1167:
Perhaps humans have no
sadistic need to harm animals for the sake of it. It’s just that economics dictates how we keep
them whilst alive, and how we bring them to their deaths. We do what we have to do, to get what we want
from them, without spending too much money. Since the world is a very competitive place,
it all has to be done at low cost. Those
with lowest ethical standards set the benchmark. For example, take the matter of producing eggs.
‘Cage-eggs’ are cheap, so
every egg farmer in the world must cage their hens or risk going out of business. It’s the same with all commodities. If milk is cheaper to ship in from overseas
then the retailer will buy it from there, and Australian dairy farmers eat your
heart out!
To take (her) milk and sell
it for a profit (our profit), a cow must be cheap to keep. Oceans of milk, produced at minimum cost,
supply the maximum numbers of consumers. And it’s the same with all farm-animal
produce. We want huge amounts of it, and
if the animals have to live in slum conditions and eventually be put to death, well,
so be it.
It’s unusual in our society
to be compassionate enough to refuse to be party to harming these animals. In our culture, we are so used to animal
products that to voluntarily deny ourselves of them seems absurd. In our culture, we consider animal cuisine an
art form. The appreciation of animal
food is greater still if we think it makes us strong. For most brainwashed omnivores, it’s
unimaginable to deny oneself any of what is available in shops, simply because these
products are said to be unhealthy or represent human cruelty to animals.
And likewise, omnivores can’t
imagine animal products being satisfactorily replaced by plant-based products. They just don’t believe it’s possible. And because they can’t imagine it (whereas of
course vegans can) they continue to demand ever more animal product and, in
consequence, condone farming practices and the way in which these animals are deprived
of living a happy life.
No comments:
Post a Comment