this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
42 points (88.9% liked)

vegan

6781 readers
75 users here now

:vegan-liberation:

Welcome to /c/vegan and congratulations on your first steps toward overcoming liberalism and ascending to true leftist moral superiority.

Rules

Resources

Animal liberation and direct action

Read theory, libs

Vegan 101 & FAQs

If you have any great resources or theory you think belong in this sidebar, please message one of the comm's mods

Take B12. :vegan-edge:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
ella@hexbear.net
DashEightMate@hexbear.net
Dirtbag@hexbear.net
artificialset@hexbear.net
ZoomeristLeninist@hexbear.net
BeamBrain@hexbear.net
jack@hexbear.net
Yor@hexbear.net
Angel@hexbear.net
ButtBidet@hexbear.net
a_little_red_rat@hexbear.net
42
Do carnists understand conservation of energy? (hexbear.net)
submitted 2 days ago by dat_math@hexbear.net to c/vegan@hexbear.net
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Conservation of mass?

Do they understand that producing energy and fertilizer using the bodies of animals is less efficient than producing the same number of calories or mass of nitrates from plants+less-energy-than-is-required-to-raise-the-animal-in-question?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] theturtlemoves@hexbear.net 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Assuming the land in question is arable in the first place …

There's land that isn't good enough to grow crops, but is good enough for wild plants to grow. You can, as you said, 'manage' it - give enough fertiliser and water to make it suitable for agriculture. But that is often unaffordable for the people living in such places, so using animals to gather and concentrate the available nutrients is the best option available to them.

[–] dat_math@hexbear.net 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

That's an orthogonal injustice though, no? Collectively, our species massively overproduce food, so I would think the fact that there is a prior reason to be trying to cultivate land like this, which ought to be managed for native flora/fauna is a separate and solvable large scale land allocation problem, the solution to which frees whatever livestock use the argument excuses.

[–] theturtlemoves@hexbear.net 1 points 1 day ago

Collectively, our species massively overproduce food

The economist Amartya Sen, who studied famines in South Asia and Africa said that 'starvation is the characteristic of some people not having enough food to eat. It is not the characteristic of there being not enough food to eat." Producing more food than we need means nothing if it does not reach everyone.

separate and solvable large scale land allocation problem

I would say it is more of a food-allocation problem. Land redistribution is a great thing, and has worked in the past. But natural disasters and crop failures can occur in regions, and larger farms can benefit from long-term planning and more scientific management. So the better solution, in an ideal world, would be to focus on guaranteeing food rather than land.

the solution to which frees whatever livestock use the argument excuses.

Solving food security will of course greatly reduce this problem, although personally I am worried that food availability will get worse in the coming years and decades due to the various ways in which we are damaging the environment.