This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Are the western vegetarian and vegan movements food fetishes for the rich?
'LET THEM EAT CAKE'. These words, attributed to Marie Antoinette just prior to her execution, enraged the struggling masses during the French Revolution. To people who had few daily food choices, most subsisted on low grade bread and little else, these words seemed so callous, and so bereft of compassion.
Why do we, in today's wealthy western countries, place such a high degree of importance over our individual diet? Is it just selfishness and ego born out of having too many choices each day? Do we claim self esteem and identity this way? Are we detached from the real meaning of food and nutrition, of survival?
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Warren Bowen 30+
Do you mean "fad"? I've never heard of vegan diets as a fetish under any conventional definition. If you mean fetish, can you please elaborate? Sometimes the ways people talk about meat, the (sometimes sexual) way it's advertised, and the "special powers" you get from meat (you can only be strong and healthful eating meat) that individuals and industry profess, seem to fit the definition of a fetish. I've never seen plant food spoken of and represented this way.
If you're vegan because you don't want to give money to factory farmed meat, dairy, and egg suppliers (supermarkets, restaurants, etc.) because of the environmental destruction and animal torture they cause, it's a challenge to see how this is born out of selfishness and ego.
Joanne and I have already touched on this debate in Jonathan Foley's talk, but I couldn't help but respond to such an inflammatory conversation heading :)
Joanne Donovan 30+
You are preaching to the converted when it comes to the meat industry. Its often disgusting, usually rampantly exploitative and sometimes even tragic. This is not the subject I have put up for debate.
When you say this ' you don't want to give money to factory farmed meat, dairy, and egg suppliers (supermarkets, restaurants, etc.) because of the environmental destruction and animal torture they cause, it's a challenge to see how this is born out of selfishness and ego', I can see you wish to make the 'individual protest' point. I think this is a valid point of view and I applaud you for it. Who do you give your money to instead?
Thanks for your heartfelt contributions.
Alexis Rodirugez
Joanne Donovan 30+
Warren Bowen 30+
I agree that many vegans are so because of irrational reasons. However, your question wasn't "are some veggie movements fetishes but the rich?" but "are the veggie movements fetishes..." You've implied all are, when clearly this is untrue. And inflammatory because you are inaccurately generalizing an entire movement.
Glad to see you acknowledged that many nonvegan diets are actually fetishized, especially meat. Also, vegan and vegetarian diets are not fads; they've existed formally declared in western culture since the late 1800s, are recognized and advised by registered dieticians worldwide (which paleo, raw, Atkins, etc. diets are not), and have existed for thousands of years in other parts of the world.
"[Nonvegan industries are] often disgusting, usually rampantly exploitative and sometimes even tragic. This is not the subject I have put up for debate." It actually is the subject up for debate, because you've clearly implied in your question that veggie movements are irrational fetishes. What is the alternative to vegan? Nonvegan, meaning meat, eggs, and dairy. This is why I brought these industries up, this is why it is relevant to do so.
I give my money to growers of Canadian organic soy, organic dried beans, organic hemp, and nut butters for protein. Please tell me if there is something worrying about these industries so I can adjust my dollar voting. Who do you give your money to?
My diet is not a fetish because I have rational reasons for choosing it, many of which you are acknowledging, and it is not based in spirits, charms, sexual urges, or magical powers. Do you still think all vegan diets are fetishes? If so, please explain clearly.
peter lindsay 30+
Ken brown 30+
Each has their own personal reasons individually,not as a group.
Peter Lindsay
Joanne Donovan 30+
Orlando Hawkins 20+
While I agree with both of your concerns about the moral hierarchies of animals, I think there is something we have to keep in mind.
To understand that all the biotic communities are equally significant and to understand that the biosphere is essentially holistic as opposed to hierarchical I think takes a higher level of awareness.
The reason why this is the case is because, as humans, we have a natural tendency to be concerned about those organisms that have a higher range of suffering and pleasure; a higher range of experience and interest as opposed to those who don't:
I don't think its by accident that people would be concerned about the slaughter of a chicken as opposed to, as Peter puts it, "cut the reproductive organ from a whole field of corn plants? "..the reason for this is because we tend not to think that plants suffer and therefore we see nothing wrong with doing such a thing.
In spite of this, the question remains, is any of this justifiable? perhaps not being that we have the capacity to understand that every part of the biosphere serves a purpose in regards to the worlds eco-system..
nonetheless, I do have to agree that this line of thinking is what gives way to the whole issue of moral hierarchies.
which I am sure you, Peter and Natasha are well aware of
peter lindsay 30+
Warren Bowen 30+
I agree we don't know with 100% certainty if plants can feel pain. Or most invertebrates for that matter. But given what we know about experience, there is no reason to think it.
It is a terrible error in reason and judgment to argue that because we don't have complete certainty in "plant consciousness" that therefore we may kill or use any living thing we like. We don't have complete certainty in gravity or evolution—you don't even have complete certainty that humans other than you are conscious—yet all the evidence we currently have points to these explanations of the natural world. Any other way of thinking disregards the evidence we have of how the natural world functions. It is unreasonable.
It wasn't until the 80s that the governing body of US veterinarians declared that nonhuman animals could feel pain. Prior to that, they were engaging in nothing else but an assault on reason and evidence. There has been lots of evidence throughout human history that many nonhuman animals are conscious, sensitive beings. Not so with plants. There is no evidence for it, only convenient speculation when challenged to abstain from killing and hurting those sensitive nonhumans.
And if plants could feel? If all the evidence is wrong, and the lack of it sprung up? Eating meat, eggs, and dairy uses more plants that a strictly plant-based diet, anyway.
natasha nikulina 50+
In Meta-Reality there is no clear distinction between 'dust' and 'man'.
So what ?
Peter Lindsay
Warren Bowen 30+
This argument is so disingenuous. Reflect honestly for one moment, without thinking of "debating vegans" and ask yourself if you truly believe plants feel pain, if you have no preference for seeing a head of lettuce go into a blender or a mouse go into a blender.
There is zero evidence for plants feeling pain.
1) No brain.
2) No centrally organized nervous system.
3) No nociceptor cells.
4) No evolutionary function.
Can plants react to stimuli? Definitely. So can my thermostat. Reaction does not mean feeling or experiencing psychological, conscious phenomena like pain and pleasure. Human bodies in comas react to pathogens constantly. Do these people feel anything?
People call veganism irrational, and yet this kind of arrogant sophism gets a platform. Comparing the suffering of young calves confined in crates barely wide enough for their bodies, deprived of iron such that they lick rusted nails, separated from their mothers in a hostile environment where some have their heads caved in by the heels of brutalized workers... to corn in a field?
Is it any wonder people genuinely concern with animal suffering and environmental destruction get angry?
peter lindsay 30+
Joanne Donovan 30+
Only a generation ago people said farm animals felt no pain, or mourned or felt emotion. Most people today do not accept this. Whales where not considered to have a family life, or a language or even much intelligence until relatively recently. The point is, we do not know, and we are notoriously arrogant and anthropocentric.
Warren Bowen 30+
True. Those points do apply to most animals on earth, since most animals on earth are invertebrates. I have little to no reason to think most invertebrates (like arthropods and molluscs) experience pain or pleasure. Given this, I happen to think insect and oyster farming would be a great humane food source (with likely little environmental impact).
I don't think "vegan" should be "don't eat animals or their by-products", but rather "don't do things that hurt sensitive beings".
Also, respond to my comments of your comparison of veal and corn suffering. You don't get off that easy for making such callous, empty arguments.
peter lindsay 30+