Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

EdgyIndividualistBuffoon OP wrote

Reply to comment by fdsfnn3ir9vuv2LLuIIfre in So much of the left is anti-science and it's sickening by EdgyIndividualistBuffoon

Do you realize how many people will die during the environmental apocalypse?

Why don't you enlighten me? I'll even put on a tin foil hat so you don't feel alienated.

It's also toxic for the planet.

Even cow farts are toxic to the planet. Do you suggest we ban cows?

To me, you clearly don't understand that even basic anarchism has beliefs that are not neccesarily connected with capitalism. Abolishing capitalism is not the only staple of anarchist thought. I don't quite understand why you are focusing so hard on capitalism when critiquing primitivists, it seems like an odd focal point for that

Because once we address capitalism, everything else will be semantics. Capitalism is what has put a strangehold on us, without it, the planet will heal itself.

No, it is humans who "use and abuse" technology and science

Humans corrupted by capitalism...

Are you sure you know what a primitivist is or have you even talked to one?

I doubt they exist off of the internet tbh.

2

theblackcat wrote

Even cow farts are toxic to the planet. Do you suggest we ban cows?

I sure do.

5

sudo wrote

I'm pretty sure they were asking if you supported killing all the cows, not just not eating them anymore. Do you support that?

2

theblackcat wrote (edited )

What else are we going to do with the 1.5 billion cows in the world? Release them? They'd continue to devastate the environment for generations. They don't exist in the wild, humans created them, so the only thing to do is turn people away from meat eating until there are so few of them being bred for slaughter that the industry will be no more.

If humanity somehow got its shit together to actually ban cattle and other mega polluting industries, then it wouldn't be an instant ban, it would just prevent farmers from breeding more cattle - they'd still get a year to sell the animals they already bred.

3

sudo wrote

Well, that's better than just mass slaughtering them all at one. But, you said humans created cows. I assume you meant humans are responsible for breeding them so that their population got so high, not that we literally genetically engineered cows, and that they didn't exist beforehand. Right?

Also, in your first comment, when you said you support "banning cows," that made it sound like you wanted to exterminate the entire species, hence my reply. "Banning the cattle industry" would have been more accurate.

2

theblackcat wrote (edited )

We domesticated cows and bred them to be the ultimate meatsack. They barely resemble wild bovine populations now.

I would like a ban on industrial meat. Wild bovine species would continue to exist even if industrial cows were phased out. But they won't be phased out as long as India exists. All the breeds will survive.

2

Lenny wrote (edited )

Humans corrupted by capitalism...

Humans aren't going to magically stop being corrupted by capitalism, even after capitalism fails, the damage is done.

Even cow farts are toxic to the planet. Do you suggest we ban cows?

I do. We don't need billions of cows eating all our grain stores when we could be feeding the whole world population 12 times over with that grain we feed to cows.

4

zorblax wrote

Not trying to justify the ridiculously large meat industry, but the grain we feed livestock is high-calorie but low in other nutrients, and a lot of it is inedible to humans.

2

[deleted] wrote (edited )

3

zorblax wrote

This implies that there isn't a natural balance in a natural environment.

There isn't, though. Nature is always in flux, it always has been, it always will be. Like capitalism, life thrives off instability.

3

EdgyIndividualistBuffoon OP wrote

Oh, so you are one of those "erasing capitalism erases all problems" people? This kind of naivity is no more than a joke

It doesn't erase all problems, it simply creates the conditions that will allow us to address these problems as a collective, without interference from lobbyists and politicians, and motivated only by what is good for all.

This implies that there isn't a natural balance in a natural environment. Quite anti-science if you ask me

Except that cows aren't in any way natural, they were engineered by science to feed us.

It's quite entertaining that you are bashing "anti-science" people, when you aparently have the nerve to hypocritically deny that climate change and man-made global warming exists. Here's a good start for you

I didn't do that, I simply think your whole biblical apocalypse conspiracy theory is ridiculous. Yes, climate change is real, but no it won't result in the end of humanity. We'll adapt as we always do. Why on earth would we allow the planet to be destroyed? We live on it. It goes against all our survival instincts.

Your article (which I'm only a paragraph into so far) talks about "worst-case scenarios", but that doesn't mean we'll be facing those scenarios, it's simply a far-fetched possibility.

2

[deleted] wrote (edited )

3

EdgyIndividualistBuffoon OP wrote (edited )

More harm caused by technoloy and science

If you took buffalo straight out of the wild, bred them with each other, and tried to feed 7 billion people, it would never work. They need to be domesticated and have specific traits bred in them to feed us more efficiently. It's not a bad thing, to change something in order to better meet our needs...

Perhaps because much of the damage is already done. Perhaps because most people won't give a single shit about the environment and will have the same thoughts as you up until they are affected by it first-hand.

Exactly. At some point, it will directly affect even the United States, and they'll be forced to curb their emissions.

We're in the middle of a mass extinction but nobody seems to care, why is that?

Because we're not going extinct, there are more of us than any time in history. If we start to die off, the problem will fix itself because there will be less greenhouse gasses being produced with less consumers.

The damage being done is exponential, and nobody wants to solve the problem which is rooted in civilization, because that would sacrifice their comfort

Excuse us for not wanting to sleep on the ground, drink parasite infested water and eat raw fox liver. If humanity could survive by reverting back to a primitive ape-like state, then there would be no point in saving us. We'd lose everything that makes us who we are, our creativity, our zest for experimentation and discovery, our need to advance ourselves and forever expand our minds and improve our lives.

2