Philosophical Vegan Forum

Many people, including me a few years ago, say stuff like "Be the part of the change you want to see in the world! Capitalism allows us to fix the world's problems by being careful about which products we buy!". Now I think that is mostly false. That is, it's true in theory. Obviously, capitalism allows individuals to address world's problems, much more so than communism does. However, the problem is that the average person's understanding of the world's problems is bad, and many people are doing ineffective or even counter-productive things in an attempt to fix the world's problems.

For example, many people are boycotting sweatshops. But it is difficult to see how boycotting sweatshops could do anything but make the problem of global poverty worse. People are in sweatshops voluntarily, so they think the alternatives available to them are even worse. And they are probably right about that. They certainly have more insight into the situation in their country than we do.

A few years ago, I was worried about global warming, so I stopped drinking cow's milk... to replace it with rice milk. Whether that's helping is hard to tell. It's certainly not helping significantly. Both the production of cow's milk and the production of rice milk emit huge amounts of methane.

A few years ago, I was worried about superbacteria, so I stopped eating meat... but I continued eating eggs and, later, I even started drinking wine. The biggest user of antibiotics these days, by far, is the egg industry, not the meat industry. And the industry that uses antibiotics the most irresponsibly is the vineyards: antibiotics stay in the ground forever, forever causing antibiotic resistance, and it's just a matter of time before the genes for antibiotic resistance spread from bacteria which attack plants to bacteria which attack humans via horizontal gene transfer (as bacteria can conjugate with their quite distant relatives). Vegetarianism addresses neither of those two things.

I was wondering what you thought about that.
Let me be clear that I am still not against capitalism, I think that capitalism is the best economic system compared to others that have been tried from time to time. I just think that perhaps it doesn't really make it easy to address the world's problems.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 5:25 am However, the problem is that the average person's understanding of the world's problems is bad, and many people are doing ineffective or even counter-productive things in an attempt to fix the world's problems.

And how exactly does that invalidate the actions of well-informed, educated individuals? And why wouldn't educating others to make more well-informed decisions be possible?

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 5:25 amFor example, many people are boycotting sweatshops. But it is difficult to see how boycotting sweatshops could do anything but make the problem of global poverty worse. People are in sweatshops voluntarily, so they think the alternatives available to them are even worse. And they are probably right about that. They certainly have more insight into the situation in their country than we do.

So tell them to stop boycotting sweatshops and tell them why they're a net-positive. Easy.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 5:25 amA few years ago, I was worried about global warming, so I stopped drinking cow's milk... to replace it with rice milk. Whether that's helping is hard to tell. It's certainly not helping significantly. Both the production of cow's milk and the production of rice milk emit huge amounts of methane.

I have a feeling you're baiting here, but if you don't feel as though rice milk makes much of a difference due to the methane, why not drink another plant milk like soy or oat?

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 5:25 amA few years ago, I was worried about superbacteria, so I stopped eating meat... but I continued eating eggs and, later, I even started drinking wine. The biggest user of antibiotics these days, by far, is the egg industry, not the meat industry. And the industry that uses antibiotics the most irresponsibly is the vineyards: antibiotics stay in the ground forever, forever causing antibiotic resistance, and it's just a matter of time before the genes for antibiotic resistance spread from bacteria which attack plants to bacteria which attack humans via horizontal gene transfer (as bacteria can conjugate with their quite distant relatives).

Then stop drinking wine.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 5:25 amVegetarianism addresses neither of those two things.

Sure thing, brah brah.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 5:25 am Let me be clear that I am still not against capitalism, I think that capitalism is the best economic system compared to others that have been tried from time to time. I just think that perhaps it doesn't really make it easy to address the world's problems.

Then what's the alternative?

Red wrote:And how exactly does that invalidate the actions of well-informed, educated individuals?

But the problem is that almost everybody thinks they are well-informed and educated. People who boycott sweatshops probably think that. I used to think that back when I chose to stop eating meat in order to fight superbacteria, while continuing eating eggs.

Red wrote:Then stop drinking wine.

And I did, when I started taking Alprazolam. Alprazolam and alcohol together are deadly.

Red wrote:Then what's the alternative?

A good enough government, obviously. And I think that's realistic. Governments all around the world are making efforts to fight superbacteria by reducing the amount of antibiotics used in the egg industry.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 3:36 pm But the problem is that almost everybody thinks they are well-informed and educated. People who boycott sweatshops probably think that. I used to think that back when I chose to stop eating meat in order to fight superbacteria, while continuing eating eggs.

And what if you actually are educated and well-informed? It really isn't that hard to be, if you're willing. Most people are not, they just stick with their camps and what their respective ingroup advocates. Facts don't matter very much to most people. If most people genuinely cared about the truth and actually bothering to do the right thing (instead of just paying lip-service on social media), a helluva lot of the world's problems would be solved.

You just need to go with what the evidence and expert consensus says. People who boycott and protest sweatshops do so out of an emotional reaction, or an ideological impulse (against capitalism, free trade, etc) rather than coming to that decision based on any sort of evidence. The consensus amongst economists is that these sweatshops are beneficial for the people living in these countries, and there is tons of evidence to support that. And as you implied earlier, you don't need to make it a fully empirical case if you ask why these people are deciding to work at sweatshops.

The world needs educated individuals to nudge uneducated ones into the right direction. It's a slow grueling process; Like I said, most people don't care too much about the truth, regardless where they are on the political spectrum and just do whatever they're comfortable with doing. But putting those pebbles in shoes and sewing a little bit of doubt in their minds about what they believe is a crucial step.

It actually wouldn't be too hard to convince a lot of people that sweatshops are a net positive though, since most people already buy from them and those products are usually cheaper. You're going to have a hard time convincing a leftist of that, though, even if you provide them with the evidence and the consensus of experts. In this case they're already deadset against capitalism, and any concessions that it might be a net positive in some ways would be a threat to their worldview, so they tend to reject it by default.

There will be exceptions to that though, some leftists would be willing to acknowledge sweatshops were a good thing if they're rational and open-minded enough, but this is not the norm. Best case scenario, while they may reject what you say, if you made a compelling enough case, it'll give them something to think about and wear down their opposition to capitalism a slight bit; But those opening cracks might be all that is necessary to break the dam. Don't count on that from just one or two interactions, though.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 3:36 pm A good enough government, obviously. And I think that's realistic. Governments all around the world are making efforts to fight superbacteria by reducing the amount of antibiotics used in the egg industry.

That's a start but why not also advocate for the reduction of animal products in tandem with that? Surely having fewer chickens would be even more effective.

Red wrote:And what if you actually are educated and well-informed? It really isn't that hard to be, if you're willing.

How the hell it isn't hard to be educated and well-informed? It took me years to realize that my vegetarianism is not actually helping against superbacteria. If you think that everybody should spend years studying politics and things related to it just so they might not hurt the environment with their consumer choices, I don't know what to tell you.

teo123 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 03, 2024 5:01 amHow the hell it isn't hard to be educated and well-informed?

If you actually read my whole post instead of just the first two sentences:

You just need to go with what the evidence and expert consensus says.

You don't do this either Teo, since despite EVERYTHING we've told you, you always go with your intuition than expert consensus and stubbornly argue against it. You might not realize it but you're being just as bad as the people who boycott sweatshops, and because of that there really is no reason to keep arguing with you since you always assume you're right and the expert consensus is wrong.

teo123 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 03, 2024 5:01 am It took me years to realize that my vegetarianism is not actually helping against superbacteria.

See I think this whole thread was just a front just so you can bait an argument on vegetarianism's role in Superbacteria. Well not really and argument, it was just something you posted and hoped someone could respond so you could annoy them to satiate your boredom since you want to argue with someone, anyone.

teo123 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 03, 2024 5:01 amIf you think that everybody should spend years studying politics and things related to it just so they might not hurt the environment with their consumer choices, I don't know what to tell you.

Brah brah, it doesn’t take years, it can take less than a month if you find out what the issues are and what the consensus is for each one of them. It just takes longer in your case because you think you know everything.

Here, there's a new ChatGPT bot that compiles the consensus of experts on various topics. Here's what it said about vegetarianism and superbacteria:

Veganism could play a role in reducing the prevalence of superbugs, primarily through indirect pathways related to the use of antibiotics in animal agriculture and the subsequent impact on antibiotic resistance. Here's how veganism might contribute to mitigating the spread of superbugs:

1. **Reduced Demand for Antibiotics in Animal Agriculture:** A significant amount of antibiotics worldwide is used in animal agriculture for disease prevention and growth promotion. This extensive use contributes to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. By reducing the demand for animal products, veganism can decrease the reliance on antibiotics in agriculture, potentially limiting the emergence and spread of resistant bacteria.

2. **Decreased Risk of Transmission:** Vegan diets eliminate the consumption of animal products, which can sometimes be contaminated with antibiotic-resistant bacteria. This reduces the direct pathway through which such bacteria could enter the human population, decreasing the risk of spread to humans.

3. **Environmental Impact:** Veganism can lead to a decreased environmental footprint, including less pollution from animal farming practices. Since environments contaminated with antibiotics and resistant genes can act as reservoirs and conduits for the spread of resistance, reducing such environmental impacts can help mitigate the spread of superbugs.

4. **Promotion of Healthier Gut Microbiota:** Research indicates that diet influences the gut microbiome's composition, which can affect the presence of antibiotic resistance genes. While direct effects of veganism on reducing superbugs in the gut microbiota are not conclusively established, a diet rich in plant-based foods can promote a diverse and stable microbiome, which might be less prone to colonization by resistant bacteria.

However, it's important to note that while veganism can contribute to reducing some pathways for the spread of antibiotic resistance, tackling the problem of superbugs requires a multifaceted approach. This includes global efforts in antibiotic stewardship, improved infection control practices, development of new antibiotics, and strategies to reduce the spread of resistance genes across different environments and populations. The impact of veganism, though potentially beneficial, is one part of a broader strategy needed to combat the complex issue of antibiotic resistance.

And yes, I trust an AI Chatbot more than you. I can send the studies it links if you're actually interested in learning more but since you aren't I'm not going to bother.