when liberals get the bullet, too, I guess you won’t need to worry about how we take care of each other
when liberals get the bullet, too, I guess you won’t need to worry about how we take care of each other
that same bank also impoverishes developing nations with crippling debt.
but you haven’t shown that people can’t help each other without banks
this is not evidence that people cannot be helped without banks
this, too, is not evidence.
this is not evidence, it’s handwaving.
We don’t need to eat beef.
probably not but it’s really small potatoes compared to the systems that actively kill people instead of feeding them.
And banks have been instrumental in one of the largest rises in human living standards in history so dismantling them seems pretty cruel to those who don’t yet live as well as we do.
i don’t see any reason we can’t help people without banks.
whining about billionaires online
is just as effective. if you want to change things that are wrong, you need to go to where they are and stop them.
we need to eat. lets dismantle the fucking prisons, banks, and armies first.
Way easier to rail about billionaires online and feel snugly superior rather than actually doing the work.
did you try abstaining from beef? the meat industry grows every year. did you try abstaining from smartphones? sweatshops? air travel? your decisions made no difference.
farming is one of the biggest contributors
all of agriculture makes up about 20% of our ghg emissions.
stop wasting both of our time.
you’re free to not respond at any time.
Approximately 0.01% of lemmy’s user base would conflate simple “use” with exploitation.
can you substantiate this?
I’m surprised you don’t have a better understanding of exploitation
you have no idea what my understanding is. that’s not the subject of our discussion. don’t make this personal.
we are discussing the vegan society’s understanding.
the barest definition is a synonym of “use”. the vegan society could clear up this ambiguity but they have chosen not to do so, and there is no reason to assume they prefer a special definition of exploitation.
The absence of exploitation is indicated through consent,
no, it’s not. it’s exploitation by the barest definition, like exploiting a fallow field or a forest. the definition of exploitation can by synonymously defined as “use”. using a corpse is exploiting it. using a corpse which has, with informed consent, been consigned for use is still exploitation.
if the vegan society wants to create an additional carve-out for consensual exploitation in addition to its exceptions for practicability and possibility, it’s not as though they are unaware of these concepts. they have not done so, and there is no reason to believe they mean to do so.
Your assertion was that consent isn’t at all relevant to veganism in regards to exploitation. However, if there exist situations in which consent could relieve the existence of exploitation then it must be relevant to consider.
it’s not clear that the vegan society would allow for any exploitation, consensual or otherwise, and to the extent that sometimes people consent to being exploited, there is no reason to believe that exploitation ceases to exist in those cases.
I’m waiting for the mods to read their reports