Respectfully, the problem with that line of thinking is it’s effectively based on a strawman. Veganism is not about perfectionism, nor is it about living like some monk in the woods who does not harm a single blade of grass. Veganism is about not viewing animals as commodities and reducing as much harm is reasonably possible.
The problem with modern supply chains is that you can’t know every detail about the goods you are purchasing, so vegans make decisions based on what they know, it’s common for vegans to accidentally purchase a product with animal products. So you just go oops and try better next time. It’s not really as complicated as you are making out to be in your head.
But to directly answer your question how do you avoid food that have been grown with things like feather meal and manure? The answer is simple but a lot of people aren’t going to like it. You avoid buying organic, and if possible you support local farmers which grow in a way which aligns with your values. And if you can, start a garden and grow some of your own food.
But if you avoid buying organic, then you’re supporting agricultural practices that harm local ecosystems, pollinators, waterways and aquatic life, bird populations, etc…
So which is worse, honestly? You’re right that perfectionism isn’t possible, but it’s entirely possible to become overwhelmed with the constant triage one must do to reduce one’s impact as much as possible.
I think that’s a false dichotomy, because someone can be vegan and only eat organic. It’s not mutually exclusive, and the vast majority of people are probably neither.
If you mean that organic produce isn’t vegan, then I’d say you’re taking the ideological purity test a little too far. If you really want to reduce your harm to 0, then the only way to do that is to be like the Jain Sallekhanas who vow to eat nothing for the rest of their lives.
My point was that even non-organic agricultural practices harm ecosystems and wildlife, so avoiding organic foods as a vegan is pointless.
So it is more harm reduction than systematic change? Completely reasonable.
I didnt mean to imply this is somehow not enough - Im just a ponderer and wanted to know if there was some general consensus on the issue because the whole endeavor appears impossible in the modern world (we have little power over where our food comes from or how it is produced), something the meme seemed to allude to.
Yeah, harm reduction with a side of “it’s often easier to go for the systematic change”.
For example, one of the possible moral stances is that it’s fine to “employ” animals for their animal products, so long as the relationship is beneficial for both sides and we take utmost care that the animal actually wants to be in that relationship.
But even people with that moral stance generally end up not eating animal products after all, because well, as you say, it is practically impossible to know what happens in the supply chain. They’d have to keep backyard chickens or such to actually know the supply chain, which is a lot of effort for eggs.
What if it’s a cow that like does something shitty? Like it murders a kid on purpose and then even gets a trial with full due process. Is it cool to eat just that one?
I’m just kidding, haha. I fully support your diet. I tried it myself for one year experimentally when I was still competing in Muay Thai. It was pretty cool but my metabolism is way too fast to afford it.
Yeah, good bit of trolling. 😅 That’s exactly why I mention it, because folks often cannot conceptualize giving up a particular food and just assume you have to take on every possible conflict to be able to still eat it as often as morally possible.
It was pretty cool but my metabolism is way too fast to afford it.
I mean, a vegan diet shouldn’t need to be expensive, as legumes are the cheapest form of protein.
Of course, if you were eating lots of veggies along with the vegan diet, that can be pricy.
And there’s lots of replicas of non-vegan foods, which are highly marketed and expensive as balls.
But yeah, beans, lentils, peas, peanuts etc. are super cheap and keep you satiated for a few hours.
It was more access and versatility of fats, as well as overall caloric intake. To note too, I’m a pretty unique case in this and not a good example anatomically/physiological relative to the norm. I walk around at about 125 naturally, and I’m 5’9. I fought at flyweight (125) pounds, so even though in day to day life I’m a very small guy, I was hillariously considered monstously huge in my weight class.
I’m 37 now, and I still have an insanely high metabolism and look the same. The issue I ran into in a nutshell is this was back in 2009ish, so access to a lot of alternative fats and proteins was considerably less, and with my freakish metabolism it was at the time extremely expensive.
I was also only twenty so there is a very fair to real chance I was also just a fucking idiot.
Respectfully, the problem with that line of thinking is it’s effectively based on a strawman. Veganism is not about perfectionism, nor is it about living like some monk in the woods who does not harm a single blade of grass. Veganism is about not viewing animals as commodities and reducing as much harm is reasonably possible.
The problem with modern supply chains is that you can’t know every detail about the goods you are purchasing, so vegans make decisions based on what they know, it’s common for vegans to accidentally purchase a product with animal products. So you just go oops and try better next time. It’s not really as complicated as you are making out to be in your head.
But to directly answer your question how do you avoid food that have been grown with things like feather meal and manure? The answer is simple but a lot of people aren’t going to like it. You avoid buying organic, and if possible you support local farmers which grow in a way which aligns with your values. And if you can, start a garden and grow some of your own food.
But if you avoid buying organic, then you’re supporting agricultural practices that harm local ecosystems, pollinators, waterways and aquatic life, bird populations, etc…
So which is worse, honestly? You’re right that perfectionism isn’t possible, but it’s entirely possible to become overwhelmed with the constant triage one must do to reduce one’s impact as much as possible.
The one that has a mother crying for her slain newborn. That’s the worse one.
Can you offer more context than that? I’m not sure what the reference is. Which one is that?
Between organic or non-organic produce, I’m not aware of either one involving infanticide.
I read your comment as a choice between organic food and veganism.
I think that’s a false dichotomy, because someone can be vegan and only eat organic. It’s not mutually exclusive, and the vast majority of people are probably neither.
If you mean that organic produce isn’t vegan, then I’d say you’re taking the ideological purity test a little too far. If you really want to reduce your harm to 0, then the only way to do that is to be like the Jain Sallekhanas who vow to eat nothing for the rest of their lives.
My point was that even non-organic agricultural practices harm ecosystems and wildlife, so avoiding organic foods as a vegan is pointless.
So it is more harm reduction than systematic change? Completely reasonable.
I didnt mean to imply this is somehow not enough - Im just a ponderer and wanted to know if there was some general consensus on the issue because the whole endeavor appears impossible in the modern world (we have little power over where our food comes from or how it is produced), something the meme seemed to allude to.
Thanks for your insight.
Yeah, harm reduction with a side of “it’s often easier to go for the systematic change”.
For example, one of the possible moral stances is that it’s fine to “employ” animals for their animal products, so long as the relationship is beneficial for both sides and we take utmost care that the animal actually wants to be in that relationship.
But even people with that moral stance generally end up not eating animal products after all, because well, as you say, it is practically impossible to know what happens in the supply chain. They’d have to keep backyard chickens or such to actually know the supply chain, which is a lot of effort for eggs.
What if it’s a cow that like does something shitty? Like it murders a kid on purpose and then even gets a trial with full due process. Is it cool to eat just that one?
I’m just kidding, haha. I fully support your diet. I tried it myself for one year experimentally when I was still competing in Muay Thai. It was pretty cool but my metabolism is way too fast to afford it.
Yeah, good bit of trolling. 😅 That’s exactly why I mention it, because folks often cannot conceptualize giving up a particular food and just assume you have to take on every possible conflict to be able to still eat it as often as morally possible.
I mean, a vegan diet shouldn’t need to be expensive, as legumes are the cheapest form of protein.
Of course, if you were eating lots of veggies along with the vegan diet, that can be pricy.
And there’s lots of replicas of non-vegan foods, which are highly marketed and expensive as balls.
But yeah, beans, lentils, peas, peanuts etc. are super cheap and keep you satiated for a few hours.
It was more access and versatility of fats, as well as overall caloric intake. To note too, I’m a pretty unique case in this and not a good example anatomically/physiological relative to the norm. I walk around at about 125 naturally, and I’m 5’9. I fought at flyweight (125) pounds, so even though in day to day life I’m a very small guy, I was hillariously considered monstously huge in my weight class.
I’m 37 now, and I still have an insanely high metabolism and look the same. The issue I ran into in a nutshell is this was back in 2009ish, so access to a lot of alternative fats and proteins was considerably less, and with my freakish metabolism it was at the time extremely expensive.
I was also only twenty so there is a very fair to real chance I was also just a fucking idiot.