Maybe this should be elementary: no, there are no right-wing vegans. But at least Lifting Vegan Logic has said that he is neither left, or right. Usually I would say it means he is right-wing, so I am wrong?
They are definitely a thing but it's always for weird pseudoscientific health reasons. It's a diet fad, basically.
I know a republican vegan. Started as a health thing but adopted more traditional reasons the further into it they got.
The real question should be is why aren’t more leftists automatically vegan?
Except that animals take up a lot of space for themselves and their food. And additionally animals give co2 and other harmful games into the air. So big difference between farming plants and farming animals.
Just say you can not be arsed to be a vegan, even though you know you should.
But that's not really how it works in practice, is it? We don't limit meat production to what can be produced as a byproduct of ecological management, or scavaged after an animal's natural death. The material conditions that actually exists are that there is a massive industry that's exploitative of humans and animals alike, and it's causing tons of needless cruelty and wanton ecological damage in order to provide people with meat.
Even if you limited yourself to only eating meat produced in the ways that you described (plenty of people will deploy this argument and then make no attempt to actually live up to the standards they put forth, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt), would it not be better to sell the meat produced this way, so that some other carnist will eat that rather than meat produced from a factory farm?
This is an idealist argument. Just because you can engineer some hypothetical situation where eating meat doesn't cause harm doesn't mean that that hypothetical is relevant to the vast majority of cases that actually exist.
I judge people of the ideaology that is anti-human and thus not vegan.
I know them. They're a minority, but I know them. Some people focus on the spiritual and avoid the material. When non-vegan leftists argue that veganism is a right-wing issue, there are heaps of statistical evidence that we can use to refute it. Also this. And this.
You are right! Sorry I said otherwise, I read wrong, because I'm drunk!
Maybe I'm ignorant, but I don't see how veganism is necessarily left-wing?
It is not necessarily left-wing, but vegans usually want to disassemble hierarchies (like left-wingers), which of the meat industry is one of the worst examples today.
There are plenty of right wingers who eat a vegan diet, but I would say it's impossible to be right wing and and support animal liberation. You can't abolish the exploitation of non-human animals without getting rid of capitalism.
You could be against speciesism but not classism or racism. It’s weird but theoretically could be. The thing I find more ridiculous are “leftist” non-vegans
Yea, leftist carnivores, probably indicate a strain of materialism, consumerism and affectation in their personality/values.
A right leaning vegan or animal rights person may just be a bit of a misanthrope, which I can relate to.
I would argue being anti-human disqualifies you from veganism as it is inherently speciesist.
Yes, but right wing people usually have "cognitive dissonance" so they don't have a coherent logic for their life. And I'm not talking about "knowing you should be vegan but too lazy/self-indulgent to do so", I'm talking about examples like:
- "I'm vegan cuz it's the right thing, and it's also the right thing for people with inferior genes to live in poverty and work for me"
But there's also examples of:
-
"I'm vegan not only cuz I love my golden retriever but also because it's healthier so I get to live longer and with more energy which is exactly what (((they))) don't want"
-
"I'm vegan cuz that gets me a personality and it's an elitist fad so it increases my chances to fuck hot rich people"
Cognitive dissonance, or however is called when you never even try to make two ideas bump into each other inside your head yet hold both of them as truths
cc @Salmarez@hexbear.net Yeah, like someone else hinted at, they might become a vegetarian or vegan for other reasons, like health reasons or even spirituality or pseudo-sciences. Then they might find other vegans who expose them to the reality of animal cruelty, which compels them to become legitimate vegans motivated by the same ideas as other vegans. So long as they don't connect the that with understanding how human hierarchies tend to cause egregious and unnecessary human suffering (and add to that the violent reputation of anti-capitalists in the media, which seems like causing direct suffering) then I wouldn't be that surprised to see anti-leftist vegans.
What is your basis of assuming there are (for any definition of 'right-wing') 'no right-wing vegans'? It seems like a baseless assertion. Adolf Hitler infamously identified as a vegetarian and tried to dissuade others from eating meat due to animal suffering (according to witnesses).[wiki]
- 'Right-wing' is extremely vague and doesn't imply an attitude towards animal wellbeing or environmental concerns (see: eco-fascism)
- 'Right-wing' doesn't even imply any (conscious!) attitude towards human suffering. It's very common for them to legitimately think they're doing the right thing and reducing suffering in the world, despite obvious counter-evidence (if they sincerely believe the mainstream US narrative that socialism will cause mass starvation and mass murderous government repression and genocide, then opposing it would seem morally better than the status quo). But, even if it did imply they were fine with human suffering, it could be seen by them as deserved (like a vengeance thing, or like anti-parasitism like squashing mosquitoes) as opposed to animal suffering for commercial production.
Despite all this: people hold inconsistent views and values all the time. This isn't rare or anything. It's actually extremely normal. I wouldn't even call it cognitive dissonance, it's standard neurological behaviour.
But at least Lifting Vegan Logic has said that he is neither left, or right. Usually I would say it means he is right-wing, so I am wrong?
The ideas of 'left' and 'right' are basically meaningless. They are inherently relative and vaguely defined to the point they can mean anything. Chances are, if they're being sincere, they don't consider themselves political and therefore believe that makes them neutral. Most of us would obviously disagree.
Good point, the premise of my OP is rather narrow-minded and self-congratulatory to leftists. One of the many pitfalls of drunk posting...
It's alright, everyone drunkposts sometimes.
Then wakes up to crit + hangover
