You Call Yourself a Progressive -- But You Still Eat Meat? (AlterNet)

[marmar]

OP's note: I just posted the article for discussion's sake. For the record, I eat meat.


You Call Yourself a Progressive -- But You Still Eat Meat?

By Kathy Freston, AlterNet. Posted March 14, 2007.



Eating a plant-based diet is an easy, cheap way to end animal cruelty and clean up the environment. Why, then, are so many progressives still clinging to their chicken nuggets?

The report released this week by the world's leading climate scientists made no bones about it: Global warming is happening in a big way and it is very likely manmade. The U.N. report that came out soon after made a critical point: "The livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global." And yet, so many environmentalists continue to eat meat. Why?

Being part of the solution can be a whole lot simpler -- and cheaper -- than going out and buying a new hybrid. We can make a huge difference in the environment simply by eating a plant-based diet instead of an animal-based one. Factory farming pollutes our air and water, reduces the rainforests, and goes a long way to create global warming. Yet for some environmentalists, the idea of giving up those chicken nuggets is still hard to swallow.

So, I thought I might discuss a few of the key concerns that my meat-eating friends offer in defense of their continued meat consumption. Here we go:

Some were worried about thriving, physically, on a vegetarian diet.

Now this just does not make sense. Half of all Americans die of heart disease or cancer and two-thirds of us are overweight. The American Dietetic Association says that vegetarians have "lower rates of death from ischemic heart disease; ... lower blood cholesterol levels, lower blood pressure, and lower rates of hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and prostate and colon cancer." Vegetarians, on average, are about one-third as likely to be overweight as meat eaters. ....(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/49188/

[Greeby]

1. I'm a paid-up member of the food chain

If that means I ain't a progressive then :shrug:

[zanne]

2. Warning; Many flames ahead

I don't eat meat either, but people on DU really react to things like this. I admire you for your courage, though.

[TechBear_Seattle]

3. I was an omnivore long before I was a progressive

I keep my meat consumption to only a few times a week and try to make wise choices on what meat I consume. If I could, I would raise my own food animals (and yes, I have killed to eat.)

[Champion Jack]

4. I agree with this post

[izzie]

5. I gave it up about a doz. years ago. I saw cow eyes when

I got near the meat in stores. I still eat chicken about once a week but then I had to clean the hen house and take care of the eggs as a child.

[sharp_stick]

6. Yup, I like a steak

also, chicken, pork, lamb and even the occassional piece of veal. It may be cute but it's tasty ;-)

I know I can survive and even thrive on a vegetarian diet but I don't want to. Good for you though if you enjoy it.

[unpossibles]

8. the point being made is that it is as irresponsible as driving a hummer

sure, you have the freedom to drive a 5 mpg clunker if you want to, but is it really honest?

[TechBear_Seattle]

13. And those of us who drive a hybrid?

Don't condemn all meat-eaters: many of us strive to be responsible.

[unpossibles]

16. I don't condemn anyone - I just think the post I was responding to

missed the point of the article.

Yes, you can do what you want - you have the freedom to do so, but to try to attempt to reduce waste (such as by driving an efficient car or eating less meat) is progressive. To justify waste by saying "but I like ______" or "I have the right to ______" is short-sighted and selfish, imo.

No, none of us is perfect, and I don't think most expect everyone to be, but this is an easier way to make a difference than most, and effective. And yes, we should still try to make positive social changes elsewhere.

[unpossibles]

7. (insert applause here)

I was just thinking about that this morning, how we are focusing on the auto industry to fix the problem. We should get them to clean up their acts and look at renewable energies, but those are only part of the picture and harder to change than diet.

Although I don't eat meat, I think people do not have to completely give up meat until/unless they are ready to make that decision themselves. BUT, the idea of reduction is something we can all do quite easily and cheaply. hell, I first vastly reduced eating meat out of poverty before I had even heard of vegetarianism. It's an easy way to make so many differences environmentally and socially.

The final straw for me was working at a restaurant that did everything from scratch: the gross out effect of making chicken stock, sausage, and other things that most people probably do not want to know the details of, as well as thinking about my own love of animals and environmental concerns.

Anyway, good for you for bringing this up and for the link. And put your flamesuit on.

I suggest people read Fast Food Nation and Diet For A New America for more info.

:D

[Double T]

9. I try to avoid eating fur bearing creatures but will eat poultry and fish........

on occasion. Main staples are plant based foods.

[zanne]

18. I really miss the taste of meat and I love the smell of it....

But of all my weaknesses (and there are many), I can still say that I have not had any meat in five years. It's good for my soul.

[Double T]

19. Good for the animal's soul too!

[stillcool]

10. I read an article a while back...

which made the case that the single most effective choice one could make to contribute to a solution was to not eat meat. I need to read articles like this one in order to comprehend the chain of events which lead to that conclusion.

[texastoast]

11. Bloody integrity you are asking for, is it?

That's a hard one. A life-long struggle to achieve it.

But you do have a point. "Progressive" Hollywood types rolling up in limos while crying about the environment got their clue when the RW jumped on their hypocrisy. And I guess we all need to take their lesson to other areas of our own lives where we can make a difference. Pain in the ass, this integrity thing. I like hamburgers. With Angus beef. And tomatoes and pickles.

[gollygee]

12. Just because I can't be perfect doesn't mean I can't be better

I am eating less meat and I'm very careful about where I get it. But no, I'm not perfect. I also drive a minivan, which uses more gas than I could use. But I limit my trips out in an attempt to make up for that.

It will make a bigger difference for the world if we can get everybody to do a few things than if we can only get a few people to do everything.

[unpossibles]

14. exactly. I don't think there are many who could be "perfect" if any

I would not expect that. Shit, we're humans and we live in society. Like I said, I have no problem with omnivorism itself - even if I make a different choice - but being aware of what we're doing and trying to at least minimize the problem areas is great.

I am not an extremist with most things, including this, and also I find it more realistic for us as a Nation to reduce waste than to stop it.

[texastoast]

15. I carry my recycling to the center

We don't have trash service that will recycle, but the recycling center is only about five miles away. Saving glass, cardboard, tin cans, aluminum, and #1 and #2 plastic throughout the year keeps my family of several (including our many animals) down to one Hefty bag of garbage for about 10 days.

I've spent the last 20 years teaching my children and their friends to recycle. Really doing the work of recycling was a totally new concept to my kids' friends, which means their parents never taught it.

[Na Gael]

17. I tried being a vegetarian

For two years I ate no meat. For two years I was generally unhappy with my meals.

Growing up, I was raised on "organic, range-fed" steer. How do I know they were "organic, range-fed"? We raised and processed them.

There are evils with most things...Heck, having children could be viewed as anti-environment.

[kenny blankenship]

20. And I certainly hope none of you are having or have had children

or are planning to. I mean "having children" as in rearing offspring of your own reproductive making of course, not as in having them for dinner. Vegetarians, you're probably in the clear on the second charge. BUT NOT ON THE FIRST! Overpopulation is a huge problem and the common denominator in many of the other problems.

You say you did have children? Well you're no progressives! I guess you'll have to listen to me from now on. Expect me to remind you of it if you ever start to contradict me in our discussions.

[unpossibles]

21. I think I see your sarcasm

but again, we would have more resources available for the people we do have if we ate more responsibly.

I agree that population is an issue, or will be very soon, but there is a difference between reducing meat consumption and making kneejerk reactions. Sorry.

[The2ndWheel]

22. If you earn it, you can eat it

Now, we live in a mass produced society, and I have meat on my sandwiches bought from the deli. I'm a mass produced product, just like everyone else.

In the reality of 2007, life is pretty cheap. Like I said, it's all mass produced. There will always be someone more desperate than you, so they'll do the same work you did for less. There are tens of thousands of pigs and chickens and whatever else we molded to our wants stuffed into cages and pens(where they don't even get to fight back), and the vast majority of us aren't anywhere near the food we eat. It's cheaper to let Monsanto and the rest own it.

You want to go out there, track down the deer(pig, chicken, whatever), kill it, and eat it? Have a feast, be merry. Want to buy the meat after it was born in a giant factory, "lived" in a closed area with no space since the rest of your species has been mass produced for the desires of a single species, and died without the ability to fight for its life? Well we're still going to do it(I do, it's all I know, it's all I've ever had to know, there hasn't been a moment in my life where my quenching of hunger depended on anything else), and that's because life is very cheap in 2007. Living life is quite expensive. Life itself isn't.

[suziedemocrat]

23. OK - I AM a Vegetarian - but this is just a way to dismiss Progressives as Hypocrites .

Beware of articles like this - they are very dangerous. Maybe they will highlight the benefits of vegetarianism, but I think their true purpose is to criticize Progressives. I mean, we ALL breath in Oxygen and breathe out Carbon dioxide, so just being alive hurts the planet. Should we all just off ourselves?

[deepthought42]

25. Good point.

I prefer a varied diet myself. I don't eat alot of meat because I just don't crave it all the time, but if I'm really craving some... I like moderation. It works for me.

[kestrel91316]

24. Eat LOCALLY, whether you eat vegetarian or omnivore. The

environmental impact of eating food from far away is HUGE. We can no longer, as a society, afford strawberries in January from Chile or wherever.

Grow your own fruits and veggies if you have even a tiny piece of land.

Read up on permaculture: perennial crops rather than annuals.

Read up on native crops that thrive in our climate, rather than imported species that require huge inputs to grow.

Be an informed eater. And keep the meats to an occasional treat rather than the foundation of every meal.

[SteveM]

26. Try fishing and hunting to lessen harm on environment.

Each year, I kill 1 - 2 deer, game birds, squirrels, fish, etc., and make them a part of my diet. The more you can cut back on the expense and degradation of the environment to acquire your food, the better. There are those upset with my putting a finger-size hole through a deer each year; but how does that measure with, say, blowing a three thousand square mile hole through bottom land habitat in Louisiana, all for the sake of soybeans? How many animals were killed and extirpated in this critical habitat? We ALL kill to live; either directly, by agent, or by abstraction (the latter being agriculture). The question is: how to reduce the load on Earth? Labeling someone "progressive" or not based on some flimsy litmus test is gratuitous.

[unpossibles]

29. I have no problem with hunting

but you do realize that far more of those soybeans go to feed the cows than people, right? And that a few pounds of soybeans are required to produce a pound of store-bought meat, right?

At least hunting is a more honest way of eating meat.

[GliderGuider]

27. Look, over there - a distraction!

People, there are enough real problems out there to address. Let's not get sidetracked into a game of Politically Correct oneupmanship. We're products of our culture, our families and our genetics. Our genes have made us omnivores, our culture tells us that eating meat is a sign of success, and our families mostly reinforce those messages. Next to these forces, the role personal enlightenment plays in governing our behaviour tends to be spotty at best. I find it best not to lose to much sleep over things like this.

But here's an interesting thought:

On the single issue of cattle producing lots of evil GHGs: we do all realize that those gases come from the cellulose they eat, don't we? It's exactly the same as the CO2 that comes from burning the current environmental darling ethanol. As near as I can tell, the cattle themselves may in fact be pretty much carbon-neutral. Strange, eh?

Now that's not to say that industrial cattle farming is OK. There are plenty of real problems there, from fossil-fueled monoculture feed production to e. coli in the runoff, to the general problem of the low calorie-efficiency of grain-fed meat. But it's interesting to wonder if those four-legged methane dispensers might actually be less guilty of roasting the planet than the charges state.

[unpossibles]

28. the cows aren't guilty of anything

don't blame the victim. ;)

seriously though, sure the carbon comes from the vegetation they eat, but the point (which could have been made better I think) is that much more vegetation, water, and oil is required to make meat than to just use those same resources for people. Therefore, farming a cow for food consumes more energy and puts out more waste and greenhouse gasses.

We can make a difference with our dollars on this one issue far more easily than convincing the oil lobby to change their ways or the auto companies to reduce emissions. You don't have to stop eating meat, but imagine the difference if people cut back even 10% of their intake across the nation? Trust me, you can survive on one meal a week that lacks meat.

[NickB79]

30. I have a hunch we'll all be eating less meat soon, whether we want to or not

Peak oil and climate change will make hamburger meat at $15/lb a little bit out of the price range for the average American.

[unpossibles]

31. not only peak oil, but unless we figure a few things out

water prices as well.

I don't think most people realize how much water a factory cow farm uses - not only it's consumption, but in growing its food and handling waste, as well as when local water gets waste runoff in it - and that we taxpayer pay for that through government subsidies to keep the price low for the consumer.

I'm fine with farm/food subsidies honestly and am not saying we should not have them, but we should be aware of how much is used and that we all pay for it. I would say the Meat industries lobbyists are up there with tobacco and oil when it comes to power. Consider this - how many industries get to provide information to school children which promotes their product?

[gravity]

32. I'm human

It's the circle of life