this post was submitted on 01 May 2026
677 points (97.6% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
16564 readers
1053 users here now
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's a disingenuous comparison that doesn't take into account class based analysis of the two situations. Consumers, who are of the working class, do not have direct control in how their meat was produced. They can only indirectly make choices based on what is available and accessible to their circumstances. They don't own the farm and ethically sourced meat is usually prohibitively expensive to many consumers. The slave owner is an OWNER, with direct control over the labor practices, who directly makes the choice to employ slavery or not. The slave owner is the one who controls the production so the responsibility lies with them.
Don't buy into the myth of supply-demand. If you quit buying the meat, the capitalists will still sell to those who support the harmful treatment and just have the difference subsidized like they currently do. Supply-demand logic puts the responsibility on the consumer; it is propaganda by capitalist owners to shirk off their responsibilities for producing ethically and sustainably. Just because a demand exists doesn't necessitate that others labor to fill that demand. Only because we exist in capitalism that incentivizes the pursuit of profit above all else does it justify that kind of logic because a demand unfulfilled is one that hasn't been exploited for profit. If workers owned the farms, and decided to only produce ethically and sustainably, then people who demand more than what is available can go shove it or start hunting for themselves.
So if I bought a shirt made from cotton picked by slaves, that would've been perfectly fine? If I buy chocolate harvested with child labor, or blood diamonds, that's all fine?
This whole production-focused morality is entirely self-serving and has nothing at all to do with class consciousness. Many people involved in the meat industry are workers just trying to make a living. You just don't want to deal with the inconvenience of these issues yourself.
Even if it's theoretically possible to create a system that doesn't depend on supply and demand, it is very much a thing in the world we actually live in.
Complete nonsense. If they could just "get more subsidies" whenever they felt like it, they'd get them now, until they couldn't get anymore. Which is... where we're at. This is magical thinking.
Even if one particular worker-owned farm decided to do that, it wouldn't change anything. The consumers looking for cheaper meat would simply go to the farms willing to use harmful treatment.
Why does that logic only work one way and not the other?
Go read the other thread where I've already typed my opinions over the topics discussed and also maybe try reading theory. You'll learn a thing or two about the reductive-ness of arguing over individual action of consumers instead of placing the blame on
If you think focusing on the owners and how they control the means of production is not based in class consciousness you're not worth talking to.
Sure they do. My meat was not produced. You have this power too.
Disbelieving that consumer demand influences production is a wild take that doesn't absolve you of responsibility for that which you consume.
Not understanding that production induces demand is something that people who have never read theory or studied economics fail to comprehend.
You didn't consume meat. That doesn't change the fact that meat was produced and has gone to waste. Happens every year. Look into food waste statistics. Yet somehow the companies that know they are just throwing products in the trash still overproduce and come out making profits off of it. You'll never change the system by focusing on inconsequential, individual action. The only way to solve the issue is to take control of the system first.
Quit it with your misplaced blame. The responsibility lies with the ones who own the means to which the product was produced. Ya know, the whole "means of production" thing? Maybe learn about it and the fundamentals of how it works instead of gobbling up capitalist propaganda that lies about how it works to shift the blame onto consumers.
This sounds incredibly naive. But ill bite, where can i read about how production is entirely unswayed by demand?
it will be interesting reading how doubling of halfing consumption will have zero effect on an industry despite countless examples of the opposite occurring in real life
Regardless, the issue of meat isnt a problem with the system, since there's no ethical consumption of meat. Unless you propose taking over the means of production to burn it down.
Kropotkin's "Conquest of Bread". Start there. And FYI, I never said it is entirely unswayed by demand, only that demand does not influence it in the way that capitalist realism propaganda of supply-demand makes it appear to.
There are ethical methods to the production and thus consumption of meat. They do exist. So piss off with this claim that there is no ethical consumption of meat. There is nothing inherently unethical about the consumption of meat. Humans are animals and part of the wider ecosystem and our consumption of meat is just as ethical as when any other animal consumes another for its sustenance. The issue is entirely with the system and how it incentivises certain methods over others due to arbitrary societal structures.
Thanks, ill have a look.
it feels like youve backpedaled. Consumers /do/ influemce production, just not as much as you think I think they do.
To match your tone, piss off with thid claim that unnecessary killing is ethical. "animals do it, and we are animals, therefore its ethical for is to do" is a lazy argument that doesnt stand up to 20 seconds of thought.
Just because you didn't understand the original argument doesn't mean the clarification of misunderstanding means I'm backpedaling.
People need to eat and animals are food. Get over yourself with your arbitrary moral judgements.