Gore, You Can Have Your Meat and Eat It Too

While Jill Richardson might have made a good attempt at making Al Gore feel better about his meat eating habit, it would seem irresponsible from his part to keep ignoring the fact that Factory Farms have a devastating impact on the environment. Yeah, there are gentler to the Earth alternatives, like small & sustainable farms, but the vast majority of Americans buy meat and/or dairy products from animals raised at CAFO's. Besides, there is the animal cruelty issue. Even if raising, handling and trasnportation are improved, these animals still have to die, for a meal. As a responsible individual, who leads by the example, Gore should raise awareness about the animal products industry and give veganism a try. His body and soul will thank him for that!

As a vegan I agree there are many other reasons to stop eating meat - animals exist for their own reasons, not for ours and it is way past time for humans to acknowledge that we have no right to bring about their suffering. We can thrive on a healthy vegetarian diet if we choose to. Meat is a choice, not a necessity. As far as the environment, given the population of meat eaters on this planet, there is no possible way to support their habits with sustainable meat. No matter how you spin this - the bottom line is that when billions of animals are raised and slaughtered each year, it is a problem certainly for the animals themselves but also for our health and the health of our planet. I am a person with serious health issues and have been on many medications for years - since becomming totally vegan about 5 yrs. ago, along with a totally organic and holistic diet, I no longe require any medications to manage my health problems. This is not coincidence.

Eating meat: divisive issue among progressives in the U.S.!

But let's not forget that LDC farmers, especially in arid and hilly regions, desperately need the chance to make money on this value added enterprise, livestock, instead of just being limited to grains and produce.

When Gore ran for president he never got on board with a decent farm bill, one with price floors (set above costs) supply management, sufficient strategic reserves and price ceilings. But then, neither did the majority of progressive and left groups and writers in the 2007-8 farm bill debate. Can anyone show me one around here in the past 2 years?

But he deserves some credit for moving the climate change issue more mainstream and speaking out on assault-on-reason issues.

Another cuddle up to Al Gore and the Democrats article.

WTF posted in part: "(NM does not provide cashback incentives for over-production)."

I hope that you are lending a little of your political efforts towards fighting this injustice. Every individual homeowner should be allowed to produce energy and be compensated for potential excess. Using the best scenario, you should be paid at or near market rates for your excess generation.

You can start by insisting that your political representation support legislation that requires energy suppliers in NM to purchase or generate a certain percentage of their distribution from alternative generation. They will then soon realize that it's very cost effective to buy excess from their customers as a means to meet the requirements.

If individuals are allowed to generate and be compensated for excess contributions to the grid, real conservation efforts will follow and supply and demand for new technologies will kick in to benefit all. As a consequence, the "need" to colonize other countries for their oil will diminish.

Addressing food choices... ALL of our lifestyle options affect everyone else... some in big ways. I've been in and out of vegetarianism several times... but not for "higher" reasons. I'm currently in a 12 year mostly vegetarian phase that feels right for me... mostly whole grains, seed, nuts, fruit and vegetables with some fish and fowl... no red meat. Used to grow a great deal of our vegetables, but current property doesn't lend itself to planting... French intensive gardening in pots supplants in part... especially tomatoes and herbs. With the declining state of the economy, I suspect many of us will be planting more.

hey timebiter --

ok, I'm with you. there is nothing more important than deciding whether the cow is more deserving than the bean. and *we* make that call (who is to say?, you ask) every single time we eat, right?

mainly, though, I don't see how more people are not vegan, given the structures of thought out of which they operate regarding animals. before I even get to the bean, I have to make sense of the cow.

as I see it, most folks make decisions out of a system which regards animals in a very complicated (and I would argue, contradictory) way: it is one where they are willing to kill and eat animals, but it is also one in which a huge number of people grant value to animals that severely disallows such practices. the same kind of ambiguity does not seem to be a wide-ranging consideration when it comes to plants -- again, for most people (I know a fair number of fruitarians who only eat what falls from the plant). again, I don't think most people see an equivalence between violence against animals and violence against plants. so, from a view which looks at pragmatics and the public's way of thinking, I just don't see how the decision between cow and bean is a profitable one. I'd rather hear why we are so schizophrenic about animals and why the attitude of caring for them rather than killing them is so objectionable --- then we can get to the bean.

it seems like that is not the best starting point when considering the value of changing from meat-eating, though I am willing to entertain the nature of my relationship to plants *on their own terms,* but not as a debate about whether one kind of violence permits violence against animals.

it's a really tough question -- that of the bean -- and I'm not sure I have the answer, but I feel a lot more confident when it comes to the cow.

hey bigtime - reality is based in part on perception, belief, and empirical date. Bad air was once believed to be the cause of illness. Is that still the case? The point I was making is that as living beings we live off of death. I am guilty of generalizing life and trying to escape the prejudice of our species. I am well aware that plants and animals are different in many respects. They are also very similar. My point is who is to say that the cow is more deserving of life than the bean?

hey Caelidh --

glad you are all for vegans

one: no vegan is calling for the vegan police state that matti claims, so there is no attempt to force Alaskans to change

so, two: why don't we let them choose and make their culture a living entity, rather than one that is locked into some prisonhouse of the past (all cultures evolve anyway, despite the need for some to freeze culture in some timeless, idealized past). maybe they'll move away, maybe they'll find ways to live vegan there (to be honest, I have no idea what kind of local, sustainable, vegetable-based lifestyle is or could be practiced there, but they do have a growing season, especially on the coast, that could be the start). same is true for the argument that humans were meant to eat meat: come on, almost all the other choices we make are not dictated by such logic, nor do they have to be.

hey grumpyoldlady --

we only *accept* the rules of the food chain when the violence is applied away from humans; just let one bear chew on a human and see whether you hear anything about the cycle of life. no, instead we spend every possible effort to discipline bears. we apply such "timeless" and "natural" concepts at our convenience, once again, as you seem to agree with, at our desire (meaning they're not so natural or timeless after all, but subject to choice). but I thought the whole point of ethics and morality is to look more broadly than our self-gratifying needs.

and what is the foundation for finding equivalence in the violence against animals and violence which supports a vegan diet? (I'd like to hear how you actually define that violence involved in vegan agriculture, and I'm not going to hear the whole "mice and small critters are chewed up in harvesting" line of thinking -- change ag. practices as we've all been saying, as you've been saying, so that appropriate scale does not contribute to violence against animals)

hey timebiter --

just like the desert island scenario, the whole "if" a vegetable could do something like an animal is not worth discussion since it just isn't real. how can you collapse animal and vegetable when the two categories (umm..I think they're called the animal KINGDOM and the plant KINGDOM) are generally very distinct? (your comparison of beef and beans in a hole fails, in part, because of the same category confusion)

Kill your own cow.

There is no such thing as "humane meat". All food animals go to slaughter in the end.

Humane myth: An idea being propagated by the animal-using industry and some animal protection organizations that it is possible to use and kill animals in a manner that can be fairly described as respectful or compassionate or humane.
www.HumaneMYTH.org

Caelidh -

Great questions!

Recycle1 -

Congrats on steering your family onto a locally-grown, sustainable lifestyle...no mean feat, when kids are inundated from birth to eat nutritionally useless junk. Thanks, also, for the book recommendation.

timebiter -

You're exactly right. And like Caelidh pointed out, including meats in your diet does not mean that you support the abuse or cruel treatment of animals bred for food, any more than eating corn or wheat means that you support GM crops and big agri-business. Whatever our dietary preferences, we can all find ways to support responsible farmers and farming practices.

Vegans suffer that all to common human failing. Prejudice. The fact is that, with the possible exception of dairy, we must kill something in order to live. To be prejudiced against vegetable life forms shows a lack of insight. If broccolli could get up and run (to keep from being eaten) don't you think it would? If I plant a big mac I end up with a rotten bit of flesh. If I plant bean sprouts I get bean plants. So I guess that makes vegans baby eaters.

Has anyone read the book "Plenty" by Smith and Mackinnon? They took on the challenge of eating a 100 mile diet. It was a very good read.

In the growing season, our household eats a 90% meat-free diet (except for the 12 year old who is a vegetarian). Most of our meat is from our local organic farmer (it costs more, so we eat less, and most Americans would also eat less if they had to pay more)or we fish. By February, meat is a more predominent part of our meals as the food I've put up is usually dwindling and I REALLY am trying to eat as locally as possible. With the rains/floods of this June, my garden is not looking good, but our CSA share should help supplement that!

That said, my diet and that of my family's has become more meat-free over the past 5-6 years. Going from beef being the center part of a meal, to rarely eating beef and only having meat(generally fish we've caught) served at 1-2 meals per week, on average, less in summer. And I have to agree, that from my experience, my overall health has improved (less colds, better looking skin) once we cut back on eating meat.

Prince Fielder of the Brewers is a vegetarian, by the way, and seems to be doing all right.

Question?

What about cultures that live in areas that have very short growing seasons and have to live off of animals in order to survive? And, until recently have done so in a fairly respectable manner that is sustainable and in balance both environmentally and spiritually?

I think a Vegetarian diet and Veganism to be great!! I think MORE people should adopt these diets.

But to include cultures that happens to consume animal protien as a means of survival is ridiculous...

Do you just expect people in say.. far reaches of Alaska to survive on snow?

But perhaps then Global Warming will extend their growing season and all will be fine and dandy!...?

There is no sustainable or humane way to maintain a healthy planet while disrespecting/tormenting/torturing other animals for food. It is obvious that our planet would struggle with the numbers of our species present, even if we were all vegan. I am nearly vegan for reasons of respect, compassion and health (my own and that of the planet and all sentients). We are all healthier when we try to control our excesses. Our species could use a major birth control injection, and also an injection with a piece of the experience that these poor animals experience by way of our vicious species. But war and slaughter are our way, so it must be OK!

"I'm sure the pigs, cows and lambs would agree with you."

This may come as a shock to you, but the pigs, cows and lambs don't have a clue.

"Pigs are highly intelligent, sensitive, and actually very clean animals. Like dogs, pigs dream, enjoy listening to soothing music, and, when given the chance, establish complex social structures. Pigs have very long memories and sophisticated communication skills. In other words, they are sentient beings."

Therefore...what? Pigs are part of the food chain, just like the rest of us, and are killed for food by many predators, not just human beings. Should our compassion be limited to sentient beings, or encompass all living things? A head of lettuce is just as much a living thing as a pig. Doesn't a head of lettuce have a right to live out its life, or is it expendable simply because it isn't intelligent, sensitive or mobile? By what criteria do we rationalize that it's okay to kill some things and eat them, but not others? Only human beings seem to suffer a moral dilemma over what is a natural, biological necessity.

"Sorry grumpyoldlady, but you ARE delusional if you think that just because someone raises animals "naturally" for slaughter, they are cruelty free."

In nature, death and life go hand in hand. Whether it's a T-bone steak or a pile of vegetable stir-fry, it's a plateful of dead stuff that was once alive and was killed for your eating pleasure. If you really believe, in the grand scheme of things, that one plate of dead stuff is more "moral" than another, it is you who are deluding yourself.

Sorry grumpyoldlady, but you ARE delusional if you think that just because someone raises animals "naturally" for slaughter, they are cruelty free.
biomusicologist--I heard an interview with an anthropoligist once who was studying an indigenous tribe in South America I believe. They were cannibals and invited him for dinner. He didn't want to offend them, so he indulged. "It tasted quite like chicken," he remarked!

JaneM July 22nd, 2008 12:57 pm wrote:

"We have several sustainable farms in central Massachusetts now and we are able to get grass-fed pork, beef and lamb in addition to our vegetables and fruits. It's wonderful, tastes great, and is much healthier."

I'm sure the pigs, cows and lambs would agree with you. Human flesh tastes great, and is much healthier. And way more "sustainable" since there are so many of us humans.

Pigs are highly intelligent, sensitive, and actually very clean animals. Like dogs, pigs dream, enjoy listening to soothing music, and, when given the chance, establish complex social structures. Pigs have very long memories and sophisticated communication skills. In other words, they are sentient beings.

So uh, Jane....why not eat your pet dog for lunch tomorrow? I'm sure he/she tastes great and is much healthier than anything you can buy at your local Safeway (Riskway). Quite sustainable, too. Plenty of dogs to go around. Not to mention cats. I hear they taste "just like chicken."

SUSTAINABLE , is it like HUMANE SLAUGHTER ?
Please, people, no more murders . Love the beasts, don't kill them .

AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH, TOO:
ANIMAL FARMEATING POO
GIVES U MORE GAS
THAN CO2

earl

probably easier to digest though.

...in addition, I have a sneaky suspicion that people who eat meat are much more prone to violence and general meanness. Meat (in my humble opinion of course) has (possibly) helped America become the Meanest Nation ever on earth. Maybe its all that CRAP they feed and inject the animals with(?)

I dunno, just a thought.

l ate Vegan once, they taste like veal.

"To me, you are more than just a former veep. You represent a combination of my president, my father (who you remind me of very much), and a leader who is more than either of those, someone on the level of Martin Luther King, Jr. or Gandhi."

this person has problems.

They never once mentioned that the energy that gets put into farming animals is far more than the energy put into farming plants. not only that, but the energy in creates larger yields of plants.

Not only that, but it's ethically wrong to raise animals. Man, there are great advantages of being multi-issued. There is a larger picture here.

Not only to enslave animals to be used as food but to slaughter them as a preference of an addiction to gluttony of meat.

There is no argument for raising and eating animals.

As for veganism- it is simple, healthy but still needs to be paid attention to. All too often soy products are harvested in far away countries or GM soy beans are used. Not to mention there is a facination with meat-alternative products which not only use unsustainable packaging, but these products must be shipped all over the world/country.

The solution first of all MUST be eating foods and consuming products LOCALLY and products that are reusable and/or organic. the next step is to rid oneself of dairy and meat.

There are tons of recipes out there which are fabulous. tons of people prefer vegan baked goods for instance to diary and egg based sweets and there are plenty of home made recipes for meat alternatives like sausages made out of gluten flour or cheese made out of cashews!

Here are two very good vegan recipe blogs!!!

http://www.theppk.com/blog/

http://blog.fatfreevegan.com/

I CHALLENGE ANYONE ON THIS SITE TO TRY BEING VEGAN FOR ONE WEEK, ONE WEEK!!

See how you do, see how you like it, there are plenty of support and answer groups where you can recieve help and suggestions for alternatives.

I say just try it for a week, return to eating your diet before the change and just see how your body feels. Just compare the two and THEN DECIDE from there.

First try being vegetarian or vegan and then come back and tell us how it went.

I'm with zimmie53.

And I'll take a starry-eye'd hippie over a Stanford grad any day.

As I did with cigarettes, I stopped eating meat. It was too much of a hassle, so I decided I would just stop eating my fellow beings--no matter where or how they lived their lives.

Its not a bit deal to do. I'm in much better health, more fit, I have much more energy and I sleep much better at night with a clear conscience. I no longer am at odds with my heart.

Learning to eat without meat has been totally rewarding. New things to learn (and how to cook) awesome & fun. I wish I had done it years ago.

But hey, that's just me.

As for comparing Al Gore with MLK & Gandhi, I dunno about that.

Peace, love (and don't eat the animals you say you love.)

bigtime -

"you missed the point. I'm not talking about some imaginary and highly unlikely situation where you have to choose eating your dog over your survival..."

Actually, I didn't miss the point. I was being facetious. But you're right, we (i.e., human beings) do view the world and its living things through the filtered lens of our own needs and desires. We build our homes on the prettiest spot of land, irrespective of the impact our home has on whatever was there before it. We have no problem chopping down trees and plowing up the natural landscape in order to plunk our house there. We keep some animals as pets, love and cherish them, at the same time taking away their freedom and surpressing their natural habits. I have both a dog and a cat. I would not have a goat or a cow or a gazelle as a pet. Why not? Because I have no compassion for goats, cows or gazelles? No, because my house is too small, they are too big, the zoning laws in my town forbid it, and I don't particularly yearn to scoop gazelle dung off my wood floors.

We, like all other species that consume meat, view some animals as potential food. Some people view dogs and cats as potential food. Some people keep guinea pigs as pets, but have no problem eating them for dinner. I know Vegans who sincerely believe that consuming meat is barbaric, but who will readily smash a spider if it crawls up their leg or a mosquito that lands on their arm seeking a warm meal. I do consume meat. I don't apologize for it. It's one form of food that my body was designed for, and I enjoy it. Other folks feel differently. That's cool. But my desire to consume meat does not translate into a desire to see animals tortured and abused, so I limit my consumption to sources of naturally raised, cruelty-free producers and encourage others to do the same.

Truly, our viewpoints are not that far apart. I have no problem with folks encouraging me to adopt a Vegan or vegetarian lifestyle for reasons they feel are important. I do have a problem with being called delusional, in denial, addicted, or accused of having no compassion for other living things based solely on my dietary choices. While that approach might demonstrate passion, it does not persuade.

hey matti --

half measures sound great when stacked against the hyperbolic, exaggerated characterization of vegan aims. your vision of a sustainable society is no less far-fetched than the fearsome absolutist tyranny you (mistakenly) attribute to vegans as their ideal. sustainability can (and is) ridiculed in like manner as a pie-in-the-sky attitude.

as you say, the time to act is now. so if we want real change to occur, it seems to me that the gradualist approach (filled with moderate reductions and palatable, easy to accommodate change) is the most ineffective approach. I really think people want to know how they can can make big changes, changes they can feel and see the results of. that's where environmentalism has gone wrong in the past: people were able to commit without really committing (send in your check to Sierra Club or whatever and you're done, but where does that leave you?).

I really would be interested to know more about your ideas regarding cooperation and compromise -- and how they fill the bill for the kinds of fundamental change that are called for -- in terms of real practical actions.

and why are meat-eaters so absolutist and superior in their "defense" of meat-eating? the attacks on vegans are usually against vegan suasory tactics and the likelihood of change, but not the efficacy of such a diet. tell me why a well-thought-out and sustainably-driven vegan diet is NOT good -- that's the place I start.

hey grumpyoldlady --

you missed the point. I'm not talking about some imaginary and highly unlikely situation where you have to choose eating your dog over your survival (I can't stand these desert island ethical scenarios); when in the world would that ever really happen? (hmmmm...if I was stranded on a desert island and the only food was my sister........so I guess cannibalism is swell!)

what I was talking about was the inconsistency that is going on right now regarding our treatment of animals. we claim some kind of compassion for Rover which keeps us distracted from the fact that we do not apply the same set of intellectual, emotional, and ethical responses to "food animals". which is it going to be? I think the thing that connects the two is the desire of the human: we kill and eat them (as many here joke) because they taste good to us, and likewise we care for pets because it makes US feel good, gives US satisfaction/protection/etc.

jozef -

"When I am in the throes of passion the last thing in the world I want to be reminded of is filet mignon rare."

True enough, LOL! But it would make a terrific afterglow snack!

"A nice piece of steak is like sex on a fork." Jessum Crow, man". When I am in the throes of passion the last thing in the world I want to be reminded of is filet mignon rare.

WTF -

I make no bones (ahem) about why I eat meat. I enjoy it. I makes my tastebuds happy in a way a carrot or stalk of celery never could. A nice piece of steak is like sex on a fork. If our brains were designed to respond to meat as pleasure, who am I to argue with my brain?

@WTF,

"Eating meat reward the brain's pleasure centers."

Well, there you go. Our bodies like meat. Q.E.D.

I'd be curious to know how many top athletes are vegans.

@grumpyoldlady

Eating meat reward the brain's pleasure centers. That's why so many people eat meat, and as you remarked, increasingly many people eat meat. One only needs to read the passionate "reasons" why people justify eating meat to recognize that this is an addiction.

Denial is thick amongst eat-meaters.

People can eat what they want. I don't begrudge anyone their choices. I choose however, not to serve animal death on my table. If it walks, squawks, swims, flies, looks back at you, crawls, or otherwise is a member of the animalia classification I don't eat it. Pushing four decades now. I can do little to lessen the overall violence on the planet. Choosing not to eat animal flesh of any kind is one small, easy, and perhaps, healthy, way to do so. Buying local veggies and produce helps.

This approbation of Al Gore is rather misplaced, as the one of his prior sins that he has yet to give a public mea culpa, the PMRC, lies out there unchallenged. It was via the PMRC that Gore became a nationally known public figure by cooperating with some really toxic nut bag extreme right wing types (Jello Biafra has plenty to say about that topic on his spoken word LP, "I Blow Minds For a Living"). Considering the anti-meat lobby have next to nothing in their sights, the writer's tunnel vision regarding Gore is not surprising.

Just my observations:

1. "Meat eaters, like people who smoke or are alcoholics, are in denial that they have an addiction."

Eating is not an addiction, it's a necessity. Eating meat is a choice, not an attempt to relieve onesself from meat-withdrawl symptoms. Human beings have always included both meat and plant matter in their diet, so those humans who deliberately exclude meats from their diet are an anomaly, not the norm.

2. Although meat has always been a staple of the human diet, its consumption has dramatically increased, resulting in poorer health generally and increasing obesity. Greater consumption has also led to the evolution of mass-produced meats, and the resulting environmental impact and widespread abuses of animals bred for food.

3. "are vegans just asking for a kind of moral consistency when it comes to killing animals (i.e. if you don't want to kill your dog, then why do you want to kill a cow?)?"

Aside from the fact that beef is far tastier than dog, if it came down to a survival situation, sorry, Rover. I would take comfort, however, in the fact that if he had to, and if he could, Rover would not only happily eat me first, he would be spared the moral dilemma over devouring the one who spent years buying him only the finest dog food and trimming the hair around his butt. In my opinion, this gives Rover a distinct advantage.

4. "Soon, they'll figure out how to factory-produce tissue-cultured meat that is never part of a living animal– just a bunch of multiplying cells like enzymes in cheese or yogurt."

YEECHHH! Given the choice between a beautifully broiled, medium-rare hunk of prime rib and a soy wiener...sorry, Bossie, pass the au jous! Does anyone else find it strange that folks who have sworn off eating meats, for whatever reason, still seem to want their vegetable matter to look and taste like meat? What's up with that? Garden burgers, tofu hotdogs, tapioca steaks...it's akin to taking ground beef and trying to make it look and taste like broccoli! Someone, please, make it stop!

5. Whatever diet we may choose, it behooves us all to make choices that support our local farmers and producers using bio-friendly and sustainable, cruelty-free methods. If you can grow or produce your own, even better. Only by reducing the demand for mass-produced foods can we have an impact on the kind of production techniques described in the article.

@Buckcat

When I used the term "wannabes", it was in reference to the author of the lead article, Jill Richardson. I think other commentaters here have remarked on Ms. Richardson's state-of-mind when she broke into tears upon seeing Gore.

In terms of transitioning to a vegan diet, MOST people give it a whirl, maybe even try it for a few months, complaining that it does not work for them and give up, hiding behind some whiney excuse.

Sorry, it may take years of hard work to find what works (or digests), and what does not. Ask any ex-smoker how many years it took before not lighting up feels natural. Every reformed alcoholic, no matter how many years have elapsed since they last took a drink, will steadfastly admit "I AM an alcoholic". As Yoda said, "Do or do not. There is no try". "Trying" to become a vegan will often result in disappointment.

Food allergies are easily dealt with. Allergic to soy? Then don't eat it. Substitute other beans and nuts. Our bodies are not as fragile as you may believe. The body can be easily trained, ask any athlete, but it takes hard work, discipline, and yeah, a lot of GI aggravation along the way. But my point being that it takes years, many years, to find what works, and what does not.

Some people find that it is not the diet, but lifestyle (home, work, play environments) that interferes with a rapid transition. However recognizing that it is lifestyle and not diet is difficult for most people. If you are committed, you will do what is necessary.

I ate meat 45 years ago. And I have still been unable to reprogram my brain not to think "That smells good" when I catch a whiff of a barbied steak or Aussie snag. I'm no super-hero. Hell, I'm as bland as people come. But if I can make a change, others can.

rtdrury July 22nd, 2008 5:23 pm
Jill, we Americans need to cut 90% of our carbon emissions in less than 10 years to avoid destroying 2/3 of living species and flooding major coastlines worldwide among all the rest fo the destruction.
hmmm....
In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish. -- Paul Ehrlich, Earth Day (1970)

I just love how it just keeps coming back! Grand Eschatology predictions! rtdrury I'll make you a bet: 10 years from now we're all alive and well.

Jill, we Americans need to cut 90% of our carbon emissions in less than 10 years to avoid destroying 2/3 of living species and flooding major coastlines worldwide among all the rest fo the destruction. And you're advocating half the cuts, or maybe just 1/3 of the cuts, with no legitimate argument. Maybe you are implying that those 90% of emissions we need to cut somehow benefit us. But they don't benefit us unless we're talking about hyper-luxuries, conveniences, including the convenience of neglecting our civic responsibilities. We're looking at all the pros and cons of the status quo and the revolution and we find the revolution to greatly benefit people and planet and the status quo to greatly damage. I thought you were going to say something like "Hey Al Gore, you will enjoy your meat much more if you cut back from three meals a day to a couple meals a week." But no. What do you tell the murderer/rapist? Rape just one fewer this week?

Soon, they'll figure out how to factory-produce tissue-cultured meat that is never part of a living animal-- just a bunch of multiplying cells like enzymes in cheese or yogurt. Then the meat will be produced much more efficiently and humanely. Don't know as I'd want to eat it, but there's a whole new angle on this debate coming soon.

I stopped reading at this line: "You represent a combination of my president, my father (who you remind me of very much), and a leader who is more than either of those, someone on the level of Martin Luther King, Jr. or Gandhi. I burst into tears when you took the stage in Austin."

"BigTime" -- I think you must have misunderstood my post, or else I wasn't clear enough. I, myself, am vegetarian, and mostly vegan. My motivation is compassion for the animals. I want less animal suffering. The point of my post was to remind people that even though "sustainable farming" may cause less environmentally degradation than factory farming, that STILL people need to eat less meat.

I've realized that I cannot convince many people to have the compassion that I have for the lives of the animals, but I do have the right to ask them to stop messing up MY planet.

Thank you for deeming my posts irrelevant, WTF. So good of you to decide who gets to have an opinion -- mine being that I'm tired of being preached at by vegetarians. And I do appreciate you answering my rhetorical questions.

I'm curious how you established that I am among those "wannabes who go part way in absolving their addiction and then make excuses why they could not go further." I guess just more of your omnipotence. What were my excuses exactly?

Sounds like you have a great set-up there in NM. Congratulations, honestly -- I think yours is the direction most folks on CommonDreams are going. Perhaps we're not all there yet, and I apologize for not measuring up to your standard. I still don't think you know as much about what's best for all the rest of us as you think you do, but I guess that just comes with being you.

In terms of food, there are many people for whom a veg diet just does not work -- medically. As in: become veg, get sick, seek help, try many variants, stay sick, try vegan, get sicker, try macro, get sicker. You know, there ARE things that go on in other peoples' bodies that you just may not know about or understand, hard as that may be to believe.

People have different constitutions, allergies. Plus there are the medically proven drawbacks of many soy-based diets - including the thyroid problems resulting from some diets. I have first- and second-hand experience in this area, so please do not begin to tell me about my excuses for not following your diet. Perhaps your diet is not correct for everyone, and maybe we don't want to hear it from you.

Why are Internets Vegans so judgemental, absolutist, and superior?

All the vegans I've met in the real World are so nice!

Anyway, three points that I think are being neglected:

1. What the Author calls "sustainable meat" -animals raised on farms mimicking natural cycles of growth and decay then slaughtered and eaten locally- WILL WORK in reducing overall meat consumption AND reducing "greenhouse" gasses and other pollutants. One cannot shove the animals into a CAFO for the last part of their brutal lives, then slaughter them at a gigantic plant at the rate of several hundred an hour, then truck their meat all around the country to processors and distributors, and finally consume them at an international fast-food franchise and be "sustainable". All these "industrial meat" practices contribute to the low cost of meat -which increases consumption- the brutality and coldness of the animal's treatment -which increases suffering- and, most relevant to this article and discussion, the amount of pollutant gasses released into our atmosphere and meat eating's contribution to climate change.

2. The tactic of berating people until they do what you say -without being in a position of power or authority, such as the vegans are not- IS NOT WORKING. It is time to give it up, not just on Pro-Veganism either, but Pro-Peace, Pro-PC stuff, just about all of the "Concerned College Kid" and "Social Liberal" issues in fact. Seriously, we should stop this, it only works in "consensus decision processes" -and only in those until the best beraters either obtain unofficial "party boss" type power or the group fractures. Cooperation and compromise -and the fair and just use of the power one gains through them- are superior tactics in the actual World.

3. Short of the extinction of all animal species, the imposition of a world-wide autocratic system of unimagined total control, or an unprecedented and long-term social or spiritual change globally, the goal of "everyone a vegan" WILL NEVER, EVER HAPPEN. As long as there are animals around and people have the freedom to hunt them or raise them, some will choose to eat them. While this may be against someone's Moral Code, there ARE strong biological imperatives involved -nutrient value, fat and calorie content relative to portion size, the loop-closing role of the predator, etc.. So, unless you are willing to impose absolute tyranny -and therefore untold suffering- on the People, the only way to eliminate the suffering the People cause to the animals would be to actually CONVINCE THEM ALL that your beliefs are correct and "sustain" this attitude in ALL of them INDEFINITELY.

That sounds like a bit of a tall order there to me.

Instead (or in the meantime) one could work on reducing animal (and human if you are not a hypocrite elitist) suffering, reducing the consumption of animal foods, and reducing the environmental impact of farm animals (and all farming and all human activities for that matter).

"Sustainable" or "Grass-Finished" or "Pastured" meat and other animal products do work toward these reductions. A system of local sustainable farms and pasturelands for the small cities and urban farming and resilient transport systems to sustainable farms and pasturelands (rail/sail) for the large cities would of course go even further and should be the longer-term goal.

I think that a careful look at the World will tell you that it is no longer "Discuss Our Feelings About Stuff Time", it is now the beginning of "Get Over Yourself and Cooperate to get Things on Track Time".

Though I'm applying this to the Internets Vegans, it goes for myself and many other groups as well.

Time to wake up and go to work kids.

Have Fun,

-matti.

@Buckycat

You are free to eat what you want, as long as you recognize that you are the problem, rather than the solution.

And to demonstrate that I am not of the "Do as I say, not as I do" ilk, allow me to answer your very pointed questions:
- Did you read the article? Yes.
- do you eat locally? Yes.
- support the trucking of pineapples from coast to coast? No. Pineapples are not grown within my home state of NM, where I source ALL my food.
- does your electricity come from wind/solar? Yes. In fact, I supply my neighbor as well (NM does not provide cashback incentives for over-production).
- is your cat litter sustainable? No cats, but my goats and burro are provided for sustainably, and their "products" are given to the community.
- did you recycle the last oscillating fan that broke down? We have little in the way of consumer items. I advocate that if a good needs to be advertised, I don't need it. If I do buy a consumer item, I maintain/repair it many times beyond it's mean-time-to-failure.

I'm not perfect, far from it. But I do get annoyed by wannabes who go part way in absolving their addiction and then make excuses why they could not go further.

If you have something to contribute, do so. Otherwise, your posts are irrelevant.

OH Thank Goddess that WTF is here to shower us all with his/her perfection...

re: 2:38 p.m.

"A typical Vegetarian attitude, bristling with hubris, arrogance and a "I'm better than thou" attitude. Pathetic. Waddyawant, a medal?"

Did you read the article? Or just jump at the chance to preach? Fine, you're a veg., do you eat locally, or support the trucking of pineapples from coast to coast? does your electricity come from wind/solar, or do you help support strip mining and the degradation of communities and ecosystems? is your cat litter sustainable? do you compost, even if you don't have a garden? did you recycle the last oscillating fan that broke down, or just pitch it in the landfill?

Point is, none of us is perfect, not one anywhere. So how's about climbing down off of that reclaimed-wood soapbox and eating whatever the hell you want. And let me eat what I want. Shit, if things get bad enough maybe we'll all be hunting and eating each other. Unless you can tell the future, too...

It is good to be passionate, conscious and aware of what we are putting into our bodies and where it comes from. So many people do not even think about where their food originates. I'm also no saint, but each day, I like to think that I'm making better choices than the day before.

Hey thundermoon--

can veganism be local and sustainable (the criteria used by this article by Richardson)? Yes!

are some vegetarians/vegans hypocrites or deeply flawed? Perhaps!

does that mean you shouldn't go vegan? NO WAY!

is a vegan diet unhealthy and do vegans lose nutrients, etc.? A big lie!

do plants suffer? not in the way we understand it!

is killing a plant the same as killing a human or a cow? No way!

are vegans just asking for a kind of moral consistency when it comes to killing animals (i.e. if you don't want to kill your dog, then why do you want to kill a cow?)? YES!

are vegans willing to consider what it means to kill a plant? Absolutely!

can vegans promote veganism without being self-righteous? I sure hope so!

do vegans think that veganism is the only thing that matters? Heck, no, man!
(it's a pretty big deal, though)

@thundermoon

Meat eaters, like people who smoke or are alcoholics, are in denial that they have an addiction. Some people can make the transition to veganism, while others, because of their weakness for addictions, are unable to give up eating meat.

In light of your denial based on your addiction to eating meat, all your points against veganism are specious (even though scientific evidence overwhelmingly supports veganism). Your stories only fool yourself.

I doubt that most in the US could be vegan or vegetarian without modern technology and shipping. In my northern climate, the vegans are eating food from far away and claiming a sustainable diet. It does seem that the farther north or south you go from the equator, the less you see any diets other than those that are based on meat.

And I always think a huge point is getting missed when people brag that their diet is somehow more moral: there is no innocence. You are hurting and killing plants. You don't care, but you are. You are killing the life that resides on them, but it does not have big brown eyes; it's not appealing. Somehow, this world does not seem set up to avoid the inflicting of suffering, but the human brain seems able to justify the killing of one type of living thing, and not the other.

I eat meat, and my position is supportable in many ways, especially nutritionally. There simply has to be a reason that so many try it and fail, even after a few years. Some of you who are calling yourself vegetarians and vegans here won't be once your stores of certain nutrients are used up, and they will be, and you can't get those nutrients from plants. If you're a pregnant or nursing woman, you are taking one big risk.

I'm also sure, seeing fairly often someone who has for some time told me they are a vegetarian eat something with obvious meat on it or in it, that some of you do eat meat. You just don't intend to, think the meat you had yesterday or last week doesn't really count because you "are" a vegetarian. I wonder how many truly are. Some, I know. But observing life the last few years as I've come to hang out with more people who call themselves this name and yet still seem to eat the pepperoni pizza instead of the mushroom makes me wonder more and more. I have a feeling there is some guilt, and the most, well, strident and/or judgemental comments come from those who still find meat irresistable a few times a month. Anyway, google "number of vegetarians in America" or something like that, and you don't come up with a number high enough to make me think the answer lies in this direction. It does toss a big wrench in the works, though, if you keep insisting that a diet that less than 3% follow (or say they do; one vegetarian website asked the question, "When did you last eat meat?" and something like 60% of the vegetarians answered, "Within the last 24 hours") is the main thing that will change the world and nothing else much matters, you get to keep every other precious behavior that maybe you did not want to change anyway.

Jill Richardson did a nice job of presenting a suggestion for Al Gore while acknowledging his tremendous contribution to saving the planet.

I also appreciate that she was not self-righteous but admitted that she has environmental shortfalls also.

A typical American attitude, bristling with hubris, arrogance and a "I'm better than thou" attitude. "Its OK if I eat meat because it is sustainable" she whines. "I'm doing my part against global warming because I drive a Corolla with a GW bumper sticker."

Pathetic. Waddyawant, a medal?

Jill Richardson, and her friend Judith McGeary eat meat, so they suck.

hey, gimmesometruth -- since when does "animal-friendly" mean that you get to kill animals whenever you get hungry?

And JaneM -- you say meat from "sustainable" farms is more healthy? For whom? the animal? ... or you?

STOP the myths, the lies, the rationalizaations!!! Save your neo-liberal, feel-good, self-involved pieties for someone else! VALUES FIRST, NOT HUNGRY FAT AMERICAN BELLIES!!

vegan-power...."the proof is in the (dairy-free) pudding."

JaneM,

I didn't think that there was a need to find an *alternative to veganism,* but rather to the harmful and destructive dietary and agricultural systems which dominate the political food landscape -- in other words, veganism ain't the problem.

Also, the comparison of religious proselytizing to the promotion of veganism seems unfair. Sure, they share members who have a real passionate urgency about their causes, but there is no mystery about the material environmental and health benefits associated with wise veganism and the infrastructure to support it. I might not accept Jesus because of profound metaphysical doubt, but I am convinced that real, practical, and immediate change can occur with a change to personal practice -- and practice, as tikiboy80 points out, is the best place to start (though it does take a real commitment). I do think there is a significant moral implication to our treatment of animals as food, but the ethical considerations regarding the well-being of ourselves and others should be enough to be convincing. And why is it that we invest so much in the idea of a caring relationship with the non-human/non-animal environment to the exclusion of a caring relationship with animals?

So if veganism does offer a real set of solutions, why go out of your way as Jill Richardson and Judith McGeary do to cling to unsupportable actions?

The author is right that sustainable meat-production practices will have a lower carbon-footprint than factory farming. However, it would not be possible to produce the amount of meat that Americans currently consume using only sustainable farming practices.

I would recommend eating less meat, and when you do eat meat, choose meat that was produced in local, animal-friendly, sustainable farms.

zimmie53
the world is seriouly deficient in starry-eyed idealistic hippies, to be sure. but they/we will never seek to compete with the agendas of militaristic, corporate and culturally challanged mainstream america, but to propose and practice our own. it became necessary to withdraw to a degree from the madness. but it is becoming equally necessary to begin reasserting those values. we are one with all creation. love makes the world go 'round - love makes the world - love makes - love.

JaneM,

You make a good point: you can either embrace the sustainable agriculture that we "cast off generations ago," or become a vegan. The choice is yours. The problem is that the former is virtually impractical today (unless you live on or near such a farm), and the latter is only impractical to personal habit . . .

Like Ms. Richardson, I too admire Al Gore for his efforts to educate and inervate the public about global warming. Unlike many who post here on CommonDreams, I realize that there is "none perfect, no, not one" and do not consider ideological purity necessary (look where "conservative" ideology has gotten us!)

Where I have an issue with her piece is the statement "They might not all have degrees from Stanford but they aren't starry eyed, idealistic hippies either."

What's wrong with starry eyed, idealistic hippies? What's so great about degrees from Stanford (or any other feudal institution of "higher learning"?)

It seems to me that if we had taken those starry eyed, idealistic hippies seriously the world would be a better place.

"Make love, not war" would mean no Iraq occupation. As would "Hell no, we won't go."

"Tune in, turn on, drop out" would mean better communities and less slavery to the corporate masters (and maybe more than a little fun!)

So, Ms. Richardson, don't diss the hippies. They were right!!!

As always, "i am constantly awaiting a rebirth of wonder..."

I say no to sustainable meat because there are ethical reasons to refrain from harming animals as well as enviromental ones. I think to not study something because you might have to rethink your own behavior is really ridiculous. What is up with this lionizing of Albert Gore??

Thank goodness, a reasonable alternative to veganism. Not that I have anything against being a vegan, but this attitude of "everyone must be vegan to save the planet" is as bad as those who proclaim that everyone must accept Jesus as their savior. The ironic thing is, in many cases, we need to embrace the farming methods that we cast off generations ago. We have several sustainable farms in central Massachusetts now and we are able to get grass-fed pork, beef and lamb in addition to our vegetables and fruits. It's wonderful, tastes great, and is much healthier.