Moral veganism and support of government

General philosophy message board for Discussion and debate on other philosophical issues not directly related to veganism. Metaphysics, religion, theist vs. atheist debates, politics, general science discussion, etc.
BrianBlackwell
Junior Member
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 9:37 am
Religion: Other
Diet: Vegan

Moral veganism and support of government

Post by BrianBlackwell » Fri Jun 07, 2019 10:46 am

A couple of years ago, I posted a thread called "Do you believe in self-ownership?" (viewtopic.php?f=17&t=3467), questioning the apparent contradiction between moral veganism and support of government. At that time, I was told by one member to come back when I was vegan and then we can have a discussion about the moral imperative of anarchism.

Well, I'm full vegan now, and I'm back to put forth the idea that anyone citing the NAP as a basis for veganism must - by logical necessity - also embrace the anarchist philosophy. Listening to speakers like Melanie Joy describe the dynamics of domination, it becomes abundantly clear that all the arguments against aggression and infringement upon the lives and freedom of animals directly apply to governmental authority.

Furthermore, many vegans are atheists, citing the fact that religion represents a system of unfounded beliefs; and yet, the unfounded belief that certain individuals may gain valid authority over others by way of political rituals seems to pass through their filter unnoticed. I seek to heal this dissonance and bring our thought process into harmony in whatever small way I can.

Are you a vegan that supports the authority of the state, the validity of man's legislation, the politicians' right to rule based upon ancient parchments and majority consensus? If so, I'd like to hear how you resolve this idea with the NAP.

teo123
Master in Training
Posts: 520
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 3:46 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by teo123 » Sat Jun 08, 2019 12:04 am

Better don't bring this up on this forum, I've bringed this one up multiple times, and you can't really have an intelligent discussion about it. People here are convinced government can and often is based on science, and nothing you say is going to convince them otherwise.

User avatar
Jebus
Master of the Forum
Posts: 2026
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:08 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by Jebus » Sat Jun 08, 2019 1:45 am

teo123 wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 12:04 am
People here are convinced government can and often is based on science, and nothing you say is going to convince them otherwise.
Not only that! People here are convinced that the earth is round, and nothing you say is going to convince them otherwise.

Most of the active posters on this forum are first and foremost consequentialists, which is why they tend to lean against the ideas of anarchy.
How to become vegan in 4.5 hours:
1.Watch Forks over Knives (Health)
2.Watch Cowspiracy (Environment)
3. Watch Earthlings (Ethics)
Congratulations, unless you are a complete idiot you are now a vegan.

teo123
Master in Training
Posts: 520
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 3:46 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by teo123 » Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:10 am

Jebus wrote:People here are convinced that the earth is round, and nothing you say is going to convince them otherwise.
Well, now, the difference betweeen the two is that it's instinctual to think the Earth is flat, but the reason and evidence tell us otherwise, and that it's instinctual to think big government can protect the powerless and poor, but the reason and evidence tell us (or at least strongly suggest) the opposite.

teo123
Master in Training
Posts: 520
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 3:46 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by teo123 » Sat Jun 08, 2019 2:44 pm

Oh, and, @BrianBlackwell, they will consider you crazy if you say stuff like that you think Croatia may be the best country in the world to be living in. Foreign media is rather negative about Croatia (if they mention it at all, they usually claim it's a very corrupt country, and claim that politicians do nothing to eliminate that alleged corruption), and the people on this forum appear to buy into stuff like that. If you ask me, what Kolinda Grabar Kitarovic (the current president of Croatia) speaks is way more reasonable than what Donald Trump speaks and what Hillary Clinton speaks combined. Not that I agree with everything she is saying (for example, she is religious, though she rarely mentions that, and she is not nearly as much against regulation and investing in military as I am), but I can see it's much more reasonable than what popular American politicians speak. And she is also educated in linguistics, which is, if you ask me, the queen of social sciences. And I like how she dares to express skepticism of those outrageous claims about massacres in Croatian history, almost everybody accepts those claims without question (and she even dared to bring this up in Argentina, where many Croatians fled to during the 20th century). That's what should be doubted, and not global warming or the GMOs.
If you ask me, it's certainly less absurd to be proud to be Croatian, than it is to be proud to be an American (since about 3% of Americans are in prison or in jail, most of them for victimless crimes), or to be Chinese (since countless Chinese still don't have access to sanitation).

User avatar
Jebus
Master of the Forum
Posts: 2026
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:08 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by Jebus » Sat Jun 08, 2019 4:52 pm

Are you ok @@teo123 ?

Seems like you are barely holding it together.
How to become vegan in 4.5 hours:
1.Watch Forks over Knives (Health)
2.Watch Cowspiracy (Environment)
3. Watch Earthlings (Ethics)
Congratulations, unless you are a complete idiot you are now a vegan.

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 9522
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Sat Jun 08, 2019 8:56 pm

Welcome back @BrianBlackwell! Glad to hear you've gone vegan and are 100% consistent with the NAP now, I want to respond to this fully but don't have time yet.
teo123 wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 12:04 am
Better don't bring this up on this forum, I've bringed this one up multiple times, and you can't really have an intelligent discussion about it. People here are convinced government can and often is based on science, and nothing you say is going to convince them otherwise.
Teo, you made an empirical argument without evidence, Brian's argument is based on logical deduction from a particular ideological foundation. Completely different.

BrianBlackwell
Junior Member
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 9:37 am
Religion: Other
Diet: Vegan

Post by BrianBlackwell » Mon Jun 10, 2019 5:39 pm

Jebus wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 1:45 am
teo123 wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 12:04 am
People here are convinced government can and often is based on science, and nothing you say is going to convince them otherwise.
Not only that! People here are convinced that the earth is round, and nothing you say is going to convince them otherwise.

Most of the active posters on this forum are first and foremost consequentialists, which is why they tend to lean against the ideas of anarchy.
I, too, am a consequentialist, as this is the only rational basis for morality. What are the consequences of giving a select group of people permission to perform actions that would be easily recognized as immoral and unacceptable if anyone else did them? The consequence is human slavery and chaos in the name of order.

Would it be moral for me to personally "tax" your salary under threat of violence in order to pay for my child's education? If it is wrong for me to do this, what about majority consensus and political rituals alters the morality of this action? And yet, we vote for politicians to do this very thing, and permit their enforcers to fine, cage, and even kill people who resist this demand. Contradictory, no?

The result of supporting this false authority has adverse consequences, just as any denial of Truth. Imagine ignoring the laws of physics in designing an airplane. Valid authority may only be had over validly owned property. Claiming the fruits of another's labor as your own property is to claim the body that performed that labor as your property as well. Claiming people as property is called slavery.

It is not consequentialism to say, "Driving drunk has adverse consequences", since that is not always the case. Acknowledging a false claim to authority, however, always and can only have adverse consequences because it denies the free will nature of the being in question, and is thereby a denial of Truth itself.
Last edited by BrianBlackwell on Mon Jun 10, 2019 5:44 pm, edited 4 times in total.

BrianBlackwell
Junior Member
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 9:37 am
Religion: Other
Diet: Vegan

Post by BrianBlackwell » Mon Jun 10, 2019 5:41 pm

teo123 wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 2:44 pm
Oh, and, @BrianBlackwell, they will consider you crazy if you say stuff like that you think Croatia may be the best country in the world to be living in. Foreign media is rather negative about Croatia (if they mention it at all, they usually claim it's a very corrupt country, and claim that politicians do nothing to eliminate that alleged corruption), and the people on this forum appear to buy into stuff like that. If you ask me, what Kolinda Grabar Kitarovic (the current president of Croatia) speaks is way more reasonable than what Donald Trump speaks and what Hillary Clinton speaks combined. Not that I agree with everything she is saying (for example, she is religious, though she rarely mentions that, and she is not nearly as much against regulation and investing in military as I am), but I can see it's much more reasonable than what popular American politicians speak. And she is also educated in linguistics, which is, if you ask me, the queen of social sciences. And I like how she dares to express skepticism of those outrageous claims about massacres in Croatian history, almost everybody accepts those claims without question (and she even dared to bring this up in Argentina, where many Croatians fled to during the 20th century). That's what should be doubted, and not global warming or the GMOs.
If you ask me, it's certainly less absurd to be proud to be Croatian, than it is to be proud to be an American (since about 3% of Americans are in prison or in jail, most of them for victimless crimes), or to be Chinese (since countless Chinese still don't have access to sanitation).
I understand, and I appreciate your concern and lucidity. I do not balk at being called crazy, I only ask that it be proven by valid refutation of my argumentation.

User avatar
NonZeroSum
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1012
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 6:30 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan
Location: North Wales, UK

Post by NonZeroSum » Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:24 am

BrianBlackwell wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 10:46 am
. . .anyone citing the NAP as a basis for veganism must - by logical necessity - also embrace the anarchist philosophy.
. . .
Are you a vegan that supports the authority of the state. . .? If so, I'd like to hear how you resolve this idea with the NAP.
The former statement as I understand it is non-controversial because the NAP is an anarchist stance no? You're saying anyone citing anarchist reasons to do X must be an anarchist.

With the latter question I understand you're asking about NAP because that's what you care about, but just to be clear, ethical veganism is a big tent of people all arriving at the same philosophical conclusion, but often for wildly different reasons. So someone who's vegan because they think they're under a divine command to do so, doesn't need to resolve this idea with the NAP. I'm fairly confident you accept this and just making the case that most vegan reasons you've seen also apply to governments, but thought it was worth mentioning anyways.
Listening to speakers like Melanie Joy describe the dynamics of domination, it becomes abundantly clear that all the arguments against aggression and infringement upon the lives and freedom of animals directly apply to governmental authority.
Could you do some quoting of their arguments and showing how the premises reach the same conclusion for government? I understand for Dr. Joy a food aversion in the hospital broke their habit of relating to animal flesh in a removed capacity. Now they focus their advocacy on these ingrained cultural double standards to different animals, so breaking away from the collectively very impactful unconscious habit of picking meat up off the shelf and replacing it with an action where your every intent can be to do a great thing as a collective. Comparisons could be drawn with how the homeless are moved out of sight in some city centers, so you unconsciously don't imagine it's as bad a problem, and live a luxury lifestyle without organizing to solve the problem or donating to effective organizations.

I think the case is still yet to be made that a movement of people tax dodging would produce a society with more well-being/happy flourishing. Same with ancaps only concerning themselves with property rights and the NAP because you think it's the natural order humans are always seeking to return to and any deviation from only produces suffering.
Furthermore, many vegans are atheists, citing the fact that religion represents a system of unfounded beliefs; and yet, the unfounded belief that certain individuals may gain valid authority over others by way of political rituals seems to pass through their filter unnoticed.
Sure, I'm good with questioning unjustified authority. And I want to get to a radically direct and democratic society. So I think some of our best options at freedom to what is ours is; fighting for rights within the workplace, forming rent unions so landlords can't profit too much without putting in any labor, campaigning for a carbon tax on industry that harms us all, helping out in our community, etc.

So to sum up from my perspective I'm a progressive democratic socialist, ideally wanting to get to a radically direct de-centralized council-communist society with a balance of maximum rights and liberties for all. And I just see anarcho-capitalism as a desire for society to be based around a simplistic moral right to property and the NAP.

My reason for being vegan because I don't want to pay for any humans short or long-term to breed and kill animals in captivity for the virtue of their own sake and the animals. And I'd like to free up more wildlife habitat for myself to explore and animals to be able to express all their capabilities. And I'd be fine with culling invasive species where non-violent birth control methods aren't yet available. So I think all those cultural and existential virtue reasons wouldn't fit neatly into a consequential NAP argument, but I'm glad to have you on board as a fellow vegan, working towards similar goals :)

Image
Image
Unofficial librarian of vegan and socialist movements, video and writing culture.

PhiloVegan Wiki: https://tinyurl.com/y7jc6kh6
Vegan Video Library: https://tinyurl.com/yb3udm8x
Activist Journeys YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/y9vwdcj3

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests