Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)MR
Posts
0
Comments
321
Joined
1 yr. ago

  • It's not possible to produce the amount of meat needed to feed our massive population while treating animals humanely.

    There are really two options to deal with this:

    1. Most humans in the world become vegan -- sounds great but it's not gonna happen
    2. Reduce our population to sustainable numbers (by eliminating the driver of the population explosion, i.e. fossil energy) -- maybe also not gonna happen

    Edit: What (do I think) will happen? We'll continue as we are now as hundreds of billions of animals are tortured until our civilization collapses. This will happen because we were all brought up under a state and told that defending ourselves, our communities, our animals, is wrong and illegal.

  • These problems are not all the fault of either the producers or consumers, we're both part of a fucked up cycle within an exploitative economic system and influence each other.

    It doesn't make any more sense for the consumer to wash their hands of all blame and consume without concern and push all the blame on the producer than it does to say it's all about our "carbon footprint".

  • rule

    Jump
  • Without ambition and drive people would still be living in caves.

    And we'd have a planet to live on indefinitely rather than letting a few thousand rich people destroy our world causing massive suffering. But really, there's a world between living in caves with zero progress and letting capitalists destroy our world while we praise them, I'm not suggesting we live in caves, I'm suggesting we don't let ambitious assholes kill us all while blaming us for the problems they create.

    I don’t need some jabbering moron with an agenda to tell me how I should feel about things I can observe with my own eyes.

    And you don't have an agenda of driving civilization in the direction you want? Are you that blind to your own behavior? You're engaging in a conversation about it and pushing a point, that's an agenda.

    It’s always a situation where the few are carrying the many

    That's very likely due to different people having different tolerance for exploitation. Just because you don't mind being exploited try to be a good boot licker doesn't mean others are bad because they don't want to be exploited. Maybe in a different situation you'd be viewed as the lazy one. It's not selfish to not work harder for another's gain.

  • I think that would cause a different confusion. I don't know that this is a concept that can be expressed in a single existing word. Sometimes concepts take time before the right word arises. No sense blaming people for using the language available to them to express a novel idea.

  • Anti-work is anti-exploitation.

    It's not about people wanting to be lazy yet still have all the niceties, it's about not being coerced into a lifetime of labor to enrich the ones coercing you. A person's labor should enrich themselves and those they choose.

  • rule

    Jump
  • I say ambition, drive, greed, etc are personality issues that cause harm to others and the environment.

    While I'm sure there are a few individuals that would rather sit and die than go get some food, this is not something to actually be concerned with. You watch too much right wing TV telling you there's a whole class of people that just want to take from you, but what's actually happening is that this group is being stolen from and what you see as laziness is often just an unwillingness to facilitate being stolen from.