Philosophical Vegan Forum

I do not think they are accurate comparisons. The comparisons stop at industrialized, cruel, mass killings of innocent creatures. Unlike the holocaust, there is no intention for genocide when consuming meat.

Meat eaters do not want to eliminate their food source, the opposite is true. If anything vegans would more likely wish for species specifically intended for human use to go extinct so the vicious cycle of suffering will end. Who is more genocidal now?

I don't actually see a significant moral difference between killing in huge numbers and continually bringing into the world in order to kill in huge numbers.

Meat eaters do not want to eliminate their food source, the opposite is true.

This is a straw man. I don't want to exterminate all farmed animals in the world. Rather, I resent them being brought into the world to be maimed, raped, mistreated and killed in their billions for no good reason, and I recognise that their existence is causing widespread environmental damage that is causing the extinction of myriad wild animals all around the world. And let's not forget about animals like the aurochs, the ancestor of domestic cattle, which were effectively wiped out by domestication over a long period of time.

I would argue for the numbers of farmed animals to be reduced dramatically (by ceasing to breed and impregnate them), and I would like to see a tiny fraction of the ones that are left allowed the chance to (over time and generations) go feral and work their way back into the ecosystem. If they can't do this and nature selects them for extinction then that may be the best thing. I certainly don't want them all purposefully exterminated.

How on earth could you construe my position to be "genocidal"?

Well said Viking Redbeard. I have no interest in seeing species go extinct, just in ending the cruelty.

gogogadgetarms wrote:Who is more genocidal now?

It's dishonest carnists like these who are ethically worse than Nazis, if anything.
They're perpetuating this cycle of cruelty for personal enjoyment. The Nazis were delusional, but they did it for some misguided sense of self defense; they didn't instigate the holocaust for personal pleasure like Carnists do.

The delusions of the Carnists and Nazis are probably comparable, but when you weigh the moral defensiveness of gluttony and personal pleasure that the Carnists are fighting for against self defense and the perceived attack on the "Arian race" and "Fatherland" that the Nazis were fighting for, Carnists are the ones that come out less ethical.

It's really hard to be less ethical than genocidal Nazis, but congrats on that gogogadgetarms; you're not genocidal like Nazis, you're worse. You're both delusional, but at least the Nazis' imagined justification was better.