Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article
--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
Most noteworthy for me is the fact that more Americans think that porn (52%) and homosexuality (39%) are wrong than spanking children (23%) and being ultra wealthy (18%).
🤡 country
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2026/03/19/what-do-americans-consider-immoral/
Apologies, my assumption is that tribes/clans is synonymous enough to be used interchangeably but with that explanation I'll change it.
True, but my opinion is that if you are not directly doing the harm, then the degree of separation from the act of harm is entirely arbitrary per individual. I'll only judge someone for the harm they directly cause. The root of the problem is still the system, not the consumers within that system who have little to no power to directly influence it. The animals have already been killed in unethical fashion. Letting their body rot on a shelf instead of it being nourishment for someone is far more disrespectful towards the animal that had to die. We all have only so much we can do before we make concessions for convenience and how each individual decides that is up to them so long as they do not directly commit harm in doing so.
Like, even if it doesn't sell, there are still enough people that do not even object to the horrible treatment of these animals that companies, through the capitalist system, will just mitigate the impact on their profits by having it subsidized. They already account for waste, so they will simply adjust to it. There are also plenty of arguments against agricultural practices to how many of these vegan alternatives are produced themselves that you're not actually mitigating harm, you're just choosing a different product that was produced through equally harmful and unethical practices.
So, no, none of us are able to judge the other because, at the end of the day, we still exist in the capitalist system unless you and the community which produces your goods is entirely self sustaining and independent of the capitalist system. So we shouldn't waste our time judging each other and instead focus on building and providing these alternatives to people within our local communities, through intensive and organized labor action, where we actually have the ability to control and affect it.
And those rectangles of knowledge have just as much misinformation as they do information and the majority of people do not have the education or cultural upbringing to influence their perspective of said (mis)information needed to be able to accurately tell the difference.
They will adjust to it by making less. Because that's how price signals work! This is extremely basic economics.
When people stopped buying pet rocks, did the company continue making them? Are there still as many pet rocks being made today as there were in 1975, and they're just piling up in a warehouse somewhere, as they get bigger and bigger subsidies from the government? You know as well as I do that's not how anything works.
And those arguments are nonsense. Producing meat means growing vastly more food to feed to animals which you then eat, so even if growing vegetables was comparable in harm to the meat industry, it would still be more ethical to be vegan because less food would have to be grown.
If you honestly believe they will just make less the. You have clearly never read an ounce of theory. Your methods have been written about in theory time and time again by many authors of leftist literature and all state that it is reductive and counterproductive. That's absolutely not how prices work. That's capitalist propaganda telling you that's how prices work so they can shirk off their responsibilities of being the ones who set the price in the first place.
Pet rocks are not a necessity like food and are not comparable in the slightest. People don't need pet rocks. People need food, and as long as people need food, capitalists will sell what is edible and control the markets to where they will always ensure they are profitable because they control the means by which these necessities are produced. They already subsidized the agriculture industry to keep their products profitable for business owners of these factory farms. It will be incredibly naive to believe that they won't just do more of the same of what they are already doing to ensure their control over the markets.
If we got rid of meat and went entirely vegan without ending capitalism, the capitalists will just overproduce your vegan products with unsustainable practices and literally nothing will be solved. We will still be destroying the environment in the endless pursuit of profits and any waste will just be balanced out. They already own the land. They will use the land if there is even the chance they can make a profit on it. Changing what they use the land for changes nothing except now people get to feel morally superior having denied the people access to animal products. So yea, we won't be directly killing them anymore but we will still be burning their house down and they will die regardless as a result.
But whatever. You want to continue justifying your arbitrary judgment of the working class and misplacing blame away from the owners of industry, go ahead. Continue beating each other up over insignificant individual action so you can feel morally superior to someone else instead of focusing on class based action to take back the means of production and providing alternatives (actual alternatives to access these things, not just substitutions for those things) to each other without judgment of how they get through this dystopian society.
I'm done with this argument.
Again, you're making this a false dichotomy. We can go vegan and fight capitalism at the same time. Avoiding unethical products and encouraging others to do the same is in no way an endorsement of capitalism.
Even if we overthrew capitalism, either we would have to keep factory farms going or we'd need a drastic reduction in meat consumption. Because they don't just do cruelty for shits and giggles, they do it because it's efficient.
You go ahead and tell yourself whatever lies you have to as you run from the truth. Fucking, Reaganite supply side "class consciousness."
You're the one making the false dichotomy between "keep factory farms" and "going vegan". There is in fact a middle ground you are ignoring.
Yes, they do it because it is efficient for making obscene profits for the owning class. Once the working class has control of production we will no longer be constrained by arbitrary concerns about efficiency for the sake of producing obscene profits. We overthrow capitalism and change our methods of production away from factory farming to more ethical and sustainable models because we will then have the control and authority to do so. Ecological science proves that this is entirely possible. We simply do not currently employ these practices because of the interests of capitalists blocking their accessibility through their control over our societal structures and the means of production.
Please, for the sake of our collective future, read theory.
That's not how any of this works. Remove money from the equation: factory farms produce more meat per labor hours. If you're not reducing meat consumption, then you're calling for a massive increase in the amount of farm labor.
How? You gonna force people to work on these farms? How are you gonna get that labor?
I think you don't understand what the word "efficiency" means.
I do. What theory is it that will provide me with a convincing argument for why it's actually perfectly fine for me to buy chocolate harvested with child labor? Be specific.
Atlas Shrugged?
Just because a demand exists doesn't mean we need to fulfill that demand
Yes, it is the most efficient per man hour it isn't the only method available that can fulfill our needs while also being ethical and sustainable. Once we, the working class, control the means of production, we can choose scientifically proven alternatives that are both sustainable and ethically while also providing more than enough to meet our needs because we now have the authority and control over our means
How will I get people to work on farms? I don't need to convince them. Those who want to work on farms will labor to do so because they know we need food and, if we want a functional society at all, other people also need food so they will labor as needed to produce that food along with others in their community who willingly choose to labor so in ways that meet their needs while also being ethical and sustainable in their methods because they have the authority and control over the means of production to be able to do so with nothing incentivizing them to needlessly over produce. Remove money from the equation and we are no longer burdened by the interests of profit that necessitates the need for unsustainable production.
That's basic anarchist theory. Read Kropotkin.
And to your strawman argument:
Do people want chocolate? Yes. Has chocolate been produced and resources consumed for its production? Yes. Does the person in question have access to ethically produced chocolate? We don't know their individual circumstances so the benefit of the doubt will say no for sake of argument. Does not buying the chocolate change the fact that a child labored for its production? No, it just means they don't get chocolate while the chocolate and resources/labor goes to waste and the shrink is written off through taxes and insurance. The capitalist still wins and you've done nothing to change things. Congratulations.
If your argument ever is necessitated with "if only everyone suddenly just stopped doing X" your argument is shortsighted and lacking in effective praxis and just an attempt to gain an arbitrary feeling of moral superiority to boost your own ego in the fact that others aren't choosing to behave exactly the way you do. It's reductive and counterproductive trying to shame people over insignificant, miniscule personal choices in how they find what little enjoyment they can in this dystopian, capitalist society they have no individual power to change.
No. I don't have to be specific for the argument that I am making. Your lame attempt to appeal to specificities is just you trying to avoid engaging with the point by attempting to dictate the scope of my argument so you can pick apart the vagaries of how specific my hypothetical would be to make my argument fit your narrow, arbitrarily defined requirements. So quit making up strawmen and try having a class based analysis over the systems that dictate the circumstances in which situations take place in. If you'd actually read theory, you know how to.
I'm done talking with someone who clearly doesn't understand shit. If you have read theory you didn't understand it.
Jesus Christ. Actually justifying buying products with child labor. No wonder anarchism is so popular with Western "leftists."
So then, much less meat gets produced, which means much less meat gets consumed, which means, people will have to make major changes to their dietary habits. And given the unlikeliness of convincing everyone of cutting out the vast majority of meat from their diets, those of us who actually understand that situation should probably just cut it out entirely.
Fuck off simpleton.
You don't understand jack shit and it's readily apparent.
Lol.
If only I read theory, I'd understand how much the children yearn for the mines.
What incredibly self-serving bullshit. The fact that you call yourself a leftist disgusts me. You're a consumer and nothing more. Everything else is just to justify your habits.