Marxist Animalism
- This topic has 973 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 2 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Vin, socialism is not freedom to do whatever you want – that is anarcho-individualism.The damage to the planet may have been caused by capitalism drive to maximise profit, but we have the effects and consequence of climate change inside a socialist world which we require to remedy and reverse. That sausage roll is a product of social production and therefore there may well be other members of society who will deign to participate in its production. Greggs sells around 2.5 million sausage rolls per week or around 140 million per year, 1600 outlets, 20,000 workers. I suggest socialism will find better use of those resources.On the other hand since it contains less than a fifth of pork and its pasties just a third of beef, Greggs might be thought of as sustainable.I have already referred to those who have to slaughter and butcher animals.You may hold the view that it is desirable work and that many will continue working at it. Or that even though it is unpleasant, the job can be rotated and made more humane. I cannot imagine that possibility, certainly not if the present scale of demand has to be maintained.The fact that poverty in this present time forces people mostly migrant labour to take that type of job makes me think that not many will offer themselves up for it. I lived close to a meat processing plant, and despite high local unemployment, when you passed by at finishing time, it was only Eastern European languages you heard from the workers leaving the factory. In Germany it is the same…Romanians and BulgariansA few specialised abattoirs may remain for providing meat as a luxury for special occasional feasts or will be as Robbo suggests, very localised due to geography and perhaps tradition, but global or even widespread consumer demand simply will not be met, imho. There will simply be other priorities to address once we get socialism ALB posted on India's meat eating Beef and overall meat consumption has fallen by 15 percent across France between 2003 and 2010 so obviously the meat industry began a campaign to increase consumption. Although on a global scale, UK meat consumption is relatively high, it is in a steady and consistent decline. https://www.vivahealth.org.uk/resources/meat-truth/uk-meat-consumption-%E2%80%93-going-down-online
alanjjohnstone wrote:Vin, socialism is not freedom to do whatever you want – that is anarcho-individualism.The damage to the planet may have been caused by capitalism drive to maximise profit, but we have the effects and consequence of climate change inside a socialist world which we require to remedy and reverse.That sausage roll is a product of social production and therefore there may well be other members of society who will deign to participate in its production.Well said, Alan.
And Vin, I will have the freedom to liberate your pigs too.
gnome wrote:alanjjohnstone wrote:Vin, socialism is not freedom to do whatever you want – that is anarcho-individualism.The damage to the planet may have been caused by capitalism drive to maximise profit, but we have the effects and consequence of climate change inside a socialist world which we require to remedy and reverse.That sausage roll is a product of social production and therefore there may well be other members of society who will deign to participate in its production.Well said, Alan.
Yes, well said Alan. And some may deign to take part in the production of sausage rolls. . That is freedom and democracy. Not anarch- individualism, whatever that is. That is all I was saying. Dont set up strawmen, not a good debating tactic.
John Oswald wrote:And Vin, I will have the freedom to liberate your pigs too.No that would be anarcho- individualism. Nor would I be allowed to 'liberate' your cabbages.
What you need to realise is that by saying you will end meat eating, religion and alcohol workers may make a connection with the oppressive Soviet regime which also claimed to be 'communist' and who also claimed to know what was good for its citizens. Socialism will not remove the right to organise and make community decisions without the big boot of Stalin stamping on their choices.
But we who wish to stop you will be free to do so. Unless you choose to stop us, dictatorially. Even that won't work. And, exactly, you won't have what today's capitalists have: a police force to stop us stopping you!
John Oswald wrote:But we who wish to stop you will be free to do so. Unless you choose to stop us, dictatorially. Even that won't work. And, exactly, you won't have what today's capitalists have: a police force to stop us stopping you!you’re welcome to try, Bonny lad!
ALB wrote:Be careful not to provoke the Hindu nationalists, Bijou. They kill people for eating meat.Round my way they’d kill whole families for a Greggsy’s pastie.
I note that the environmental argument against livestock production is not being addressed. Just as it was not even touched upon in the Paris COP21 talks. Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that 18 percent of annual worldwide GHG emissions are attributable to cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats, camels, pigs, and poultry but other more recent analysis finds that livestock and their byproducts actually account 51 percent of annual worldwide GHG emissions. Worse than energy and worse than transportation. Nor should the pollution side-effects of pig slurry and chicken shit be ignored. But as Marx said of London shit, it could be transformed into an asset as fertiliser manure with socialism. Are members of this party claiming that we should not as a socialist society not tackle this threat to people's well-being and the planet's health?I think we don't quite take on board that to fix our eco-systems involves changes in consumption patterns across a wide variety of goods and products. I think it is agreed that meat-eating will continue and that there will not be authoritarian attempts to stamp it out but i believe increased campaigns such as what we have now from those working in health and safety who are already exercising influence to reduce the damaging effects of our diet will be upped considerably. In socialism, there will not be a very effective lobby from vested interests to counter-act such information but a balanced view put forward about what a balanced diet entails. And what we offer our kids to eat will be more than just the responsibility of parents. When they are no longer exposed to insidious advertising techniques, demand will begin to diminish and dwindle. Regards John Oswald's concern on the animal welfare, there will not be any imposed censorship and the media will be given full access to the conditions of animal rearing and the manner in which they are slaughtered. As i said some members believe animal husbandry and the method of killing can be humanely done. I have my own doubts about that but full transparency will eventually determine if it is possible.I think we can underplay just what great changes will take place with the implementation of a rationally planned society. Preferred brands in needless competition with others will disappear generic versions – of the best quality – will appear.Socialism is about diversity and what people eat will be according to local custom and tradition and culture as Robbo .suggested. What i think will not exist is the globalisation of particular cuisines – if you can call KFC and McDonalds cuisine. For sure we all benefit from a certain amount of transfer of culinary delights…from Italy we got the pizza, from India curries…and so on …and so on Greggs sausage rolls, if it remained a parochial NE "delicacy", would be no problem but like all capitalist enterprises it hopes to put out of business all other regional bakeries and capture the market. Try a Stephens steak bridie if you want a really tasty pastie. We must also address the way we grow our food. But let me once more state that some degree of meat eating will carry on but nothing like the current rate of meat consumption. That organic farming will not entirely displace industrial farming's reliance on artificial fertiliser and pesticides but agroecology will increase and monoculture decrease. Localism will become more popular…older members remember the days of local dairies…but for some foods it is more ecologically sound to transport from other regions especially if all-year round supply is sought rather than seasonal.Some members have stuck it head into sand by declaring that there will not be a widespread change in lifestyle attitudes but contradictorily say there will be changes in behaviour when it comes to why there will be voluntary labour and self-imposed limits to accessing goods and services. It will take time but same as crime, religion, racism, sexism xenophobia and many other negative traits meat-eating and animal cruelty will die out and will no longer receive public acceptance. And those who insist socialism is about personal individual freedom should note the Party declared HO a no-smoking zone. It doesn't require policemen to impose that rule against addicted tobacco users…just reasonable adherence to democratic decision-making of the party by smokers.I also recall at conferences i attended there was no meat on the menu, no sausage rolls or meat pies. But we did after conference go to local restaurants for our lamb curries and pepperoni pizzas
Now that the interval for banter is over, back to the discussion. In the meantime I've re-read the two articles on agriculture in this month's Socialist Standards. Both assume that animal rearing and meat-eating will continue in socialism. Both in fact advocate mixed farming, partly to cut back on using artificial fertilisers. That's something that those whop dream of a meat-free world haven't thought through properly. If only crops are to be grown how is the fertility of the soil to be maintained? Also, as Robbo has pointed out, it is difficult to imagine a countryside without animals and making use of them.
Quote:as Robbo has pointed out, it is difficult to imagine a countryside without animals and making use of them.Actually not so long ago it was quite easy to imagine when the UK was rife with foot and mouth. The 2001 epidemic triggered a livestock culling campaign that involved the slaughter of more than 6.5 million animals and it basically suspended cattle and sheep farming in the UK. Some environmentalists suggested it presented an opportunity to address ecological concerns. They argued that removal of sheep from the uplands presented an opportunity for the land to regenerate itself in terms of biodiversity. In the absence of grazing, and if the vegetation remains unchecked, succession will take place. More and more species of flora will establish, in turn supporting more species of fauna. The land, therefore, becomes progressively wilder, similar to that prior to human interference, hence the term "re-wilding". In this way, the land is no longer used for food production, but is used for the conservation of wildlife. By means of tourism or recreation etc., it is proposed the land could generate far more funds, and prove more economical than livestock farming on the same land.Mark Avery director of conservation for the RSPB at the time suggested that this opportunity for the conservation of biodiversity was the "silver lining" in the foot and mouth crisis. Moreover, re-wilding would be in accordance with the Rio Earth Summit 1992, and many EC Directives, which, in both cases encourage the conservation of biodiversity.But this article might be relevant in that it presents a sustainable mixed veg/meat diethttp://www.thelandmagazine.org.uk/articles/can-britain-feed-itself
Quote:organic livestock agriculture becomes more efficient and sustainable when it is carried out in conjunction with other traditional and permacultural management practices which are integral to a natural fertility cycle. These include: feeding livestock upon food wastes and residues; returning human sewage to productive land; dispersal of animals on mixed farms and smallholdings, rather than concentration in large farms; local slaughter and food distribution; managing animals to ensure optimum recuperation of manure; and selecting and managing livestock, especially dairy cows, to be nitrogen providers rather than nitrogen stealers.This recent report questions the benefits of a fully vegan diet.https://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Article/2017/11/30/Eliminating-animal-based-food-production-isn-t-panacea-for-health
The point, surely, is that 'farming' under capitalism – for which read 'factory farming as an efficient means of maximising profits' is at once fucking up the planet and producing meat that is scarcely worth eating. Most mass-produced supermarket meat is flavourless and almost entirely lacking in nutritional value. The same is true, incidentally, of mass-produced fruit and vegetables. Capitalism has produced an entire generation of people who simply don't have a clue what an apple or a tomato taste like, leave alone the explosive umami experience of a well-reared cow. FFS! Lots of people don't even know where their food comes from. I think that it's mistaken to believe that there is any quantitative or qualitative difference between cow factory farming, sheep factory farming, chicken factory farming or fish factory farming. It's all harmful, both to people and the environment and the only slightly-sentient creatures that it fucks about with. (If livestock were so clever it'd have a socialist party!) From my point of view, socialism won't be socialism if it treats animals in the way that capitalism does. So forget about your chicken nuggets and your beefburgers. If they still exist after the revolution – except as a frozen exhibit in the museum of idiocy and total divorce from the concept of a food chain – it won't have been a revolution at all. Human liberation equals animal liberation, it seems to me. And I don't even like animals. I like animals about as much as I like humans. Which is to say, scarcely at all. I'm not a vegetarian. My attitude to food is simple. If you speak to it and it can't answer then it's on the menu. And that includes tabloid readers and the watchers of the X-Factor. But you really shouldn't be eating that stuff unless you know where it came from.
TheMightyYoghourt wrote:The point, surely, is that 'farming' under capitalism – for which read 'factory farming as an efficient means of maximising profits' is at once fucking up the planet and producing meat that is scarcely worth eating. Most mass-produced supermarket meat is flavourless and almost entirely lacking in nutritional value. The same is true, incidentally, of mass-produced fruit and vegetables. Capitalism has produced an entire generation of people who simply don't have a clue what an apple or a tomato taste like, leave alone the explosive umami experience of a well-reared cow. FFS! Lots of people don't even know where their food comes from. I think that it's mistaken to believe that there is any quantitative or qualitative difference between cow factory farming, sheep factory farming, chicken factory farming or fish factory farming. It's all harmful, both to people and the environment and the only slightly-sentient creatures that it fucks about with. (If livestock were so clever it'd have a socialist party!) From my point of view, socialism won't be socialism if it treats animals in the way that capitalism does. So forget about your chicken nuggets and your beefburgers. If they still exist after the revolution – except as a frozen exhibit in the museum of idiocy and total divorce from the concept of a food chain – it won't have been a revolution at all. Human liberation equals animal liberation, it seems to me. And I don't even like animals. I like animals about as much as I like humans. Which is to say, scarcely at all. I'm not a vegetarian. My attitude to food is simple. If you speak to it and it can't answer then it's on the menu. And that includes tabloid readers and the watchers of the X-Factor. But you really shouldn't be eating that stuff unless you know where it came from.Fuck me, someone who is as misanthropic as myself, Right on brother/sister. The only slight points of disagreement, beefburgers can be delicious, if made with properly produced beef, and you seem to rule out eating parrots.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.