Does being vegan actually save animals or does it just not support the slaughtering? Do the animals still get slaughtered anyway?
Side note - It took me a while to figure out why this “you save x animals per year” dogma is so persistent even though, in my opinion, it’s somewhere between misleading and just plain wrong (except in case of fish, see above), but I think I've got it now:
1. The "save animals" vegan activism creates a more positive and emotionally pleasing argument, which may be more effective advocacy: telling people to do a good thing rather than to stop doing a bad thing (although it does risk meat eating defenders finding the flaws in the argument).
2. Simplicity. The alternative way I've described it in my previous post is somewhat complicated and awkward to express.
3. The "saving animals" argument is suited to the deontological ideology, whereas the "going vegan actually benefits humans and wild animals but doesn’t benefit farm animals" is probably more correct but is more of a utilitarian argument and, since vegans are mostly not utilitarian (in my opinion), they don't naturally tend towards this kind of thinking or find it pleasing.
Oh good Lord Jaime. Not again.
It's not just because it's "emotionally pleasing." You are correct to point out decreasing meat demand simply eliminates the domesticated animals being bred into existence, but veganism also encompasses stopping animal testing, banning wearing of fur (as we have in California), and seeks to create activists who literally rescue animals by sending agricultural animals to sanctuaries, or who join movements like Direct Action Everywhere, or Animal Liberation Front. Public demonstrations like National Animal Rights Day (which I've joined) and PETA antics really do save animals by changing public attitudes and laws. PETA got Barnum and Bailey Circus shut down after years of persistence.
Your murmurings to yourself about deontological vegans seems to be some sort of pet theory you have that is extremely overgeneralized.
The truth is that going vegan offers no benefit for the animals whatsoever unless you think their life is so awful that it would be better not to be born - which in the case of some animals, notably factory farmed chickens and maybe pigs, may actually be true.
In all my decades of omnivor-ism not a single PETA video or advertisement ever did anything to sway me towards not eating dead animals/their secretions. Neither any other animal rights group or individual. While it is true I was nudged into trying it by a speech by a single individual (Gary Yourofsky) - I wouldn't have even listened or been swayed by him if I hadn't already experienced certain life issues and done some investigation that
was not in the least related to PETA ads or animal rights groups activism.
I am sure I am not alone in this, and asking everyone to be an activist (by how you define it - protesting, joining groups, etc) in "being vegan" doesn't
convince outsiders (and many insiders) to even try going vegan(or stay one if they already are). Most people have a huge issue just dumping the animal products, much less jump on the activism train - not to mention that many wouldn't even be good at it.
The South African philosopher David Benatar, who is a vegan and antinatalist, believes that the lives of all sentient beings are so awful that it would have been better for them to have never been born, even if they don't know it due to a bias toward optimism. He has said that it will be good when all sentient species have gone extinct because then and only then will suffering end.
I agree with him, but I believe it is much more true of domesticated animals than anyone else. Of all the life forms on the planet today, none are worse off than domesticated animals and I see boycotting animal products and retail pets as saving non-existent animals from coming into existence. Additionally, by not procreating myself, I save humans from the horrors of existence and all the horrors those humans would inflict on others, the environment and animals throughout their lives, if they were to come into existence.
Inmates of my pro-extinction prison:
- The CEOs of Exxon Mobil and BP oil
- **** Cheney
- The executive staff of Tyson Foods
- Trump and Sons
- Assorted trophy hunters
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this philosopher, but we've got enough negligence on this planet by selfish Westerners to begin with, without Hitler Reincarnated influencing others philosophically to actually destroy the planet faster. That's the "hasten Armageddon" mentality of some evangelical cults. That's why they keep voting for fossil fuels when it otherwise doesn't profit them in any way. I actually learned about these psychos in a class called Environmental Conflict Resolution. I'm picturing this South African guy clubbing baby seals and dumping oil into the ocean while he eats tofu. How is wanting to kill everything vegan.
He has said when all life in the universe has gone extinct, like maybe near the end of the universes' life, that will be good, because with sentient life, the bad always outweighs the good, and this is something we are not aware of due to a bias toward optimism.
For example, a young couple planning a family does not consider the last 10 years of their future childrens' lives, which could be long slow declines filled with suffering and illness; they do not consider the suffering that the lives of their children will cause to wild animals due to their consuming resources and polluting the environment, or the suffering farm animals will endure due to their eating them, or to any of the other types of suffering that will occur. They only think of happy stuff because of the bias toward optimism, which is an evolved coping mechanism of of our brains.
I still strongly disagree and suspect this person of suffering from clinical depression...at best. His words are pointless, nihilistic, and frankly irresponsible in the middle of the sixth mass extinction.
I can agree that it's better to never be born rather than to be force bred into a life of torture on a factory farm, but I will not in any intelligent capacity align with someone arrogant enough to deem themselves a "philosopher" for spouting some psychologically disturbed, intellectually lazy garbage like "when everything dies it will be great because there will be no more suffering." There also won't be any happiness. Or thinking. These are the thoughts of a person who is about to commit murder suicide, not the words of a serious scholarly academic.
Right, because you didn't become vegan at first, you went plant based for health (which is fine, you're still not eating animals) and that's why you like to argue about being more lenient with the term "vegan." The OP is vegan for the animals. The OP is actually vegan.
I'm okay with the fact that animals suffer. What bothers me is inflicting that suffering upon them needlessly.