Before tractors, almost the entire food chain involved animal slavery, since farms used draft animals. For that matter, even transportation was based on animal slavery (horses). Many of the sustainable and high performance fabrics like wool, silk, and leather are now replaced by synthetic fossil-derived plastics. But petroleum is also an animal product.

To be vegan, is to choose fossilized animal products and services over fresh.

  • TheAlbatross
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    1 month ago

    The bitch of this world is that most any activity is pro-fossil fuel because of the way our infrastructure is built.

    This isn’t much of a gotcha, but it’s a sad observation of the state of the globe.

  • RAM@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 month ago

    there is a lot of weird things about what you’re saying, but for one:

    the same amount or more petroleum would be spend on cultivating food for the to-be-slaughtered animals and transporting the meat around.

    I’m not a vegan (anymore), but veganism is still the lesser evil here

    • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I always wonder how many people who think eating meat is murder, evil, etc. have actually watched animals die in the wild. If I had to choose between getting knocked out with a stunner or being chased down by a predator, struggling and screaming while being torn apart by teeth and claws until finally losing consciousness from blood loss and pain - which is how wild animals tend to die - I would absolutely pick the slaughterhouse any time. From that standpoint alone I would absolutely call eating meat the lesser evil.

      Of course death is only one dimension - many domestic animals live in terrible conditions - but mistreatment isn’t necessary for vegans to condemn using animal products. Even eating honey is frowned on, simply because bees are animals. I don’t think that simple flat rule takes enough information into account.

      • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        I always wonder how many people who think eating meat is murder, evil, etc. have actually watched animals die in the wild.

        My issue pertains more to forcibly breeding animals into existence for the sole purpose of exploiting them, and also the often terrible conditions they are kept in. I consider hunting and fishing to be more ethical than industrial animal ag, so long as it is done in a responsible manner (yes, I know this is subjective).

        Nature is brutal, but industrial animal ag has absolutely heinous abuses.

      • Ephera@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        I would choose dying in the wilderness. A few solid years in freedom and then a potentially horrid death sounds like a much better deal to me than a few weeks/months in purgatory before a less horrid death.
        I am writing “purgatory”, because at this point, I do assume that mistreatment is involved.

        Ultimately, I just find that simple rule …simpler.
        Is it a capitalistic thing with animals involved? Then the default assumption should be that the animals get mistreated, because treating animals well doesn’t generally pay out.
        I just don’t care enough about honey to get into the gritty details of whether this doesn’t involve animal mistreatment.

        I would also bet a lot of money that it does involve questionable treatment at some point. For example, I’ve heard that beekeepers get live honeybees in the mail, and not in some fancy transport box.
        But you’ve got other moral aspects, too, like honeybees killing local ecosystems by taking food away from better pollinators.

        I could think about all that and try to work out the exact details of when eating honey is coolio, or I could just not bother.
        I don’t need a perfect moral framework, I just want to steer clear from immoral shit.

    • antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Not talking about eating meat, that’s vegetarianism. Many animals eat grass or waste products, like chickens and pigs.

      Veganism as a rejection of all animal products and services, is a full embrace of petroleum.

      • yesman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        No, because the vegans are right, eating meat isn’t justifiable. You can’t “both sides” morality. The attempt is an admission that you’ve lost the plot.

        Consider the possibility that your feelings of guilt or being judged is a call coming from inside the house.

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    Català
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Since fossil fuel contains animal remains, wouldn’t veganism be inherently against all petro products, including plastics?