War and the meat industry

[Hayato]

“On the surface it may seem that wars are caused by economic and political questions, but in fact they are caused by our wholesale slaughter of animals. The laws of justice are inexorable, and human beings are going to have to pay with their own blood … We kill animals, but nature is an organic whole, and by killing animals we are, as it were, affecting certain glands in that organism. When this happens, the balance of the organism is disrupted, and it is not surprising that before long war breaks out among men. Yes, human beings have slaughtered millions of animals for their meat, without realizing that on the invisible plane those animals are linked to other human beings, and it is they who will now have to share the fate of the animals. When we slaughter animals we are slaughtering human beings. Everybody agrees that it is time to establish the reign of peace in the world, that there must be no more wars. Yes, but war will go on just as long as we continue to slaughter animals, because by destroying them we are destroying ourselves.”

- Omraam Mikhael Aivanhov

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Omraam_Mikhaël_Aïvanhov

[Emerald]

It's an interesting idea. 

But I'd say it doesn't need to be true literally to be true practically. 

What I would say is that, in order for a human to kill and/or eat an animal for reasons beyond sustaining life in times of food scarcity... there are certain hierarchical justifications that are often made in order to justify the needless exploitation. 

And many of the hierarichical justifications that human beings make to exploit animals for pleasurable flavors and textures are quite similar to the types of hierarchical justifications that human beings make when exploiting other humans.

So, when we create these hierarchical paradigms to justify exploitation and murder of other types of sentient beings... we will also do it to each other.

And most of the paradigms that justify exploiting animals for culinary pleasure, require human beings to see ourselves as separate from and above the rest of nature... and as being hierarchically above all other life-forms on the planet.

And instead of seeing ourselves as ordinary animals... we see ourselves as extraordinary animals that are outside of nature.

And when we see nature as an other... we can also harm nature itself.

Contrast this with the hunting and farming practices happening 100+ years ago. Back then, the justification was the actual sustenance of human life in the face of food scarcity... and adding hierarchy to the equation was unnecessary, though still sometimes added.

But now that there are grocery stores with plenty of options where humans can thrive without consuming any animal products... there has to be some pretty intense mental gymnastics to justify the exploitation. 

So, humans (especially "animal lovers" who consume animal products for pleasure) will create all kinds of paradigms to make those choices okay... when the choices contradict their own values.

And those paradigms open the door to exploiting and oppressing other humans, and being able to justify it to quell cognitive dissonance.

Edited 14 hours ago by Emerald

[OmniNaut]

44 minutes ago, Hayato said:

“On the surface it may seem that wars are caused by economic and political questions, but in fact they are caused by our wholesale slaughter of animals. The laws of justice are inexorable, and human beings are going to have to pay with their own blood … We kill animals, but nature is an organic whole, and by killing animals we are, as it were, affecting certain glands in that organism. When this happens, the balance of the organism is disrupted, and it is not surprising that before long war breaks out among men. Yes, human beings have slaughtered millions of animals for their meat, without realizing that on the invisible plane those animals are linked to other human beings, and it is they who will now have to share the fate of the animals. When we slaughter animals we are slaughtering human beings. Everybody agrees that it is time to establish the reign of peace in the world, that there must be no more wars. Yes, but war will go on just as long as we continue to slaughter animals, because by destroying them we are destroying ourselves.”

- Omraam Mikhael Aivanhov

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Omraam_Mikhaël_Aïvanhov

Tell this to the Tibetans ask them how they feel about it now.

Being peaceful and in touch with nature will not stop an invading force. This is just Green bypassing

Also there are plenty of regions in the world where no crops can be grown, so the alternative is meat or fish. Tell it to the people there that they should stop eating meat/fish.

Edited 13 hours ago by OmniNaut

[OmniNaut]

59 minutes ago, Hayato said:

We kill animals, but nature is an organic whole, and by killing animals we are, as it were, affecting certain glands in that organism

Haha, the animal is dead, the animal does not care that we affect their glands anymore.

If the text points to evolutionary change, animal change for survival is going on long before humans existed and is still part of nature.

 

I have a strong beef (as a vegetarian 😄) for people who cherry pick examples of nature to proof their point. You see it in discussions everywhere, same sex intercourse does not exist in nature therefore it's bad. Yes it does exist. Animals are gendered male or female, those are the only genders that exist. No it doesn't there are plenty of genderless animals, or animals that change sex to be found. If you try to use nature as part of your argument, I will find an example that will proof otherwise. 

Rant over

Edited 13 hours ago by OmniNaut

[Hayato]

Emerald - Good point.

 

Omninaut - If you stop eating meat that doesn't make you immune to aggression. In a hypothetical world in which we show no, or less violence toward animals, we would show no, or less violence towards each other.

If meat is the only option for some remote cultures then of course the choice is obvious. Survival comes first. But they are an insignificant percentage.

Not saying that eating meat should be banned, or that people who eat meat are bad. Just giving food for thought how our everyday decisions could be influencing the world at large.

The gland part does not refer to the dead animal, it is a metaphor for Nature as a living whole. Harming one part affects the whole.

[LordFall]

Are foxes also perpetuating this spiritual war by eating rabbits or are we the only ones held to this invisible plane standard?

I think veganism is a good goal but his explanation is not that great. I do feel bad when I kill any beings though even bugs. I was vegan for a couple of months but it was too hard to maintain. Perhaps I'll go back to it one day. 

[OmniNaut]

28 minutes ago, Hayato said:

Omninaut - If you stop eating meat that doesn't make you immune to aggression. In a hypothetical world in which we show no, or less violence toward animals, we would show no, or less violence towards each other.

If meat is the only option for some remote cultures then of course the choice is obvious. Survival comes first. But they are an insignificant percentage.

Not saying that eating meat should be banned, or that people who eat meat are bad. Just giving food for thought how our everyday decisions could be influencing the world at large.

The gland part does not refer to the dead animal, it is a metaphor for Nature as a living whole. Harming one part affects the whole.

Trust me I know the reasoning behind this on an intellectual, emotional and spiritual level. It is a big part why I turned vegetarian 14 years ago. Not wanting to go back.

It increases empathy towards beings that suffer yes. It did that for me.

But this text is too much hippie. It does not take into account real life, and is just utopian dreaming.

It's text book green, not saying it is wrong but it is flawed. Just pointing out the flaws not saying it's inherently wrong.

And there might be more people then you think that have no good access to plants and crop alternatives. Some of it can be substituted yes animal farming for vegetarian options, but those people think of survival. You can't expect someone is who is fighting for physical survival everyday for self and family to think about animal welfare. This is green bypassing again, and I have seen this many times first hand in (Western) non profits. Trying to address animal welfare without addressing physical survival.

The act of thinking about animal welfare and spiritual wholeness does not compute for someone who is thinking about survival.

If you are thinking about this, congratulations you are in the top 5% of the world and probably have surpassed physical survival for the most part.

Edited 12 hours ago by OmniNaut

[Ajay0]

Veganism can be an effective weapon in the war against global warming.

The global meat and livestock industry is responsible for about 14% to 18% of all human-caused greenhouse gas emissions worldwide.  A study has found that meat accounts for nearly 60% of all greenhouse gases from food production, study finds.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/13/meat-greenhouses-gases-food-production-study

Quote

The global production of food is responsible for a third of all planet-heating gases emitted by human activity, with the use of animals for meat causing twice the pollution of producing plant-based foods, a major new study has found.

So being a vegan or vegetarian is a necessary austerity to be taken for the health of the world, for a temporary period at least till an another effective alternative can be found.

I am a vegetarian and use electric vehicles mostly without any expensive petrol or diesel.

[Hayato]

LordFall -

Animals don’t have the same level of self awareness and reflection as humans. They run on instinct.
If foxes turned vegan they would live twice as long. (a joke, don’t take it seriously)

Veganism/Vegetarianism isn’t automatically a golden ticket to a healthy life. There is a lot of junk food out there.

If the goal is health, there is a right and wrong way to do it.

OmniNaut - 

Congratulations on 14 years being a vegetarian.

Survival doesn't mean no choice. 

The planet can produce enough food to feed everyone. The problems are bad management and distribution.

The world we live in is much better compared to the world 500 years ago.

Animal welfare and human welfare are connected.

[Basman]

Magical thinking.

The real answer is that war and carnivory is caused by finitude. The lack of resources. If you can decrease finitude, you take away the reason for war and carnivory. It's probably not possible to do that maximally though. Your better off accepting reality for what it is than for what it should be, metaphysically.