Posted on 09/07/2010 4:19:32 PM PDT by nickcarraway
The ethical case against eating animal produce once seemed clear. But a new book is an abattoir for dodgy arguments
This will not be an easy column to write. I am about to put down 1,200 words in support of a book that starts by attacking me and often returns to this sport. But it has persuaded me that I was wrong. More to the point, it has opened my eyes to some fascinating complexities in what seemed to be a black and white case.
In the Guardian in 2002 I discussed the sharp rise in the number of the world's livestock, and the connection between their consumption of grain and human malnutrition. After reviewing the figures, I concluded that veganism "is the only ethical response to what is arguably the world's most urgent social justice issue". I still believe that the diversion of ever wider tracts of arable land from feeding people to feeding livestock is iniquitous and grotesque. So does the book I'm about to discuss. I no longer believe that the only ethical response is to stop eating meat.
In Meat: A Benign Extravagance, Simon Fairlie pays handsome tribute to vegans for opening up the debate. He then subjects their case to the first treatment I've read that is both objective and forensic. His book is an abattoir for misleading claims and dodgy figures, on both sides of the argument.
There's no doubt that the livestock system has gone horribly wrong. Fairlie describes the feedlot beef industry (in which animals are kept in pens) in the US as "one of the biggest ecological cock-ups in modern history". It pumps grain and forage from irrigated pastures into the farm animal species least able to process them efficiently, to produce beef fatty enough for hamburger production.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Keep in mind this guy is the reason that the term “Moonbat” (as in “Moonbat Monbiot”) is used to describe far left eco-wackos.
It a better time, these sorts of intellectuals would just stop writing, shut up, and go away.
LET ME? LET ME? How about I let the next veg-head lib-twat I see keep their teeth!?!
I find this a rather well reasoned mea culpa article from a guy who is predisposed to be a liberal moonbat. I’ve got to give him credit for writing it, given his general biases.
Kudos to him for admitting he was wrong.
I’d still argue with the basic premise of these guys though (ie. “how can we possibly produce enough food!?”).
There is simply no connection between starvation anywhere on the planet and our global ability to produce food.
Frankly, we’re generally awash in it.
The problem is money. Of course money comes from development and productivity, and therefore must be banned.
That “ecological cock-up” of feedlots are a direct result of federal regulation in the name of food and worker safety (unions again). Because of the hard work of federal regulators at the USDA we have neither.
You want quality meat produced and processed locally... get rid of the USDA. The government IS the problem.
That “ecological cock-up” of feedlots are a direct result of federal regulation in the name of food and worker safety (unions again). Because of the hard work of federal regulators at the USDA we have neither.
You want quality meat produced and processed locally... get rid of the USDA. The government IS the problem.
Of course I had to fight the constant desire to scratch SUVs with my keys and cry at rainbows but I it actually changed the way I look at how I eat.
*nod* — One big problem is that the Government “thinks” in terms of extremes: people in NYC have too much salt in their diets[!], well ban salt from restraunts.
Government regulators think in terms of their own comfort and workload. Much easier to regulate large systems into monotonous sameness.
Having to deal with thousands of Mom and Pop producers and processors, not so much. They might have to get out of their chair and put muck boots on.
Which is kinda my point, albeit looked at from the inside rather than an outside vintage point.
Didn’t the founder and longtime editor of Vegetarian Times magazine call a press conference a while back to announce that he was no longer a vegetarian? The veggie fascists went nuts over his heresy and savaged the poor schnook.
I am often amazed at those who can go vegan for the right reasons. Everyone’s body is different, though. I know no one wants to pay for my therapy or the damage when I go on a murder spree, because I did not get enough protein. Eggs and beans don’t do enough.
I love animals. They’re delicious.
I went on a meat and veggie diet (70% meat 30% veggies and fruit)and lost 70 pounds over the last 3 years. My BP is at 120/70, my cholesterol is at 130, my tryglicerides are at 135. I have sustained my weight for over a year. I eat LOTS of lean meat EVERY DAY. Eggs (3 a day) for breakfast, lean RED meat for lunch and dinner, occasional fish and chicken, too.
I avoid breads, pasta, potatoes, rice, corn, and other starchy foods.
Try no meat at all if you have the cajones!
Did you really go vegan or was it vegetarian?
We now have settled into mostly veggie and cheat with salmon chicken and tuna.
Im fortunate in that my wife is a great athlete and eats healthy and a great cook no matter what the meal thank God.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.