Cool, and you’re actively doing that? You’re working on a concrete plan that will actually create that outcome? And going vegan in the meantime will actually materially harm your efforts for that?

How often do we gotta pull out that tweet until you people learn? To paraphrase: "People online will be like ‘Your approach of veganism pales in comparison to my plan of eating the rich!’, and then never eat the rich or go vegan.

From my memory of their financials, they actually get enough donations for the browser. The issue is the for profit companies fetish for a million different side quests.

The Rich also do far more to perpetuate patriarchy, and racism. Am I, an average white guy, therefore freed from any and all responsibility? Do I just get to do whatever, because richer, even worse assholes exist somewhere?

More importantly, by your fucking logic, would ANY justice movement EVER have achieved ANYTHING? You’re ironically exactly like all the Elon cocksuckers: You’re both expecting the rich to magically save us.

Sure, but there’s a strong upper bound to how much we can reduce transportation. There’s also a limit on rich people, meaning the absolute savings to be had, even if all of them “transported” like the median person, is miniscule compared to the meat industry.

Meat is also just one category of food, whereas “transportation” is an entire concept. We can remove all meat and still have food.

Finally, what is more realistic? 10% of people going vegan, or all rich people suddenly stop using cruises etc.? “But it’s not my job, but it’s not my fault, but they should!” In the history of all social justice movements, never has it been anyones job, and never have the people most responsible been the ones to do the job. It is what it is.

Most environmentalists online, exactly like most leftists online, are focussed on purity of speech and moral grandstanding, not on any actual impact a person might have. Even though no individual can or should change anything, magically, a Collective will form, creating The Revolution, which will Eat the Rich and destroy the System, all without any of them having had to make material changes in their lives.

Here’s some 5 seconds of googling: https://ourworldindata.org/environmental-impacts-of-food

Ok, so you don’t actually believe in collective action that requires YOU PERSONALLY to be part of the collective? You’re waiting for some other undefined collective of INDIVIDUALS to make INDIVIDUAL CHOICES AND SACRIFICES to make the changes?

You would’ve genuinely derided any and all civil rights movements, or womens movements, as long as they weren’t big enough of far along enough.

Your morals depend not on what you actually support with your actions, but what you say you care about. As long as I, as a straight white man, SAY I care about feminism or anti-racism, I don’t actually have to DO anything. Because there’s only two forms of a movement: The one too weak, so there’s no point helping, and the one so strong, there’s no point helping (beyond words).

Unless being vegan would keep you from actually eating the rich, this point is utterly and completely irrelevant.

To illustrate, imagine some celebrity said “rape culture is bad, and everyone should work against it!”. Do I, as some average guy, get a pass if I talk about how “um akschually, Epstein Island, Trump, bla bla”?

Like, seriously, my INDIVIDUAL impact on womens liberation is exactly as big as your impact on animals rights. So do we both get to just not care, and sit on our lazy asses, because we can’t, on our own, change the world?

You people talk a big game about material reality, about systems, but you’ve turned “systems” into a near religious excuse for personal inaction. “The revolution” is the second coming, and all you have to do is believe. Not act, not make the world a better place, just preach.

Yelling omnivores is exactly as stupid as conservatives talking about this or that being natural or unnatural.

And in socialism, the exploitation of the planet for meat production didn’t happen? I’d love to see any sort of data on that.

Finally, you likely pretend to be smart, at least much smarter than all the capitalism fans. Yet, you lack any and all concept of the material reality of meat production, or most production while we’re at it. Meat production IS unsustainable at anywhere close to the amount we have today. Throw in environmental and worker protection, and you’ll eat meat like caviar.

BTW, if in your dream worker collective, everybody votes to keep polluting the earth because they just can’t give up meat, do I then get to have morals?

Well, the beauty of research is that you can actually do it, instead of spouting whatever nonsense that was.

If Bill Gates tells you tomorrow to not kill puppies, you killing puppies overmorrow?

I’ve not had 20 kids, so now I get to eat a bunch of animals, and fly a bunch of private jets, and roll coal all day long!

Also, your decision to eat meat in a western country DOES actually cause as much damage as some entire families existence in the poorer countries like Nigeria.

Not necessarily change them. You don’t really know who they are yet, and they don’t know what you care about yet. This is more about giving them a chance to show they care about you. They can only do that if they know what you care about.

Angebot und Nachfrage. Märkte existieren auch unterm Kommunismus.

Wenn ich 100 Dingens habe, aber 200 Interessenten, dann kann nicht jeder ein Dingens bekommen. Das ist eine unumstössliche Realität. Das hat einen Scheiss mit Profiten zu tun.

Ironischerweise sind diese Profite auch nur möglich, weil nicht genug gebaut wird.

Du verstehst rein garnichts wenn du tatsächlich nicht siehst wie deine Aussage PERFEKT das Zitat beweisen. Es wird in einem Markt gebaut, was sich lohnt. Wenn ich wenig Land habe, und alles ewig braucht, dann baue ich lieber 10 Luxuswohnungen als 20 “normale” Wohnungen.

Du kannst ja als glänzendes Beispiel dein Geld verlustbringend anlegen, hindert dich niemand dran.

Unser fundamentales Problem ist, dass wir 100 Wohnungen nicht magisch auf 200 Familien aufteilen können. Nicht im Kommunismus, Kapitalismus, Anarchismus. Es geht um eine MATERIELLE WIRKLICHKEIT!

Wir müssen mehr bauen. Gerne vom Staat, von mir aus auch Privatwirtschaft. Es gibt keinen Weg drumherum.

Das hat absolut garnichts damit zu tun.

Bitte, ich find ja eigentlich linke Themen ganz gut, bin Fan. Aber wie von Linken über Wohnungen gesprochen wird ist absolutes Kindergartenniveau. Schlimmmer noch. Ein Kleinkind versteht, dass man 10 Stifte nicht auf 20 Kinder verteilen kann. Deswegen fragt es nach 10 zusätzlichen Stiften. Ob die 10 Stifte jetzt 10 Kindern gehören, der Lehrerin, dem Staat, dem Kapitalist oder wem auch immer ist im Kontext dieses Problems scheiss egal.

Kannst du mir bitte für Dumme erklären, wie das helfen soll? Vorallem, weil man bei Enteignung sowieso für die Wohnungen zahlt, und das grösste Problem fehlender Wohnraum ist.

Wenn ich 100 Wohnungen habe, aber 200 Familien, dann gibt es weder im Kommunismus noch im Anarchismus oder im Kapitalismus eine Möglichkeit, alle unterzubringen. Es muss mehr gebaut werden, Punkt aus.

From memory, the choice of an american to become vegan makes up for a nuclear families worth Nigerians.

It wouldn’t be an issue if you suddenly had to tell everyone in the western world they need to cut their meat consumption to like 1/10? I’ve seen how even the seemingly smartest, most rational western leftist reacts to the mere suggestion that their personal consumption habits are unsustainable, no matter the economic system. Good luck…

Google Maps also makes us bad at finding our way manually. Are we therefore a moron?

Isn’t that literally the last line, but for art? The average person gave very little fucks about “art” before AI, and most art happened for purely base reasons, like marketing or porn. Fancy shmancy art will continue to exist.