once upon a time in shaolin - buy the book now!
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Vegans and vegetarians think they donít kill animals but they do

  1. #1
    Honk Honk. soul controller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Clown World.
    Age
    42
    Posts
    11,689
    Rep Power
    92

    Default Vegans and vegetarians think they donít kill animals but they do

    I was a veggie way back when., from 2002 to 2011, i did it for personal reasons, cos i didnt wanto consume processed and fucked up meets, i was in america and eating meat constantly for well over 9months.. i gained weight and felt un healthy.
    i did it due to me, not cruelty to other animals..its a dietary choice.

    Vegans and vegetarians think they donít kill animals but they do


    Posted By: PlayGround November 12, 2016



    Claudio Bertonatti, one of the most renowned naturalists in Argentina, wrote an article that triggered an earthquake. The tsunami reached us here and is likely to extend even further.
    In his article, The Vegan Confusion, he warns that eating vegetables doesnít prevent the death of animals. Bertonatti has enraged thousands of vegans and vegetarians, as well as other nature conservationists. However, many who read his article learned something about animal rights that might never have occurred to them otherwise.
    We spoke to Claudio about his earth-shattering idea and discussed the most important points of the controversy.

    Claudio, you were a vegetarian. What made you decide to become one?

    As a teenager, I grew interested in nature. I thought that by becoming a vegetarian Iíd avoid killing so many animals. But then I changed my mind.

    What happened?

    I began studying nature and going out to the countryside to observe wildlife. I noticed that in the fields of agricultural crops there were no birds, and the few that were there were being persecuted. Then I started studying amphibians, mammals, reptiles and fish and I realized that Iíd been confused.

    How?

    As a vegetarian, I was helping to prevent the death and suffering of domestic animals, but not of wild species. And many of these species Ė unlike cows, pigs and goats Ė were disappearing. So, I went back to being an omnivore.


    What drove you to write the article?

    In Argentina, I encounter many people who claim to be defenders of nature because they donít eat meat or wear leather. They think that by being vegan or vegetarian theyíre preventing animals from dying. Itís not true.

    Why?

    From the moment that humans began to raise cattle and adopt agriculture we generated an impact. There is no animal species whose survival doesnít result in the death of other animals, whether directly or indirectly. I understand that this can be a painful realization. Iíd also like to live in an ideal world, but thatís not the reality. Many vegans and people who only wear cotton seem to believe they donít cause any deaths, but they do.
    When I say this, many people feel like Iím cornering them

    Indirect deaths?

    Wheat, rice, corn. Most vegans eat these things. The first impact of mass cultivation is deforestation: we force nature out to make room for crops. In Argentina, they set fire to the jungle, burning nests with flamethrowers. Then they must defend the sown land from the birds who come to feed; many landowners do this by scattering poisoned grains. After that, the wild herbivores come looking for the first shoots, so the landowners put up electric fences or hunt the animals down with guns.
    If you eat meat, you kill animals, but you also kill them by eating plants

    What happens during harvest?

    The land is fumigated to combat fungi, insects and other plants. The animals that have been driven out move on to other areas which already support animals: the hotel is fully booked. So, the animals go to neighbouring crop fields and another wave of impacts is generated.
    By contrast, he says, in fields dedicated to livestock there are more species of other animals.
    There are lots of wild grasslands in Argentina. You can go for a walk there and find everything: amphibians, reptiles, birds. Of course, Iíd be lying if I said thereís the same variety of animals as youíd get if the cows werenít there. The farmer also persecutes wildlife and kills any animals he considers harmful to production. Even so, the impact is less. When I say this, a lot of people feel Iím cornering them.


    In what sense?

    In the sense that thereís no escape: if you eat meat, you kill animals, but you also kill them by eating plants. A lot of people who care about environmental issues look for good guys and bad guys, but itís not like that: itís far more complicated.
    Give us an example.
    There are lots of people here demonstrating and saying ďNo to miningĒ. The slogan should be ďNo to mining that recklessly exploits resources and peopleĒ. The activists use computers that wouldnít exist without the metals brought up from the mines. Iím surprised they donít see the bigger picture.
    Most slaughterhouses in Argentina are models of cruelty. I could never pretend otherwise!

    What do you think of the way in which meat is mass produced Ė the meat industry?

    Itís a tragedy. Feedlot and most slaughterhouses in Argentina are models of unrestrained cruelty. I could never pretend otherwise!
    Thereís evidence that the resources required for meat are far greater than those required for vegetables. And, that crops make up a large part of these resources: a high percentage of them are used to feed livestock.
    Thatís true. I know that most soya crops are used for this purpose. Iím not saying vegans are stupid or that they should all become carnivores, Iím just saying that itís important to be sensible, to adopt an intelligent position and show some solidarity.
    To a fundamentalist, itís a sin to mention death. What else should I call it? Euthanasia?

    What is an intelligent position?

    Showing solidarity with nature: the lesser evil. Itís important to encourage the responsible consumption and humane killing of animals. But to a fundamentalist, itís a sin even to mention death. What else should I call it? Euthanasia?

    If I understand correctly, your intention is to warn vegans and vegetarians that zero impact is impossible.

    Most of us live in cities and know very little about the animal world. Ask your friends if they can name 10 animals and 10 wild plants native to the area they live in.


    We probably wouldnít be able to.

    If we donít know anything about nature and diversity, then we wonít be able to value it. Our universe is limited to what we see: dogs, cats, chickens, pigs, ducks, cows. Our sensitivity extends only towards them. Itís like looking through a keyhole. The world is bigger than that and far more complex, whether you accept it or not.

    You talk as if you know a lot of fanatics.

    There are fundamentalist carnivores and vegans. As a scientist, when I hear them speaking in that confident tone Ė so utterly lacking in self-doubt Ė it scares me. Fundamentalists only pay attention to people who think like they do, and see everyone else as an enemy. Itís a contradiction.
    Our universe is limited to what we see: dogs, cats, chickens, pigs, cows. Our sensitivity extends only towards them

    What?

    For a carnivore to be violent is logical, but for a vegan to be violent is philosophically inconsistent.
    Have you met violent vegans?
    I was the managing director of Buenos Aires Zoo. I resigned because I tried to transform it into a conservation centre for endangered species but couldnít. There were these vegans whoíd demonstrate in front of the zoo, shouting at the families who came in, calling them murderers. That damages veganism. People think: if this is veganism then I want no part of it. Not all vegans are like that, of course. But there are lots of people who develop a great empathy for domestic animals only. Many of them end up hating people and thatís a pathology: itís not healthy.
    For a carnivore to be violent is logical, but for a vegan to be violent is philosophically inconsistent

    In your article, you say that if the whole human race suddenly became vegan, it would be a tragedy. But some say if we were all vegan then weíd need fewer crops than we do as omnivores.

    I wrote the article as a way of generating debate in my country, where the vegan movementís grasp on environmental analysis is generally quite shaky. If the whole human race became vegan because of this type of thinking (not counting other philosophical, religious or health reasons that I wonít go into), it would be a tragedy because we wouldnít be understanding the worldís environmental problems.


    Youíre not convinced by the statistics.

    If a well-understood veganism contributes to improving the natural world, then Iíll gladly become a vegan. My chief concern is the conservation of biodiversity: that the wealth of life on Earth does not become impoverished.
    But, again, if everyone in Argentina were vegan, wouldnít that require fewer crops?
    I donít know. I donít think you need to be vegan to conserve nature and biodiversity. Iím not a specialist in agricultural production development, but from what I know about the environment, itís always better to diversify production. There should be crops, cows, beekeepersÖ diversity.
    You donít need to be vegan to conserve nature and biodiversity

    What shortcomings do you see in the vegan movement?

    I never see them fighting for the creation of new protected areas or combatting the illegal trafficking of wildlife. I see them protesting bullfighting, which no longer goes on in Argentina, and slaughterhouses. Itís like they only care about domestic animals which, again, are not in danger of extinction. Iím not saying itís wrong Ė just that thereís so much more to it.

    In general, do you think thereís not enough of a connection between veganism and environmental awareness?

    What I find dangerous is that you spend all your energy trying to save the black cat, while knowing nothing about the environment, because maybe youíre wasting your energy; maybe your energy would have a greater impact elsewhere. Itís important to have a broad vision: it could help you analyse your situation better. If, afterwards, you still want to dedicate your life to saving black cats, thatís great, Iím appreciative of it. Defending animal rights is not incompatible with nature conservation.


    Clearly, thereís a conflict between environmentalists and animal rights activists and itís definitely going to have a big impact on the future of humanity.

    It reminds me a little of left-wing political parties: they act like theyíre enemies, and yet theyíre very similar and should be allies. Do you know who the biggest enemy of nature conservation is?

    Who?

    Indifferent people. A lot of indifferent people believe that everyone who cares about the environment is the same: we donít eat meat, weíre do-gooding greenies who never have sex. Itís not true. Weíre normal people!
    Environmentalists tend to think vegans and vegetarians are just sentimental. On the other hand, the indifference of some vegans to wild animals and biodiversity concerns me
    Death is a part of nature. Mixing feelings with science doesnít seem very scientific. On the other hand, human consciousness is important, as is our responsibility for an appalling and heavy-polluting industry. Whoís wrong?
    Mistakes are made on both sides. Environmentalists tend to think vegans and vegetarians are just sentimental. On the other hand, the indifference of some vegans to wild animals and biodiversity concerns me: itís not consistent. I acknowledge the fact that humanity is a machine that devours the world. One anthropologist said that weíre cosmophagic: we devour that which surrounds us.

    Are you happy about the stir your text has caused?

    A lot of people insult me and attack me by saying I killed a polar bear, which isnít true. Others provide me with new perspectives for which I thank them! Iím just a journeyman of nature conservation, a gardener, and Iíve been wrong many times. I do my best, but it doesnít offend me to find out Iím wrong. I think like a scientist, not like a fundamentalist.
    You donít need to be vegan to conserve nature and biodiversity
    Last edited by soul controller; 11-16-2016 at 05:28 AM.

  2. #2

    Default

    meat is not the one regardless. its dead and it's acidic. Heavy meat diets mess tings up for the body
    this is interesting though. I did have an idea about cultivation messing certain systems up.

    If I was in grandmother land I'm sure I'd be eating more eco friendly what with all the coconut jelly around and mangoes. fruitarians in Caribbean would be doing no harm....right?




  3. #3

    Default

    going on weed can make u more conscious to this type of thing but after I went hospital and came out my thoughts became more limited. I was vegetarian before I went in but came out eating beef, lamb chicken. on some primitive stuff hungry for flesh. but yeah if one is gonna eat meat I'd say do it no more than twice a week coz there are correlations between certain diseases and certain diets. cleaning the colon out with some rhubarb root or cascara sagrada is supposed to be could for dispelling all that rubbish built up. I might order some cascara next week.
    It my lungs um worried about tho




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •