• z3rOR0ne
    link
    fedilink
    661 month ago

    Hmm…one of these seems more important to do than the others…

      • @grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        491 month ago

        Recycling is literally the least important thing you can do (despite still being important).

        The phrase “refuse, reduce, reuse, repurpose, recycle” is listed in order of importance.

      • @Crampon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        251 month ago

        Recycling your glass bottles won’t negate the effect of a private jet taxing or a yacht sailing for 20 seconds even.

        Always recycle. But don’t compare it to the incredible environmental impact the rich has on the planet. Everyone has equal rights of polluting. Some polluting is just necessary as a human life require energy to sustain. The rich and poor have the same quota.

        • @Eheran@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          61 month ago

          Stop making it sound as if “the rich” are the sole producer of emissions. Everyone has their share in this problem. Some more, some less, some far more. 1 million average people reducing emissions a bit is still more than one “rich person” reducing it a lot.

          • @Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            201 month ago

            Stop making it sound as if “the rich” are the sole producer of emissions. Everyone has their share in this problem.

            Yeah, except it would be more accurate to say that the richest one percent have their 48 shares each.

            1 million average people reducing emissions a bit is still more than one “rich person” reducing it a lot

            So because each rich person isn’t responsible for a MILLION times as much, you want to pretend that they’re no worse at all? Fuck off with that nonsense!

            • @Eheran@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              71 month ago

              Hahaha, that is not what I said. I said everyone is responsible for driving less, looking at what they are buying, flying less, … Instead of just throwing their arms in the air and saying the rich are to blame for everything. And note that probably all of us here are part of the world’s top 10 %, given how poor most of the world is.

              • @blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                5
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                I agree. The rich are the main problem, and that should be top priority. But that also shouldn’t be used as an excuse to not improve oneself personally. My suggestion is that people shouldn’t worry about aiming for personal idealism, but should just make a conscious effort to be less environmentally damaging than their peers, their family, work colleges, and friends. If a person achieves that, then they can be confident that they are not the problem.

                [edit] Obviously if everyone did what I’m suggesting then it would be a kind of race-to-the-bottom. But that’s not happening. If it was, then we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place. All I’m suggesting is a rough heuristic for what’s reasonable for an individual to do on their own.

              • @Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                41 month ago

                You are right, we should all do something. That’s why I solemnly pledge never to take a private jet and to not engage in Space tourism. I dare any billionaire to follow my lead.

    • @explodicle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 month ago

      Wow, way to not care about the environment. If you’re suggesting systemic change that can work, then I’m just saying you should make half-assed unilateral sacrifices that aren’t working. Or else you’re a dirty hypocrite!

      /s

        • @surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          151 month ago

          Sure. But where’s the option of a sedan where I can detach 75% of it when I just need to drive someplace alone? Where’s the electric car with 300 miles range under 30k?

          You can hate on trucks all day long, and I do too because trucks suck, but we’re still stuck with horrible polluting expensive options that were designed with efficiency of cash flow as their primary goal.

      • セリャスト
        link
        6
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        For real, I was looking at the newer subaru models. Outside of the BRZ (which is a rebranded toyota 86) all of em are SUV. It’s insane

        • @homesnatch@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          61 month ago

          More like the Toyota 86 is a rebranded BRZ. The platform of both cars are made by Subaru, using the Subaru boxer engine, in a Subaru factory.

        • @chrizzowski@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          31 month ago

          Crosstrek is pretty awesome though. It’s basically just an off-road lifted Impreza. I mountain bike and climb a bunch and some times get onto some pretty questionable roads. It’s great to have something that handles that, but also feels more or less like a smallish 2.0l hatchback the rest of the time.

          They are definitely getting bigger though this last year, and sad none of them are manual anymore. Luckily got the last model year that was

    • Beaver
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 month ago

      Right give me electric hatchbacks and sedans. Then start funding public transit as we fix North American infrastructure gore.

          • Beaver
            link
            fedilink
            English
            111 month ago

            Look the transit in my town is 3.9 times longer than driving also it is not connected to other towns as of yet. But I will support any initiative to get people out of cars. I don’t want to be forced to drive the one I have. Active transport/transit is the most sustainable and safest way to get around. Damn I really wish I was living in Amsterdam right now.

      • lad
        link
        fedilink
        English
        151 month ago

        If anything, impressing peers is very natural, it probably predates humans as a species

    • @Corigan@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      51 month ago

      Pretty much the only option.

      Obama passed some great regulations to improve fuel economy and reduce pollution, but there’s different li.its for car type and an SUV is a truck standard so much easier tegs then sedans. That’s why you see so many SUV car things. It’s bullshit heaven forbid you do the right thing automakers.

      Easier to get an car/SUV ev then a sedan, model y, Lexus option, Kia etc are all half way SUV with the functionality of a sedan is dumb.

  • Beaver
    link
    fedilink
    English
    351 month ago

    Meatless Mondays doesn’t go far enough. It should be everyday. Meat is murder.

      • Beaver
        link
        fedilink
        English
        271 month ago

        I’m not vegan to make friends. I do it for animals rights and the environment.

        • @grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          231 month ago

          Being less of an extremist about it would result in fewer animals being eaten, though.

          In other words, you are killing animals via your attitude.

        • @Eheran@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          111 month ago

          Why not vegetarian first? Improving step by step?

          Vegan is not sustainable and far more effort, not possible for most. People try to get by. Unlike with emissions, a poor person essentially eats as much as the richest. But those are also those with the least free time and money to change to a different diet.

          • toomanypancakes
            link
            fedilink
            English
            161 month ago

            Why not vegetarian first? Because dairy is seriously messed up.

            Cows have an average lifespan of around twenty years off the top of my head. Cows are mammals, and produce milk to feed their young. To keep them producing milk, you have to keep them perpetually pregnant. This is done via artificial insemination the overwhelming majority of the time, where a farmer puts her in a rape rack, sticks their hand up her ass far enough to grab her cervix and align everything, then jams a syringe full of bull semen into her vagina.

            A side effect of pregnancy is children. Her calves are stolen from her after she gives birth, and murdered to be sold for veal. This cycle is repeated continually for four or five years until she becomes physically incapable of functioning from the repeated pregnancies. Then she’s slaughtered for her flesh too.

            Dairy is the meat industry, just with additional abuses. Vegetarians are continuing to support the abuse of animals. It makes much more sense to just go vegan from an ethical standpoint.

            • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              11 month ago

              To keep them producing milk, you have to keep them perpetually pregnant.

              this just isn’t true. they aren’t perpetually pregnant.

            • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              11 month ago

              Her calves are stolen from her after she gives birth, and murdered to be sold for veal.

              almost no calves end up as veal at all. the vast majority of cattle are brought to full weight before slaughter.

            • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              11 month ago

              Cows have an average lifespan of around twenty years off the top of my head.

              no, they don’t. they have an average life span of about 18 months as beef cattle and maybe 6 years as dairy cattle.

          • Beaver
            link
            fedilink
            English
            131 month ago

            A whole foods plant based is 30% cheaper and will save thousands of dollars in healthcare related costs.

            I’m low income can manage just fine as a vegan. The only extra time needed is to learn the new recipes.

            Abstract

            “It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. These diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood, and for athletes. Plant-based diets are more environmentally sustainable than diets rich in animal products because they use fewer natural resources and are associated with much less environmental damage. Vegetarians and vegans are at reduced risk of certain health conditions, including ischemic heart disease, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, certain types of cancer, and obesity. Low intake of saturated fat and high intakes of vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, soy products, nuts, and seeds (all rich in fiber and phytochemicals) are characteristics of vegetarian and vegan diets that produce lower total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and better serum glucose control. These factors contribute to reduction of chronic disease. Vegans need reliable sources of vitamin B-12, such as fortified foods or supplements.”

            https://www.jandonline.org/article/S2212-2672(16)31192-3/abstract

            • @Eheran@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              171 month ago

              Yeah, no, raising children vegan is the hardest possible thing to do safely/healthy. example from a study in Poland

              And this comes on top of the fact that vegan people are richer and spend much more time thinking/planing food than average people.

              • @ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                91 month ago

                So what does it mean for children on vegan and vegetarian diets?

                This doesn’t mean every child who follows these diets is going to have these nutritional and health benefits or problems. And we also can’t say whether these problems will persist into adulthood.

                But it does highlight potential risks which health practitioners and parents need to be aware of. And it’s a reminder to either find suitable replacements that align with the family’s diet philosophy, or prescribe supplements if a deficiency is diagnosed through a blood test.

                In particular, parents and caregivers need to be careful their children are maintaining a good intake of protein from a variety of vegan sources (beans, lentils, nuts) and calcium (from calcium supplemented plant milks).

                Whether you’re following a vegan, vegetarian or meat-eating diet, you still need to make sure the diet is balanced across all food groups.

                I get it might not be easy, especially if you’re just starting out, but “hardest possible thing to do safely” seems like a stretch.

                • @Eheran@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  21 month ago

                  It is the hardest thing possible in terms of proving the right nutrition to your children using only vegan food. Any other form is easier. Any other age is easier.

            • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              11 month ago

              A whole foods plant based is 30% cheaper and will save thousands of dollars in healthcare related costs.

              not for everyone.

            • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              11 month ago

              “It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that

              no, it’s not. this position expired. from your link:

              This position is in effect until December 31, 2021.

              they had been renewing it every time it expired, with as much of a gap as abut a year. it’s been 3 years. i don’t believe there is any reasot to think they are going to keep this same language if it is ever renewed at all.

          • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            this comment was removed without explanation.

            edit:

            i have received a reason: supposedly it’s misinformation to claim that (something) doesn’t help the environment, but i have a proof:

            (something) exists
            the environment is getting worse
            therefore
            (something) doesn't help the environment
            

            my logic is sound, it is not misinformation. in fact, labeling it misinformation is, itself, misinformation.

      • JackGreenEarth
        link
        fedilink
        English
        201 month ago

        So when you don’t have any actual arguments against their point of view, you resort to criticising their ‘attitude’. I see

      • @DarthFrodo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        19
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Serious question, what could possibly convince them?

        We all learnt about the atrocious living conditions on factory farms long ago. We all know that the meat industry is terrible for the environment and climate. We learnt about the avian flu being spread on cattle farms, with owners hiding the cases from the authorities, with 0 regard for public safety. We all know that migrants and children are systemically exploited by slaughterhouses, many get PTSD or become alcoholics, some get severely injured or die because of accidents.

        Yet after all of that, meat eaters still happily give their money to these places every time they go to a supermarket or restaurant.

        The meat industry got people so hooked on animal products that they can get away with basically anything, change my mind.

          • @DarthFrodo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            8
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            We’ve already come a long way on price, thankfully. When I go to local supermarkets or discounters (Lidl, Kaufland, Aldi, Penny,…), the store brand meat alternatives are already as cheap as their factory farmed products. Same for the milk alternatives, soy yoghurts, and so on. So price parity has already been reached in many cases, at least here in Germany.

            I guess now the issue is that many of the discounter alternatives don’t taste the same as meat yet (although they’re getting better), and the premium plant-based products taste great, but are still more expensive than the cheapest meat products.

          • @chrizzowski@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            51 month ago

            That’s a good point actually. If meat and animal products weren’t ridiculously subsidized and the price at the cashier reflected the true cost then there would be an overnight surge in veganism. Nobody would have the political will to completely tank massive well lobbied industries though, regardless of any long term benefit.

        • @Aceticon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          41 month ago

          “People in the US consume far more meat than is normal or necessary for human beings to consume. This has resulted in an obesity epidemic, were heart and circulatory system problems are the biggest (second biggest?) cause of death in America and tens millions of people (probably more but I didn’t check) spend decades of their lives suffering from chronic health conditions related to food overconsumption. Eating less meat is not only good for Environment of the planet you live in, it’s also good for you”.

          There you go.

          Start with an “eating less meat is good for you” message (that can even sway selfish assholes) and then as they get used to doing it slowly convince people to eat less and less meat, which is basically the step by step approach that Meatless Mondays is going for.

          Even just a reduction of the demand for meat might reduce the use of the worst, industrial, methods of killing of animal for food and will certainly reduce the number of animals getting raised just to be killed for food - it’s basic Economics.

          Demanding that others MUST fully obbey your morals is just going to generate pushback and actually strengthen resistance to even the practical positives of being more like what you want, which ends up resulting in far more killings of animal than an approach that accepts that the way to perfect goes through less than perfect.

    • @Holzkohlen@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      131 month ago

      Pretty sure it literally is not murder, since that requires killing another human. I do love animals, but I will never agree to put animals and humans on the same level. I don’t want animals to suffer and die horribly cruel deaths, but other than that I do not care. I do not eat much meat nowadays, but that is because meat is bad for the environment. I care a LOT more about that, then about animals being killed.

      • @wafflez@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        81 month ago

        Definitions are perscriptive, not descriptive.

        Animals are moral agents, it is murder. It is unnecesary and cruel to forcefully breed and take lives for the sake of taste.

        They have desires, ability to suffer, ability to love, build social bonds and connections. They don’t deserve to die.

        • @kux@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          51 month ago

          They have desires, ability to suffer, ability to love, build social bonds and connections. They don’t deserve to die.

          True but still not murder. You can use words to mean just what you choose them to mean if you please but murder requires a human victim

        • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          11 month ago

          It is unnecesary and cruel to forcefully breed and take lives for the sake of taste

          most livestock is bred and killed for profit.

              • @wafflez@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                11 month ago

                They’re paid because there is demand for their bloodshed and torture. Supply and demand. If consumers stopped demanding it the supply would diminish

                • @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 month ago

                  supply and demand isn’t a magic phrase that makes your theory true. there is no reason to believe animal husbandry will ever stop before people are extinct.

    • @Schmoo@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      101 month ago

      The whole point of the meme is contrasting tiny ineffectual lifestyle changes with actively targeting the people responsible for climate change. Changing the “meatless mondays” panel to “going vegan” ruins the meme by replacing what’s supposed to be small and ineffectual with something that’s actually radical.

      • Orphie
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 month ago

        Vanguard means the front. So either you don’t know what that means, fam, or you’re being sarcastic. O:

    • BlanketsWithSmallpox
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 month ago

      I’m sorry, best we can do is still allow you to invest in our stock market to hoard more so you can retire with a pittance through the magic money generation machine that requires unlimited GDP growth.

  • @wafflez@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    121 month ago

    Fixed it. Stop making excuses to unnecesarily kill 200+ innocent beings every year. Choose kindness at your next meal, not after more deaths.

    • @Schmoo@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      331 month ago

      The whole point of the meme is contrasting tiny ineffectual lifestyle changes with actively targeting the people responsible for climate change. Changing the “meatless mondays” panel to “going vegan” ruins the meme by replacing what’s supposed to be small and ineffectual with something that’s actually radical.

      If you want a vegan meme then make a vegan meme.

        • Liz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          101 month ago

          Yeah, radical change as in, I dunno, killing all the billionaires?

          • @wafflez@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            51 month ago

            Yes that’d be a great step in the right direction but both are examples of radical change. Even if we lived in an anarcho-communist society killing animals when we don’t have to is unnecesary and cruel

            • Liz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              31 month ago

              Sure, but like, you gotta know where to advertise. Most people don’t like having their point hijacked even if you’re right.

        • ArxCyberwolf
          link
          fedilink
          111 month ago

          Bravo, you don’t eat animals. Would you like an award?

          Self important, smug vegans who huff their own farts and feel the need to preach everywhere and attack other people for not being the same are hurting your ideology more than you realize. You aren’t convincing anybody and just coming across like a blowhard.

          • @wafflez@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            9
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Self important? I live this lifestyle to do the bottom baseline, not kill. You’re the aggressor here by killing hundreds a year. The most effective rights movements always have and always will we fueled by those who are loud. You should be vegan. Killing animals is unnecesary.

          • @chrizzowski@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            91 month ago

            They changed the comic to point out veganism being a meaningful change compared to meatless Monday. While I agree it doesn’t fit the context or intent of the comics original message, they aren’t wrong. Like it or not at some point we all need to acknowledge that animal agriculture is one of the worst things we do to this planet. All they did was point that out and suggest that hey, maybe we should not do that.

            The only attack is your reply. They didn’t call you out as a self important, smug carnivore who huffs pig farts. It sounds more like you’re being defensive at the notion that something you do has a negative impact, and it’s easier to go “vegans preachy radical ideology, hurr durrr mah bacon!” than it is to confront the inconvenience that there are very real and surprisingly easy things you can do to bring about actual change in the world.

            Thin sliced tofu, fried crispy in a skillet, tablespoon of both maple syrup and soy sauce, and a few drops of liquid smoke. I call it tofakeun. Seriously, try it.

    • @FireRetardant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      141 month ago

      I’d argue if you just did #3 while changing nothing about the way we run our society, we would just need to repeat step 3 later down the line as new oligarchs and monopolies form and exploit us.

      • @masquenox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        31 month ago

        Fair enough… but you’'ll never get the chance to do something about “the way we run our society” if you don’t do #3. They don’t fund, train, arm, and exempt from accountability the fascists for shits and giggles.

      • @Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        11 month ago

        Don’t forget about the decades of strife and chaos after giving a group power based on their willingness to kill their political opponents

  • @SupraMario@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    8
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Unfortunately the same group who wants this also wants to disarm everyone…good luck on your guillotining when the only people are armed are the bodyguards protecting the people you want headless.

    Edit: apparently this hurt some feelings

    • @Revan343@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      101 month ago

      ‘Disarm everyone’ is generally a liberal position, ‘guillotine the rich’ is generally a far left position, and plenty of leftists are pro-gun.

      Under no pretext, etc.

      • @SupraMario@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        31 month ago

        The mix is higher than it should be though, tons of people who agree with the eat the rich are also the disarm everyone type.

        • @Revan343@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          6
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          I suspect a lot of them are just memeing, and would get very squeamish very quickly once the guillotines start being built

      • @SupraMario@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Soap, ballot, jury, cartridge…we are in the ballot/jury section. You don’t just start with the last box because it’s available…no wonder you euros have so many wars under your belts, you just go right to fighting.

        • @gens@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          31 month ago

          I have no idea what you are talking about. But the usa is alway at some war, just that the war is never on their own ground. My country had a war ~30 years ago, and is still recivering from the propaganda. Usa never stoped the propaganda.

          • @SupraMario@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            21 month ago

            The last civil war we had was almost two centuries ago, and the last war we fought a neighbor was about just as far back…yea we are at war a lot but it’s not internally.

    • @aeharding@vger.social
      link
      fedilink
      6
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Guillotine would transport well by bike, like a canoe or kayak…

      1. Secure the blade
      2. add wheels to heavier end
      3. add bike attachment to the other

      In fact, you could even make the wheels reusable for a nice kayak trip after using the guillotine! Win win!