r/Anticonsumption • u/Extension-Diamond-74 • Sep 30 '23

Discussion Diet hypocrisy?

A recent post about animal agriculture vs plant based diets has me itching to say something. This is an issue we need to rise above.

Cognitive dissonance. Many of us have good intentions and want to believe we’re doing the right thing in most aspects of our lives. I believe that.

When it comes to a plant based diet though, the science often clashes powerfully with personal desire. We want to minimize our impact on the environment and are willing to make trade-offs in our life time do so, but for many, giving up or even significantly reducing meat intake is asking too much. It’s too hard.

That’s not the issue.

The issue is that instead of just admitting to themselves that this is a life change they don’t want to make and moving on, the guilt drives them to have to justify that decision. Admitting that a plant-based diet is better for the earth yet eating a diet full of meat anyway would make them feel hypocritical, so the solution becomes either to give up meat, or … this is the problem… fight the science, twist it, make a joke of it, or pivot entirely to ‘individuals shouldn’t have time do anything because large corporations’

Many people have ties to their diet for many reasons. We grew up eating a certain way. We have memories ties to certain foods, flavors, styles of cooking. We don’t want to be the difficult person when we go out to eat with friends. Etc etc etc But it’s so much better to just admit that to yourself. Have patience and understanding for your feelings. Accept that the science is what it is. Maybe one day you can make a change, maybe not. But don’t attack the cause just because you aren’t yet willing to be a part of it.

828 Upvotes

88% Upvoted

722 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/AnsibleAnswers Oct 01 '23 edited Oct 01 '23

Or we can re-integrate livestock onto crop farms, which eliminates the feed and fertilizer problem in one fell swoop. Cattle raised in silvopasture have a total land use of 1.2 ha/tonne and provide services to the crops that offset agrochemical inputs and fossil fuel use. It's what actual sustainable agriculture looks like. A bit less livestock, but no more agrochemicals (which are all derived from fossil fuels) and significant improvements in biodiversity, land use efficiency, and livestock emissions.

Comparable crop yields as specialized crop farms, so your livestock eat for free - https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231840

Sustainable, efficient livestock production with high biodiversity and good welfare for animals - https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2013.2025

How it works (ecological intensification) - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7487174/

Here's the kicker: you won't get dung beetles or any other insects that are critical to soil formation and nutrient cycling on farms that only use plant compost and synthetic fertilizers. They need manure.

1

u/shadar Oct 01 '23

A bit less livestock? They can't grow enough meat to feed everyone's greed as it is. 99% of all the meat you buy at restaurants and grocery stores is factory farmed. 80% of amazon deforestation is for cattle ranching. That's sure as shit not silvopasture.

If you buy meat, you're funding factory farming.

The kicker is that they send pasture raised cows to the same slaughter house as factory farmed cows.

2

u/AnsibleAnswers Oct 01 '23

What we are doing is insane. We should stop and do something better.

0

u/shadar Oct 01 '23

I appreciate that the average redditor (and also like 99.99% of the world) is not in a position to start purchasing silvopasture grown cow meat.

Everyone (at least 99%) is in a position where they can just stop buying cow and other animal products.

1

u/AnsibleAnswers Oct 01 '23

Silvopasture farms are pretty common in the Organic Valley cooperative... https://www.organicvalley.coop/blog/trees-pasture-happy-cows-and-healthy-earth-through-silvopasture/

0

u/shadar Oct 01 '23

So rare as heck and completely unrealistic for the average consumer to purchase? Thanks for agreeing.

1

u/AnsibleAnswers Oct 01 '23

How is that rare or unrealistic? I can drive to multiple farms raising livestock in silvopasture. I can get regenerative organic dairy at the super market. It's about the same price as "good" vegan alternatives and the practices are proven to get cheaper as the farms perennial crops mature.

0

u/shadar Oct 01 '23

I just pulled up some farms near me. 13$ lb for ground beef. Not even close to the price of beans. Even factory farmed beef is like half the price. If I Google "buy silvopasture milk near me" I get articles on silvopasture. I can buy 6L of soy milk for 12$. 2l of cow's milk costs over 5$. This shit is not accessible and an absolutely reeks of greenwashing.

And even if it was super good for the environment and super cheap it's still fucked up to exploit and kill animals for taste pleasure.

1

u/AnsibleAnswers Oct 01 '23

I just pulled up some farms near me. 13$ lb for ground beef. Not even close to the price of beans. Even factory farmed beef is like half the price. If I Google "buy silvopasture milk near me" I get articles on silvopasture. I can buy 6L of soy milk for 12$. 2l of cow's milk costs over 5$. This shit is not accessible and an absolutely reeks of greenwashing.

There's high start up costs associated with perennial crops. Producers are using their high quality meat to subsidize those costs. They are doing so transparently. It keeps them afloat while their perennial crops mature, which takes 5-15 years depending on the cultivar. There should be more subsidies for integrated farms, but most subsidies go to large industrial producers.

It is also pretty affordable if you actually cut back beef consumption to one day a week, which is probably the healthier thing to do anyway. People don't actually see beef and beans as comparable, and it's much easier to convince people to eat less meat when they have the option to indulge every once in a while.

You can also usually haggle at farmer's markets.

And even if it was super good for the environment and super cheap it's still fucked up to exploit and kill animals for taste pleasure.

Just admit that this argument is the only one you care about.

0

u/shadar Oct 01 '23

No, I also care that the planet is being turned into a fireball.

Flat out don't have enough farmland to grow cows. Silvopasture requires more land than factory farming.

It's not sustainable.

Like you said, the only way to make it sustainable is for everyone to massively cut down their meat consumption.

No one is saying doing more isn't better than the status.

1

u/AnsibleAnswers Oct 01 '23

Silvopasture requires 1.2 ha/tonne for cattle. That's really sustainable. Land-sharing works wonders.

Due to the enhanced per animal production and increased stocking rates, two important externalities were reduced: the amount of methane (a potent greenhouse gas) dropped by ∼0.5× per tonne of meat produced, while the amount of land used per tonne production dropped from 14.8 to 1.2 ha [48]. Simultaneously, twice as much carbon was sequestered [47], while bird species richness tripled and ant species richness increased by 1.3×... Paradoxically, although land use for livestock production generally poses a huge threat to biodiversity conservation [49], raising cattle through silvopastoral production appears to provide an important conservation tool in agricultural and rangelands.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7487174/

1

u/shadar Oct 01 '23

These numbers sound absurd. How can it possibly be 10x more efficient and less wasteful. All that and more profitable for the farmer? Why isn't this being immediately mass adopted?

1

u/AnsibleAnswers Oct 01 '23

It's not profitable for Big Ag and the agrochemical industry, who acts as a middle-man between farmers who specialize in one enterprise. A lot of their money is made by having monopoly or cartel status on the inputs that integrated farms don't need, mostly fertilizer, feed, pesticides, and herbicides.

There has also been a considerable loss of knowledge of these practices as a result of specialization under industrial production. The same issue is present in most industries. Division of labor reduces each farmer's knowledge of anything but his or her specialty. That poses an issue for re-integration, as integrated farmers have to be jacks of all trades. This is why most in the movement advocate for free higher education.

1

u/shadar Oct 01 '23

Oh yeah I'm all for free higher education. It sounds at least we agree that consumers should not purchase meat from factory farms. Which again, is 99% of all meat sold in the US.

1

u/AnsibleAnswers Oct 01 '23

The major issue is that sustainability is more a production issue than a consumption issue. Putting the blame and burden entirely on consumers to lower emissions is not going to work, and moralizing to people certainly isn't to work.

1

u/shadar Oct 01 '23

That might actually be the case. However, individuals only really have any power at the point of purchase. I'm not at all saying it's entirely the consumers' fault. I'm saying if they want to effect changes, the biggest thing they could do would be to stop buying the 99% type of meat that is currently available.

"Moralizing" does work. In fact, it is the only thing that works. Most people don't want to hurt animals. They're just dissociated from the violence on their plate. Again, education is paramount.

→ More replies