• 5714@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    Veganism is (mostly) binary for a reason. You either kill and exploit non-human animals for your pleasure (taste, comfort, affordability, i.e. a want) or you don’t (exceptions exist, but mostly represent needs and not wants, e.g. conditions, intial acclimatisation etc.)

    Veganism and Vegetarianism are not two steps of the same ladder. I’m not an expert on vegetarianism, but AFAIK vegetarianism aims to avoid meat-eating. Veganism aims to minimise suffering from the killing and exploitation of (non-human) animals by abstaining from consuming products directly made from (non-human) animals.

    Veganism isn’t inherently utilitarian. I don’t agree with them, but there are vegans who are climate change (impact) denialists. I don’t agree that giving up on veganism (which has huge climate action potential) for some vague ‘free energy’ is a viable climate action path that doesn’t follow RCP8.5. Nevertheless, I consider those either-or, dichotomy debates as delayist discourse or simply put fossil fuel arguments. Food AND Energy need to cut emissions completely.