Quote:
Originally Posted by aberkok
So completely transforming the chain of supply and demand to a paradigm which arguably will not even meet the demand is more practical than opting out entirely? How would this be implemented? Would the governments be required to outlaw corn feedlots? I don't think it's any more achievable than getting people off of eating animals. I would hope that at least it becomes half and half.
|
Yes,
that's how unreasonable it is to expect people to give up eating animals entirely. It's simply not going to happen. Case in point: I care about the environmental impact of meat eating far more than your average person, and I still have absolutely no interest in giving up meat entirely. It's not even entirely a conscious choice: humans
evolved to eat meat, we didn't just choose it after we got smart and lazy. We have certain teeth specifically designed for that purpose. It's a core part of our being. That doesn't mean we need to be gluttonous about it, and it doesn't mean that we need to mass produce meat in factories the way we've been doing, but the ability of individuals to forgo meat consumption simply does not translate to the human population as a whole. It really is no different than abstinence education: there are plenty of health reasons (and overpopulation reasons) why we'd all benefit if people only had sex in committed relationships, but it's just not going to happen.
Quote:
|
I'm also curious what effects you think the UN's statement will have and if there's a history of them making statements like this.
|
Specific to this topic, I don't know, but the UN does have a history of making statements that have no basis in reality and no force of, well, anything. I like the UN, but they're not the most effectual organization in the world. As for the impact of this statement, that's actually my biggest problem with it. It's simply not going to have the impact that the UN wants it to have - regardless of whether global veganism is a pipe dream or not. At best, the statement is pointless. I think it actually does a disservice to the whole discussion, though, because now people and industries who have no interest in changing
anything will see all pushes for change as coming from "those crazies at PETA and the UN who want us to give up meat." It's one of the same problems the environmental movement has: many people who are not as engaged in the issues see all environmental advocacy as coming from "those crazies at Greenpeace," not people hoping for reasonable compromise.
As someone who would actually like to see a cultural shift away from daily meat consumption and factory processing of meat, I think this UN statement completely undermines the movement. Thankfully - at least in this case - most people already ignore the UN anyway.