jerkface

~~https://web.archive.org/web/20250704213602/https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-region/13-year-old-kitchener-cyclist-injured-after-being-struck-by-vehicle/article_fcac4bea-10b0-55ab-89df-15fdb201dc2d.html~~

didn't work

Awwww, missed you this last two years

We're in for a long arc.

First of all, the goal here is simply to meet the Chinese governments "Sustainable Development Goals." That's what "could help protect ground water" means. It's a meaningless goal from the perspective of veganism or even global conservation.

But it's also a meaningless solution. The rate of consumption increases each year. In that context, the goal isn't just, "eat 10% less meat", it's, "establish a hard limit on the amount of meat consumed, which is 10% less than our current rate of production." Maintaining that hard limit becomes a larger and larger commitment each year, with a growing population sharing a fixed amount of meat. There might be a mechanism for accomplishing that IN CHINA, but globally that is an utterly unimplementable solution to any problem that animal ag is currently causing.

I think it's the only fair compromise. I think we should respect a right to delete. But I don't think that right to delete should be powerful enough to smother discussion. The person who started the communal thread should not have the power to silence everyone who participates.

I don't give a shit about eating meat, I care about murdering individuals I love. You can't trick people into not committing atrocity. It will never work. They've already been thoroughly tricked by someone much more clever and devious than we. That's not a contest we can win. The only thing we have are our principles. It worked on us, it has worked on others, and it will continue to work.

Yeah. Right. How long would a 10% reduction last before we were right back where we were.

this is a cartoon understanding of partriarchy

It's a rigged game. It's like you're at a casino. It doesn't matter HOW you play the game, the casino wins. The way to beat them is not to engage with them at all. Established capital exploits the artist and the audience alike. You have to work outside the system of coercive control to have a meaningful effect that doesn't just get turned back against you. Giving the artist more incentive to stay in an abusive situation ultimately helps the platform more than the artist, as compared to spending the same money through a direct channel.

Irrelevant but thanks

your brain has been fucked by capitalism.

Says the guy who wants to die fighting for some corporation's stable diffusion AI

I'm not going to unfold the thread to see what other benighted things you are saying