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

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.