This originally was planned to be part of my revisited TVP prepping & marinating article. However to maintain readability I feel compelled to split them as another feature write up in two three parts.
…And neither that this article was “emotionally” vested or influenced; evidently from the viral campaigns we see today.
Eg. Vegan 2015/ Vegan 2016/ Vegan 2017/ Vegan 2018, or the next Vegan 2019, the next Vegan 2020, 2021, 2022, so on and so forth to infinity – very moving pictures. We get it. I get it. I have indeed watched Food,inc,and that made me question everything.
This article is to simply implore my positioning of neutrality;from a bird’s eye view. Hopefully, you can draw your own conclusion besides my own – that is –
Leave everyone alone. That’s it. close this browser window. Get on with your own lives.
Oh wait, many people still want “more” explanation. They won’t rest until they “fight the good fight”. Very well. We’ll see, by the end of this article if it is even worth fighting this moral fight over “food”.
“Us” against “you”.
Watch the above “debate”. Two vegans against one.
The successful outcome of all “debates” is the resulting evidences that of winners (survivor) and the losers (pending for “change”). Irrespective, a virtuous notion of a belief, or solution, or strategy – largely revolves around Re-coordinations. From disordered subjectivities (Chaos) – into concise and more concise-“er” – objectivities (Order).
What seems concise thus seemed to be rationally direct. What is “rational” therefore requires it to be visually validated by whomever as direct witnesses. Hence Survivorship Bias.
The “losers” are simply left to redeem themselves for change or to await coercive, submission. Either way, it all appeals towards only one linearity – the strategy of correctness faith as devised – by the Survivors.
To their’s eyes (the winning veganists) – their thought pattern is likely as follows. It’s not “us” or “our’s” fault to blame for any persisting frictions between contrasting conviction/s.
…”it’s the individuals’ “me” or “you” – who seemingly remains as the remaining “problem”.
A vision for dystopia. With “good” intent.
Veganism is now a political ‘ism’.That’s right. Dare I say it. Fit or die.
We’re nearing 7.75 billion. Yup, nearing figure eight – billion citizens. Suppose we built a city out of this intent at accomodating with as “green”-est moral virtuosity. Is it possible? We already have a city fully politicised by veganism. Very well, I am indeed moved. Morally speaking.
Suppose now we’re approaching at a breaking point. Contemplating to legislate everyone in divisive “class” morality warfare. Imagine each individual’s access and rights to living are bound by these new law/s. Confounded and Structured by simply – their way and belief of eating.
But what if “good” intent is met with impractical needs of reality?
If a vegetarian wishes to invest in a property he/she shall not invest in a home or property if their building aren’t sanctified or “blessed“. Unless approved by vegetarian builder-society. Or by some sort of cruelty-free Charter.
If meat eaters wishes to file an insurance repair claim he/she is likely denied. Especially if events within any claim of damage involve factual harming of animals.
…Well, that’d surely violates the ethics of such cruelty-free Charter.
I can already hear the screams (the keyboard-totting, SJW pitchforks). But those screams are still amongst the living. Thus emotively concerns only the living. What about those amongst the dead? In the context of Veganism, Death, indeed is a victimhood attachment, an emotive permission to arm against the perpetrators.
This involves as a result – placing both flora and fauna on a protective pedestal. Call it the Noah’s Ark, if you will. A shelter for all beings. All creatures big and small. From seeds to the chickens. From cattles to the ants. From the giant crocodiles to hyenas and vultures. Include everyone here. Include humans, too.
….Once again, a virtuous nobility indeed. I am in”deed” sold. ….yet alas also I feel guilty and remorseful at the same time to have been granted “life” in the first place.
Because my identity is already (involuntarily) am such another perpetrator to the ecosystem. Yet also, they; the “animals” – be it predators or carnivores – need to somehow consume something. Somehow, on their own accord. Without “guilt”.
What or how does the Realist Nature has to say of all this? Nature has no recognitions of “guilt” nor “perpetrators” once we place ourselves in this “dome”. This Noah’s Ark. The grass the cow eats were in just as much pain as the prey being overwhelmed by the lion. Perhaps I’d think twice from cooking that spinach; even if that offers me a more favourable macronutrient only when cooked.
Hence, we all contribute towards Ecological Martyrdom. Everything – involves “pain” for the sustenance of something else.
Yet the moral allures of saving every-single-thing; remains an undying gospel amongst the “green” – moral virtuosity.
Morality VS Reality & the meaning of “Predator”.
“Morality” is often an influence (or affluence) one looks up to. This is almost the universal appraisal of anything in regards to Vegetarianism. Purity, nobility and preservation. Indeed these are VERY ideal outcomes. Everything is assumably malleable as accordingly inspite of his or her own “free” will. All to be collectively expected to remain fixated towards “Compassion”.
“Reality” on the other hand – has no interpretation of “wills”. Everything revolves by ticking of the clock. The passing of time.
Consider the word “Predator“. Deconstruct it. Explore every one of its connected definitions and how closely it resembles to “Time”.
See if nature possess any “Morality”, or recognises binary or conscious expressions of “Compassion” from forces of geology and astronomy. Natural disasters, meteor strikes, solar flares, earthquakes, tectonic plates movements, volcanoes, thunderstorms. Or Cycles between day or night. Moments of cellular oxidations, growth, decline and decomposition.
Is it nature’s “morality” at fault therefore – being the sole cause of our deaths in the above ensuing events?
No. “It” (Nature) just speaks on its own accord. That – is what Reality says.
…Yet, the green moral virtuosity says we should not ever fault nature. Instead, “It is our own fault to have caused climate change and all those forces”…..very well…okay.
Vegetarianism – assumes dignified control of all flora and fauna’s “senses”. Human or not human.
Picture a grass sitting happily. That is, “growing”; assuming it NEEDS to be left as is to thus “succeed” in growing.
Now what happens then if it’s involuntarily chewed out by the cows? Should we blame the cow then – for being the perpetrators for the death of the grass (victim)?
Alas, vegetarianism defends this as “there are exceptions”. Or that sentient beings have more superior feelings. Great. Correctness hierarchy here we go again.
What about plants who are by their inherent nature – carnivorous and extremely deadly to organic beings? Aren’t they sentient too? Can we speak on behalf of their’s “morality” therefore as to why they are such and such – dangerous to mammals? Can we thus say to these plants – “not to eat this and that?” All we’d get is a blank stare.
…What if we are facing a lion? A Great White Shark? Or a Vulture?
I am yet to have faced a rebuttal. I can imagine they’d run for their lives. Me too. But I’d have to embrace one day knowing how to kill (them). To defend myself. Before they kill others too.
….And the best question for last is,
What or how can we explain why there are ex-vegans?
Do all other concerning vegans still own these ex-vegans authority and authenticity over their decisions?
If it were me – “who cares”. Or simply “I don’t know”.
I don’t speak for each of them. I do not own their contexts.
Yet condescendingly, The green moral virtuosity – still adamantly believe – they still own what is rightful, on behalf of all organic indifferences.
…Whilst threatening fellow human beings differing to their ideals. Including ex-vegans.
The mind boggles. “Four legged good, two legged bad”….