Scholar

I don't know what you mean by crusading and religious like intolerance. Michael, consider the issue of projection here. While for you firmly advocating for veganism might have stemmed from a place of some sort of superiority complex, this is not the case for me, nor for I believe most vegans out there. I personally do this out of compassion, and when I get emotional, it is out of compassion. It is not because I want to make myself feel superior to others, when I talk down to people in terms of this moral problem, it will be in the same way you would talk down to someone who pays for children to be tortured and killed. When we are talking about health, we have to have a holistic picture of health. Human health and enjoyment is important, but so is that of any other creature. Their health should be as much concern to us, if we view them as an extention of our selves, as that of our children. Whenever there is a new extention of self, a change in societal behavior requires moralistic attitudes. Sure, you could have called the abolitionists crusaders, you could have pointed to them and judged their religious-like intolerance in the name of moral superiority. All of this you could have done, and from your very point of view, it must have been valid to do so. But who would this have helped? Who would it have helped if I had told the soldiers who were fighting the nazi's that they were showing religious-like intolerance and were crusading for the sake of moral superiority? How would this have helped anyone? Please consider this question deeply Michael. Some vegans might be crusading and might be showing religious-like intolerance in the name of moral superiority. But then, what would you describe yourself us? Someone who is deliberately, in fully conscious of the consequences of his actions, paying for his own brothers and sisters to be subjugated, to be treated like property, to be raped, enslaved and murdered, all for his own comfort. Michael, Let us say that refusing to pay for the enslavement and killing of your brothers and sisters makes you more intolerant. What is the answer to this? Is it to go back to paying for the enslavement and killing of your brothers and sisters, or is it fixing the deeper issue, the intolerance itself? My issue here is not simply your behavior, but your very perception of what animals are. They are your brothers and sisters, they are literally like mentally handicapped people. They are not different whatsoever, other than in bodyshape. They are children. But you cannot see this, and this is why you look at those who are so disturbed by their suffering in the way you do. People who hunt serial killers, rapists and murderers are crusading and religious like, in the name of moral superiority, in your own eyes. But consider that they do what they do, that their judgment is so harsh, precisely because they have so much compassion for those who are suffering. If you do not recognize, you will not understand them. The world will change infront of your eyes, and the increasing sensitivity of people on this earth you will confuse for lack of sensitivity. Simply ask yourself this, if it was humans in place of the animals, how would that make you feel. How would you look at people who oppose this? What would you be calling them? The issue of veganism is a moralistic one, a crusade, because we need to a establish a new moral standard. For this to happen, it can only happen if this is taken seriously. And if it is taken seriously, it will be inevitably emotional. We must be moralistic for our brothers and sisters, because that's just how society evolves. Apathy will not create change. And radical change is needed, for the sake ourselves and all of our brothers and sisters. At some point, we must firmly establish: "No, I will not pay for this. This behavior should not be tolerated.", as we did with slavery in the past. It is precisely because morality is imaginary, that it is so vital that we create it.

I am not sure how this is related to what @neutralempty said. When we are talking about those unhealthy looking vegans, as Yog refers to them, we are probably talking about people in the western world who will have access to a cheap and healthy vegan diet, no? Nobody disagrees that adhering to a moral principle will be more or less difficult in different parts of the world, and of course in different times in history. In some countries, it is difficult to survive without exploiting or murdering other human beings. Of course it is due to the fact that we are so civilized that we can now appreciate a higher standard of ethics. But on the other hand, there is a reason why in underdeveloped countries, such as china, african countries and india, a majority of the poor are almost exclusively plant-based. It is precisely because animal products are such a luxury, infact to such a degree that you are now seeing an increase in obesity in China due to people being more financially secure and adopting a more western diet. The poor chinese people who never could have afforded much meat (and were actually healthier and more long-lived for it), now require the amazonian forests to be burned down so that there is enough land to feed all the cows. Explaining to people simple rational ethical principles is not a problem no matter where they live. To what degree they can live according to those principles will vary, as is the case with any other moral problem. However, you reject the foundation of those ethical principles in the first place, so I don't see how it is useful to discuss whether or not some people have an easier time consuming an exclusively plant based diet. The disagreement is about the validity of the ethical stance. Otherwise we are simply discussing whether or not people in china can only eat plants.

Well, I just think it's a missed oppurtunity. The problem is that when I go to a monastery, no one knows anything about politics. When I go to people who study politics, no one knows about consciousness. I do think that there will come a day when these two things will merge.

Okay Boss.

By that logic, the very same applies to your post. Can you see how you are using this to dismiss my perspective, rather than integrating it or actually contending with it? I do not have to be outside of the problem to point out the fact that there is a problem. And not every problem can be solved by simply "becoming the change you want to be". I tried to explain in the response to Preety_India.

There is not much incentive to do so, my experience is that people usually don't react to ideas that fall outside of the current political climate/mainstream discussion. It would be too much effort to contemplate it and engage with it. It is easier to just talk and engage with things that you are familiar with. And of course it is demotivating to see people discussing on the level they are doing. Half the time we are discussing things that should be obvious to everyone, whether Trump is a devil or not and so forth. And that is what generates most engagement too. Sure I could contemplate a particular topic and then give my take on it, but if nobody engages because the conversation revolves around basically shitposts then the effort is just wasted. I would rather read a book. And then you have Leo posting stuff like this: Literally Twitter level engagement. The vibe and culture in this section is very much reactionary rather than constructive.

Well, as long as it makes us energetic it should be fine.

Notice the difference between the one who is attempting to sacrifice in the name of his brothers and sisters, and the one who is seeking justification for why he is sacrificing his brothers and sisters. Imagine you were not certain whether you had to sacrifice your brothers and sisters to thrive, yet, you chose to sacrifice them anyways, just to be safe. Is this self-love, compassion and sensitivity to life? Or is this fear?

I am not interested in playing ego-games with you my brother. As I said, I hope one day you can open your heart so that you do not have to live your life from a place of fear, hatred and judgement.

Debating this is really ineffective. When you are ignorant about a topic, it usually is better to do some research. Here you have one article: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/08/08/fact-check-socialism-alone-did-not-destroy-venezuelas-economy/3323566001/ It is a bit unfair to come here and expect Forestluv to explain to you why an argument is not really an argument, when you don't even yourself know what the argument truly is. You come to such a discussion to test your ideas, that you hopefully put some effort into. Not so Forest can spoon feed you facts about Venezuela.

Alright, but I do hope you heed my advice and come back to this conversation at a later point. You could bookmark it and one day when you remember and feel open-hearted, you can come back and read this.

Nyseto, I am not saying you have no compassion, you certainly lack some dimensions of compassion, this is true. And it is not just because you said a particular thing. If you will one day re-read this conversation, maybe you will be able to understand my perspective. I am not condemning you, I do believe you lack sensitivity. It is clear to me and others. This could be a powerful moment for you if you could recognize this in yourself. It would be a leap in consciousness, but this doesn't need to happen. It is not expected, currently fear is occupying your heart. Look, you are not open hearted at this very moment. You wouldn't be so defensive. You would say "Brother, I can see how you would interpret what I said in this way, but here, let me show you how I meant this in another way. I actually do care about the animals that are suffering, I am a vegan myself and I seek to advocate for it.", something of this sort. You would not compare yourself to me, this is an act of fear. You would not respond to what you perceive to be attacks on your personality the way you do. You would have compassion for me and be patient. All of this will be very obvious to you when the time has come. You are not at the end of the path, nor am I my brother. There is no point in comparing ourselves to each other. We should help each other on our paths. And this is my attempt to help you. It might not succeed, but I am not perfect either.

Consider for a moment that I am right about what I am saying. Come back when you feel open hearted, and re-read this conversation with a fresh mind. This can't hurt you, treat it like an experiment. The worst that can happen is that you will learn something valuable. This is all.

@Nyseto This is the crux of the matter my brother, contemplate these words deeply: My brother, what you fail to see is this. What you say is not what is revealing to me the state of your heart. It is what you are not saying that is revealing it. It is not merely what you are focusing on, but that to which you are blind to. And you are blind because of fear. I do not judge you for this, but this is the truth. I can see it so obviously in you because I have seen and continue to see it in myself. Any person of higher consciousness on this forum could come here and tell you the same.

@Nyseto The reason why it is so easy for others here to identify that your mind is closed and your heart filled with fear. Imagine someone raped a woman, and someone else caught the rapist in the act. The person punched the rapist and pulled him away from the woman. Imagine now a person coming up to this situation and being outraged. "How could you punch the rapist? You could have just pulled him away! Let me tell you exactly why I think you should have treated the rapist with compassion and restrained him without punching him!" Notice how this is inappropriate. While yes, the person should have not punched the rapist, something seems wrong with a mind that would focus on this particular detail in this particular situation. In fact it lacks compassion for the woman who was raped and for the person who punched the rapist. Imagine if the first thing that came to your mind when I mentioned rape is a person restraining a rapist in a way that you think to be inappropriate. That you would post this here, announcing it with the words "Lol". What would this mean to you? When you have equal compassion for everyone, you do not focus your compassion on everyone equally. The suffering of the one who was raped is far more significant, and any truly compassionate person would know that this is where your mind ought to be focused on. If you were truly open hearted, you would look at this in a completely different way. Your response to the activist who has chained himself up would not be "Lol, he brought this upon himself", rather it would have been. "Wow, this poor man. He cares about these animals who are suffering deeply so much that he would put himself in harms way to try to change this. I believe the way he does this is not the right way to do this, let me try to help him, because I myself do not want these animals to suffer. I will aid him on his path by giving him some ideas of how he could improve his activism." None of this was present here. You have been demeaning them, invalidating them for their efforts. The way your spoke would have not been compelling to them at all, if they had been present here. They would have felt ridiculed and judged. I think you should do as I proposed. Come back here one day with an open heart. You will learn.

I hope you do well too!

Let us try a little experiment my brother. Your heart cannot be reached in the current state you are in. Leave this thread for a while until you do not feel attached to it anymore. Then, when you feel especially loving and open hearted, like you wanted to give your brothers and sisters love, come back here and read again our conversation. I think it could be enlightening.

Who would have thoughts, but there you go: If you are a Trump supporter, give it a listen. Although if you are a Trump supporter at this point, may God help you free yourself of the fear and hatred filling your heart.

We are not talking about my ignorance right now, but yours my brother. You have clearly displayed your insensitivity here, it would be obvious to any sensitive creature. As we speak you are talking from fear. You are defending yourself, because you lack an open heart. This will not change if you simply continue to life from fear. You will see, if your heart grows stronger and more loving, it's focus will change. This is a natural evolution of the heart in relation to the mind. I feel like I am talking past you my brother because all you can see is fear.

Yes, I found that studying how people react to the propositions of veganism is an excellent way to come to learn about the human mindand heart. It is quite extreme, because I am at a point at which I do view most animals to be nothing but humans with minorly different anatomy. Replace this scenario with humans being the ones who are being slaughtered. Could you see how incredibly insensitive and absurd what you have said sounded? You are comparing the suffering and death of all of these individuals to liability of the slaughterhouse, or the fact that one individual that you consider to be worth of more consideration would get injured. Put that in relationship to what is happening in those slaugherhouses. And again, your focus is still immersed in criticizing those people while you truly have no genuine interest in helping them with their cause. Nothing you said is helpful, it isn't a constructive critique. It is an attempt to invalidate. It is clearly fear my brother. You have to open your heart.

Imagine there was a slaughterhouse with humans. In the background you can see humans being treated like objects. Then there is a human that is protesting that in what you consider a silly way. They chain themselves to the machines that kill the humans. Now, people post videos of this an laugh at how silly those humans are for trying to save the other humans. Imagine how sensitivity you would have to be for you to come forth and criticize that person, announcing it with the word "Lol", for being what you consider ineffective in their activism. Imagine all of this. This is you, my friend. And now ask yourself. How could you possibly have become so insensitive to the suffering of your brothers and sisters? It is fear, it is a lack of love. Your heart is not open, and your mind cannot see the humans who are being treated like objects. You mind can only see the silly activist. Because that is what your mind has chosen to focus on, fuel by fear and hatred. Open your heart.

An interesting question is, how much responsibility, or even a moral obligation, do humans have to speak our for those who cannot speak for themselves? Do you think it would have been an obligation, that if you had the required awareness, to have been actively advocating against slavery during when it was going on? It could be put even more controversially. If there was going on a human holocaust on the scale of the animal holocaust, what would it mean if we would not dedicate a significant amount of our time and energy into an attempt to fight against it? Especially if fighting against it brought virtually no consequences to us other than having spend our time differently. Would not any other problem in society pale in contrast to that? Would it not feel almost bizarre that we invest so much energy into other problems, while that most obvious one has virtually nobody speaking out against it? Can you see how your response is not a genuine attempt to help this cause, but rather to invalidate it? Also notice who you are focusing on. You are not focusing on the fact that there are people laughing at such a cause, you seem to have a disinterest analyzing that and finding ways to change that. Rather, all you have done is invalidate this cause. You have pointed to some things that activists might be doing wrong, simply because this annoys you, not because you want them to be more effective so that the world can change more quickly. Notice this. It is fear, not love, that fuels you attention.

Excellent analysis Forest. I find this kind of mentality often occupied by people who resist progress towards a more vegan society. Many people for example will use the hypocrisy of vegans to justify whatever they are doing. Crop deaths are a good example. Someone might say, why is it okay to kill animals in crop production but not to kill animals in a slaughterhouse? The vegan is clearly a hypocrate, therefore I can continue to consume meat from slaughterhouses. The one who is using this line of reasoning does not actually care about animals who die in crop deaths nor about those who die in a slaughterhouse. He is simply using that example to hinder progress. It is as if a proponent of slavery had said that the abolitionists are hypocrates because while they think it is wrong to enslave a certain race of humans, they do believe it is fine to enslave animals. Yes, the abolitionist is indeed a hypocrate. But the argument here is not being used to actually point out a flaw so that it can be corrected, no, the argument is made so that a change in behaviour can be dimissed. With this kind of reasoning, progress can be halted. The slaves nor the animals get to live a existence free of enslavement. However the context changes. Today it is quite valid to compare a person who believes human slavery to be wrong but yet justifies it in the animal context. It is the case because this comparison is not use to invalidate progress, but rather to fuel it. Now the question is, who will go on the streets and fight for the animals? Imagine how long it would have taken black people to free themselves of slavery if none of them had the ability to speak or resist. I think this is perfectly demonstrated if we look at how animals are treated. If humans of the same capacity for sentience were to be treated this way, we would deem it to be justified to kill those who are enslaving them so that we could put an end to this tremendous kind of suffering. Imagine how it might expand your mind if you could spend a month in a factory farm, or a slaughterhouse.

Let us not fight brother. Your hatred is fueled by your fear.

Brother, you hare successfully self-indoctronated yourself.