• DanglingFury@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you believe that then you should work to change people’s minds, like actually research how to do that. The way you currently approach it will only make people disagree with you out of spite. Good luck to you.

    • ClarkDoom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Some people really think being a good example of the product of their beliefs and being obnoxiously obtuse and argumentative about their beliefs are equally effective at persuading others to think like them.

      I can tell you no person ever in the history of humanity was convinced by the latter.

      • abraxas@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Worse, if someone attempts to convince me of something I already think is wrong and uses an argument that I am convinced is flawed, they will only make me more sure I was right in the first place.

          • TheUniqueOne@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Those did challenge the oppressors for one they both had sticks like Malcolm x and the many assassinations of British leaders and other violent actions by Indian independence actors. You can’t just erase huge parts of those movements. Also MLK JR was very disruptive with sit ins and marches he was nonviolent yes but differently not coddling or non-disruptive.

          • TheUniqueOne@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            How? Should anti nazi advocates never challenged nazi beliefs and instead say doing a little less genocide is okay. Should anti-colonial revolutionaries not responded with violence or direct action to force the colonizers to change and instead sent letters saying " I know you are people too you are activly harming me but I’m not going to fight against you we have to agree to disagree." Your point makes no sense.

            • ClarkDoom@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s the most straw man argument I’ve seen in a while.

              Maybe take a step back and think about how using nazi analogies when discussing meat eaters is counterproductive to your beliefs and frigging offensive to large swaths of the global population who were affected by nazis. Those two things are not comparable and you need to do some self education if you think that’s okay or persuasive.

              • oshitwaddup@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Maybe take another step back and recognize that many people who were tortured by the nazis see the similarities to animal agriculture and are actively against it

                Edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_analogy_in_animal_rights

                “Perhaps the earliest use of the analogy comes from Edgar Kupfer-Koberwitz, a German concentration camp survivor and journalist, who wrote in 1940 in his “Dachau Diaries” from inside the Dachau Concentration Camp that “I have suffered so much myself that I can feel other creatures’ suffering by virtue of my own”.[4][5] He further wrote, “I believe as long as man tortures and kills animals, he will torture and kill humans as well—and wars will be waged—for killing must be practiced and learned on a small scale”.[4]”

            • DanglingFury@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              The animals are being bred to live and die. Everything loves and dies. If we didn’t eat cows they would be extinct. A billion animals that get to experience being. I am against indoor livestock agribusiness that is a manamade hell on earth, but good local ranchers raising livestock I like. Personally I’d rather live for a while and be eaten than never get to live at all.

              • TheUniqueOne@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Local ranchers can’t provide any reasonable kind of meat or dairy production for our population no matter how much the ideal farm you are picturing is a myth still using widespread abuse of the animals. Cows would live in drastically lesser numbers on sanctuaries and such. Breeding a population to kill for your sense pleasure isn’t justified unless you would be okay doing the same to humans.

    • TheUniqueOne@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you help kill living beings out of spite then I’m not the problem. If nobody is challenged when they kill and oppress others they will never stop doing so.

    • TheUniqueOne@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also who are you to tell me how to argue for animal liberation given whats been tried before has obviously not worked on you.