I escaped the Reddit regime a little while ago. I consider myself a marxist-leninist-MZT. Vegetarian and vegan for a few years. I've a lot of thoughts on how marxism and veganism are connected. Never wrote them down. I'd like to start smth like a club for marxist vegans to develop our own proletarian theory. Most vegan theory I found is either openly bourgeois (Francione is a literal TERF) or revisionist (anti-China, anarchist, libertarian). How about fixing this?
I don't have any stance in the first place, that's what I meant, I'm just eating like 99% humans at any point at history.
Bruh I don't eat diets ''under capitalistic companies'', don't eat fast food and the like, I eat food brought fresh straight from the village.
You're acting like you accomplished some huge goal worth of every praise like getting sober or stopping using drugs or lost a lot of weight, when all you did is literally just change diet and try to force other people into it.
A chicken raised by grandparents on yard in village is more environmentally friendly food source than a plants imported from across the country or from abroad.
You're actually not, though! Historically, humans were hunter gatherers with a diet fairly different from yours, I would bet. Think about what you would be eating if you needed to forage between the Euphrates and Tigris some handful of thousands of years ago before widespread agriculture. And then consider that humans were out there doing human things for hundreds of thousands of years before that. They weren't eating storebought nitrogenated steaks from generations-bred, cornfed cows! Domesticated cattle did not even exist. There were Aurochs.
That is not a quote of anything I said. I'm saying that we live in capitalist societies with industrialized agriculture and our foods have been highly modified by humans. How do you define a natural diet? Does it include twinkies? Sweet corn? Winter Wheat? What does it really mean to call a diet natural or not?
Actually, I said it was easy for me. That is the opposite of what you are saying I said.
How am I trying to force other people into it?
That depends on how it is fed. If you ever provide it with feed, this statement is probably false. And the vast, vast majority of chickens are given feed.
Is every chicken you eat a backyard chicken not prpvided with feed?
I do, we just don't have to hunt for a long time now that we have livestock, I'm eating as 99% of humans in a sense that I'm a omnivore, which is natural for human beings and other apes.
Natural as in I don't eat junk from McDonalds and other capitalistic companies, I eat stuff brought straight from the villages.
You literally are(you are currently doing it) by going and moralizing, guilt tripping and annoying about this stuff, go and attack companies, poachers, animal traders and people who endanger near extinct species if you want to do something truly noble and leave normal people alone.
Guess what, it isn't, they don't provide it with it. Most are explicitly against it.
But you're also not eating like 99% of human history in the sense that your diet is very different. It took humanity thousands of years across myriad cultures to generate the foods we take for granted. This is something that often goes unappreciated about past and current cultures, as some of the most amazing technologies are plants like corn, potatoes, wheat, soybean, lentils, etc, not just electricity or guns. There are also many such technologies that are not widely known or have even vanished, which is cultivation without planned plots or inputs, just taking care of the environment threw stewardship of existing plants and lands, like the ubiquitous technology of controlled burns. This made food that would not go to market, but sustained societies.
So, why would eating like 99% of history be the thing to do in one way but not the other?
Like whole foods, that kind of thing. That's good! But don't forget that villages are highly advanced and use agricultural technology developed over thousands of years, right down to the food itself.
I haven't moralized once. I suggested a materialist analysis of the phenomenon of modern veganism, which is basically the opposite of that.
I have not guilt tripped.
Can you tell me what I've done that's annoying?
I suggested a material analysis of modern veganism as tied to capitalism and imperialism. We are currently discussing things that you have brought up, not me.
I don't know what you mean by this. Can you explain? Thank you!
Bruh, it's just eating livestock, not that complicated or deep, people eat both plants and meat as we're omnivores, that's the point.
Tree log, chicken, axe and cooking isn't advanced technology.
Ughh, I'm pretty sure that not using the time for something better and instead bothering other people about what they or should eat because you dislike the fact that humans are omnivores is the annoying part.
I think that a villager keeping chicken and other livestock, eating eggs and drinking milk doesn't constitute as imperialism unless I missed that part in Highest Stage of Capitalism.
They don't feed chickens with that, most are against it.
If the only point is that people do consume animal products and have in the past, then nobody argues with that. I assumed this was connected to what is "natural" and why you think it is right to do, which is also not something I have asked or suggested. I haven't told you what you should or shouldn't do in this thread, but I am pointing out that "we are omnivores" is not a coherent argument re: the appeal to what is "natural". You don't actually need to justify yourself, as again, I am suggesting a material analysis, but since you brought this up without reompting I figured you would be interested in discussing it.
Axes are pretty advanced and are not the historical traditional tool for killing animals for food. Those would be the spear and traps. The domestication of chickens is fairly advanced, as they have been selectively bred for domestication from an ancestor in Southeast Asia.
Like I said, I haven't told you what to eat. So I am not doing the thing you find annoying, I guess.
Of course not. Who said it did?
That's good.
You're literally becoming incoherent at this point at discussing the way to execute and cook a chicken. There is no material analysis needed on how mother nature designed the species called homosapiens which are biologically omnivores and the fact that they eat meat. The material analysis should be for capitalist food companies, poachers, animal traders.
You did.
You said analysis tied to capitalism and imperialism, I don't see any imperialism in basic biology and villagers working hard to get us meat, eggs and milk.