Feeling sad about the Amazon burning? Stop eating meat.
August 26, 2019 11:33 AM Subscribe
Studies have shown that the fires aren’t caused by natural occurrences, but by humans--our love for meat, to be exact. The vast majority of the fires have been set by loggers and ranchers to clear land for cattle: Brazil is the world's largest exporter of beef. But it's not just a problem for Brazil. Neighboring Bolivia has also lost 1 million acres of forest.
Set aside the destruction of the Amazon rainforest, the planet's lungs, producing 20% of our oxygen every year. The science is clear. Huge reductions in meat-eating are essential to avoid dangerous climate change. Livestock are thought to contribute somewhere between 14.5% and 18% of global greenhouse gas emissions: more than cars, planes, trains and ships combined. Some studies have found that number may be as high as 51%. And methane - the main GHG produced by livestock - warms the planet by 86 times as much as CO2.
It goes on and on. More than one billion people do not have adequate drinking water, and while agriculture consumes about 70% of fresh water worldwide, it takes 1232 gallons of water to produce a serving of steak, and only 61 gallons to produce a serving of tofu. Meanwhile, manure runoff pollutes lakes, rivers, groundwater, killing aquatic life, causing ocean dead zones, and poisoning drinking water.
"Climate despair" is real. You may feel anxious, depressed, hopeless. But the problem is not out of our hands. One person not eating beef for a year saves approximately 3,432 trees. By far the most practical solution is to stop - or at least dramatically reduce - our meat intake.
Set aside the destruction of the Amazon rainforest, the planet's lungs, producing 20% of our oxygen every year. The science is clear. Huge reductions in meat-eating are essential to avoid dangerous climate change. Livestock are thought to contribute somewhere between 14.5% and 18% of global greenhouse gas emissions: more than cars, planes, trains and ships combined. Some studies have found that number may be as high as 51%. And methane - the main GHG produced by livestock - warms the planet by 86 times as much as CO2.
It goes on and on. More than one billion people do not have adequate drinking water, and while agriculture consumes about 70% of fresh water worldwide, it takes 1232 gallons of water to produce a serving of steak, and only 61 gallons to produce a serving of tofu. Meanwhile, manure runoff pollutes lakes, rivers, groundwater, killing aquatic life, causing ocean dead zones, and poisoning drinking water.
"Climate despair" is real. You may feel anxious, depressed, hopeless. But the problem is not out of our hands. One person not eating beef for a year saves approximately 3,432 trees. By far the most practical solution is to stop - or at least dramatically reduce - our meat intake.
This post was deleted for the following reason: I appreciate that this is a big detailed post about something important, but the framing (and the subsequent OP followups) make it pretty impossible to have a discussion about the subject and not about the OP's particular suggested position. -- restless_nomad
pope guilty posted this twitter thread to the bernie sanders thread during the stretch where it got derailed with a discussion of meat-eating and the burning amazon.
i'm a small number of degrees of separation from the person who originally posted this; she's a phd candidate who's done extensive field work in the amazon and who knows her shit.
the tl;dr is that the fires weren't set to clear land for beef production. the fires were set by the brazilian bourgeoisie to break the political power of brazilian indigenous people and peasants — to literally burn away their ability to survive without submitting to rule by big landowners. the big landowners would do this even if there were not any money in it. stopping them doesn't require abstaining from meat-eating. stopping them requires smashing capital.
it is i suppose a good thing to not eat cows, but you will not solve the problem of the burning amazon by refusing to eat cows. there is no individual solution available here, not unless you're ready to become an ecoterrorist and have the skills required to become an ecoterrorist.
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 11:43 AM on August 26, 2019 [92 favorites]
i'm a small number of degrees of separation from the person who originally posted this; she's a phd candidate who's done extensive field work in the amazon and who knows her shit.
the tl;dr is that the fires weren't set to clear land for beef production. the fires were set by the brazilian bourgeoisie to break the political power of brazilian indigenous people and peasants — to literally burn away their ability to survive without submitting to rule by big landowners. the big landowners would do this even if there were not any money in it. stopping them doesn't require abstaining from meat-eating. stopping them requires smashing capital.
it is i suppose a good thing to not eat cows, but you will not solve the problem of the burning amazon by refusing to eat cows. there is no individual solution available here, not unless you're ready to become an ecoterrorist and have the skills required to become an ecoterrorist.
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 11:43 AM on August 26, 2019 [92 favorites]
Here's another twitter thread by crop scientist Dr. Sarah Taber also arguing that the Amazon fires are not meat-related. Everyone should probably reduce their intake of meat, yes, but the Amazon issue is more complicated.
posted by thebots at 11:48 AM on August 26, 2019 [20 favorites]
posted by thebots at 11:48 AM on August 26, 2019 [20 favorites]
Perennial MeFi favourite Sarah Taber recently had a thread about this very subject:
Her point is similar to RNTP’s above: from the perspective of the US, the Amazon fires are a political problem, not one caused by economic demand. The solution is also likely to be political in nature.
That said, beef is really not great for the environment, even if some of the anger is misdirected in this instance. We’re not going to arrive at a habitable planet with current consumption patterns.
posted by chappell, ambrose at 11:48 AM on August 26, 2019 [24 favorites]
Hi! If you live in the USA and you want to do something about the Amazon that's fantastic.(Threadreader for twitter averse)
And just so's you know, giving up beef will do jack squat because BRAZILIAN BEEF EXPORTS TO THE US HAVE BEEN BANNED SINCE 2017.
Her point is similar to RNTP’s above: from the perspective of the US, the Amazon fires are a political problem, not one caused by economic demand. The solution is also likely to be political in nature.
That said, beef is really not great for the environment, even if some of the anger is misdirected in this instance. We’re not going to arrive at a habitable planet with current consumption patterns.
posted by chappell, ambrose at 11:48 AM on August 26, 2019 [24 favorites]
Bah, thebots!
posted by chappell, ambrose at 11:48 AM on August 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by chappell, ambrose at 11:48 AM on August 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Taber also pointed out that, due to the US/China trade war, Brazil is now the go-to market for soybeans for China. Which means more cleared land needed for even more soy farms. But no one is saying "stop eating tofu."
posted by rednikki at 12:02 PM on August 26, 2019 [14 favorites]
posted by rednikki at 12:02 PM on August 26, 2019 [14 favorites]
Charles C. Mann also has an interesting twitter thread about how the current activity in Brazil echoes the old dictatorship's actions in Amazonia. TL;DR: it's only superficially about ranching and beef. It's perhaps even more about breaking the back of indigenous peoples who don't support Bolsonaro while the kleptocrats get in on the grift.
posted by tclark at 12:02 PM on August 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by tclark at 12:02 PM on August 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
This is a good post because it brings out important knowledge. I heard a very angry Brazilian on the radio saying basically what is posted here, but clearly, international politicians don't know enough. I can see that sometimes MetaFilter reaches influential people, I hope this is the case now.
posted by mumimor at 12:05 PM on August 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by mumimor at 12:05 PM on August 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
and like i'm totally down with stopping meat-eating — cows and pigs are basically sentient and it's a sin to eat 'em, and yes the resources devoted to livestock farming are best spent elsewhere — but grafting this struggle onto the political problem of the brazilian bourgeoisie's insane scorched-earth violence against indigenous people and the rural poor is beyond poor praxis. by placing your hobbyhorse in front of the real issues you are providing cover for the rich criminals committing a global-scale crime against humanity. this is true even though your hobbyhorse is a really good hobbyhorse.
well and also in general pretending that maintaining individual virtue is a way to combat systemic violence is a strategy for feeling good about oneself while also failing to engage in real political action.
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 12:06 PM on August 26, 2019 [24 favorites]
well and also in general pretending that maintaining individual virtue is a way to combat systemic violence is a strategy for feeling good about oneself while also failing to engage in real political action.
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 12:06 PM on August 26, 2019 [24 favorites]
A quote from The Case For Climate Rage by Amy Westervelt, which I found in the dim dusty corners of 4 threads down, same title, I was going to quote it there, but it feels even more relevant here.
...Foer will soon join them with his own version of the “we are all to blame” narrative, We Are the Weather, in which he argues first, incorrectly, that human diets are the primary cause of climate change, and then that “we” need to tackle it by making the necessary lifestyle changes. There are more, believe. The system explicitly rewards these men for visualizing the future as a parallel system that leaves the patriarchal, capitalist pyramid intact. It’s all they know how to imagine, and all the rest of us are permitted to imagine: a future in which the right politicians, coupled with the right scientists and corporate executives, will turn climate change into an opportunity, not a crisis, with jobs and profits for all!
posted by Acid Communist at 12:10 PM on August 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
...Foer will soon join them with his own version of the “we are all to blame” narrative, We Are the Weather, in which he argues first, incorrectly, that human diets are the primary cause of climate change, and then that “we” need to tackle it by making the necessary lifestyle changes. There are more, believe. The system explicitly rewards these men for visualizing the future as a parallel system that leaves the patriarchal, capitalist pyramid intact. It’s all they know how to imagine, and all the rest of us are permitted to imagine: a future in which the right politicians, coupled with the right scientists and corporate executives, will turn climate change into an opportunity, not a crisis, with jobs and profits for all!
posted by Acid Communist at 12:10 PM on August 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
like if even one person walks away from this post thinking "i don't eat meat so i've done my part to stop the amazon from burning," that is one person's worth of damage that you've done to the cause of stopping the amazon from burning.
okay i'm going to step away now. i am too angered up in the blood to participate in this thread.
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 12:11 PM on August 26, 2019 [11 favorites]
okay i'm going to step away now. i am too angered up in the blood to participate in this thread.
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 12:11 PM on August 26, 2019 [11 favorites]
in general pretending that maintaining individual virtue is a way to combat systemic violence is a strategy for feeling good about oneself while also failing to engage in real political activity.
This, a thousand times this. See also the recent discussion of boycotting SoulCycle and Equinox. Every time something with complicated and problematic issues arises, some numbnuts suggests boycotting. It's a pattern. The reason boycotts are always suggested is that it frames discussion around the stupid boycott rather than the real issue, and gives cover to the actual assholes to continue their assholery. At this point I assume I can't trust any journalist who still wants to write a story about boycotts, but that may just be my own tinfoil hat.
posted by axiom at 12:11 PM on August 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
This, a thousand times this. See also the recent discussion of boycotting SoulCycle and Equinox. Every time something with complicated and problematic issues arises, some numbnuts suggests boycotting. It's a pattern. The reason boycotts are always suggested is that it frames discussion around the stupid boycott rather than the real issue, and gives cover to the actual assholes to continue their assholery. At this point I assume I can't trust any journalist who still wants to write a story about boycotts, but that may just be my own tinfoil hat.
posted by axiom at 12:11 PM on August 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
It's perhaps even more about breaking the back of indigenous peoples who don't support Bolsonaro while the kleptocrats get in on the grift.
I'd go further and say it's purposeful cultural genocide - by razing the Amazon, you're razing a way of life.
posted by dinty_moore at 12:11 PM on August 26, 2019 [10 favorites]
I'd go further and say it's purposeful cultural genocide - by razing the Amazon, you're razing a way of life.
posted by dinty_moore at 12:11 PM on August 26, 2019 [10 favorites]
I agree with all the anger. I am so angry, I find it hard to be in myself, if that makes sense. But anything that threatens the economy of the genocide that is happening right now is helpful. I embrace this angle, as I pressure local politicians to take action.
posted by mumimor at 12:15 PM on August 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by mumimor at 12:15 PM on August 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Philosophy Tube: Climate Grief
As the signs say, start apologizing to your children now.
posted by The Whelk at 12:20 PM on August 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
As the signs say, start apologizing to your children now.
posted by The Whelk at 12:20 PM on August 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
A very useful thread. Thanks to ohsnapdragon, Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon , and tclark.
Question: is this about meat in general, or beef in particular?
posted by doctornemo at 12:21 PM on August 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
Question: is this about meat in general, or beef in particular?
posted by doctornemo at 12:21 PM on August 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
As the signs say, start apologizing to your children now.
I don't have kids, does that absolve me ?
( trick question, the answer is no ).
posted by Pendragon at 12:24 PM on August 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
I don't have kids, does that absolve me ?
( trick question, the answer is no ).
posted by Pendragon at 12:24 PM on August 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon, Acid Communist, axiom: in your opinion what is it that we can do to help stop the Amazon burning?
Rednikki: soy is also one of the main crops used to feed livestock.
posted by ohsnapdragon at 12:25 PM on August 26, 2019
Rednikki: soy is also one of the main crops used to feed livestock.
posted by ohsnapdragon at 12:25 PM on August 26, 2019
Just read this earlier today in the Guardian, a very angering read about what Bolsonaro’s government has been doing: Fires are devouring the Amazon. And Jair Bolsonaro is to blame
posted by bitteschoen at 12:26 PM on August 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by bitteschoen at 12:26 PM on August 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon, Acid Communist, axiom: in your opinion what is it that we can do to help stop the Amazon burning?
I'm not them, but: Remove Jair Bolsonaro from power. Or remove the pretense that he's doing all he can to stop the fires. Either would require massive state-level action, which is not something most mefites can do (especially since those of us the US and UK have pro-Bolsonaro and pro-wildfire governments).
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:40 PM on August 26, 2019 [8 favorites]
I'm not them, but: Remove Jair Bolsonaro from power. Or remove the pretense that he's doing all he can to stop the fires. Either would require massive state-level action, which is not something most mefites can do (especially since those of us the US and UK have pro-Bolsonaro and pro-wildfire governments).
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:40 PM on August 26, 2019 [8 favorites]
Hank Green also weighed in. The Amazon isn't 'Burning'. It is Being Burned.
posted by Glinn at 12:42 PM on August 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Glinn at 12:42 PM on August 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
I'm not them, but: Remove Jair Bolsonaro from power.
see also: respect and protect indigenous sovereignty and respond to attacks upon it as strongly and as decisively as one would to violent organized attacks on any other allied world government. sanctimony about meat eating contributes nothing of value.
posted by poffin boffin at 12:45 PM on August 26, 2019 [14 favorites]
see also: respect and protect indigenous sovereignty and respond to attacks upon it as strongly and as decisively as one would to violent organized attacks on any other allied world government. sanctimony about meat eating contributes nothing of value.
posted by poffin boffin at 12:45 PM on August 26, 2019 [14 favorites]
> Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon, Acid Communist, axiom: in your opinion what is it that we can do to help stop the Amazon burning?
ugh, you have dragged me back into it.
there is a lot of nothing that we can do immediately, not unless you have connections there and speak both portuguese and one or more indigenous languages. if you're someone who can do something immediately you already know what you need to do.
in the medium-term we gotta prepare for the no-fooling international revolution. shit's gotten weird in the last decade and it's going to get a lot weirder as the climate catastrophe continues to get worse. a lot of things that seemed stable throughout the 20th century are melting into air, titanic forces that were once frozen are now shifting, and all we know is that everything we knew is falling apart around us. what's that one gramsci quote? an old world is dying and a new world struggles to be born. now is the time of monsters.
organize in your community. build networks of mutual aid in your local community. join a group of organized anarchists and/or socialists and work with people with an international perspective (which if you're in north america might mean working with the goddamned trotskyists, who are obnoxious and culty but kind of effective in their weird-ass way. network with them, but don't join their cults.) militate with leftists who are trying to gain influence over the united states government, because the united states government is inherently crap but it's also an 800 pound gorilla, and if we can pry it out of the hands of the fascists we'll have an easier time throwing bolsonaro into the ocean.
stop eating meat if you want to feel good about yourself, but organizing a meat boycott isn't going to stop the brazilian fascists. back in the 19th century a lot of decent good-hearted people organized cotton and sugar boycotts in order to fight slavery... but it wasn't cotton and sugar boycotts that ended de jure slavery in the western hemisphere. it was slaves liberating themselves and it was john brown fomenting revolutionary violence and it was activists getting abraham fuckin' lincoln elected and then it was abraham fuckin' lincoln sending soldiers with guns to kill confederate assholes and warships with guns to blockade confederate ports.
boycotting meat is fine, but it is a fundamentally unserious response that doesn't rise to the fraught occasion we find ourselves living in.
solidarity.
goddammit. now you've made me realize i need to take activism more seriously rather than trying to like build a cult of personality on the Internet. gross.
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 1:01 PM on August 26, 2019 [16 favorites]
ugh, you have dragged me back into it.
there is a lot of nothing that we can do immediately, not unless you have connections there and speak both portuguese and one or more indigenous languages. if you're someone who can do something immediately you already know what you need to do.
in the medium-term we gotta prepare for the no-fooling international revolution. shit's gotten weird in the last decade and it's going to get a lot weirder as the climate catastrophe continues to get worse. a lot of things that seemed stable throughout the 20th century are melting into air, titanic forces that were once frozen are now shifting, and all we know is that everything we knew is falling apart around us. what's that one gramsci quote? an old world is dying and a new world struggles to be born. now is the time of monsters.
organize in your community. build networks of mutual aid in your local community. join a group of organized anarchists and/or socialists and work with people with an international perspective (which if you're in north america might mean working with the goddamned trotskyists, who are obnoxious and culty but kind of effective in their weird-ass way. network with them, but don't join their cults.) militate with leftists who are trying to gain influence over the united states government, because the united states government is inherently crap but it's also an 800 pound gorilla, and if we can pry it out of the hands of the fascists we'll have an easier time throwing bolsonaro into the ocean.
stop eating meat if you want to feel good about yourself, but organizing a meat boycott isn't going to stop the brazilian fascists. back in the 19th century a lot of decent good-hearted people organized cotton and sugar boycotts in order to fight slavery... but it wasn't cotton and sugar boycotts that ended de jure slavery in the western hemisphere. it was slaves liberating themselves and it was john brown fomenting revolutionary violence and it was activists getting abraham fuckin' lincoln elected and then it was abraham fuckin' lincoln sending soldiers with guns to kill confederate assholes and warships with guns to blockade confederate ports.
boycotting meat is fine, but it is a fundamentally unserious response that doesn't rise to the fraught occasion we find ourselves living in.
solidarity.
goddammit. now you've made me realize i need to take activism more seriously rather than trying to like build a cult of personality on the Internet. gross.
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 1:01 PM on August 26, 2019 [16 favorites]
[Note: 'you' here is basically editorial, I'm not specifically referring to anyone]
I'd add to what both Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish and poffin boffin have said: there's not a lot of specific, direct action you can take that's as immediately psychologically satisfying as skipping a burger for lunch (or forever). These types of issues aren't amenable to an individual-vs-the-world type of approach. I'd suggest that you at least have to start by voting where your boycott is/would be -- don't support politicians who don't have the will to fight against Bolsonaro, or who are aligned with the powers whose interests countermand that inclination. If you are inclined you can extend your involvement from there, by callng your representatives or even getting involved in politics at a ground level, which is really just to say that's the next logical step from simply voting.
Separate from the specific issue of the Amazon, think about what you do on social media, which is definitely a thing you can control. Don't blindly repost whatever you trip over that seems like it might be vaguely aligned with your views, because a lot of the memetic churn on social media confuses the real issues. It's much easier to see the real problems in the world when you're not bombarded with stupid gifs about meat boycotts or whatever the issue du jour is (and which I view as the social media equivalent of journalists writing articles about boycotts for clicks). This is probably one of those areas where nobody can put an end to stupid memes, but hey, you can at least not perpetuate them. Hell, get real crazy and delete facebook altogether.
posted by axiom at 1:02 PM on August 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
I'd add to what both Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish and poffin boffin have said: there's not a lot of specific, direct action you can take that's as immediately psychologically satisfying as skipping a burger for lunch (or forever). These types of issues aren't amenable to an individual-vs-the-world type of approach. I'd suggest that you at least have to start by voting where your boycott is/would be -- don't support politicians who don't have the will to fight against Bolsonaro, or who are aligned with the powers whose interests countermand that inclination. If you are inclined you can extend your involvement from there, by callng your representatives or even getting involved in politics at a ground level, which is really just to say that's the next logical step from simply voting.
Separate from the specific issue of the Amazon, think about what you do on social media, which is definitely a thing you can control. Don't blindly repost whatever you trip over that seems like it might be vaguely aligned with your views, because a lot of the memetic churn on social media confuses the real issues. It's much easier to see the real problems in the world when you're not bombarded with stupid gifs about meat boycotts or whatever the issue du jour is (and which I view as the social media equivalent of journalists writing articles about boycotts for clicks). This is probably one of those areas where nobody can put an end to stupid memes, but hey, you can at least not perpetuate them. Hell, get real crazy and delete facebook altogether.
posted by axiom at 1:02 PM on August 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
Oh also look up guillotine blueprints on the internet.
posted by axiom at 1:03 PM on August 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by axiom at 1:03 PM on August 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
"sanctimony about meat eating contributes nothing of value"
Jair Bolsonaro is an evil person. He is part of a corrupt government and corrupt power system. Eating meat is still factually bad for every facet of the planet and all its lifeforms.
As mentioned in the post, deforestation is not just a problem for Brazil. Uruguay, the fifth-largest exporter of beef to the US, devotes more than 70% of its land to pastures. Since 2001, it’s leveled one-fifth of its forests.
Moreover, "the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service has a rule that allows beef and pork labeling to bear the phrase “Product of the U.S.A.” if it is merely processed in the States. However, this rule doesn’t require that the animal actually be raised in the States." And the 2017 ban only applies to "fresh beef" not beef products. The most recent data shows imports of beef from Brazil in January 2019 were up 39 percent by volume compared to January 2018 (11.5 million pounds vs. 8.3 million pounds, respectively).
But okay, say we are confident that none of our beef is currently coming from Brazil/other countries surrounding the Amazon. Donald Trump agreed at a meeting in Washington on March 19, 2019 with Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro to take steps to resume beef trade between the two countries. And the original ban was due to health concerns, not because of the environmental damage.
posted by ohsnapdragon at 1:04 PM on August 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Jair Bolsonaro is an evil person. He is part of a corrupt government and corrupt power system. Eating meat is still factually bad for every facet of the planet and all its lifeforms.
As mentioned in the post, deforestation is not just a problem for Brazil. Uruguay, the fifth-largest exporter of beef to the US, devotes more than 70% of its land to pastures. Since 2001, it’s leveled one-fifth of its forests.
Moreover, "the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service has a rule that allows beef and pork labeling to bear the phrase “Product of the U.S.A.” if it is merely processed in the States. However, this rule doesn’t require that the animal actually be raised in the States." And the 2017 ban only applies to "fresh beef" not beef products. The most recent data shows imports of beef from Brazil in January 2019 were up 39 percent by volume compared to January 2018 (11.5 million pounds vs. 8.3 million pounds, respectively).
But okay, say we are confident that none of our beef is currently coming from Brazil/other countries surrounding the Amazon. Donald Trump agreed at a meeting in Washington on March 19, 2019 with Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro to take steps to resume beef trade between the two countries. And the original ban was due to health concerns, not because of the environmental damage.
posted by ohsnapdragon at 1:04 PM on August 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
fundamentally unserious response. listen to axiom. i am going to just straight-up copy-paste one of their paragraphs in order to stress its importance:
this mefi post is chaff that helps the other side. be an activist against meat-eating — that's a super important cause that you can militate for on its own merits — but do not fucking pretend it has anything to do with stopping the burning of the amazon.
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 1:12 PM on August 26, 2019 [10 favorites]
Separate from the specific issue of the Amazon, think about what you do on social media, which is definitely a thing you can control. Don't blindly repost whatever you trip over that seems like it might be vaguely aligned with your views, because a lot of the memetic churn on social media confuses the real issues. It's much easier to see the real problems in the world when you're not bombarded with stupid gifs about meat boycotts or whatever the issue du jour is (and which I view as the social media equivalent of journalists writing articles about boycotts for clicks). This is probably one of those areas where nobody can put an end to stupid memes, but hey, you can at least not perpetuate them. Hell, get real crazy and delete facebook altogether.one danger of being desperate to want to be part of the solution is that if there's no way for you to be part of the solution — which is often the case, because you're not that important — you'll end up throwing out chaff that helps the other side.
this mefi post is chaff that helps the other side. be an activist against meat-eating — that's a super important cause that you can militate for on its own merits — but do not fucking pretend it has anything to do with stopping the burning of the amazon.
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 1:12 PM on August 26, 2019 [10 favorites]
Axiom and Reclusive Novelist, why are you convinced meat consumption is a stupid "issue du jour" and a "fundamentally unserious response"? It may or may not be responsible (or at least contributing!) to the burning of the Amazon, but how can you ignore all the scientific data? North Americans (and Europeans, and increasingly Asians) eat way, way more meat than the planet can support, period. Cutting out meat can be done concurrently with other forms of activism.
posted by ohsnapdragon at 1:12 PM on August 26, 2019
posted by ohsnapdragon at 1:12 PM on August 26, 2019
Even if demand for Brazilian beef stopped tomorrow, Bolsonaro would still be for torching the Amazon. Pretending that this is just straight economics instead of a deliberate attack on Indigenous people is like treating the US border crisis as a simple immigration issue. It's fundamentally ignoring the larger racial and political issues at play.
Yes, eat less meat! It'll help the environment in the long run, though it won't help the Amazon.
posted by dinty_moore at 1:13 PM on August 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
Yes, eat less meat! It'll help the environment in the long run, though it won't help the Amazon.
posted by dinty_moore at 1:13 PM on August 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
Eating meat is still factually bad for every facet of the planet and all its lifeforms.
This is true, but kind of empty because it leaves out the issue of scale. Whether or not any given individual recycles, the global climate problems will continue. Shaming someone for eating a burger or throwing out a recyclable box does not an ally make, and we're going to need allies to actually fight against the huge entrenched interests that are the real movers and shakers. If we don't do anything about them, we're all screwed regardless of what's for lunch tomorrow, y'know?
posted by axiom at 1:13 PM on August 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
This is true, but kind of empty because it leaves out the issue of scale. Whether or not any given individual recycles, the global climate problems will continue. Shaming someone for eating a burger or throwing out a recyclable box does not an ally make, and we're going to need allies to actually fight against the huge entrenched interests that are the real movers and shakers. If we don't do anything about them, we're all screwed regardless of what's for lunch tomorrow, y'know?
posted by axiom at 1:13 PM on August 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
Axiom, I take your point, but how can any individual take themselves seriously while they are lobbying their government to take action on climate change while eating a burger and tossing a water bottle in the trash?
It may hurt people's feelings to confront the consequences of their consumption. Doesn't change the facts.
posted by ohsnapdragon at 1:16 PM on August 26, 2019
It may hurt people's feelings to confront the consequences of their consumption. Doesn't change the facts.
posted by ohsnapdragon at 1:16 PM on August 26, 2019
Axiom, I take your point, but how can any individual take themselves seriously while they are lobbying their government to take action on climate change while eating a burger and tossing a water bottle in the trash?Because individual actions are not driving climate change and they will not drive the fight for it.
It may hurt people's feelings to confront the consequences of their consumption. Doesn't change the facts.
Focusing on individual morality is a band-aid for a systematic existential threat.
Politics and policy are force multipliers; individual shame just makes the shamer feel a little better about their own powerlessness.
posted by Ouverture at 1:21 PM on August 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
> Axiom, I take your point, but how can any individual take themselves seriously while they are lobbying their government to take action on climate change while eating a burger and tossing a water bottle in the trash?
how can any individual take themselves seriously about stopping baldness when sometimes they pull out a strand of their own hair
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 1:23 PM on August 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
how can any individual take themselves seriously about stopping baldness when sometimes they pull out a strand of their own hair
posted by Reclusive Novelist Thomas Pynchon at 1:23 PM on August 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
it's stressful to me personally on a cellular level when people are more concerned about ending meat eating than they are about valuing and protecting the lives of millions of indigenous people facing genocide but it's nothing more than i've come to expect.
posted by poffin boffin at 1:24 PM on August 26, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by poffin boffin at 1:24 PM on August 26, 2019 [17 favorites]
Well, one thing is that focusing on something that isn't fundamentally the actual problem allows the agents causing the actual problem to escape blame and/or responsibility for those issues. For example, blaming the Amazon fires on beef ranching instead of on Jair Bolsonaro directs Anglophone ire abroad towards cattle ranchers rather than towards Bolsonaro. More broadly, focus on individual-level attempts to combat climate change by giving up small daily luxuries allow the corporations whose waste is driving a much bigger fraction of modern climate change to escape being held accountable for the consequences of their profit-driven actions. You feel more in control, but it comes at the price of ignoring the people who really are in control.
Secondly, when you are going to use shame to change behavior, you need to consider that too much shame and people stop paying attention or give up, because the magnitude of the behavior change being demanded is not sustainable. Shame is a double-edged weapon, and it is harder to use it to drive good behavior than it is to use it to stop bad behavior, since shame tends to be fundamentally paralyzing.
I am with other posters: this framing is causing harm.
posted by sciatrix at 1:26 PM on August 26, 2019 [12 favorites]
Secondly, when you are going to use shame to change behavior, you need to consider that too much shame and people stop paying attention or give up, because the magnitude of the behavior change being demanded is not sustainable. Shame is a double-edged weapon, and it is harder to use it to drive good behavior than it is to use it to stop bad behavior, since shame tends to be fundamentally paralyzing.
I am with other posters: this framing is causing harm.
posted by sciatrix at 1:26 PM on August 26, 2019 [12 favorites]
Poffin, that's not fair at all. How does ending meat eating compete with saving the lives of indigenous people? Both are important. And it is the most disenfranchised people who will suffer the greatest effects of climate change.
posted by ohsnapdragon at 1:27 PM on August 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by ohsnapdragon at 1:27 PM on August 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
The framing of this post is how.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:31 PM on August 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:31 PM on August 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
By directing attention away from the suffering of indigenous people and the attempts at genocide that undermine this specific forest burning and towards meat-eating, you risk allowing the genocide to continue as long as the cattle stay out of it.
Furthermore, this is a long-standing problem with animal rights and anti-meat initiatives in particular. There is a long tradition of activism under this banner engaging in racism in order to make an "equally important" point about not eating animals, while throwing anti-racist initiatives under the bus. For example, look at... oh, I'd say about 50% of PETA's most recent campaigns. You are being particularly offensive to say "look away from the suffering of indigenous people" in the context of anti-meat-eating activism in the context of this history.
posted by sciatrix at 1:32 PM on August 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
Furthermore, this is a long-standing problem with animal rights and anti-meat initiatives in particular. There is a long tradition of activism under this banner engaging in racism in order to make an "equally important" point about not eating animals, while throwing anti-racist initiatives under the bus. For example, look at... oh, I'd say about 50% of PETA's most recent campaigns. You are being particularly offensive to say "look away from the suffering of indigenous people" in the context of anti-meat-eating activism in the context of this history.
posted by sciatrix at 1:32 PM on August 26, 2019 [7 favorites]
what is it that we can do to help stop the Amazon burning?
Firstly, the Amazon specifically is all tied up in settler-colonalism, so definitely don't be going around implying that's ever ok and has good outcomes, and don't stand by while others do.
Directly, fairly little, especially if you're not in Brazil. The struggle is always at home. Generally, every other climate activism possibility. Talk to everyone you meet and know about climate change and the need for action. Provide them with specific ways to get involved that meet their circumstances. I think there's a lot of hope in radicalising kids and teenagers and supporting the school strikes. Don't just go to protests - actively work to get others there as well. Run reading groups and do consciousness raising, get each other angry and informed.
Leaflet, soap-box, rally, strike, chain, superglue, block traffic like it's not a game but instead about whether or not I can go outdoors in my retirement.
Work to build local associations and forms of common wealth that will both help us endure disaster and be more secure in taking action. We know a general strike can't come out of nowhere, but so often people stop there, rather than saying, where can it come out of? Radicalise your co-workers. Join a union, join a dozen environmental activism groups and stick with the two best.
Support feminist and anti-racist organising, and not just because of some cold calculation that access to birth control lowers birth rates, but because if you're not they're going to be less able, even if still inclined, to also be enviro activists.
Hey even do some electoral politics maybe. The options for resistance are not limited, it's the time and energy to put into them that are. In my case, the world's largest coal port is not far off. I'm going to pay more attention to that and far less to making anaemic people ashamed of themselves.
posted by Acid Communist at 1:35 PM on August 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
Firstly, the Amazon specifically is all tied up in settler-colonalism, so definitely don't be going around implying that's ever ok and has good outcomes, and don't stand by while others do.
Directly, fairly little, especially if you're not in Brazil. The struggle is always at home. Generally, every other climate activism possibility. Talk to everyone you meet and know about climate change and the need for action. Provide them with specific ways to get involved that meet their circumstances. I think there's a lot of hope in radicalising kids and teenagers and supporting the school strikes. Don't just go to protests - actively work to get others there as well. Run reading groups and do consciousness raising, get each other angry and informed.
Leaflet, soap-box, rally, strike, chain, superglue, block traffic like it's not a game but instead about whether or not I can go outdoors in my retirement.
Work to build local associations and forms of common wealth that will both help us endure disaster and be more secure in taking action. We know a general strike can't come out of nowhere, but so often people stop there, rather than saying, where can it come out of? Radicalise your co-workers. Join a union, join a dozen environmental activism groups and stick with the two best.
Support feminist and anti-racist organising, and not just because of some cold calculation that access to birth control lowers birth rates, but because if you're not they're going to be less able, even if still inclined, to also be enviro activists.
Hey even do some electoral politics maybe. The options for resistance are not limited, it's the time and energy to put into them that are. In my case, the world's largest coal port is not far off. I'm going to pay more attention to that and far less to making anaemic people ashamed of themselves.
posted by Acid Communist at 1:35 PM on August 26, 2019 [2 favorites]
« Older spi vs spi | This is what patriotism looks like Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
This is the high price for cheep beef. It's kind of absurd that you can pay a few dollars (USD) for a burger, given how much work goes into getting that meat to you. But it's externalized costs.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:37 AM on August 26, 2019 [4 favorites]