• Melpomene@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Would I prefer that 5 people free half of their slaves versus no one freeing any slaves? Of course, why would I want everyone to stay enslaved if I could free some and continue to work to free others? Would you prefer that everyone who is currently a slave remain enslaved until we convince the entire world to free their slaves?

    I think they more prefer to focus on the issue (the state of Twitter) in a post about Twitter, versus going off on tangents that would otherwise make for interesting conversation.

    • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That you literally made this argument is sad and gross. You just argued that people shouldn’t fight to free all slaves. What the actual fuck? You literally made an argument to not fight against slavery because it’s hard

      • grahamsz@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think it’s really a difference about whether you approach meat consumption as a moral issue or an environmental and social one.

        I tend to agree with @Melpomene that any improvement is a good thing, maybe a better analogy would be in CO2 emissions. If we can convince 10% of people to bike to work one day a week then that’ll make meaningful difference, and it’s exactly the same from an emissions standpoint as taking X cars off the road.

        Convincing someone, at least in the USA, to do without a car is fundamentally difficult, but convincing them to use it less is a significantly more accessible proposition.

        • NotAPenguin@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          1 year ago

          I just don’t see reduction as enough or what should be advocated when it comes to something so serious as billions of animals getting needlessly killed.

          • FlowVoid@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Billions of animals are killed wherever crops are grown.

            Even if you are entirely vegan, animals have to die if you want to eat.

            In fact, if your food is grown on a farm then you are probably contributing to more animal deaths than someone who obtains food from hunting or fishing.

            • NotAPenguin@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Source on billions of crop deaths?

              Besides, most plants grown are used for animal feed.

              Killing animals when we don’t have to is inherently cruel, farming can be done without harming animals.

              • FlowVoid@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Billions of invertebrates and other small animals are killed during tilling before planting, with pest/weed control during the growing season (even with “organic” or “natural” compounds), and of course during harvest.

                This is inevitable, farming requires controlling soil and plants, and this will inevitably kill animals that you don’t even see. Do you really think you can flood a rice paddy without killing countless mesofauna?

                Fishing/hunting also kills animals, but you can catch a fish or hunt a deer without restructuring an entire ecosystem. Which means you can feed yourself without killing quite so many animals.