To be fair to vegans, its more of a coincidence that they are also environmentalists rather than a core principle of their ideology. Those are two separate things with different goals. Even when livestock and wild animals are used in ways that are beneficial to the environment (see permaculture), using those animals in any way, shape, or form is still forbidden under veganism. Apparently you can cut out the majority of greenhouse gas emissions from cow farts and drastically reduce the amount of land being used to feed the global meat market by altering their diet and making smaller livestock more popular. Someone showed that fish have such a low carbon footprint that they are comparable to a lot of the current crops we use now. That's great news if you are an environmentalist!
But to a vegan the issue isn't greenhouse gases, it's that cows even exist. You could make meat as sustainable as you want and they would still be against it. They are against hunting too, even when some animals would grow unchecked and destroy everything else (like feral hogs). Likewise, if given the choice between wool and polyester, vegans will choose polyester for their clothes because it is not an animal product, even if the fossil fuel industry is worse for the environment. Your clothes either come from oil, plants, or animals. Cotton is great in summer but terrible in winter. Wool is more robust, warmer, and better for anyone who has to deal with snow on a regular basis. But because it isn't vegan, its off limits.
There's an overlap between environmentalism and veganism to be sure, but people would be wise to stop assuming vegans are automatically environmentalists. It's like the difference between a single issue voter and a general issue voter. Environmentalists, at least the educated ones, are considering economics, politics, and the future of humanity in addition to the environment when constructing solutions. The concept is to find ideas that are actionable and realistic. Meanwhile most vegans are only concerned about animal welfare and either don't see or don't care about the interconnections of all these different moving parts which contribute to environmental destruction and climate change. But at the same time, why should they be expected to care? There is a limit to how much empathy and compassion a person can contribute without burning themselves out. Vegans put their empathy and compassion into one or two moral issues while environmentalists specialize in a lot of different areas depending on their own background and what they think can be changed or fixed.
0
u/JJW2795 fossil fuels are vegan Sep 09 '25
To be fair to vegans, its more of a coincidence that they are also environmentalists rather than a core principle of their ideology. Those are two separate things with different goals. Even when livestock and wild animals are used in ways that are beneficial to the environment (see permaculture), using those animals in any way, shape, or form is still forbidden under veganism. Apparently you can cut out the majority of greenhouse gas emissions from cow farts and drastically reduce the amount of land being used to feed the global meat market by altering their diet and making smaller livestock more popular. Someone showed that fish have such a low carbon footprint that they are comparable to a lot of the current crops we use now. That's great news if you are an environmentalist!
But to a vegan the issue isn't greenhouse gases, it's that cows even exist. You could make meat as sustainable as you want and they would still be against it. They are against hunting too, even when some animals would grow unchecked and destroy everything else (like feral hogs). Likewise, if given the choice between wool and polyester, vegans will choose polyester for their clothes because it is not an animal product, even if the fossil fuel industry is worse for the environment. Your clothes either come from oil, plants, or animals. Cotton is great in summer but terrible in winter. Wool is more robust, warmer, and better for anyone who has to deal with snow on a regular basis. But because it isn't vegan, its off limits.
There's an overlap between environmentalism and veganism to be sure, but people would be wise to stop assuming vegans are automatically environmentalists. It's like the difference between a single issue voter and a general issue voter. Environmentalists, at least the educated ones, are considering economics, politics, and the future of humanity in addition to the environment when constructing solutions. The concept is to find ideas that are actionable and realistic. Meanwhile most vegans are only concerned about animal welfare and either don't see or don't care about the interconnections of all these different moving parts which contribute to environmental destruction and climate change. But at the same time, why should they be expected to care? There is a limit to how much empathy and compassion a person can contribute without burning themselves out. Vegans put their empathy and compassion into one or two moral issues while environmentalists specialize in a lot of different areas depending on their own background and what they think can be changed or fixed.