My thoughts on Veganism Part 1/3

Posted on
My thoughts on Veganism Part 1/2

This originally was planned to be part of my revisited TVP prepping & marinating article. However to maintain readability I feel compelled to split them as another feature write up in two  three parts.

No, this article is not a repeat viral sharing of the surrounding “dangers” of veganism nor is it for spreading gluten-fuelled mock meats alarmist scare-ware. Nor is it an attempt at extrapolating fears out of Soylent Green.

…And neither that this article was “emotionally” vested or influenced; evidently from the viral campaigns we see today.

Eg. Vegan 2015 / Vegan 2016 / Vegan 2017 / Vegan 2018, or the next Vegan 2019, the next Vegan 2020, 2021, 2022, so on and so forth to infinity – moving pictures.

We get it. I get it. I have indeed watched Food,inc, and that made me question everything.

This article is to simply implore my positioning of neutrality; from a bird’s eye view. Hence, I assert that everyone read through this, top to bottom irrespective of their pre-conceived notions or expectations. Hopefully, you can draw your own conclusion besides my own – that is –

Leave everyone alone. That’s it. close this browser window. Get on with your own lives.

Oh wait, many people still want “more” explanation. They won’t rest until they “fight the good fight”.

Very well. We’ll see, by the end of this article if it is even worth fighting this moral fight over “food”.

“Us” against “you”.

Watch the above “debate”. Two vegans against one.

The successful outcome of all “debates” is the resulting evidences that of winners (survivor) and the losers (pending for “change”). Irrespective, a virtuous notion of a belief, or solution, or strategy –  largely revolves around the recoordination of disordered subjectivities (Chaos) – into concise and more concise-“er” – objectivities (Order).

What seems concise thus seemed to be rationally direct. What is “rational” therefore requires it to be visually validated by whomever as direct witnesses.

Hence, the voting system. From whatever is won, achieved, and/or conquered – something “else” as a consequence becomes less desired. Less visible. Less seen. Hence  Survivorship Bias.

The “losers” are simply left to redeem themselves for change or to await coercive, submission.  Either way, it all appeals towards only one bias. To succumb to order of authority. Or to the strategy of correctness faith as devised – by the Survivors.

To their’s eyes (the winning veganists) – their thought pattern is likely as follows: It’s not “us” or “our’s” fault to blame for any persisting frictions between contrasting conviction/s.

…”it’s the individuals’ “me” or “you” – who seemingly remains as the remaining “problem”.

Creative Commons / Pixabay

A dystopia; with “good” intent.

Veganism is now a political ‘ism’.That’s right. Dare I say it. Fit or die.

We’re nearing 7.75 billion. Yup, nearing figure eight – billion. Suppose we built a city out of this intent. Is it possible yet? We already have a city fully politicised by veganism. I am indeed moved, Morally speaking.

Suppose now we’re approaching at a breaking point – for contemplating to legislate everyone in divisive “class” morality warfare. Imagine each individual’s access and rights to living are, bound by these new law/s – confounded and Structured by simply – their way and belief of eating.

But what if “good” intent is met with impractical needs of reality? 

(COMPANY NAME BLURRED) Am I supposed to feel "morally" uplifted by seeing this SEO heading?
(COMPANY NAME BLURRED) Am I supposed to feel “morally” uplifted by seeing this SEO heading?

If a vegetarian wishes to invest in a property he/she shall not invest in a home or property if their building aren’t sanctified or blessed, or built by vegetarian builders and/or employees pertaining towards cruelty-free charter. If meat eaters wishes to file an insurance claim he/she shall be denied – if events pertaining within each claim of damage or predicament involves moral damage to the ethical beliefs or codex of cruelty-free living.

Impossible? In my own helpless conviction – all the more Realistic.

Why? I call it a futile effort no more differently than establishing yet another Religion.

Amritanshu Sikdar /

Ecological Martyrdom.

I can already  hear the screams (the keyboard-totting, SJW pitchforks). But those screams are still amongst the living. Thus emotively concerns only the living.What about those amongst the dead? In the context of Veganism, Death, indeed is a victimhood attachment, an emotive permission to arm against the perpetrators.

This involves as a result – placing both flora and fauna on a protective pedestal. Call it the Noah’s Ark, if you will. A shelter for all beings. All creatures big and small. From seeds to the chickens. From cattles to the ants. From the giant crocodiles to hyenas and vultures. Include everyone here. Include humans, too.

….Once again, a virtuous nobility indeed. I am in”deed” sold. Alas also I feel guilty and remorseful at the same time to have been granted “life” in the first place.

Because my identity is already (involuntarily speaking) am such another perpetrator to the ecosystem. Yet also, they; the “animals” – be it predators or carnivores – need to somehow consume. Somehow, without “guilt”.

What or how does the Realist Nature has to say of all this? Nature has no recognitions of “guilt” nor “perpetrators” once we place ourselves in this “dome” – this Noah’s Ark. The grass the cow eats were in just as much pain as the prey being overwhelmed by the lion. Perhaps I’d think twice from cooking that spinach; even if that offers me a more favourable macronutrient

Hence, we all contribute towards Ecological Martyrdom. Everything – involves “pain” for the sustenance of something else. 

So do we all need to congregate and band-up together against all infidels regardless of “what” they eat? No. Quite a silly prospect if you ask me. Yet the moral allures of saving every-single-thing; remains an undying gospel amongst veganism.

Morality VS Reality & the true concept of “Predator”.

“Morality” is often an influence (or affluence) one looks up to almost anything in regards to Veganism. Purity, nobility and preservation. Indeed these are VERY ideal outcomes. This is sadly – a wishful, speculation that everything is malleable as accordingly to his or her own free “will”.

“Reality” on the other hand – has no interpretation of “wills”. For each and every outcome of reality – rely upon Primal Admissions and instincts served as its witnesses. Us. Our hormones.

Consider the word “Predator“. Deconstruct it. Explore every one of its connected definitions and how closely it resembles to “Time”.

In conjunction to my prior assertion of Ecological Martyrdom – all “life” are obligatory Predators. No exceptions. The concept of “Time” itself after all – is what “Predates” one thing before – everything else leading to life, the earth, any organic “matter” – to their current objectivist manifestations. I can only hope we shall agree – that something has died or being predated before it – for something else – to progress.

See if nature possess any “Morality”, or recognises binary or conscious expressions of “Respect”, or “harmless” from all forces of geology and astronomy. Natural disasters, meteor strikes, solar flares, earthquakes, tectonic plates movements, volcanoes, thunderstorms. Or Cycles between day or night. Moments of cellular oxidations, growth, decline and decomposition.

Is it nature’s “morality” at fault therefore – being the sole cause of our deaths in the above ensuing events? No. It just speaks on its own accord.

Tj Hollowaychuk /

Veganism – assumes dignified control of all flora and fauna’s “senses”. Human or not human.

Picture a grass sitting happily. If the grass sits happily growing; that is “growing” – assuming that it NEEDS to be left as is to thus “succeed” in  growing, on its own accord…yet all of a sudden then it is involuntarily chewed out by the cows. Should we blame the cow then – for being the perpetrators for the death of the grass?

Alas, veganism defends this as “there are exceptions”. Or that sentient beings have more superior feelings. Great. Correctness hierarchy here we go again.

What about plants who are by their inherent nature – carnivorous and extremely deadly to organic beings? Aren’t they sentient too? Can we speak on behalf of their’s “morality” therefore as to why they are such and such – dangerous to mammals? Can we thus say to these plants – “not to eat this and that?” All we’d get is a blank stare.

Now what if we’re facing a lion? A Great White Shark? Or a Vulture?

I am yet to have faced a rebuttal. I can imagine they’d run for their lives. Me too.

Yet, I save the best question for last,

What or how can we explain why there are ex-vegans? Do all other concerning vegans still own these ex-vegans authority and authenticity over their decisions?

If it were me – “who cares”. Or  simply I don’t know”. I don’t speak for each of them. I do not own their contexts.

Yet condescendingly, veganism purportedly believe they still own what is rightful on behalf of all indifferences within everyone next to them, in front of them and underneath – them.

Whilst threatening fellow human beings. Including ex-vegans.

The mind boggles.

Morality Subscription = Reality Compromises. At the very least – a merit of Veganism is that of a morality march of preservative good will and nobility, at a somewhat accumulative dire cost at neglecting the much more nuanced side effects – of reality.  
Go here for Part 2!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *