot of health benefits are gained through eating meat. We do still need it and unlike you not everyone can afford to not eat meat.

No that doesn't make you a neo-liberal, but you don't see things from a working class perspective. Most of us cannot afford to be eating vegetarian friendly/vegan stuff.

[Wred]

Stunning, etc. are often ineffective, especially in the slaughter of pigs. Please do your research about slaughterhouse conditions before talking about them.

Yes "often" ineffective, but you don't think of the many animals it has brought a swift painless death to. Cars "often" cause accidents, so lets all stop driving them, planes "often" cause accidents also.:rolleyes:

[fa2991]

Why not believe it? the human race has developed over time thanks to the consumption of meat, and alot of health benefits are gained through eating meat. We do still need it and unlike you not everyone can afford to not eat meat.

Even the American Diabetic Association endorses vegan diets as healthy and nutritionally more than sufficient. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.


No that doesn't make you a neo-liberal, but you don't see things from a working class perspective. Most of us cannot afford to be eating vegetarian friendly/vegan stuff.Because vegetables cost so much more than meat. :rolleyes:


Yes "often" ineffective, but you don't think of the many animals it has brought a swift painless death to. Cars "often" cause accidents, so lets all stop driving them, planes "often" crash also.:rolleyes:

:rolleyes: Yeah, that makes total sense.

[Wred]

Even the American diabetic association endorses vegan diets as healthy and nutritionally more than sufficient. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

Because vegetables cost so much more than meat. :rolleyes:



:rolleyes: Yeah, that makes total sense.

I'm not saying that vegan diets are unhealthy, I am able to see that they bring good health benefits, but I believe what is best for humans is a balanced, varied diet. And yes it does make sense, you can't just totally stop something for a few ineffective results from it. :rolleyes:
You must look at the benefits of it first. And you fail to realise not all of us have the time to prepare a veggie meal, yes you could eat salad or something basic along those lines but to be honest, a vegetarian diet wouldn't satisfy me at all.

[Os Cangaceiros]

An unnecessary and undesirable source.

I disagree.


If you partake in any industry under capitalism, you're "indirectly responsible" for something horrible, be it exploitation, pollution, deforestation, or murder. The meat industry is unique in that it's probably the only industry - aside from war - that consumes a ton of resources and puts them all towards unnecessary waste and killing while hurting people and ruining the environment. It's a special (and important) case.

Not really. It produces something with utility value (meat). The only difference is the amount of waste that goes into production (although that's debatable), but that's just a matter of scale. There's nothing special about the meat industry when compared to any number of other good-producing industries.


Hardly.

Humans have been eating meat for thousands of years...in some cultures it was almost the only thing they ate, and they were perfectly healthy (this was the case for many Alaskan tribes around where I grew up). The only thing that has changed is the mode of production that meets their wants and/or needs.

[fa2991]

I'm not saying that vegan diets are unhealthy, I am able to see that they bring good health benefits, but I believe what is best for humans is a balanced, varied diet.

There are no nutrients in meat you can't get elsewhere, unless you have some sort of vampiric need for blood. :)

Variation for the sake of variation doesn't make sense.

Furthermore, you said that meat is necessary for human health, which obviously indicates that meat free diets are nutritionally insufficient, which is just not true. There are even athletes and bodybuilders who get all of their nutrients, fats, and vitamins from vegan diets.


And yes it does make sense, you can't just totally stop something for a few ineffective results from it.

It's different than with a plane or something. Stunners, etc. don't do what they're supposed to - neutralize pain in death or knock out animals. It's not analogous to a car crash - its analogous to a car that won't move. It doesn't work.


You must look at the benefits of it first. And you fail to realise not all of us have the time to prepare a veggie meal, yes you could eat salad or something basic along those lines but to be honest, a vegetarian diet wouldn't satisfy me at all.

:rolleyes: Are you kidding me? Veggies and fruits require absolutely no preparation. Have you ever tried eating meat without cooking or preparing it? Again, we return simply to the matter of taste, which is not really a valid reason to endorse the wasteful and grotesque meat industry.

[fa2991]

I disagree.

To disagree is to suggest that meat is necessary for a healthy diet, which is just not true.


Not really. It produces something with utility value (meat). The only difference is the amount of waste that goes into production (although that's debatable), but that's just a matter of scale. There's nothing special about the meat industry when compared to any number of other good-producing industries.

I can't think of other industries that have to feed large amount of food to large amounts of animals which produce large amounts of waste which produces large amounts of pollution right before they're killed, chopped, and shipped. It's a very unique industry.


Humans have been eating meat for thousands of years...in some cultures it was almost the only thing they ate, and they were perfectly healthy (this was the case for many Alaskan tribes around where I grew up). The only thing that has changed is the mode of production that meets their wants and/or needs.

Many have also been on all-vegan diets. Under feudalism, etc., peasants (who didn't starve) were often much healthier than their lords because the peasants could only afford vegetables and fruit, whereas the rich stuck mostly to meat.

Besides, I never said that you couldn't eat meat and still be healthy.

[Wred]

There are no nutrients in meat you can't get elsewhere, unless you have some sort of vampiric need for blood. :)

Variation for the sake of variation doesn't make sense.

Furthermore, you said that meat is necessary for human health, which obviously indicates that meat free diets are nutritionally insufficient, which is just not true. There are even athletes and bodybuilders who get all of their nutrients, fats, and vitamins from vegan diets.



It's different than with a plane or something. Stunners, etc. don't do what they're supposed to - neutralize pain in death or knock out animals. It's not analogous to a car crash - its analogous to a car that won't move. It doesn't work.



:rolleyes: Are you kidding me? Veggies and fruits require absolutely no preparation. Have you ever tried eating meat without cooking or preparing it? Again, we return simply to the matter of taste, which is not really a valid reason to endorse the wasteful and grotesque meat industry.

You forget about the high amount of protein that can be gained from eating meat. I would like to see these body builders also because I have met a few in my life and one was a rabid meat eater who ate 3 steaks for breakfast. And look at the past how many inventions have probably been ineffective now and then? Do we get rid of them or totally abstain from using them? No, because most of the time we are able to see that they work.

And it is not "variation for the sake of variation" we require a variety of vitamins and minerals, and what a boring life it must be restricting yourself and telling yourself what you can and can't eat. I would rather enjoy a variety of meats with vegetables than just eating vegetables and fruits, day in day out. I can go and eat a pork sandwich now with lettuce and tomatoes while you do not have that variety.

If I thought the way you do towards your diet towards human beings you would be calling me a bigot. It's very narrow minded imagine I say "WELL THAT CHINESE MAN WAS NASTY TO ME SO I WILL NEVER SPEAK TO THEM AGAIN." :rolleyes: you can't take a few instances and lump them all together.

[Pavlov's House Party]

The same could be said of

Oats
Soy
Wheat
Beans
Tofu
Brown rice
Almonds
Pumpkin seeds
Practically all nuts & seeds
Potatoes, etc. etc. etc.

Hypothetically, we could get all the nutrition we need from vitamins, but we don't because food tastes good. It is a subjective position.

[Os Cangaceiros]

To disagree is to suggest that meat is necessary for a healthy diet, which is just not true.

I was disagreeing more with the undesirable part.


I can't think of other industries that have to feed large amount of food to large amounts of animals which produce large amounts of waste which produces large amounts of pollution right before they're killed, chopped, and shipped. It's a very unique industry.

Not if you break it down into a it's most basic form: cost vs. benefit. In that sense it's not worse than any number of industries...one good example would be bottled water, which is pretty much totally unnecessary.


Many have also been on all-vegan diets. Under feudalism, etc., peasants (who didn't starve) were often much healthier than their lords because the peasants could only afford vegetables and fruit, whereas the rich stuck mostly to meat.

Vegan? I don't think so. Peasants ate their fair share of milk and cheese.


Besides, I never said that you couldn't eat meat and still be healthy.

Good. I credit my freakishly large brain with the large amount of salmon I ate in my youth.

Anyway, it's becoming more and more apparent that this conversation is going nowhere, and that never the twain shall meat (pun intended).

[The Red Next Door]

We should be onivore instead of being meat eaters and plants eaters all the time. It would not hurt eating plants or meat. I am enjoying a nice spinach and chicken pizza as we speak. We should have Human liberation at the top of our list. There is a bunch of things that cause the left to have problems, lifestylism is not the only thing, like we are not better than, them telling them that their issue does not have an importance, animal liberationists should focus on humans first, we all need each other to live and animals will taste better, if we do treat them humanly. Probably. Plus we should not be assholes about being meat eaters towards vegans and the same go for vegans, you are not better than us just because you eat meat or plants only.

I have a question for the OP, If you have a choice, would you save your mom or family or friends in a fire or fuck them save the cow and the pig? which will you choose and if you choose the second, then you are a sorry ass for a human being.

[fa2991]

You forget about the high amount of protein that can be gained from eating meat. I would like to see these body builders also because I have met a few in my life and one was a rabid meat eater who ate 3 steaks for breakfast.

I didn't forget about that. Meat has lots of protein. But you don't need to eat meat to get that protein - that's the point, and you still haven't denied that.

A simple Google search would turn up an abundance of athletes & body builders who abstain from meat. This video should suffice: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIcSuA2b_Wc


And look at the past how many inventions have probably been ineffective now and then? Do we get rid of them or totally abstain from using them? No, because most of the time we are able to see that they work.

Say you're getting surgery - not as major or painful an operation as getting a spike shot into your brain. The nurse hooks up the IV and says "This puts people out about half the time." Do you think to yourself "I'll focus on the half that were asleep when they were cut open"?


And it is not "variation for the sake of variation" we require a variety of vitamins and minerals, and what a boring life it must be restricting yourself and telling yourself what you can and can't eat. I would rather enjoy a variety of meats with vegetables than just eating vegetables and fruits, day in day out. I can go and eat a pork sandwich now with lettuce and tomatoes while you do not have that variety.

"A variety of meats"? What are you eating, dolphin? Odds are you eat cows, chickens, pigs, and fish. There are countless kinds of fruits, nuts, and vegetables, but only so many kinds of flesh. Eating a Big Mac one week and a Whopper the next doesn't constitute a varied diet.

It is variation for variations sake, because, as I've pointed out, there aren't nutrients, etc. in meat you can't find elsewhere.

And, again, you're making an argument about taste. I could just as easily say that I would rather eat kiwis, strawberries, carrots, sunflower seeds, potato chips, plums, apricots, baked potatoes, (vegan) chili, burritos, etc. than eating a dull slab of meat every day.


If I thought the way you do towards your diet towards human beings you would be calling me a bigot. It's very narrow minded imagine I say "WELL THAT CHINESE MAN WAS NASTY TO ME SO I WILL NEVER SPEAK TO THEM AGAIN." :rolleyes: you can't take a few instances and lump them all together.

Do you think before you post something, or does all just kinda flow out? :)

[fa2991]

Hypothetically, we could get all the nutrition we need from vitamins, but we don't because food tastes good. It is a subjective position.

We're talking about nutritional requirements. Taste is irrelevant to that post.


I was disagreeing more with the undesirable part.

You're right, that's subjective. :D


Not if you break it down into a it's most basic form: cost vs. benefit. In that sense it's not worse than any number of industries...one good example would be bottled water, which is pretty much totally unnecessary.

You're right - it produces goods, etc. like all other industries. You're right - other industries may be unnecessary. But the consumption of foodstuffs that could go to hungry humans, the pollution of the environment, etc. make it an industry that we need to seriously consider eliminating.


Vegan? I don't think so. Peasants ate their fair share of milk and cheese.

Sorry if I gave the impression that they were vegan. This discussion is about eating meat, not cheese, and I only meant that they were often forced to be vegetarian.


Good. I credit my freakishly large brain with the large amount of salmon I ate in my youth.

:laugh:

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

I'm truely, truely shocked at the response by many of the people on this board early on in the discussion of this topic.When I joined this board I thought, [what a mistake] that I was going finally, come in contact with like minded interests with some slight differences, man was I wrong. I find so called "revolutionaries" using the exact same verble attacks on environmentalist and animal rights activists that the right wing uses.
"hippies" "tree huggers" "animal rights nuts" some of you people are no better than the very people you claim to be fighting against.You attack people that have made a break with this system as best they can. this is called a praxis, they preach it and live it, it's more than I can say for most of you faux "revolutionaries" lol lol What a disappointment this board turned out to be. clowns, a bunch of clowns.

[fa2991]

We should be onivore instead of being meat eaters and plants eaters all the time. It would not hurt eating plants or meat. I am enjoying a nice spinach and chicken pizza as we speak. We should have Human liberation at the top of our list. There is a bunch of things that cause the left to have problems, lifestylism is not the only thing, like we are not better than, them telling them that their issue does not have an importance, animal liberationists should focus on humans first, we all need each other to live and animals will taste better, if we do treat them humanly. Probably. Plus we should not be assholes about being meat eaters towards vegans and the same go for vegans, you are not better than us just because you eat meat or plants only.

I have a question for the OP, If you have a choice, would you save your mom or family or friends in a fire or fuck them save the cow and the pig? which will you choose and if you choose the second, then you are a sorry ass for a human being.

All your points have been addressed already in previous posts, except for the idiotic cow/family hypothetical.

Vegetarians don't "favor" animals. Almost everyone, vegetarians, too, would choose their family, unless they got beaten or something.

[Tavarisch_Mike]

I had the most annoying "anarchist" ex-gf that was nothing more than a petty, elitist, lifestlyist liberal. She would say stuff like how she would sacrifice a mother and child to save a park or a tree. Or something akin to giving me the ultimatum of killing a family of gorillas or killing a baby.

These types hate humans and are disgusting to be around. They think people are the scourge of all that it good and think it would be preferable to limit our breeding.

It's these whacko types that give leftism a bad name and why people think they have to tilt "right" to have any sort of sanity in their politics. The right wing use these mad people to defame all leftists and our struggle.

Yes i have allready wrot about it in another thread but i will repeat it. If people are carrying about animals doesnt mean that they automaticly also are very kind towards humans, in some cases its the opposite. Some people tend to de-humanise humans and move theire feelings to animals, one good example, the nazis, mystifiaing nature as pure and good made that the third reich had very advanced laws in protection of animal rights, but when it came to humans...yeah we all know.
India is also a good example where vegetarianism is hughe, some people are careful where they step so that they dont crush some insect that might be a reincarnated relative. Cows are considered sacred and are allowed to go wherever they want, and in the same time millions of people are litterarly starving to death on the streets in front of evrybodys eyes, young girls are sold as sex-slaves and the cast-system justifieces rape, slavery and murdering. So being vegetarian has nothing to do with being opend minded, oh and btw to care about the enviorment has nothing to do with animal rights eighter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5vSia_tLeI

EDIT; I cant belive that the thread hasnt been closed yet.

[fa2991]

I'm truely, truely shocked at the response by many of the people on this board early on in the discussion of this topic.When I joined this board I thought, [what a mistake] that I was going finally, come in contact with like minded interests with some slight differences, man was I wrong. I find so called "revolutionaries" using the exact same verble attacks on environmentalist and animal rights activists that the right wing uses.
"hippies" "tree huggers" "animal rights nuts" some of you people are no better than the very people you claim to be fighting against.You attack people that have made a break with this system as best they can. this is called a praxis, they preach it and live it, it's more than I can say for most of you faux "revolutionaries" lol lol What a disappointment this board turned out to be. clowns, a bunch of clowns.

Marxists are very rarely as vegan friendly as anarchists. Since this board is a mixture of tendencies - with probably most being Marxist-Leninists - you shouldn't be surprised. Maybe go to VeggieBoards when you want to talk dietary matters? :thumbup1:


EDIT; I cant belive that the thread hasnt been closed yet. Me, too, actually.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Marxists are very rarely as vegan friendly as anarchists. Since this board is a mixture of tendencies - with probably most being Marxist-Leninists - you shouldn't be surprised. Maybe go to VeggieBoards when you want to talk dietary matters? :thumbup1:

Me, too, actually.


what they have shown themselves to be is as oppressive in their attacks as the right wing. I'm going over to the Anarchist board.Alot of the people on this board should be shaking hands with Glen Beck.

[danyboy27]

what they have shown themselves to be is as oppressive in their attacks as the right wing. I'm going over to the Anarchist board.Alot of the people on this board should be shaking hands with Glen Beck.

good.

[The Red Next Door]

I'm truely, truely shocked at the response by many of the people on this board early on in the discussion of this topic.When I joined this board I thought, [what a mistake] that I was going finally, come in contact with like minded interests with some slight differences, man was I wrong. I find so called "revolutionaries" using the exact same verble attacks on environmentalist and animal rights activists that the right wing uses.
"hippies" "tree huggers" "animal rights nuts" some of you people are no better than the very people you claim to be fighting against.You attack people that have made a break with this system as best they can. this is called a praxis, they preach it and live it, it's more than I can say for most of you faux "revolutionaries" lol lol What a disappointment this board turned out to be. clowns, a bunch of clowns.

Unless, you do not participate in any activity, you have no right calling us that, if all you worry about is only the liberation of animals, like you are no better than the people on this board because come off as very elitist.

[fa2991]

Unless, you do not participate in any activity, you have no right calling us that, if all you worry about is only the liberation of animals, like you are no better than the people on this board because come off as very elitist.

Few people "only" care about animals. Has anyone in this entire thread actually said anything remotely resembling that?

[The Red Next Door]

All your points have been addressed already in previous posts, except for the idiotic cow/family hypothetical.

Vegetarians don't "favor" animals. Almost everyone, vegetarians, too, would choose their family, unless they got beaten or something.

Stop Being a smartass asshole.:rolleyes:

[The Red Next Door]

Few people "only" care about animals. Has anyone in this entire thread actually said anything remotely resembling that?

No, i was just telling not to be elitist.

[Mindtoaster]

I'm truely, truely shocked at the response by many of the people on this board early on in the discussion of this topic.When I joined this board I thought, [what a mistake] that I was going finally, come in contact with like minded interests with some slight differences, man was I wrong. I find so called "revolutionaries" using the exact same verble attacks on environmentalist and animal rights activists that the right wing uses.
"hippies" "tree huggers" "animal rights nuts" some of you people are no better than the very people you claim to be fighting against.You attack people that have made a break with this system as best they can. this is called a praxis, they preach it and live it, it's more than I can say for most of you faux "revolutionaries" lol lol What a disappointment this board turned out to be. clowns, a bunch of clowns.

Awww, sorry bro.

But here, I went out of my way to find a forum way more fitting for your personality:

http://www.thedemocratichub.com/forums.aspx

Enjoy! :)

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Here is a great board for all of the fake leftists on this board http://www.democrat.com this is a more suitable home for you democrats posing as leftists.

[bots]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ_5Pev_44Y&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ_5Pev_44Y&feature=related)

[Mindtoaster]

Here is a great board for all of the fake leftists on this board http://www.democrat.com this is a more suitable home for you democrats posing as leftists.

Shouldn't you be breaking into a pet store or something?

[NGNM85]

Awww, sorry bro.

But here, I went out of my way to find a forum way more fitting for your personality:

http://www.thedemocratichub.com/forums.aspx

Enjoy! :)


As much as I disagree with what he's saying, this isn't really fair. It's clear he subscribes to the trendy sort of "Anarchist" lifestylism that is disturbingly common, today. He's probably inspired by cranks like Derrick Jensen, or John Zerzan, or bands like Crass. I, personally, find this ideology, for the most part, supremely unappealing and intellectually bankrupt. However, I think the careless way in which language is used here is a serious problem and this isn't helping. Surely, we can provide more constructive criticism than simply resorting to baseless slander. "Liberal' has become, like, 'counterrevolutionary', a preferred slander than can just be trotted out against anybody we happen to dislike. It's a barrier to conversation.

[Blackscare]

When I am Chairman ____ leader of the new soviet world government, firecrackers will be mandatory in every small animal's anus.

That is all.

[Adi Shankara]

While I respect animal life, and do think we need to do what we do to protect them from harm and endangerment...

...Humans come first. bottom line. I do not like the idea of denying humans a valuable protein source just to appease certain leftists. It would never happen if I was in charge.

[Adi Shankara]

hating liberal hippies are not something reserved to ring wing folks.

Even communists hate hippies; they hijack our ideals, but somehow end up making us all look bad.


You missed the point, being a communist means, also, to be an environmentalist, and with that, being an environmentalist means caring about life on this planet.

I DO care about life...which is why I believe that we cannot deny our brothers and sisters across the globe protein and valuable calories.

seriously, cut this bullshit, it's almost always a wealthy liberal who pumps it.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

When I am Chairman ____ leader of the new soviet world government, firecrackers will be mandatory in every small animal's anus.

That is all.



A response by someone that is intellectually stagnant.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Even communists hate hippies; they hijack our ideals, but somehow end up making us all look bad.



I DO care about life...which is why I believe that we cannot deny our brothers and sisters across the globe protein and valuable calories.

seriously, cut this bullshit, it's almost always a wealthy liberal who pumps it.



What Ideas, read the responses, the people on this board have no ideas,no vision,they are, like I said, intellectually stagnant.all the same old bullshit about, cadres, the dictatorship of the proletariat, party line blah, blah , blah.what is revolutionary about any of you? what, because you say so. anyone can say so, saying it and living it is two different things. and what do the drones on this board do, attack people that are living it, using right wing attacks, the very attacks that people like Rush Limbaugh uses. Well let me say this, when your attacks begin to mirror the attacks of the right, you better reavaluate your position.

[Steve_j]

What a disappointment this board turned out to be. clowns, a bunch of clowns.


the people on this board have no ideas,no vision,they are, like I said, intellectually stagnant.

Im sorry you feel that way.

You are aware that no one is forcing you to be here?

You are welcome to leave anytime you like and I would personally like to apologise on behalf of everyone on the board for not living up to your standards.

Perhaps in another 10 years or so we will be as good as you are.

[Andropov]

what is revolutionary about any of you? what, because you say so. anyone can say so, saying it and living it is two different things.
Well then why are you posting here? Surely its not very revolutionary to have a computer or internet access in yout trendy left poser world.
Also since you have been argueing that animals have the capacity to love etc just like people.
Surely then it is only right that when an animal and a human share that same burning love they enact their love on each other physically?

[Adi Shankara]

What Ideas, read the responses, the people on this board have no ideas,no vision,they are, like I said, intellectually stagnant.all the same old bullshit about, cadres, the dictatorship of the proletariat, party line blah, blah , blah.what is revolutionary about any of you? what, because you say so. anyone can say so, saying it and living it is two different things. and what do the drones on this board do, attack people that are living it, using right wing attacks, the very attacks that people like Rush Limbaugh uses. Well let me say this, when your attacks begin to mirror the attacks of the right, you better reavaluate your position.

YOU FUCKING MURDERER!!! HOW DARE YOU KILL AND EAT THOSE INNOCENT PLANTS LIKE A BARBARIC CREEP!!! THEY CAN FEEL AND LOVE TOO!!!!

how is that for a relevant response?

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Well then why are you posting here? Surely its not very revolutionary to have a computer or internet access in yout trendy left poser world.
Also since you have been argueing that animals have the capacity to love etc just like people.
Surely then it is only right that when an animal and a human share that same burning love they enact their love on each other physically?

this has to be the stupidist, dumb answer ever given. and this is an example, intellectually, what these parties are turning out.


When you have a "self professed revolutionary" say that "environmentalism is not part of communism", that is evidence of intellectual stagnation. when mans action is man dominating nature, and through this domination he is slowly killing everything on it, destroying the air, water, soil, and through this destruction, the various life forms on it, instead of fighting to stop this destruction, the party robots attack the people that are fighting to stop this destruction with right wing responses.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

YOU FUCKING MURDERER!!! HOW DARE YOU KILL AND EAT THOSE INNOCENT PLANTS LIKE A BARBARIC CREEP!!! THEY CAN FEEL AND LOVE TOO!!!!

how is that for a relevant response?



Do you read beyond party material? Do you know anything about how mans exploitation of the earth has led to the poisoning of the air, water, soil, the removal of trees, and deforestation leads to pollution not being absorbed and because of this, more floods, more severe winters, more severe summers, and the destruction of the ozone layer which kills slowly all life on the planet.this means precious the workers too!!! OOOOH I FORGOT, THIS HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED BY THE PARTY AS READING MATERIAL LOL LOL

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

Do you read beyond party material? Do you know anything about how mans exploitation of the earth has led to the poisoning of the air, water, soil, the removal of trees, and deforestation leads to pollution not being absorbed and because of this, more floods, more severe winters, more severe summers, and the destruction of the ozone layer which kills slowly all life on the planet.this means precious the workers too!!! OOOOH I FORGOT, THIS HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED BY THE PARTY AS READING MATERIAL LOL LOL

Enjoy your ban.

[Quail]

I wasn't going to post in this thread, because LETSFIGHTBACK is making bad, incoherent arguments and it's turned into a veggie vs omnivore thread.

I'm not a big fan of animal liberation. Humans should always put humans first, and communists should put the needs of the working class first. However, I do see the meat industry as a very wasteful industry that pollutes the planet, and to me, it is important to preserve the planet so that we can continue to live in a nice, comfortable environment. At each stage of the food chain, energy is lost, so producing meat is always going to be a more wasteful method of food production, unless we can grow it in vats or something.

Also, as an aside, why do people always claim that they can't afford to be a vegetarian? In the UK at least, it's cheaper to not eat meat.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

I'm not a big fan of animal liberation. Humans should always put humans first, and communists should put the needs of the working class first. However, I do see the meat industry as a very wasteful industry that pollutes the planet, and to me, it is important to preserve the planet so that we can continue to live in a nice, comfortable environment. At each stage of the food chain, energy is lost, so producing meat is always going to be a more wasteful method of food production, unless we can grow it in vats or something.

Your biased against any non-veggie statment, and like the majority of veggies have some bizzare superiority complex and the need to enforce your belifes on others.


Also, as an aside, why do people always claim that they can't afford to be a vegetarian? In the UK at least, it's cheaper to not eat meat.

Its pretty simple, you already answered it.

Environments differ, in some places veg may have to be imported. Get your head out of your ass.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Your biased against any non-veggie statment, and like the majority of veggies have some bizzare superiority complex and the need to enforce your belifes on others.



Its pretty simple, you already answered it.

Environments differ, in some places veg may have to be imported. Get your head out of your ass.


here we go again, dumb comment. the areas that have to import vegtables have made DEPENDENT, the small family farmer was throw off his landby the corporate famers, their land was turned into cash crops for export and also used for cattle grazing for the fast food industry.using tons of grain that could be used for the poor and hungry.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

I wasn't going to post in this thread, because LETSFIGHTBACK is making bad, incoherent arguments and it's turned into a veggie vs omnivore thread.

I'm not a big fan of animal liberation. Humans should always put humans first, and communists should put the needs of the working class first. However, I do see the meat industry as a very wasteful industry that pollutes the planet, and to me, it is important to preserve the planet so that we can continue to live in a nice, comfortable environment. At each stage of the food chain, energy is lost, so producing meat is always going to be a more wasteful method of food production, unless we can grow it in vats or something.

Also, as an aside, why do people always claim that they can't afford to be a vegetarian? In the UK at least, it's cheaper to not eat meat.


I'm making bad, incoherent comments, when you have so called "revolutionaries" saying enviromentalism is not part of the communist movent lol lol lol

[Adi Shankara]

I'm making bad, incoherent comments, when you have so called "revolutionaries" saying enviromentalism is not part of the communist movent lol lol lol

the arguments could be airtight, but you'd still be a dumb liberal who believes in failed ideologies that literally serve no one but those who can afford to have choice.

[Steve_j]

and like the majority of veggies have some bizzare superiority complex

Really? have you spoken to all of them on the matter?


and the need to enforce your belifes on others

Arguing for an alternative to an abusive/wasteful and often unhealthy practice that serves little purpose (in the west) other than cullinary preference is enforcing our beliefs on you?

You are in this thread out of your own free will, no one is forcing shit on you.

[bricolage]

"Hippie, liberal, tree hugger"
Is mainly used in regards to, well... liberals; 'lentil eating, sandal wearing, guardian reading...'
Considering papers like the Guardian and Independent actually publish articles about vegetarianism and the like this isn't actually that surprising.


To say that the right wing doesn't use the lunacy of some of these lifestyle groups is false.
But like I said I really don't think they do. And even if they do I don't think this really has any bearing on most ordinary people.
I mean its not like your average worker is sitting there going, 'Well I would join the IWW and participate in the overthrow of capitalism and the establishment of a communist society... but I'd be doing it will tree hugging hippies so I think I'll just stay here getting fucked over in the factory'... Of course not chances are they are thinking something more like, 'Well things are pretty shit but I suppose if we vote for someone else or maybe get a few more minimum wage bills passed and maybe put some limits on immigrants workers we can work it out, and at the end of the day capitalism is at least safe and ordered and communism is just chaos and labour camps so I don't really want to help set up another Pol Pot... etc etc' (apologies for the vulgar caricature but you get my point).

[Quail]

I'm making bad, incoherent comments, when you have so called "revolutionaries" saying enviromentalism is not part of the communist movent lol lol lol

Your arguments are poorly structured and it seems as though you're babbling. Besides, I think that communists should care about the environment so that we can have a better quality of life. The environment is a concern, but there are other issues that affect workers more directly. A lot of environmental damage is caused by capitalism, although I don't think I can ever see an environmentally friendly meat industry, hence why I don't eat meat.

I don't think that animal liberation should be a priority over the needs of the working class, which is what the thread started about.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

here we go again, dumb comment. the areas that have to import vegtables have made DEPENDENT, the small family farmer was throw off his landby the corporate famers, their land was turned into cash crops for export and also used for cattle grazing for the fast food industry.using tons of grain that could be used for the poor and hungry

No, Idiot. There are some parts of the world where you cannot grow crops very well like Alaska, yet people live there.


Really? have you spoken to all of them on the matter?

Well done, you spotted the obvious fallicy.


Arguing for an alternative to an abusive/wasteful and often unhealthy practice that serves little purpose (in the west) other than cullinary preference is enforcing our beliefs on you?

From the comments in this thread it seems that those arguing for veggie diets would enforce it. Since it is for the best.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Your arguments are poorly structured and it seems as though you're babbling. Besides, I think that communists should care about the environment so that we can have a better quality of life. The environment is a concern, but there are other issues that affect workers more directly. A lot of environmental damage is caused by capitalism, although I don't think I can ever see an environmentally friendly meat industry, hence why I don't eat meat.

I don't think that animal liberation should be a priority over the needs of the working class, which is what the thread started about.



So, they were poorly contructed and I was Babbling, but you still understood,but you agreed with me, So, my job was done.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

No, Idiot. There are some parts of the world where you cannot grow crops very well like Alaska, yet people live there.



Well done, you spotted the obvious fallicy.



From the comments in this thread it seems that those arguing for veggie diets would enforce it. Since it is for the best.



Hey fool, they grow potatoes, lettuce, carrots, cabbage, corn, barley and oats. in Alaska. why don't you read? I know, it has to be approved by the party lol lol

[piet11111]

If you hate it here so much you can always just log off you know.

[Quail]

So, they were poorly contructed and I was Babbling, but you still understood,but you agreed with me, So, my job was done.

I don't agree with animal liberation.

I do, however, agree with the environmental reasons for not eating meat, but not because your thread convinced me.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

I don't agree with animal liberation.

I do, however, agree with the environmental reasons for not eating meat, but not because your thread convinced me.


Not seeing a commonality with other living breathing creatures that are also abused and exploited for profit, I guess, has to be a preapproved position of the party before you can adopt it. lol lol but you are making progress on the environmental issue. there's still hope.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

if you hate it here so much you can always just log off you know.

wow, what a mind blowing response.

[Quail]

I'm an anarchist. I don't tow any "party position". I just think that you need to sort out your priorities and see that the working class are much more important than animal liberation. For the record I am against unnecessary animal cruelty, but that's different to animal liberation.

[piet11111]

wow, what a mind blowing response.

Yeah i know the feeling from reading your posts sorry.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

I'm an anarchist. I don't tow any "party position". I just think that you need to sort out your priorities and see that the working class are much more important than animal liberation. For the record I am against unnecessary animal cruelty, but that's different to animal liberation.


I don't understand, you are against unnecessary" cruelty, which means there is permissable, necessary cruelty at certain times?:confused:

[Fietsketting]

There are no nutrients in meat you can't get elsewhere, unless you have some sort of vampiric need for blood. :)

Variation for the sake of variation doesn't make sense.

Bollocks, I got sick in my 4 year time as vegetarian even. Ate all the usual stuff, extra vitamines etc etc. but couldn't gain enough weight. Now i eat meat again i weigh 102 kilo's at 2 meters tall and are quite healthy nowadays.

It didn't work for me and therefore i eat meat. I agree its terrible how aminals are treated but you can only start changing that if capitalism falls imo.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Yeah i know the feeling from reading your posts sorry.


Sorry it took so long to respond to you, but I was having a more intellectually stimulating conversation with a fly on the wall, now, what were you saying?

[Fietsketting]

Sorry it took so long to respond to you, but I was having a more intellectually stimulating conversation with a fly on the wall, now, what were you saying?
You talk to trees and flowers as well no doubt?

[piet11111]

You talk to trees and flowers as well no doubt?

Well it does explain a lot of his political positions.

[Steve_j]

I was having a more intellectually stimulating conversation with a fly on the wall

That makes sense, you appear to have issues interacting with other people, particularly when their views even slightly differ from yours. Seeing that a fly holds no opinions and therefore cant digress from the one you hold, it sounds like a workable relationship you have there.

Perhaps you should stick to talking with flies.

[Quail]

I don't understand, you are against unnecessary" cruelty, which means there is permissable, necessary cruelty at certain times?:confused:
Well, if someone was starving and the only food around was meat, I wouldn't have a problem with them eating meat then. I would always put humans above other animals. If there is an alternative to meat though, I think that it is preferable to eat that for the environmental reasons as well as because personally, I don't want another being to suffer for my food if it is avoidable.

I think that wanting to avoid animal suffering and cruelty is a personal choice, but wanting to protect the environment should tie in with a vision for a future society, if that makes sense.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Well, if someone was starving and the only food around was meat, I wouldn't have a problem with them eating meat then. I would always put humans above other animals. If there is an alternative to meat though, I think that it is preferable to eat that for the environmental reasons as well as because personally, I don't want another being to suffer for my food if it is avoidable.

I think that wanting to avoid animal suffering and cruelty is a personal choice, but wanting to protect the environment should tie in with a vision for a future society, if that makes sense.


well sure,I agree. Protecting the environment should be a vision for the future, but not to many people on this board that call themselves "revolutionaries" feel the same.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Fact is that the issue is not as nuanced as 'save the animals vs kill the animals'.

Animal liberation fighters advocate policies that harm humans - anti-animal testing for example.

Whilst we should oppose intense battery farming and the mal-treatment of domestic animals, the hunting of rare and endangered species and generally unnecessary cruelty towards animals, we must counter this with our need - as a species of 6billion+ hungry omnivores - for meat, to put it bluntly.

This means that complete and unequivocal support for organisations like PETA and the ALF are in fact in direct contradiction to the single most important human - and Socialist - goal: the continued and universal increase in living standards for our species.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Fact is that the issue is not as nuanced as 'save the animals vs kill the animals'.

Animal liberation fighters advocate policies that harm humans - anti-animal testing for example.

Whilst we should oppose intense battery farming and the mal-treatment of domestic animals, the hunting of rare and endangered species and generally unnecessary cruelty towards animals, we must counter this with our need - as a species of 6billion+ hungry omnivores - for meat, to put it bluntly.

This means that complete and unequivocal support for organisations like PETA and the ALF are in fact in direct contradiction to the single most important human - and Socialist - goal: the continued and universal increase in living standards for our species.


As stated by former workers once employed by these testing labs, they said "once you've worked in these labs, you cease to have compassion for all living things".they also said there are methods to test various chemicals and not use live animals.

And as far as your 3rd statement, read "paths to paradise and food for thought, plus roots of rebellion. That should make eveything clear. Don't let your party know that your reading literature not approved by the party Hierarchy.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

As stated by former workers once employed by these testing labs, they said "once you've worked in these labs, you cease to have compassion for all living things".they also said there are methods to test various chemicals and not use live animals.

And as far as your 3rd statement, read "paths to paradise and food for thought, plus roots of rebellion. That should make eveything clear. Don't let your party know that your reading literature not approved by the party Hierarchy.

Can you stop repeating your fucking nonsense already? Everything you don't agree with is not a part of some "party-line" or "party hierarchy", but perhaps your dietary choices have restricted your mental faculties so badly during the last twenty years that you cannot comprehend anything longer than 10 words directed at you.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Can you stop repeating your fucking nonsense already? Everything you don't agree with is not a part of some "party-line" or "party hierarchy", but perhaps your dietary choices have restricted your mental faculties so badly during the last twenty years that you cannot comprehend anything longer than 10 words directed at you.


no one is forcing you to respond. you logged onto this thread by your own free will. being that you, as you said, only have a bowel movement every other day, that makes you sluggish and irratable, as is shown in your response.take a laxative, remove the dead animal flesh and be in a better mood.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

no one is forcing you to respond. you logged onto this thread by your own free will. being that you, as you said, only have a bowel movement every other day, that makes you sluggish and irratable, as is shown in your response.take a laxative, remove the dead animal flesh and be in a better mood.

You apparently have zero reading comprehension, as this clearly shows - this and how you constantly repeat the same nonsense with your warped perceptions of what "socialism" and "revolutionary" mean.

To be fair I actually have 1-2 a day, what I was referring to was the fact that I have a chronic bowel disorder that basically has the effect of taking laxative every other day or so. :rolleyes:

And lastly, I actually do not eat much meat, and what little meat I eat is some locally slaughtered farm meat, it hasn't even been through a slaughter house or meat packing facility, so there.

[Fietsketting]

well sure,I agree. Protecting the environment should be a vision for the future, but not to many people on this board that call themselves "revolutionaries" feel the same.

Veganism is not revolutionairy, its a personal choice. Being a envirementalist is not revolutionairy, just look at COP15 in Copenhagen. I find you annoyingly elitist due to the fact we do not seem revoltionairy to you because we eat meat. Every person has its own spearpoints in politics, deal with it.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

That makes sense, you appear to have issues interacting with other people, particularly when their views even slightly differ from yours. Seeing that a fly holds no opinions and therefore cant digress from the one you hold, it sounds like a workable relationship you have there.

Perhaps you should stick to talking with flies.


Typical response. is that what it's called when your opinion clashes with the party line, when ones position contradicts the spon fed party positon.
typical. it's always the person that goes against the majority that is seen by the party robots as having the problem lol lol

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Typical response. is that what it's called when your opinion clashes with the party line, when ones position contradicts the spon fed party positon.
typical. it's always the person that goes against the majority that is seen by the party robots as having the problem lol lol

Here we go again! :laugh:

You're like a broken record. Just repeating the same nonsense again and again and again.

[RadioRaheem84]

WTF? Animal liberation is not helpful to class struggle. Help
workers liberate themselves then you can help animals.

[LETSFIGHTBACK]

Veganism is not revolutionairy, its a personal choice. Being a envirementalist is not revolutionairy, just look at COP15 in Copenhagen. I find you annoyingly elitist due to the fact we do not seem revoltionairy to you because we eat meat. Every person has its own spearpoints in politics, deal with it.

why do all you people have the same programed description of people that do not agree with you, it's always "elitist" if it's not spoon fed by the group, by it's literature, it's "eltist".stopping corporate America from exploiting the earth for profit is not revolutionary lol lol Total complete Intellectual rigomortis.

[Raúl Duke]

I would like to point out something:


As stated by former workers once employed by these testing labs, they said "once you've worked in these labs, you cease to have compassion for all living things"You keep accusing people of being mindless drones follow party line and spouting things from party pamphlets...but

Where did you get that? It sounds like something out of a PETA pamphlet really.

In other words, don't be a hypocrite (if you are being one).

Thank you that is all, continue.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

why do all you people have the same programed description of people that do not agree with you, it's always "elitist" if it's not spoon fed by the group, by it's literature, it's "eltist".stopping corporate America from exploiting the earth for profit is not revolutionary lol lol Total complete Intellectual rigomortis.

OH NO THE CORPORASHIUNSSS!

Fighting against capitalism is revolutionary, yes.

Not eating meat IS NOT.

[Barry Lyndon]

Whether you want to eat meat or not has ZERO relevance to your politics. Hitler was a vegetarian and even wrote an essay on the most 'humane' way to cook lobsters.
Plus, he was nice to his dog.
Your whole argument is idiotic.

[Steve_j]

Typical response. is that what it's called when your opinion clashes with the party line, when ones position contradicts the spon fed party positon.
typical. it's always the person that goes against the majority that is seen by the party robots as having the problem lol lol

Um..... im not in a party and dont support party politics. Alot of people here dissagree with party politics. Whats you obession with parties anyway?


Im a dick

Thanks for clearing that up, i was beginning to have my suspicions.

[Tenka]

Probably not relevant to the current ongoing shitstorm, but I think Zoos, Petting Zoos and Meat Farms should be combined into massive facilities. It should eliminate at least a small percentage of the wastefulness of the meat industry, and I do fancy the idea of eating a giraffe.

[piet11111]

What i would really like to know is how he is going to prevent the carnivorous animals from "killing" other animals ?

How will he force them on a vegan diet ? :lol:

Or is a carnivore somehow exempt from having to go vegan and if so why am i not exempt from that ?

I still would like to know what LETSFIGHTBACK has to say about this.

[fa2991]

...Humans come first. bottom line. I do not like the idea of denying humans a valuable protein source just to appease certain leftists. It would never happen if I was in charge.


I DO care about life...which is why I believe that we cannot deny our brothers and sisters across the globe protein and valuable calories.It's not a necessary source of protein or calories, and I feel that freeing up more and more farmland and working against industries that produce huge amounts up waste and suck up our resources for unnecessary gain would help humans a lot more. As I've mentioned before, using all that food, water, energy, and manpower on animals you're going to kill anyway is such a waste, from a humanitarian standpoint at least.



seriously, cut this bullshit, it's almost always a wealthy liberal who pumps it.I think that some comrades on here are mistaking the vegetarian movement for the organic food movement. Vegetarianism is cheap as shit. :thumbup1:


Also, as an aside, why do people always claim that they can't afford to be a vegetarian? In the UK at least, it's cheaper to not eat meat.:thumbup1:


Your biased against any non-veggie statment, and like the majority of veggies have some bizzare superiority complex and the need to enforce your belifes on others.People always say this to try and back out of an argument. Substitute "veggie" for, say, "atheism" and this becomes a common statement about religion. Substitute "communist," etc., etc. ...


Environments differ, in some places veg may have to be imported. Get your head out of your assYa know, I've always wondered something about these sorts of places - if there are no veggies, but there are animals for meat... what the fuck are the animals eating? :confused:


From the comments in this thread it seems that those arguing for veggie diets would enforce it. Since it is for the bestNope.


Well, if someone was starving and the only food around was meat, I wouldn't have a problem with them eating meat then. I would always put humans above other animals. Certainly. Part of my point is that there are very few situations where people can't live well eating greens and fruits. In those few situations where such foods are not available, eating meat would be acceptable.


Animal liberation fighters advocate policies that harm humans - anti-animal testing for example.Believe it or not, not everything you can pump into a rat will produce the same result when you give it to a full grown human being.


This means that complete and unequivocal support for organisations like PETA and the ALF are in fact in direct contradiction to the single most important human - and Socialist - goal: the continued and universal increase in living standards for our species....and the best way to do that is to minimize or dismantle the meat industry, which is a huge drain on resources. Meat is a pointless luxury. We need more farmland, not slaughterhouses, if we want to feed the world.


Veganism is not revolutionairy, its a personal choice. Being a envirementalist is not revolutionairy, just look at COP15 in Copenhagen. I find you annoyingly elitist due to the fact we do not seem revoltionairy to you because we eat meat. Every person has its own spearpoints in politics, deal with it.
Whether you want to eat meat or not has ZERO relevance to your politics.

Fighting against capitalism is revolutionary, yes.

Not eating meat IS NOT.
Obviously vegetarianism isn't revolutionary or necessarily political. I might have posted "Beef & Broccoli" by Immortal Technique here, but I think someone beat me to it already.


WTF? Animal liberation is not helpful to class struggle. Help workers liberate themselves then you can help animals.

Ya know, each of us is allotted 60 or 70 years here on earth - more than enough time to have more than one single thought over and over again...


Hitler was a vegetarian and even wrote an essay on the most 'humane' way to cook lobsters. :D I'd get a kick out of that essay, if you have a link.


What i would really like to know is how he is going to prevent the carnivorous animals from "killing" other animals ?

How will he force them on a vegan diet ? http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/smilies2/laugh.gif

Or is a carnivore somehow exempt from having to go vegan and if so why am i not exempt from that ? Some animals - "obligate carnivores" - are physically incapable of not eating meat. Unless you're secretly a cat, you are not an obligate carnivore. Besides, humans have agriculture and farming. That's pretty much what separates us from other species. You don't exactly have to hunt for food - there are options for you.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

I think that some comrades on here are mistaking the vegetarian movement for the organic food movement. Vegetarianism is cheap as shit. :thumbup1:


But your vitamins and supplements are not.

Plus it tastes like shit. I can't even keep it down.

[Tenka]

Ya know, I've always wondered something about these sorts of places - if there are no veggies, but there are animals for meat... what the fuck are the animals eating?
Grass? I heard humans don't digest that very well.

[Steve_j]

But your vitamins and supplements are not.

I dont take any suplements, well balanced diet and im perfectly fine.

[fa2991]

But your vitamins and supplements are not.

Plus it tastes like shit. I can't even keep it down.

I don't think I've ever taken a vitamin or supplement in my life. If you're the sort of person who has some sort of nutritional deficiency, I imagine you'd be taking vitamins whether you ate meat or not. I wouldn't really know, but wouldn't a bottle of vitamins be, like, $15 for 200 pills? That's not bad.


Grass? I heard humans don't digest that very well. I guess I was picturing a desert or frozen tundra when someone said there are places where you can't grow crops. I doubt there's an abundance of grass in such places.

[Wred]

RevLeft: Where eating meat, regardless of your political views, makes you not a revolutionary. :rolleyes:

[The Red Next Door]

I wasn't going to post in this thread, because LETSFIGHTBACK is making bad, incoherent arguments and it's turned into a veggie vs omnivore thread.

I'm not a big fan of animal liberation. Humans should always put humans first, and communists should put the needs of the working class first. However, I do see the meat industry as a very wasteful industry that pollutes the planet, and to me, it is important to preserve the planet so that we can continue to live in a nice, comfortable environment. At each stage of the food chain, energy is lost, so producing meat is always going to be a more wasteful method of food production, unless we can grow it in vats or something.

Also, as an aside, why do people always claim that they can't afford to be a vegetarian? In the UK at least, it's cheaper to not eat meat.


America different, organic stuff is much higher than non organic foods. here.

[Tenka]

I guess I was picturing a desert or frozen when someone says there are places where you can't grow crops. I doubt there's an abundance of grass in such places.
I doubt there's an abundance of other plants humans could eat, too.

Regarding supplements--I'd think that many would be needed to survive well on a totally vegan diet, except maybe if one went around eating a great variety of plant matter in order to meet nutritional requirements for fats and everything. I like carrots, but beans and nuts can die in a fire.
The only rational argument in favour of veganism, as has been mentioned, is related to efficiency; and that is something which can easily be improved in the meat industry, provided proper management.

[fa2991]

America different, organic stuff is much higher than non organic foods. here.

Vegetarian does not = organic.

I eat carrots, apples, oranges, etc. grown freakishly large by bizarre chemicals, just like the rest of you.


Regarding supplements--I'd think that many would be needed to survive well on a totally vegan diet, except maybe if one went around eating a great variety of plant matter in order to meet nutritional requirements for fats and everything.

Umm... exactly what do you think is in meat? The only things a vegan really has to watch out for are protein and calcium, and they aren't that hard to get.

[Steve_j]

America different, organic stuff is much higher than non organic foods. here.

Whats that got to do with the price of fish?

[Tenka]

Umm... exactly what do you think is in meat? The only things a vegan really has to watch out for are protein and calcium, and they aren't that hard to get.
There are also essential fats which can be absorbed more easily from meat, and are not found in too many types of plants.

[Quail]

America different, organic stuff is much higher than non organic foods. here.

I never said anything about organic food. I don't eat organic food all that often. I eat vegetables.

I also don't take any nutritional supplements because I eat a varied diet.

[Volcanicity]

I gave up eating meat 13 years ago because of digestion problems,but fuck me i dont care if a burger chokes me to death,it would be worth it just to not see this thread again.

[Steve_j]

Dont worry durdles, they pop up all the time, although this one was a particular trainwreck.

[Tenka]

There is nothing wrong with Veganism, except possibly some as of yet unconfirmed cognitive problems resulting from certain deficiencies. (DHA, maybe others)

I assert simply that Veganism and the concept of Animal Liberation are not revolutionary, and that the eating of delicious dead flesh is not inherently wasteful or "wrong"; our methods of farming can be improved, and the abolishment of this retarding Capitalist system--which should be our priority--can make way for many improvements.

[The Red Next Door]

I never said anything about organic food. I don't eat organic food all that often. I eat vegetables.

I also don't take any nutritional supplements because I eat a varied diet.
oops sorry, but some vegetables are higher in some stories. I just sort of happen to live a in city that have a lot of farming, but big cites are different.

[fa2991]

There are also essential fats which can be absorbed more easily from meat, and are not found in too many types of plants.

Like...?


fuck me i dont care if a burger chokes me to death,it would be worth it just to not see this thread again. You could always just not open it.


I assert simply that Veganism and the concept of Animal Liberation are not revolutionary, and that the eating of delicious dead flesh is not inherently wasteful or "wrong"; our methods of farming can be improvedAll meat production requires a lot of land, a lot of food, a lot of water, and a lot of labor, and it produces a lot of waste. It is a wasteful, destructive industry and will be for the foreseeable future.

As for meat's "wrongness" - I've done my best to leave moral considerations out of my arguments. You should do the same.


oops sorry, but some vegetables are higher in some stories. I just sort of happen to live a in city that have a lot of farming, but big cites are different.

I don't know about you, but I just bought a 5 pound bag of potatoes for about $4. Fruits and vegetables just aren't expensive unless you buy organic or perhaps local.

[Volcanicity]

Like...?

You could always just not open it.

All meat production requires a lot of land, a lot of food, a lot of water, and a lot of labor, and it produces a lot of waste. It is a wasteful, destructive industry and will be for the foreseeable future.

As for meat's "wrongness" - I've done my best to leave moral considerations out of my arguments. You should do the same.



I don't know about you, but I just bought a 5 pound bag of potatoes for about $4. Fruits and vegetables just aren't expensive unless you buy organic or perhaps local.
Try preaching your bullshit to a single parent with 5 kids and see where that gets you.

[fa2991]

Try preaching your bullshit to a single parent with 5 kids and see where that gets you.

That's a reference to how cheap McDonald's is, I presume?

[Volcanicity]

That's a reference to how cheap McDonald's is, I presume?
What the fuck are you talking about.Im saying a single parent with 5 kids doesnt have the luxury,money or time to spend looking around for non-meat or organic veg. Your post is extremely offensive to the working class who you obviosly couldnt give a shit about.

[fa2991]

What the fuck are you talking about.

It's a common argument put forth by people who think that working people are useless that McDonald's is really cheap, and therefore a worker with a bunch of children couldn't possibly feed their children anything besides burgers every day. I just figured you were making a condescending argument of such a sort.


Im saying a single parent with 5 kids doesnt have the luxury,money or time to spend looking around for non-meat or organic veg. Your post is extremely offensive to the working class who you obviosly couldnt give a shit about.:laugh:


Im saying a single parent with 5 kids doesnt have the luxury,money or time to spend looking around for non-meat or organic veg.I don't even eat organic food. I'm going to quote a previous post of mine here:


Vegetarian does not = organic.

I eat carrots, apples, oranges, etc. grown freakishly large by bizarre chemicals, just like the rest of you.Fruit and vegetables are incredibly cheap. I don't know what you think your stereotypical working family does at a supermarket, but I don't think one sees many workers pushing carts full of steak, ribs, and whole chickens out of Wal-Mart.

Every food store has an entire area that just stocks fruits and vegetables - and it's always right inside the front doors. And you can go beyond fruits & vegetables. Oreos, for example, are vegan. Same with potato chips, tortilla chips, pasta, rice, beans, soup, peanut butter & jelly sandwiches, pop, juice, etc.... You don't need to "look around" any store to find vegetarian food. You just have to look at all. And most of it is dirt cheap. You could make, for example, a stir fry for a family of 6 with 2 dollars' worth of frozen vegetables, 15 cents worth of oil, and 50 cents worth of soy sauce. If you can afford meat you can afford vegetarian food.


Your post is extremely offensive to the working class who you obviosly couldnt give a shit about.Yours is clearly more offensive, speaking as though working people couldn't possibly find groceries at a grocery store. Despite what you may think, being a worker doesn't make you an idiot.

[Steve_j]

Im saying a single parent with 5 kids doesnt have the luxury,money or time to spend looking around for non-meat or organic veg.

You do know that grains, fruit and veg are all meat free?

And why do people keep talking about organic food?

[Ele'ill]

Someone close this thread- please. Please- PLEASE don't let this run any type of course again.


To the OP- please use the forum search function to look up previous threads on the matter as the most prevelant posters on this topic (myself included) are likely not going to get in on new threads regarding this same issue.

You'll get the best of both sides by reviewing some of the older (and unfortunately still currently running) threads.



Thanks-

[Ele'ill]

Try preaching your bullshit to a single parent with 5 kids and see where that gets you.


A single parent with 5 kids is most likely going to use food stamps/EBT card which as you would know if you weren't privileged yourself- can't buy fast food. That money would have to come out of pocket. You would also know just how expensive meat is in comparison to fruits and vegetables.

[Quail]

What the fuck are you talking about.Im saying a single parent with 5 kids doesnt have the luxury,money or time to spend looking around for non-meat or organic veg. Your post is extremely offensive to the working class who you obviosly couldnt give a shit about.

Can you stop confusing a vegetarian diet with an organic one? They aren't the same.

Where I live, vegetables are a lot cheaper than meat. Commercial products marketed at vegetarians such as Quorn do tend to be a little over-priced, but these days most supermarkets have their own tasty meat-free range, so it's not difficult or expensive to buy meat-free food.

[Volcanicity]

You do know that grains, fruit and veg are all meat free?

And why do people keep talking about organic food?
So you would raise your kids on just grains,fruit and veg! Then you really are an animal.

[Ele'ill]

What the fuck are you talking about.Im saying a single parent with 5 kids doesnt have the luxury,money or time to spend looking around for non-meat or organic veg.

I think you lack experience in just about everything you've talked about so far in this thread.

How can someone walk into a grocery store and 'not have the money or time' to walk into the produce/bulk section? If you want to get really literal and specific- the meat and dairy section is generally in the back of markets.

[Ele'ill]

I just wanted to throw this conversation piece out there and see what the response would be. I've always wondered why animal liberation is not part of the program of alot of the left parties out there.

I agree.

Animals are victims of the same exact oppressive systems that we would try to liberate humans from.




The fact that over 1 billion animals are slaughtered every year, a huge part being for the fast food industry.If we are going fight against exploitation and the suffering of the human species, I ask what makes the suffering and exploitation of animals any less important.


:thumbup1:



We suppose to fight for those that can't fight for themselves. And with these corporates pigs destroying the habitat of various animals around the world which is causing the extinction or near extinction of many species, it's up to us, in our many papers, to throw a spotlight on this issue.

One example of this is the building of strip malls. These corporate pigs destroy the hibitat of animals which destroys their food source. Now the animals begin to wander out on to highways, killed by cars, or tearing apart trash bags or trash cans of people who live nearby,looking for food. Now the animals are viewed as the problem, not man.

The destruction of ecosystems- if we let it continue on the course it's on- will win us nothing but a wasteland after a revolution.





I don't know if you've viewed film of how animals are treated in these slaughter houses, but if one does not become a vegitarian for health reasons, one should do it for humanitarian reasons alone.



Good post- but again- about two months ago we had four or five threads running in different parts of the forum on this same topic.

Why don't you ask the mod of this forum to merge this with one of them.

[Volcanicity]

Can you stop confusing a vegetarian diet with an organic one? They aren't the same.

Where I live, vegetables are a lot cheaper than meat. Commercial products marketed at vegetarians such as Quorn do tend to be a little over-priced, but these days most supermarkets have their own tasty meat-free range, so it's not difficult or expensive to buy meat-free food.
Are you blind i said i was a vegetarian.Go speak to some single parents,then you will see where im coming from.All you animal-lib people are the same,to be busy preaching and trying to belittle others with your bullshit.

[Volcanicity]

I think you lack experience in just about everything you've talked about so far in this thread.

How can someone walk into a grocery store and 'not have the money or time' to walk into the produce/bulk section? If you want to get really literal and specific- the meat and dairy section is generally in the back of markets.
You need to step out into the real world.

[fa2991]

So you would raise your kids on just grains,fruit and veg! Then you really are an animal.

As opposed to what? Grains, fruit, vegetables, and cheeseburgers?


Are you blind i said i was a vegetarian.Go speak to some single parents,then you will see where im coming from.All you animal-lib people are the same,to be busy preaching and trying to belittle others with your bullshit.

You said workers couldn't find afford - and I quote - "organic veg." So, yes, you did confuse organic and vegetarian.

[Steve_j]

So you would raise your kids on just grains,fruit and veg!

Predominatly, yes!


I am an animal in denial

:thumbup1:

[Quail]

Are you blind i said i was a vegetarian.Go speak to some single parents,then you will see where im coming from.All you animal-lib people are the same,to be busy preaching and trying to belittle others with your bullshit.

If you'd read my earlier posts, you'd have noticed that I'm not arguing for animal liberation. I was just pointing out that vegetarian food, where I live, is cheaper than meat.

I'm a university student with a baby. I'm by no means "well off", so fuck you.

[infraxotl]

fuck animals in their stupid non-human faces, imo. If the future communist society on earth doesn't end with us nuking the planet from orbit before zipping off in space ships, it's not worth it.

[Ele'ill]

Edit- so for some reason the post quote feature borked pretty badly- but I'll let this stand as I already posted it

It copied two of the same user's posts and put them in the same reply. Anyways- thanks for this fucking thread again.


You need to step out into the real world.




Go speak to some single parents,then you will see where im coming from.

First of all- I am a single parent. Second- I don't have to talk to anybody as only a half-wit would suggest that 'being a parent means you and your kids have to eat meat'- which is essentially what you said.

I walk into the market- and the produce is right there- I purchase it- and maybe go to the bulk section to get beans and brown rice. I don't walk all the way to the back of the store (a whopping 2 minute walk but further than the produce none-the-less) to buy dairy and meat.



All you animal-lib people are the same,to be busy preaching and trying to belittle others with your bullshit.



You have yet to refute with facts- anything I've said.

I have not belittled anything except for your belligerent idiocy and immature lack of life experience.

[Ele'ill]

I'm not done yet- you can thank the caffeine.



The difference is the working class need to eat to live,and most cant afford to pick and choose.

Yes they can.




Whereas stripping trees and destroying habitats for the cosmetic industry

I'd argue that most of the damage isn't for the 'cosmetic industry' (what does that even mean)- but occurs during resource extraction which would be a problem post revolution as well.

I'm talking about natural gas- oil- mining- etc

They are all non-sustainable and they cause horrific problems- even to simply begin such resource extractions they have to clearcut.


is done by capitalist businessmen who couldnt give a shit about anybody or anything except profit.And lets not forget its not just animals affected it also affects local tribes people who are losing there way of life.

It isn't one or the other. We're not getting very far without a natural world and we're not getting very far without human rights. It's that simple.

[Adi Shankara]

Hey fool, they grow potatoes, lettuce, carrots, cabbage, corn, barley and oats. in Alaska. why don't you read? I know, it has to be approved by the party lol lol

They can grow all that 400 miles north of the Arctic circle?

idiot.

[Steve_j]

They can grow all that 400 miles north of the Arctic circle?

idiot.

You might want to actually do as the op suggested and do a little research before you go calling anyone an idiot.

[Blackscare]

I don't understand OP's insistence that eating meat is something that would preclude you from being a communist/anarchist.

I also wonder what exactly OP does, aside from refusing to eat meat, that could be considered revolutionary? Who is he to say what we are when it seems his only activity he speaks of is refusing to eat meat? I mean, he's already mocked leftist politics earlier in this thread.


OP sounds like a confused yuppie who somewhere along the line decided communism = veganism or his own specific brand of environmentalism.


Yes, you don't eat meat. That's great! Now go to another forum and pat yourself on the back about it as you call everyone a commoner and an idiot. The reason you aren't revolutionary isn't your veganism (because frankly, nobody really gives a shit bro), it's your attitude. When communists interact with people we disagree with, we try to be persuasive and approach people on their terms. We don't immediately lift our noses and scoff, calling people "common". Is it all just about "being different" for you? Well, I'm sorry to say, but you're a naive single-issue liberal with a poor grasp of where your issue of interest fits into the bigger picture.



No, I am not a member of a party and I tow no party line. So you can just save yourself the time of typing (well, probably copy-pasting) the same old line of "party politics lol lol"


So, OP, what do you do to forward political ideas you believe in? I mean besides coming onto a forum and calling everyone an idiot. Do you do any practical work with anyone in real life? Or is your ability to interact with people hampered by your elitism and self importance?

[Ravachol]

hating liberal hippies are not something reserved to ring wing folks.

and this''suffering'' is not that common, my father used to work in a slaughter house long time ago, and the last thing people working there want is torture and slow death, what they want is a quick kill so they can move to the next annimal.

Regardless of this debate (which I'm not going to get into again, considering the HURR DURR I HATE ANIMULZ, I WANT ME MEAT responses here) you do realize the automated, assembly-line supported commodification and slaughter of living beings is symptomatic of some of the worst traits of capitalism right? Wanting to 'move quickly to the next animal' is because of a profit drive, not out of some sort of drive to avoid unnecessary suffering.

[Tavarisch_Mike]

they grow potatoes, lettuce, carrots, cabbage, corn, barley and oats. in Alaska. why don't you read? I know, it has to be approved by the party lol lol

Im not to familiar with agriculture in Alaska, but since the climate are very similare towards the climate of northen Scandinavia i will just point out that the harvest season is probably very very short, here where i live in the middle area of Sweden our harvest period is about 2,5 month. Frome the region where my mother are frome i know that they grow both oat, potatoes and barley and thats pretty much it, not many crops are good for cultivating in arctic and sub-arctic climate. This region is just some miles south frome where the permafrost begins and havnt all of Alaskan soil permafrost? Eccept that and as i menthioned before the period where you have for cultivating crops is to short to be able to produce enough food for the winter, the looong winter, remeber that in cold climate your body needs more energy and meat tends to have a higher concetration of calories (and are more common in this climate). Hunting, fishing and herding animals like sheep and reindeers have allways being the main source for surviving in arctic and sub-arctic regions, because of the máterialistic and enviormental conditions.



Due to the northern climate and steep terrain, relatively little farming occurs in Alaska. Most farms are in either the Matanuska Valley (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Matanuska_Valley), about 40 miles (64 km) northeast of Anchorage (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Anchorage), or on the Kenai Peninsula (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Kenai_Peninsula), about 60 miles (97 km) southwest of Anchorage. The short 100-day growing season limits the crops that can be grown, but the long sunny summer days make for productive growing seasons. The primary crops are potatoes, carrots, lettuce, and cabbage. Farmers exhibit produce at the Alaska State Fair. "Alaska Grown" is used as an agricultural slogan.
Alaska has an abundance of seafood, with the primary fisheries in the Bering Sea and the North Pacific, and seafood is one of the few food items that is often cheaper within the state than outside it. Many Alaskans fish the rivers during salmon season to gather significant quantities of their household diet while fishing for subsistence, sport, or both.
Hunting for subsistence, primarily caribou (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Caribou), moose (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Moose), and Dall sheep (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Dall_sheep) is still common in the state, particularly in remote Bush (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Bush_Alaska) communities. An example of a traditional native food is Akutaq (http://www.revleft.com/wiki/Akutaq), the Eskimo ice cream, which can consist of reindeer fat, seal oil, dried fish meat and local berries.
Most food in Alaska is transported into the state from "outside", and shipping costs make food in the cities relatively expensive. In rural areas, subsistence hunting and gathering is an essential activity because imported food is prohibitively expensive. The cost of importing food to villages begins at 7¢ per pound (15¢/kg) and rises rapidly to 50¢ per pound ($1.10/kg) or more. The cost of delivering a seven-pound gallon of milk is about $3.50 in many villages where per capita income can be $20,000 or less. Fuel for snow machines and boats that consume a couple of gallons per hour can exceed $8.00 per gallon.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska

[McCroskey]

Slaughtering of animals, IMO, needs to be reduced to the needs of global human feeding, but it´s the human way of procuring the food, and needs to be regulated as to avoid unnecessary suffering. Other carnivores in our ecosystems are not that benign. Slaughtering for other reasons than food shoud be regulated. That said, I don´t think vegetarians should try to impose their diets on humanity. The human being is an omnivore animal by the designs of nature. Human development has allowed us to procure our meat without making animals suffer, although capitalism and profit-driven food industries, as well as several religions and tribal customs, take the easy way of treating animals the same way they treat minerals, but that is something that has to be erradicated in a socialist society. Animal food production needs to be adequate to human eating needs, not to fat millionaires´idea of a diet, but you´ll never prevent the human race from eating meat, as that´s what we do, we are omnivores.

And about veganism, well, I really have a hard time trying to understand why they don´t drink milk, eat eggs, or wear wool, as none of these things is harmful to the animals, or can even remotely seen as a form of torture. If you want to give a sheep or a cow the right to vote and the right to get married, good luck. The rest of the population will be watching you laughing our asses off. Most of radical vegans´ point is to find a scene where they can pose as radicals without really making any commitment to a change of society.

But bear in mind, a world with total liberation of animals will mean inevitable suffering. Humans are not going to stop needing and wanting meat, as it is a biological disposition, and by simply erradicating farming you will revert us to predatory means to satisfy our natural impulses, thus hunting and killing animals in a way far worse than the regulated slaughter system. I am all for regulating the farming system and avoid encagement, torture, factory processes and suffering, but to state that human beings abandon their own ecosystem is very, very utopian, and pointless, IMHO. It´s just a radical pose, not a real way for substantial change.

By the way. Bullfighting has been banned in Catalonia. THAT is what you should be focusing on, to ban torture of animals for fun and business. We catalans didn´t get a great deal of attention and support of vegans and extreme animal rights groups in our fight to ban this barbaric tradition.

Good luck, enjoy your vegs!

[Steve_j]

By the way. Bullfighting has been banned in Catalonia. THAT is what you should be focusing on, to ban torture of animals for fun and business. We catalans didn´t get a great deal of attention and support of vegans and extreme animal rights groups in our fight to ban this barbaric tradition.

Well i cant speak for the extreme groups, but the mainstream ones, (peta and so on) did.

Not explicitly catalan but check the runnign of the nudes for an example. (imo one of the better projects peta has worked on)

[McCroskey]

Peta did help, of course. Although I have had a bad experience with one of their militants in las ramblas colling me an "assassin" and comparing my baby to a calf and asking me to eat him, just for daring to admit that I eat meat, I understand that not all of them are the same. But local vegan groups etc distanced themselves a bit from the initiative because it didn´t question meat consumption.

[Tatarin]

As long as humans are suffering, so will animals. The goal must be to change the human society, which in turn will also change the way we eat animals.


Slaughtering of animals, IMO, needs to be reduced to the needs of global human feeding, but it´s the human way of procuring the food, and needs to be regulated as to avoid unnecessary suffering.

I don't think we produce food the "human way", we produce it the capitalist way. Many ordinary people have no say in how it is produced, nor do they have much choice in the buying of it. This is excluding the fact that "de-regulation" has allowed producers to hide the origins of the products, and many other producers and stores simply lie straight out (expiration date, origin, environmentally friendly made, etc).

Humans do not hate animals (well, some maybe, but that's in the handfull, and then it is mostly of psychological reasons) and the great majority want animals to live a healthy life (even if they later end up on the table). The thing is that most humans today have their hands full - they simply can't care because they have their own life and family to think of. Most have no resources to do anything about it.

Maybe even one or two owners out there at least considers the animals' situation, but make their cages 1 square bigger and that means another million to animal-care. Give them better food, and that's 2 million on "unnecessary" spending per year. Give them medicals and all the other healthy stuff, and the profits will look worse. Smash the profit system, and the food system - no - all systems will be a lot better.


And about veganism, well, I really have a hard time trying to understand why they don´t drink meat, eat eggs, or wear wool, as none of these things is harmful to the animals, or can even remotely seen as a form of torture.

You don't understand why they don't drink meat? :D


It´s just a radical pose, not a real way for substantial change.

Yes, that is more philosophical what humans will eat in the distant future, but meat and fish will be consumed for the foreseeable future. However, humans can survive on diets without fish and flesh, you could say we have "outdeveloped" that need.


By the way. Bullfighting has been banned in Catalonia. THAT is what you should be focusing on, to ban torture of animals for fun and business. We catalans didn´t get a great deal of attention and support of vegans and extreme animal rights groups in our fight to ban this barbaric tradition.

I completely agree with this. Bullfighting is pretty weird, and I too have wondered about where all environmentalists (from the ALF to people like Al Gore) have been in this question. Torturing animals means jailtime in most places, yet here we have a "traditional sport"? Just strikes me as ironic.

But once again; humans must have a normal society before animals even can get theirs. This extends to paper making, oil drilling, fishing, and just about everything else.

[Steve_j]

Peta did help, of course. Although I have had a bad experience with one of their militants

Peta has militants? They have trolls, not militants.


But local vegan groups etc distanced themselves a bit from the initiative because it didn´t question meat consumption.

Thats interesting.... i could imagine some anarchist/libertarian vegans might not support it, but to not support it because it doesnt question meat consumption is a little illogical to me.

[McCroskey]

You don't understand why they don't drink meat? :D


Oooops! I meant milk. Edited accordingly. Sorry. :D

[Ele'ill]

I don't understand OP's insistence that eating meat is something that would preclude you from being a communist/anarchist.

I also wonder what exactly OP does, aside from refusing to eat meat, that could be considered revolutionary? Who is he to say what we are when it seems his only activity he speaks of is refusing to eat meat? I mean, he's already mocked leftist politics earlier in this thread.

I don't think it's possible to prove what we each do and I don't think that anyone is suggesting that 'being vegan' is a solution to issues regarding social justice. It does however make sense to not support various aspects of capitalism if those aspects can be avoided.



OP sounds like a confused yuppie who somewhere along the line decided communism = veganism or his own specific brand of environmentalism.

Could you be more specific and quote where the OP said these things?



Yes, you don't eat meat. That's great! Now go to another forum and pat yourself on the back about it as you call everyone a commoner and an idiot. The reason you aren't revolutionary isn't your veganism (because frankly, nobody really gives a shit bro),

I give a shit and many other people do too.

What I see happening here is a strawman being created which is- 'people who are vegan think they're revolutionary because they're vegan'.

I would question all the non-vegans on this forum (the 'lolwut meetz is gud' type) to an extent and do so with a question like "Would you donate money to a capitalist organization- so that organization could use the money towards union busting- PR campaigns that are pure misinformation and lies and otherwise the exact opposite of what the organization is doing- as well as other anti-leftist systems of operation?"

The answer would be no. So unless you're in a remote part of the world and can't get access to decent meat alternatives- Why not just stop buying meat?

In another thread it was suggested that 'voting with your dollar' is rubbish and that the corporations would go under and the workers would suffer- I'm sorry I don't see this happening at all. Should we instead support the system we want to destroy? Will there be any less job-loss casualties during a revolution?





When communists interact with people we disagree with, we try to be persuasive and approach people on their terms.

This is good advice but this type of exchange is few and far between on this forum.

[McCroskey]

Thats interesting.... i could imagine some anarchist/libertarian vegans might not support it, but to not support it because it doesnt question meat consumption is a little illogical to me.

In all fairness, I didn´t mean they didn´t support it, I am sure they did. It´s just they were not interested and kept themselves outside the initiative, as it didn´t challenge animal sacrifice for food consumption, and only focused on the cruelty and torture issue and its classification as an "art".

By the way, public torture and killing of animals is already banned in Spain, like the traditional market square pig slaughtering, etc, but bullfighting is exempted from that ban, as "cultural heritage". What has been done in Catalonia is to remove that clause from the regional law, thus effectively making bullfighting illegal. And please don´t call it a sport, you would struggle to find someone in Spain who calls it a sport, not even supporters.

[Peace on Earth]

If you adhere to the idea of animal liberation, wouldn't it also make some sense that you must protect said "liberation?" If we, the human race, stopped killing animals for the sake of saving animal life and protecting the freedom, I guess, of animals, shouldn't we protect all animals from all harm? That would mean stopping every carnivore or omnivore from preying on another animal. After all, it isn't nice for the big bad lion to hurt a nice little gazelle.

The problem with the concept of animal liberation is the failure to realize the animals will still be killed in their natural environments. While I'm not in favor of the ridiculous conditions seen in slaughterhouses, giving up on eating or killing animals for food and survival isn't something that needs to be done.

In my opinion, the only use for animals (from a human standpoint) should be for food, and we should do so to minimize the pain for the animals in question. Any other uses, such as fighting or racing, should be abolished.

[Ele'ill]

If you adhere to the idea of animal liberation, wouldn't it also make some sense that you must protect said "liberation?" If we, the human race, stopped killing animals for the sake of saving animal life and protecting the freedom, I guess, of animals, shouldn't we protect all animals from all harm? That would mean stopping every carnivore or omnivore from preying on another animal. After all, it isn't nice for the big bad lion to hurt a nice little gazelle.

This is obnoxious. The idea would be to protect animals from what we know as 'profit oriented exploitation of natural life' - or name it what you want.

Nobody would ever suggest preventing animals from eating to survive-




The problem with the concept of animal liberation is the failure to realize the animals will still be killed in their natural environments. While I'm not in favor of the ridiculous conditions seen in slaughterhouses, giving up on eating or killing animals for food and survival isn't something that needs to be done.



Lions are not operating mink farms and heynas are not operating mass production slaughter houses to produce 'meat food' to go to some creature that doesn't need the meat but decides it likes it and that the system is ok because its desire is met.



In my opinion, the only use for animals (from a human standpoint) should be for food, and we should do so to minimize the pain for the animals in question. Any other uses, such as fighting or racing, should be abolished.

A lot of the meat production goes into bellies that don't need it. It's about desire not survival at this point.

[bots]

If you adhere to the idea of animal liberation, wouldn't it also make some sense that you must protect said "liberation?" If we, the human race, stopped killing animals for the sake of saving animal life and protecting the freedom, I guess, of animals, shouldn't we protect all animals from all harm? That would mean stopping every carnivore or omnivore from preying on another animal. After all, it isn't nice for the big bad lion to hurt a nice little gazelle.

The problem with the concept of animal liberation is the failure to realize the animals will still be killed in their natural environments. While I'm not in favor of the ridiculous conditions seen in slaughterhouses, giving up on eating or killing animals for food and survival isn't something that needs to be done.

In my opinion, the only use for animals (from a human standpoint) should be for food, and we should do so to minimize the pain for the animals in question. Any other uses, such as fighting or racing, should be abolished.

I think you're misunderstanding the goals of animal liberation. It's not about changing nature but instead fighting the exploitation of animals for the sake of profit. If you want to look at it as a microcosm of the struggle between workers and capitalists that may be accurate, though I'm sure animal rights activists would get pissy with this description.

[Raúl Duke]

It's not about changing nature but instead fighting the exploitation of animals for the sake of profit.

Form such a standpoint, factory farms and such would be bad...

but hunting of meat and eating meat gained outside of capitalist production would be allowed.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

I think you're misunderstanding the goals of animal liberation. It's not about changing nature but instead fighting the exploitation of animals for the sake of profit. If you want to look at it as a microcosm of the struggle between workers and capitalists that may be accurate, though I'm sure animal rights activists would get pissy with this description.

The end of capitalism ends the exploitation of animals for profit. When there's no profit, how can anyone kill animals for profit?

[ContrarianLemming]

The consensus here seems to be "humanity first", which I agee with, however the hostility to someone who chooses to advocate animal liberation - though we may oppose it - is unwarrented.

[Ele'ill]

The consensus here seems to be "humanity first", which I agee with, however the hostility to someone who chooses to advocate animal liberation - though we may oppose it - is unwarrented.


I got the impression that the consensus was 'animal liberation is important - in the same way worker's rights is important'.

[ContrarianLemming]

I got the impression that the consensus was 'animal liberation is important - in the same way worker's rights is important'.

I don't think that's true but I'm far to lazy to sift through every post.

[Tatarin]

Fighting for human liberation will smash two flies in one hit, so to say. First, it is much harder to stop animal exploitation in capitalism, and second, human exploitation will still be in place in one way or another. I mean, we're talking about making all people on earth to agree on strong animal protection laws and to follow them.

If humans are liberated first, then animal and plant and all other life is liberated too. It is no mystery that socially progressive countries also have cleaner environment and stronger animal protection laws than socially deprived countries.

[Blackscare]

I got the impression that the consensus was 'animal liberation is important - in the same way worker's rights is important'.

If you only read posts by people you agree with :blink:

[Ele'ill]

Fighting for human liberation will smash two flies in one hit, so to say. First, it is much harder to stop animal exploitation in capitalism, and second, human exploitation will still be in place in one way or another. I mean, we're talking about making all people on earth to agree on strong animal protection laws and to follow them.

I agree that it's a rough road.

I disagree as to which would be easier- I think it depends on the specific struggle.









If humans are liberated first, then animal and plant and all other life is liberated too.

I think that certain struggles can be successfully won in a relatively short amount of time. I think animal liberation is one of those (certain portions of it). I also think certain aspects of worker struggles can be won quickly in the same way.


Edit:

I also think that environmentalists and animal rights activists organize and agitate within the system in the same ways that worker's rights and labor activists do. All of which are anti-capitalist- as capitalism is what we're trying to topple.