stabby_cicada

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The recent murder of Sonya Massey really underlines how accurate that is. Massey was fucking joking with the police. Everything was fine. They were there to help her. And then she made a joke the cop thought disrespected him and she was dead thirty seconds later.

It's so fucking sickening and it's exactly how abusive parents treat kids. You have to walk on eggshells 24-7 because there's no telling what will trigger a violent reaction in the abuser - and because the abuser is confident he'll suffer no consequences from his violence, he feels free to resort to violence at any opportunity.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

“That being said, I am happy to give up my right to vote as a trade for a significantly better quality of life. It’s cleaner, it’s safer. There’s more opportunity in mobility,” she said.

Plenty of people are happy to make that trade while staying in America. This is why Trump's going to win.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Full disclosure: I don't have the time or patience to watch a thirty minute video, and perhaps the OOP discusses this point somewhere in the video. I don't know.

But I believe vegan activism doesn't require anti-capitalist activism. Or even opposition to capitalism in general.

I agree that capitalism is inherently anti-vegan. The logic of capitalism sees both animal bodies and human bodies as objects to be owned and used for their masters' profit.

I think it's more ideologically consistent for vegan activists to also oppose capitalist systems as a whole.

But vegan activism doesn't require ideological consistency. We're not trying to change the entire world economic system. We don't need to change the entire world economic system. If abolitionists could oppose slavery without opposing capitalism - and win - vegans can oppose the slavery of animals without opposing capitalism. Vegans can win victories and have protections for animals written into law without opposing capitalism. We can and we have.

And if you can be a vegan activist and still be a capitalist, you can certainly just be an ordinary vegan and still be a capitalist.

Frankly, absolute ideological consistency is for heroes in an Ayn Rand novel. Vegans can work with with anybody who puts the animals first. And anybody who puts the animals first can be a vegan.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What is the source of your quote? I can think of quite a few places where I'd want to share it 😆

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You do realize Joe Biden has been President for the last four years, right?

You realize the changes he wants to make were recommended to him by an advisory panel in 2021, right?

You realize Biden has sat on his thumbs for the last four years watching America's economy and political climate fall into the gutter, watching the world fall into war, watching the global environmental and economic collapse and the worst refugee crisis in world history grind on and doing absolutely fucking nothing, right?

But now that the Supreme Court that Biden enabled has formally instituted the imperial presidency that everybody knew they would institute, now that the end of democracy in America is literally in sight, Biden and the Democratic Party are finally going to start fighting for the court reforms we've been begging for his entire presidency?

Forgive me for not expecting much.

 

I found these paragraphs, about killing invasive rats on small islands to protect local seabirds, particularly thought-provoking:

For my own part, I wish the killing of those rats and mice were at least accompanied by a sense of what environmental ethicist Chelsea Batavia and ecologist Arian Wallach, a prominent compassionate conservationist who was Lundgren’s Ph.D. adviser, called “the moral residue of conservation.” It’s not the rodents’ fault that humans so heedlessly moved their ancestors around the globe; their appetite for seabird chicks would, if expressed by an acceptably native animal, be treated as an inevitable part of nature. To kill them, even for noble purposes, is to take innocent lives. “Conservationists should be emotionally responsive to the ethical terrain they traverse,” argued Batavia and Wallach in the journal Conservation Biology. “Feelings of grief are commensurate with acts of harm. Apathy or indifference is not.”

In all my years of reading and writing about the killing of invasive species, I’ve yet to encounter an expression of grief. To Batavia and Wallach, this is troubling because those feelings “act as tethers to abiding notions of what is good and of value in the world.” To turn them off—­Lundgren recalled a colleague who cried after euthanizing a native bird with a broken wing but killed nonnative birds with barely a change in expression—­risks harming something important in ourselves. Callousness can only be maintained at the cost of compassion.

Lundgren agreed with this. A casual attitude toward killing introduced species, he added, also made it easy to avoid less tractable but equally important problems, such as the overfishing that is now starving many seabirds. Moreover, even on islands, the impacts of nonnative species could be nuanced: An analysis of 300 Mediterranean islands containing both seabirds and invasive rats found that rats limited the abundance of only one seabird species, something the researchers called “an amazing conservation paradox.”

“We don’t give any credit to evolution,” Lundgren said. Perhaps, over time, newly introduced and long-­native species would surprise us with their ability to coexist. Perhaps in many places they already were coexisting—­but the ease of killing so-­called invasives, and the habits of mind that reinforced, made it hard to see. I fell asleep to such thoughts beneath a starscape that, in the dry desert air and the absence of human habitation for miles in every direction, was as clear as any I’d ever seen.

 

Text:

i do think its funny when biden evangelists say "not voting is how we got trump". amiguito hillary clinton won the popular vote by a margin in the millions. its not the fault of the dsa or jillnie stienders or whatever that the usa is a joke country with a political system that was set up to cater to the interests of 18th century farmers and slaveowners

realistically what actually matters to the actual biden campaign is undecided voters in like six states but if youve like emotionally seriously invested yourself in usamerican electoral politics you cant just say "if you're in arizona, wisconsin, pennsylvania, florida, nevada, or michigan VOTE otherwise do whatever who cares lol" because you have to pretend that the usa is a real democracy. very funny predicament to be in

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Added to post, thank you!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

In a way it is. Colonial empires maintain the support of the proletariat in the imperial cores by funneling wealth from colonized nations back to those people. If you're better off than your parents were, and your parents are better off than your grandparents were, why do you care that your ruling oligarchy is genociding its way across the planet and shoveling stolen profits into its insatiable maw?

English commoners forgave their empire's industrial scale genocide of African slaves on Haitian plantations because that genocide provided white sugar for their tea.

American commoners forgive the wholesale torture and murder of Latin American peasants because we can buy cheap bananas at the supermarket.

The top 20% of Americans control 80% of America's wealth. But they don't consume 80% of the resources America consumes. They don't burn 80% of the gas, they don't eat 80% of the food, they don't produce 80% of the pollution. What's killing the world is the bread and circuses - or rather the cars, cell phones, and factory farms - that give all but the very poorest Americans an artificially inflated standard of living at the cost of the world as a whole.

But telling poor Americans "your standard of living is too high" when the entire capitalist machine tells them they have the right to all the consumption they can buy and the best standard of living they can earn, it's a hard sell, you know?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

In the same time period, eating meat at every meal was a demonstration of social status - only the wealthy and powerful had enough livestock to slaughter and eat them routinely.

Like lawns, and meat, and college education, and a dozen other forms of conspicuous consumption - privileges of the wealthy during the Victorian era and earlier, when industrialized society made those privileges cheaper, the middle class seized on them to emulate the upper class, and after a hundred fifty years those privileges became expectations.

And conspicuous consumption as a status symbol, when universalized to the majority of society, led inevitably to unsustainable consumption and the world as it is now.

 
[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 weeks ago

Food Not Bombs has a cookbook with a similar style of "protest food" recipes.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I deleted most of this comment because it wasn't as civil and understanding as I wanted it to be and it's probably better off lost to history 😆

But let me summarize my thoughts: your mother, and presumably you, eat a lot more meat than the average person. The 10% of human foods that aren't plant-based and can't easily be made plant-based are overrepresented in your meat heavy diet.

And meat heavy diets are bad for your personal health and for the health of the planet, for reasons we both know very well.

Which is to say: you are universalizing your personal experiences. It's not difficult to go vegan. It's difficult for you to go vegan, because your diet and lifestyle are so heavily focused on animal products. That's not an indictment of veganism; it's an indictment of the Western diet, and big agriculture, and capitalist food science that studied what flavors and textures trigger dopamine release so they could pack food with them and sell more product, and the whole vicious capitalist PR mechanism that convinced Westerners to eat a meat heavy, highly processed, unhealthy diet and convinced Western governments to subsidize it. And, to a much lesser extent, it is an indictment of your personal choices.

It's difficult for you to go vegan. But that's not on veganism. That's on you.

view more: next ›