Basman

This battle took place in West Papua in 1964. It's part of the movie Dead Birds by Robert Gardner, which is about the Hubula people in Niew Guinea (now Indonesia). This kind of fighting was already outdated back in the Mesopotamia days of the Sumerian civilization, 4000-6000 years ago. It doesn't get any more primitive than this. Literally just sticks and stones. It's so inefficient that the actual battle is mostly just a bunch of chest beating and hollering and Westerners can calmly record the whole affair from a safe distance. They can hardly wound each other. It is also surprisingly formal, with agreed upon breaks during the battle and when and where it should take place. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JI4uirwxx1Y (The video can't be embedded because YT is a skunk)

This implies a binary of either you care about animals or you don't. It's a false dichotomy. You could care about general animal well-being but not see them as equivalent to humans, not adopting the utilitarian framing all together. You could love animals and raise them for meat on a farm, for example. This is how many farmers operate. You could care about dogs and cats but not so much for cows and pigs. This is how many suburban folk operate. It's a pretty big jump in logic if you think about it. Why does it follow that caring about animals then means that they are entitled to the same rights as humans? This is wrong. The best way is to commit seppuku and seize to exist. The best thing for ecology would be for humanity to go completely extinct over night. It is an inherent contradiction within an ideology that is all about self-denial for the sake of preservation to draw the line anywhere. Any line will necessarily be partial and reductive.

Yeah, Amsterdam is quiet dense. It's always crowded, especially in the summer. Many of the roads where built for horse carriages. It's quaint and lively. You are mostly sheltered from the strong winds that tend to blow in NL inside the city as well, which matters when you cycle about, trust me. I spoke mostly Dutch but that is because I know Dutch. You can get around speaking English just fine though but certain government websites will be in Dutch I believe (can't remember exactly) but that could have been changed since. The Dutch are very accommodating lingually and don't mind speaking English for you. Fun fact, Dutch pronounce their "O's" with a lower pitch like how you would pronounce the word "oh". You can check if someone has a Dutch accent by making them say "bottle" and they should pronounce it like "b-oh-ttehl".

This whole conflict was a mess from the very start.

You can eat meat for more reasons than just pleasure. This kind of framing is quiet reductive and antagonizing and reflects the broader misanthropy of veganism, as being omnivores is part of our natural biology and culture. You could for example care about animal welfare and still eat meat with the distinction that you don't see animals as equivalent to humans. You have to be ideologically inclined to at all consider veganism as it hinges on egalitarianism, which is inherently a tall order when speaking in generals, like what is healthy and right for people. I think there's a certain degree of entitlement to these vegan debates when it turns into "being right" metaphysically as a vegan. You could just disagree. You could also point out veganism still relies on destroying plant life in order to live. Arguably, to be truly vegan you have to photosynthesize.

I lived with my dad so 0- but I did pay for my own insurance and food. I lived in centrum by the way, but I wouldn't do that again if I where to move back. It's too busy with way too many tourists.

@MarkKol It's easier to own a car if you live in the suburbs. North Amsterdam is a small suburban ethnic paradise very close to the city center but split by the river. You can take the free ferry across an be down town in about 20 minutes but still have more space for cars and probably cheaper rent.

I have lived in Amsterdam for a couple of years. I'd generally recommend not to live in the city center as it is more expensive and less accommodating for your apparent car needs. There are too many tourists too. Amsterdam is actually not that big so you could easily cycle/take the tram into town fairly quickly and easily. The Netherlands is quiet flat overall and easy to get around with the best road infrastructure in the world. You can just cycle from the city to the coast in about 1.5-2 hours. In that time, you can reach most places in the country with the car. Public transport is expensive but you can get around fine with just a bike in my experience. Another thing is that it is mandatory to pay for health insurance in NL. The cheapest available are about 80-100 euro per month when I lived there but it might have risen since COVID. If you have specific health needs you'll probably have to pay more in insurance.

One's diet is more than just about health for the majority of people. Since a vegan diet sacrifices so much convenience, culture and taste and is primarily driven by intrinsic values, it is unlikely for many people to go vegan when an omnivorous diet is sufficiently healthy. Especially if they don't share the egalitarian values of vegans. You could argue that people are actually vegan because they don't actually like the prospect of animals getting hurt but it's quiet normal for people to hold contradictory views. Everyone agrees on paying taxes, especially taxing rich people, but nobody actually likes to pay taxes and they celebrate when they get a tax refund from the state once a year. People might not like animals getting hurt but they are content not thinking about it as they buy another frozen pizza. They like animals but they like hot dogs more.

The need to breed. Unlike a bunch of women I know, there's zero sexual tension between me and a horse.

Your probably not actually on a "higher level". Only maybe comparatively in a relative sense but you probably haven't studied psychology and epistemology sufficiently to understand how lower perspectives work. Everyone overestimates their level of development, maturity, intellect, etc.

I'd recommend you just get a tattoo artist to tattoo you instead. Not only will they give you exactly what you want, it will be hygienic and safe. You don't want to risk getting a gnarly skin infection. You can still draw your own design.

Isn't that mad expensive though? Also, two of your steaks are green dude.

Maybe your conflating faith with confidence a bit (which I define as surviving failure). You don't need to have confidence to have faith, but I digress. In my personal experience, having a very clear picture of what you want and moving towards your goals is essentially what life is all about. Once you have clear and strong goals, it should be simple. It's important to have faith in yourself if nothing else, I'd say. Perhaps just in your ability to handle what life throws at you. If you fall down you just get up.

It's not even a question that excluding animal products is more nutritionally challenging from a purely health perspective, but the point of veganism isn't health first and foremost but taking a moral stance. If health was the first priority then including animal products in your diet is a no brainer. They are highly effective, assuming you make healthy choices.

Look forward to the fakest ever, most sugary and salty Mcnuggets that are 3D printed to look like a minion or whatever kids movie character that is out. Your kids will cry if you don't get them the Spider-man nuggets with strawberry flavor. Lab meat is really the final frontier of junk food.

It's an inter-generational process of problem solving which distinguishes humans from other animals. Since we are capable of expressing complex ideas with a high degree of accuracy (plus being intelligent) we can effectively iterate on past ideas, discoveries and invention as opposed to having to start from scratch every generation such that we have a timeline of technology progressing. Eventually technological progression becomes exponential as certain discoveries are made that are highly malleable and applicable like electricity or plastics and our knowledge accumulates. Society has also changed from subsistence to industrial to a service based economy, which incentivizes innovative solutions for increasingly complex issues. We've largely solved hunger for instance with modern farming techniques and logistics. You could argue that cultural concepts is also a form of technology as our ability to create abstractions and draw distinctions in reality allow us to form new ideas of how to interact with the world. For instance, capitalism could be considered a technology that defines an environment where technological innovation is not only incentivized but institutionalized. Another crucial social technology is the concept of science, which is all about reproducing outcomes and iterating on one's understanding of the material world. To illustrate a timeline of innovation, imagine a Stone Age human having the intuitive inclination that beating some small animal with a stick was effective. What if they then somehow made the stick pointy such that it could stab an animal? Now you have a very primitive spear, a literal pointy stick. Eventually, they figure out, "what if we tie a sharp rock (flint) to the end of our spears so they're sharper and sturdier?" Now they've innovated on the base idea of a spear. After gaining experience from use and getting an inclination of how to further improve the concept they start adding serrations to the tip and improving how the tip is attached to the stick. They figure out what wood makes the best shafts, etc. Since they ended up spending a lot of time throwing their spears since it gave them a lot of extra range, they eventually figure out that they can launch spears using a bigger J-shaped stick like a sling. Eventually, they figure out to make a small hole in the base of their spears to improve on that concept. Now they have javelins, an actual ranged weapon. This timeline could take generations but since the accumulated knowledge is passed on each time, it allows successive generations to iterate on an idea without having to start from scratch. They already know what rocks to use to make spearheads or what wood makes the best shafts, or how a javelin works. They can now use that knowledge to for example make a miniature javelin which ends up being the bow and arrow for even greater range and accuracy.

Drumming up controversy is a marketing strat of Kanye. He always does something crazy to drum up attention right before an album drop, like announcing he's running for president or interrupting that award ceremony. He's also just a contrarian, plus he's mentally ill (bipolar).

In Scandinavia we have something called "first time service" (førstegangstjeneste) which is a limited contract of about a year. Basic training + a couple of months of duty. It's a good way to get some experience. I think an equivalent of that sounds like it would suit your situation more as you don't sound like you are specifically interested in a military career long-term. Once the year is over you could apply for a career in the military or move on.

I don't think it's likely that we'll ever get a fully vegan society since there will still be people running their own farms, fishing, hunting, or are into price beef, etc. Certain meats have culture attached to them. That said, fake meat slop is the final form of Mcnuggets and soggy burgers. Doesn't even need to have the texture or necessarily the taste of real meat. Just deep fried paste with extra sugar and salt. Probably won't happen in our lifetime though.

It's true that vegans tend to be largely urban (and middle/upper class) and that the cushiness of modern life makes it so you can get away with living in fantasy, but that is more on an individual basis and doesn't necessarily say anything about the merits of the ideology itself. Being vegan is both possible and healthy (due to modern imports), though generally harder and less convenient. It's a matter of values whether or not to be vegan. You don't have to be crazy to want to be vegan.

Your arguments is that they hate themselves. That is frankly ridiculous 😂. You don't have to hate yourself to care about animals. Vegans just tend to be a bit out of touch with reality at times.

Meat-eaters VS vegans is structurally the same as Atheists VS Christians.

I don't like how you assume my intentions. I haven't actually said anything about the merits of veganism or meat-eating. I just have a different understanding of what survival is. If anything, it's dishonest to assume intent over focusing on the quality of arguments. That is a prime example of survival actually. I guarantee that the average serial rapists has all sorts of rationalizations about how women deserve it, etc. Ethics and survival are two different and often opposing things. Ethics are limitations to one's selfishness. But ethics are also survival to a certain extent, as they are culturally informed and socially regulated. For example, sex slavery is abhorrent in western countries but completely normal and expected in Mauritania. People would look at you weird if you didn't keep slaves, like how big businesses are expected to screw over customers and steal wages and would get sued by their investors if they didn't. Ethics seem to have certain universality for humans at least, but I'm not completely sure and if to what extent. Also, "validity is an inherently lingual notion. Tigers don't give a shit about "validity". In the context of survival "validity" is just an opinion.

But you do. Food is the one consistent highlight in a lot of people's day. The fact that people will fight and debate you over giving up their burgers is proof of that. It's an explanation, not a justification. Trying to convert a meat-eater into veganism is structurally the same as trying to convert a secular person into Christianity. It'll only work if they are already open to the idea. Morality is not a universal feature but a relative mental construct. Human morality, including veganism, is largely an extension of behavior that would maintain social cohesion, like not being murderous. Tigers don't flinch or question when they kill because they don't have an identity that subsumes certain principles as right or wrong nor do they have the need to. That is not bug but a feature of their design.