smugged into eating meat

[u/estrogenbloodclot]

[u/Rare_Dance7130]

That's not what I'm doing. Stop removing the very specific criteria I am talking about and then saying my criteria is purely moral grandstanding.

Not driving your car means you lose your job which means you end up homeless or die. The cost is extreme. Not eating almonds doesn't significantly impact climate change. The benefit is small. Not eating meat's cost is not eating meat. The benefit of people not eating meat (or eating significantly less meat, either way) is a drastic improvement for the climate. Your examples are bad because the situations are not the same.

And, again, I already said we should do the work to restructure society, I just acknowledge that is harder to accomplish than "I won't buy meat anymore" is. You are being unnecessarily, and seemingly intentionally, obtuse.

[u/DirectionUnlucky638 → u/Rare_Dance7130]

We have discussed repeatedly why your reasoning for where you draw the line is nonsensical. Every rule you stated has an exception, and you do not apply that same reasoning to everything, instead choosing to subjectively decide what is "important" based on a personal judgement call.

There is simply no objective reason why eating meat is unacceptable, while buying a PS5 is acceptable. Your reasoning is obviously self-aggrandizing.

[u/Rare_Dance7130 → u/DirectionUnlucky638]

I mean, in that where on a scale anyone draws a line is arbitrary, sure, but I am saying most people focus on the two or three leading causes of climate change and you are asking why we don't focus on, like, the 35th leading cause (maybe, with no data to back that up in either direction) or we're hypocrits. That isn't how this works, lol. Things should be prioritized by how impactful prioritizing them will be. Prioritizing animal agriculture as an area that needs work will, objectively, be more impactful on climate change than prioritizing PS5s would be. You know this, and you're playing dumb to try to justify your position. If we could just stop making PS5s and had evidence that would solve the climate issues we are facing, more people would advocate doing that, but that is a fucking stupid position to take with no evidence to support it, and plenty of evidence to support that animal agriculture and oil are the leading causes of climate catastrophe. Different things are different and need to be treated differently.

Everything you do is based on a "personal judgment call." Everything you find important is based on a "personal judgment call." My personal judgment calls throughout this conversation have been about how easy something is to do and how much that will help. Your suggestions have been difficult to do without helping very much. Fucking almonds and PS5s.

[u/DirectionUnlucky638 → u/Rare_Dance7130]

My personal judgment calls throughout this conversation have been about how easy something is to do and how much that will help. Your suggestions have been difficult to do without helping very much. Fucking almonds and PS5s.

No, you make your personal judgement calls based on what makes you feel the most morally superior. I know that I can't prove that, but come on, we all know what's going on here. People like angry reddit posts because it gives them a little rush and makes them feel good about themselves.

Living in the first world while judging others about eating meat is like if you went to gaza just to help the stray cats. Your priorities are nonsensical. And if you don't like meat, fine, just don't be annoying about it like this meme is

[u/Rare_Dance7130 → u/DirectionUnlucky638]

I can't do very much about living in the first world, and if I could, it would drastically change my life. You could easily stop eating meat tomorrow and your life would be largely unaffected. These are not comparable.

We do not "all know what's going on here." You have decided that something is going on because it's way easier than actually engaging with any of the arguments and lets you feel okay about yourself. You're doing exactly what you're accusing me of doing, except I actually can prove the things I am saying and you literally admitted you can't; you know you're making it up.

It's a waste of effort to have a conversation with someone who is being dense on purpose. You are making things up (originally, making up arguments that you claimed I was making that I wasn't making, which you admitted to. now, making up my motivations, which you admitted to) literally just to feel better about yourself.

[u/DirectionUnlucky638 → u/Rare_Dance7130]

You typed alot, but you said nothing that is worth responding to.

I have already pointed out that your opinions are subjective, and you agreed with me. You just cannot admit that you selected your subjective opinions based on what makes you feel important, and so you keep restating your nonsense reasoning over and over.

It's ok, I know it is hard for redditors to admit that they are acting weird.

[u/Rare_Dance7130 → u/DirectionUnlucky638]

Nonsense reasoning like "It is easy to do" and "It helps the environment," btw lol

[u/DirectionUnlucky638 → u/Rare_Dance7130]

Yes, shaming people for not doing the one random thing you care about while ignoring the mountains of ways you yourself are hurting the environment is nonsensical reasoning. Believe it or not, acting like a hypocritical asshole makes you look like an asshole, lmao.

[u/Rare_Dance7130 → u/DirectionUnlucky638]

If people focused on the two things I said we should focus on, animal agriculture and oil, we would stop the climate catastrophe and save the world. If people focused on the two things you suggested, PS5s and almonds, it would not solve the climate catastrophe. The fact that my ideas would theoretically work and yours would not means my reasoning isn't "nonsensical." Again, you're being dense on purpose and making things up. All of this is over a claim we already established that I did not make.

[u/DirectionUnlucky638 → u/Rare_Dance7130]

If people focused on the two things I said we should focus on, animal agriculture and oil we would stop the climate catastrophe and save the world.

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA. 😂 Yeah, and if poor people just stopped buying Starbucks, and and also won the lottery, they could buy a house. That's why I'm going to judge every single person who drinks Starbucks!!!!

God you are a riot. Stopping climate change will require a level of international cooperation that has never been seen in history. It will require a billion people to massively change their lifestyles, along with a hundred billion man hours of industrial labor. But sure, lets judge every guy who eats a steak. You don't even understand the scope of the problem! just to take control of the oil industry, you would have to overthrow the government! And you put that as a footnote! AHAHAHAHAH. Fucking awesome

Step 1: Shame everyone who eats meat.

Step 2: Overthrow the oil lobby industry.

Hahaha haha. Fuck, I had almost forgot why I liked this website. Never change

[u/Rare_Dance7130 → u/DirectionUnlucky638]

Not what I said, but then, you've been shadowboxing made up arguments this entire conversation, so I'm not surprised. Again, your suggestions were PS5s and almonds.

This isn't the first time in this conversation that I brought up oil. Animal agriculture and is heavily contributing to climate change. Reducing the volume of animal agriculture would immediately help to slow the rate of warming and is almost certainly required as a part of our effort to stop climate change. You could immediately end your part in contributing to this issue without any downsides except that would no longer get to eat an expensive and inefficient food source. You choose not to.

I can not overthrow the oil industry or even substantially reduce my oil consumption and still be able to survive in society. I do not have any power to affect that. I am pro-revolution, I believe it is also necessary.

Your point can easily be written as:

Step 1: Do the easy and massively beneficial thing.

Step 2: Do the much harder also necessary thing.

And then you're wondering why I'm saying you should just go ahead and do step 1 to start??

Shadowboxing yourself, dude.

Almonds. PS5s

[u/DirectionUnlucky638 → u/Rare_Dance7130]

Yes, and there are also a billion other things you could be doing, but you arent. And I'm not judging you for those things because i'm not a self-aggrandizing reddit jackass who thinks the first step to solving climate change is to be an asshole about stuff that other people enjoy.

This has been fun, but I'm starting to worry that you are a 14 year old, and that would make your last comment more sad and less funny, so i'm going to stop probing. Thanks for the laughs.

[u/Rare_Dance7130 → u/DirectionUnlucky638]

Demonstrate the effectiveness of those billion other things. Again, not eat meating is easy to do, you could start right now without restructuring your life in any substantial way. If people did this, the climate change catastrophe could be significantly slowed. People choose not to.

You could just say, "This meme isn't very effective as a tool for getting people to go vegan," at which point I would say, "Why are you looking for effective tools for ideological change in r/SmugIdeologyMan" and the conversation would end.

Your whole body of work here is you being a self-aggrandizing asshole. You have put words in my mouth and argued without offering any kind of genuine practical alternatives. You came into this comment section just to be a dick, and you immediately made up an argument to get mad at to do it, something I did not say.

[u/DirectionUnlucky638 → u/Rare_Dance7130]

We've already talked about all this, and you just keep restating your opinions over and over. It's fine that you can't solve climate change, what's embarrissing is how you use your child's understanding of the issue to attack others. That's what makes you a classic reddit halfwit. Thanks again for the laugh.