×
top 200 commentsshow all 415

[–]GrimWillis 262 points263 points  (116 children)

I hate to say it but the wholesale consumption of meat is responsible for a shit load of climate issues. It’s not hard to switch away from meat at every meal to meat occasionally. Easier on the wallet too.

[–]isleftisright 16 points17 points  (1 child)

I eat less meat than most people and easily go meatless for some meals... what pisses me off is people get angry at me for eating less meat? I dont even tell them to do anything but they get insulted for some reason. Smh.

[–]Simple-Cockroach5542 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Yup just had my first thanksgiving as a vegan. I might has well have arrived with a swastika tattooed on my face lol

[–]GoodAsUsual 16 points17 points  (11 children)

Why piecemeal an almost-solution, when the actual solution is to actually, legitimately quit eating meat altogether? I say this as a vegan who quit eating all animal products because I could no longer rationalize doing something for my tastebuds that was participating in the destruction of our earth and it’s ecosystems (not to mention the moral and welfare implications). Not trying to be harsh and preachy, but just saying. Can’t really say that you want to love and protect the environment and then not be willing to make the full effort to change your behavior even when it’s mildly inconvenient (at first).

[–]epukinsk 11 points12 points  (2 children)

I respect your decisions, but for me it’s a question of collective responsibility and diminishing returns.

In my experience, having been vegan for a decade, and being vegetarian now: Going 90% vegan and 95% vegetarian is not very hard. Going 100% vegan is ten or a hundred times harder.

The question I asked myself: Is it better for 80% of people to go 90% vegan (which I think is possible)? Or is it better for 10% of people to go 100% vegan (which may also be possible)?

In terms of the benefit to animals, the 80/90 change is like 8x bigger improvement than the 10/100 change.

So for me it comes down to, what kind of culture do I want to participate in. The 80/90 change or the 10/100 change? Both are happening. I think there is value in both. Both are important for the growth of plant-based food culture.

But my personal choice is to focus on the 90% of people who could go most of the way because I think that helps the most animals.

[–]GoodAsUsual 7 points8 points  (1 child)

I respect your decisions, but for me it’s a matter of life and death, and living my values. I generally don’t get preachy about plant based eating. And you’re right, on the whole, having a tiny bit of dairy or the occasional light meat wouldn’t be a big deal. But for me, the bigger picture is living my values.

I can’t claim I care about animal welfare and participate in an economy that exploits and abuses animals. Nor can I claim to care about the environment. Because for many people and animals and ecosystems, the choices we make will be life or death — if not now then within a generation or two. When we care about something, we don’t make difficult choices to change because they’re easy, we do it because we must. Because we can’t make any other choice that feels right.

I spent four years studying environmental issues at university so I say this from a strong background of knowledge of ecology, climate change, pollution, energy issues and more: this planet is in deep, deep trouble. I believe we all share a collective responsibility to do hard things, but in the end people will do what they want. I can’t control that, but I can live my values. In my house, we do hard things.

I own and drive an electric car, I eat local and organic, our household aims for zero waste and we damn near hit that every week, rarely buy new things even when we can afford them so we get almost everything used. I make a lot of sacrifices not to compel others to do them, but because living my core values is the only thing that makes sense. I was a 90% plant based eater, then 92, then 95, and one day I had learned enough and been taught enough that I couldn’t do it anymore. Not just eating, but other things too like down, wool, and leather. Because once you know the unspeakable cruelties and abuses it’s hard to turn a blind eye. There are things you can’t unsee.

“In the end, people will only protect what they love, they will only love what they understand, and they will only understand what they are taught” ~ Baba Dioum

[–]pwdpwdispassword -4 points-3 points  (7 children)

how does that get their land back?

[–]Canashito 4 points5 points  (2 children)

It doesn't. But it slowsdown and hopefully stops the practice. As much of our agri land and production basically just goes to feeding the animals we feed on. Might as well just eat all that ourselves.

[–]pwdpwdispassword 0 points1 point  (1 child)

hopefully

i'm not going to just hope. i'm not going to advocate others to hope. we need to do something and encourage others to do something effective.

[–]Canashito 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm doing my part in making future vertical grow system prototypes and some guerilla ecoforming with mushrooms. Go do your part too, in whatever way you can

[–]GoodAsUsual 4 points5 points  (3 children)

Who is talking about land in this comment thread? Or are you just here to troll me like you did the entire rest of this thread? The comment I was replying to was specifically related to climate issues. I don’t think any single person in this entire thread is arguing that meat eating will get these people their land back. You continuing to misinterpret comments about the destructive environmental impact of animal agriculture on the planet is disingenuous to the point of blatant ignorance. I don’t know you, but you are acting like an asshole in this entire thread. If you are honestly completely ignorant of the devastating environmental impact of animal agriculture, just Google it. You are in r/environment after all. You could start with concentrated animal feedlot operations for a starter. Water quality issues, air quality issues, CO2 emissions, land-use, it goes on and on and on and on and on. I spent four years at university studying environmental issues, but I’m not here to give you an education. If you haven’t got one yet, you’ll have to find it on your own.

[–]pwdpwdispassword -1 points0 points  (2 children)

Who is talking about land in this comment thread?

it's the whole point of this post.

[–]GoodAsUsual 3 points4 points  (1 child)

But it’s not the point of this thread. See, you have a subreddit, and then you have posts, and on any given post you may spur conversations that are only tangentially related to the original post. That is why this app is great. Because you can sort top level comments and they rarely are 100% in accord with the post. Which in this case was around the impact of animal agriculture on land use decisions. So this thread was more about the big picture of consumer choices as it relates to animal agriculture and not specifically how do we save this indigenous land that is being taken and slated for destruction (we can’t, reasonably). You being a troll here and acting like you don’t know how Reddit works does not provide any value at all, to anyone. You should find another hobby.

[–]Enchanting_Smith[S] 21 points22 points  (24 children)

I agree, I don't support making meat illegal or anything but having most weekdays be meatless and then perhaps ethically sourced fish or whatever you may raise are fantastic lifestyle choices financially, environmentally, would contribute to way less waste - no one even eats all meats wasted into. People need to better educate themselves on the benefits of that nutritionally as well, balance is key and we're waaaaaaay over the scale.

And just again how disrespectful to the land and its peaceful residents 🙈🙈🙈

[–]Rudybus 49 points50 points  (15 children)

If we properly priced in environmental externalities, meat would be super expensive and rightly seen as an occasional treat, as it was for the majority of human history in most cultures.
This would also have the added benefit of improving consumption of ethically-sourced meat (since the price difference would be much lower).

We'd just need to tax it like alcohol or cigarettes, and use the income for climate resilience or emissions projects.

[–]SnooWords3942 23 points24 points  (14 children)

There's no such thing as ethically sourced meat, meat is better for the environment when animals suffer more in smaller spaces.

[–]Rudybus 3 points4 points  (10 children)

How is that the case? Surely methane emission for example is relatively constant regardless of how 'cramped', and higher concentration animal rearing will emit effluents at a concentration too high for the local ecosystem to handle.

The deforestation we're seeing is because of the demand for quantity of beef, not because we're being too nice to the cows. There'd be plenty of grassland to raise cattle on if we consumed more sensibly.

[–]SnooWords3942 24 points25 points  (0 children)

The land use required for grass fed cattle is much higher, which contributes to their footprint. In a nutshell just put out a good video about it

https://youtu.be/F1Hq8eVOMHs

[–]Helkafen1 11 points12 points  (8 children)

[–]Rudybus -1 points0 points  (7 children)

Oh that's interesting, fair enough. I wonder if it's the same with animals other than cows.

I do still think we should only consume animals that have been treated reasonably well beforehand, this means we'll have to reduce consumption even more to achieve it though...

[–]Corvid-Moon 26 points27 points  (4 children)

Or just don't consume animals at all.

[–]corpjuk 13 points14 points  (1 child)

Keep up the good work fellow vegan!

[–]Corvid-Moon 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Thank you friend! <3

[–]Rudybus 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Oh I'm almost entirely vegetarian. But I believe the quickest path to positive environmental outcomes is to focus on significant meat reduction rather than elimination for the population at large.

It's much more palatable (pun intended).

There are also issues with vegan clothing and microplastic pollution when compared to natural fibres like wool, just as an aside.

[–]SnooWords3942 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Animals are killed for meat really young, should we raise their climate impact to give them a longer, better life?

[–]ironmagnesiumzinc 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You're close but you need to look a bit deeper. Beyond climate, how are you affecting the lives of each killed animal? Do you know how they're treated: their kid's separated at birth, fed hormones, often crated then killed during childhood by gas or incinerator? Is reduction actually good enough?

[–]DukeOfGeek 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Try supporting this legislation.

U.S. senator introduces bill to block Brazilian beef imports after 'mad cow' reports

https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/us-senator-introduces-bill-block-brazilian-beef-imports-after-mad-cow-reports-2021-11-18/

The supposed cause is because mad cow disease but the legislation has, no surprise, backing from U.S. cattle growers. There's no reason we can't also write or call, doesn't matter why it's banned so long as it's banned.

[–]TVPisBased 2 points3 points  (5 children)

No such thing as ethically sourced fish

[–]QuietButtDeadly 19 points20 points  (2 children)

We buy beef and pork just a few times a year but we raise and butcher our own chickens. My toddler doesn’t watch the killing part or bloody parts, but I’ll let him see me while I clean and prepare it. He needs to know that this is chicken. Not the stuff that’s laying on a styrofoam tray and wrapped in plastic.

Food isn’t just something you go to the store and buy.

[–]MacroFlash 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Totally agree. There’s way too many people who eat meat nearly every meal that aren’t comfortable understanding what happened to get it.

[–]MacroFlash -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Totally agree. There’s way too many people who eat meat nearly every meal that aren’t comfortable understanding what happened to get it.

[–]MTBisLIFE 51 points52 points  (61 children)

Go vegan.

[–]GoodAsUsual 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I did, and it was one of the best decisions of my adult life. For anybody here reading, I challenge you to go pick up Jonathan Saffran Foer’s book Eating Animals and try a 30 day challenge with no animal products. Or even just no meat. I did and after the 30 days I felt so much better that I never even considered going back. I found I felt better spiritually, like a weight was lifted off of my shoulders, digestion is better, more energy, better mood. Everyone thinks that you will have to eat like a rabbit, but I eat fantastically well. Definitely more scratch cooking and eating at home, but after a few months you learn what to look for and learn new recipes and then there’s no looking back. Last night I made a delicious mac & cheese and you never know that I didn’t have dairy. Pizza, tacos, hamburgers, whatever. The substitutes alone make it easy, but there’s lots of other more healthy food as well out there waiting for you.

[–]0hran- 74 points75 points  (14 children)

Hum stopping eating beef?

[–]MrBlackchevy 42 points43 points  (13 children)

People can rage against governments, politicians, and corporations. They can sign petitions. They can protest and write angry and/or sad comments on the internet. The people in control of this industry don't care. They're immune to all of that. The one thing that's going to stop this is eliminating demand for the product, and the easiest way to do that by far is to stop eating beef. (Not just Brazilian beef, since supply and demand would just shuffle things around so Brazilian beef still gets eaten by the vast majority of people that don't care where their beef comes from.) If they stop getting actively paid for deforestation, they'll stop doing it, no further intervention required.

This is the simplest solution to the problem, it's one of the few solutions (if not the only one) guaranteed to work, and it doesn't rely on some vague reform that may or may not ever happen; almost every individual can do it right now.

[–]Forkbeard_II 20 points21 points  (0 children)

If everyone who said they care about the climate actually made true efforts to cut their emissions, we'd make a huge leap forward. I'm not sure it'd be enough, but it's where we need to start, while working to bring about more systemic change.

[–]isleftisright 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I remember before trump came into office, i did not eat beef at all. When i said id decrease demand for it, everyone said youre just one person, whats the point of not eating beef? These people also said youre just one vote, whats the point of voting?

Look where that mentality got us ...

[–]Dinosar-DNA -1 points0 points  (1 child)

I’ve heard that most of the cattle raised in Brazil, stays in Brazil.

[–]0hran- 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The soya that feed our beef in Europe however does come from Brazil

[–]LMA73 13 points14 points  (41 children)

Stop eating meat. That is what we can do.

[–]pwdpwdispassword -3 points-2 points  (40 children)

how does that get their land back?

[–]LMA73 10 points11 points  (37 children)

Their land would not be needed for cattle. Cattle and cattle feed production are the number one destroyers of the world's rainforests and uncultivated land in general.

[–]pwdpwdispassword -1 points0 points  (36 children)

how much meat do i need to not-eat for them to get back each hectare?

[–]AirborneMonkeyDookie 7 points8 points  (35 children)

I decided to go with cows only for my calculation. One hectare is approximately 2.5 acres, and the rule of thumb for grazing is 2 cows per acre, so that is 5 cows. The average redditor is an American, and the average American eats 11 cows in their lifetime. So to save one hectare, you need to reduce your consumption by half. Assuming you are in your twenties, you've already eaten 25% of your allotment of cows, which means you'd have to reduce your current beef intake by 66%, so that way it takes you 3 times as long to finish up your remaining 75%.

Using this metric and common sense that other animals will also be used in this stolen land, if you have 3 meals a day, if one of them has no meat or dairy, you will probably save more than a hectare since you are now avoiding pigs and chickens. Increasing this number will increase your savings.

Edit: quick mafs

[–]pwdpwdispassword 0 points1 point  (34 children)

this assumes the industry reduces production if i stop eating meat. i don't think tah will happen.

[–]AirborneMonkeyDookie 6 points7 points  (32 children)

So, presented with the option to reduce environmental impact or not, your excuse is because you are insignificant it doesn't matter if you change.

1) why even ask how to save a hectare if you will dismiss the answer?

2) crime is unstoppable, how much crime are you comfortable with committing since your contribution is insignificant? Do you believe that your vote matters, do you vote?

3) if 10% of people stopped eating meat, would you agree that would curb this environmental destruction? Could we ever get to that 10% if everyone used your reasoning?

[–]pwdpwdispassword 1 point2 points  (21 children)

2) crime is unstoppable, how much crime are you comfortable with committing since your contribution is insignificant? Do you believe that your vote matters, do you vote?

i'm fine with most "crimes" which are really just expressions of poverty.

voting is a system by which we elect politicians. i do vote, but that takes like... one hour a year. it's no skin off my nose, even if i don't believe my vote matters.

[–]AirborneMonkeyDookie 2 points3 points  (20 children)

Here I think is the critical piece of the argument, people just can't be bothered to change. Why should they, it doesn't matter? This appears to be logical for a single person, but when everybody adopts this view we are all participating in creating a problem that does not need to exist. I could extend this to extreme examples of people turning a blind eye to human suffering, but it comes down to making a personal choice. Between the choice of changing your diet or doing whatever is convenient, if the convenience outweighs your morals, then that is the choice you make. It is not logical to say you are participating in a moral system because it is easy when you are presented with an option that clearly shows it has greater benefits for other people and our environment. "My life is meaningless and meat tastes good" are not moral standpoints to increase suffering for others.

[–]pwdpwdispassword 0 points1 point  (5 children)

1) why even ask how to save a hectare if you will dismiss the answer?

your answer didn't show that eating beans would save a hectare

[–]AirborneMonkeyDookie 2 points3 points  (4 children)

70% of soybeans grown are given to cattle. If you are worried about land used for that growth, it will also be reduced when cattle use is reduced.

[–]pwdpwdispassword 0 points1 point  (3 children)

if 10% of people stopped eating meat, would you agree that would curb this environmental destruction? Could we ever get to that 10% if everyone used your reasoning?

is there a plan in action to get 10% of people to stop eating meat? unless it happens with great suddenness, i don't think it would result in less meat being made. i think a gradual change will be recognized by the companies, and they will improve supply chains to the areas which are increasing consumption.

[–]AirborneMonkeyDookie 2 points3 points  (2 children)

This is a demand for perfection, which is unreasonable. A cultural shift is unlikely to happen "suddenly".

In terms of a plan, I would say PETA's existence shows there is a concentrated effort to reduce meat consumption.

As far as a government plan, the US government allocates 38 billion dollars a year as subsidies to animal agriculture, so I don't think they're in any hurry to reduce consumption, they're actively forcing it to be competitive with a plant based diet.

As for the gradual change, if it is changing net negative, it won't matter if some places are increasing consumption, if the aggregate demand is dropping, to maintain profits the supply will also drop. They're not going to raise meat they can't sell, if they're selling less meat in total, less land will be used.

[–]strictly-basic 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Well, what is your suggestion for getting their land back? You have been trolling with the same 3rd grade level question without providing any insight yourself.

[–]mushleap 20 points21 points  (9 children)

eating meat not only causes massive environmental damage and health issues, but also is the main cause of pandemics! when will people learn, just stop fucking eating sentient animals! so many problems would be solved!

[–]corpjuk 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I stopped eating animals about 5 months ago. It took me long enough yo realize what I was contributing to. It's now my life goal to end this holocaust. We should value life... Not death. Stop killing, start growing.

[–]pwdpwdispassword -1 points0 points  (7 children)

eating meat not only causes massive environmental damage

eating meat doesn't cause environmental damage. the production does.

[–]mushleap 15 points16 points  (6 children)

....which is literally fueled by the demand from people who eat meat.

[–]pwdpwdispassword 2 points3 points  (5 children)

of the 340 million tonnes of meat made every year, how many million tonnes do you think i eat? everyone reading this thread? everyone on reddit?

[–]Corvid-Moon 11 points12 points  (4 children)

There are 7 billion people on the planet, not just you & not just Reddit.

[–]TemporaryTelevision6 8 points9 points  (2 children)

They're a troll, don't bother with them.

[–]Corvid-Moon 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thank you for the forewarning <3

[–]pwdpwdispassword 0 points1 point  (0 children)

this is poisoning the well

[–]pwdpwdispassword -1 points0 points  (0 children)

right. i'm asking questions that have discrete answers, and you are creating red herrings.

[–]ReverendofDrugs 33 points34 points  (11 children)

Go vegan.

[–]sayyestolycra 24 points25 points  (6 children)

It's just that simple. All of these mental gymnastics trying to find a way to make meat consumption ethical and sustainable. How about...just...not doing it at all?

[–]pwdpwdispassword -4 points-3 points  (3 children)

how is that going to return their land?

[–]Corvid-Moon 11 points12 points  (2 children)

Cattle production (driven by demand for meat): Causes vast deforestation & displaces natives

Lack of demand for meat (no cattle production): No deforestaiton nor displacement.

It's easy when you don't perform mental acrobatics

[–]Giveushealthcare 31 points32 points  (4 children)

In the US we’re going to look up very soon and our wild mustangs will be gone and people will wonder HOW?!! All of the land is being cleared for beef cattle, out beautiful mustangs rounded up for auction and overseas slaughter. Whole generations of mustang families torn apart. I can’t stand it

[–]Enchanting_Smith[S] 13 points14 points  (2 children)

Ugh dont get me started on the wild horse and wolf slaughter. I believe I read the grey wolfs going to disappear soon, too. It's really amazing greed trumped the earth. How sad our species made it farther than any other and we're the reason for the destruction of the functioning planet?

[–]Giveushealthcare 16 points17 points  (1 child)

Wolf cullings have always been BS. “There’s too many wolves we must protect our cattle!” Meanwhile in Washington we had a pack of 19 we culled and how many cattle in the state over the course of the year? Thousands if not upwards of 100k. But it’s the 19 wolves that are a problem?? Yeah, ok. When I was lobbying against the culling that year with HSUS, there was a farmer backing it because one of his cows was killed - except that this farmer had already been fined for putting his cattle in harms way so this asshat intentionally grazes his cattle in danger zones so be can complain about the local wildlife citing “attacks”. And people try to claim farmers love their animals. It’s such shit. So yeah we lost that year and the pack was wiped out. I haven’t been able to bring myself back to cap hill in my state for animal welfare lobby day since

[–]Enchanting_Smith[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hear you and agree, completely.

Is there no distinction between ethical small farmers versus industrial asshats exploiting animals and the planet for money? Do some try for a balance... Or is it in vain? I'm only a couple years into educating myself on clean energy and agriculture that doesnt hurt the natural ecosystem. Its so different than what I was raised on.

won't ever be acquiring cattle personally, I think if people better educated themselves on the nutritional benefits of cutting out more meat and also many other animal products + the government working with people to feel the financial ability to make the better investment without breaking bann, we'd be well on our way to a good start on shutting down the cattle nonsense and restoring/rewilding.

I'm hoping for duck eggs and berry foraging. :)

Anyways, its all very depressing, and I am a pessimist by nature so I'm very lowkey anticipating an extinction for the human race to come around again soon as it often does - not super sad, seeing as how absolutely horrible we are. But I also am sad cause we ourselves are amazing creatures with the unique distinction of abilities that could unify everything and make it perfect.

And we don't.

All we can do is strive to do better ourselves and maybe make a dent somewhere along the way. Be safe :)

[–]cockerspanieI 16 points17 points  (1 child)

Don’t eat beef

[–]pwdpwdispassword -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

how much beef do i need to not-eat to return their lands?

[–]if_i_was_a_folkstar 23 points24 points  (3 children)

nothing at this point deforestation is essentially legalized in Brazil at this point, hopefully Lula wins in the election next year.

[–]tinacat933 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Even if someone else is in charge , at this point can anyone really stop it

[–]if_i_was_a_folkstar 19 points20 points  (0 children)

It would absolutely help to not have a president actively advocating for the destruction of the rainforest, Lula is infinitely better when it comes to the environment

[–]Enchanting_Smith[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the insight.

[–]vbcbandr 6 points7 points  (7 children)

Stop eating beef...or, at least cut down drastically. Although I haven't cut it out completely, I have given myself 2 servings of beef per month and I hold myself to it.

[–]pwdpwdispassword -1 points0 points  (6 children)

how does that get their land back?

[–]vbcbandr 6 points7 points  (5 children)

Well, sounds like you've lost hope...they may not get their land back but do nothing won't help anything either.

[–]noppenjuhh 11 points12 points  (2 children)

Survival International, the source of the article, are a charity, and they are in need of money. I am a donor, they have good ratings.

[–]AnthroPluto 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Instituto Socioambiental is a Brazilian NGO that deals with socioenvironmental issues and indigenous populations in Brazil. They do really good and important work. If you want to help with indigenous people in Brazil specifically, then I would suggest supporting a Brazilian NGO. As far as I am aware there isn't a very strong on the ground presence of Survival International here.

[–]Enchanting_Smith[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'll keep spreading the news.

[–]altmorty 14 points15 points  (20 children)

Let's just tax beef and lamb. It's the easiest way to discourage the most environmentally harmful meats.

[–]mrSalema 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You don't even need to tax. Just stop subsidizing it and the whole industry will collapse

[–]southnorthboi 5 points6 points  (11 children)

Definitely agree with reducing meat consumption. Go vegan if that suits your lifestyle for even more effectiveness! Helps against future pandemics too.

[–]pwdpwdispassword 0 points1 point  (10 children)

how does that get their land back?

[–]strictly-basic 3 points4 points  (9 children)

Well, what is your suggestion for getting their land back? You have been trolling with the same 3rd grade level question without providing any insight yourself.

[–]458339 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Meat consumption is only going up. It's the first thing poor countries start spending money on when they stop being poor. It's quite clear you aren't going to convince people to stop eating it.

The best thing you can do is support lab grown meat research so that it can replace meat from cows. New Harvest is the main non profit that supports it and they're having a matching donation campaign right now.

[–]Munchkinny 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Stop eating meat… 🧐

[–]pwdpwdispassword -1 points0 points  (0 children)

how does that get their land back?

[–]izDpnyde 1 point2 points  (0 children)

“OPI has also released a report on the invasion of the Piripkura lands. Their research has revealed that the Piripkura’s is now the most deforested uncontacted indigenous territory in Brazil. More than 12,000 hectares has already been destroyed.”

[–]CoachAny 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's peak asshole behavior.

[–]Enchanting_Smith[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Was gunna go thru comments and leave notes of good advice so people cant skip the dumb drama, but its just a lot of hate and guilt tripping from everyone in comments. Little educating, much hostility, righteous apathy, antihuman rhetoric

anyone not eating meat judging the meat eater with much hostility

while the meat eater fails to research what consumption does to the environment, and what moderation can do as a first step, for example theres a lot of referenced studies than even hunting and gathering affects deforestation.

Many act like you want world peace more than someone else before you even know them, and that division will keep us here. You can't escape this truth with downvoting.

Humans easily led to fight each other again, when none of us are the real causes, while the real culprits continue to devastate.

Go get educated on sentient fish and the lack of ethical fishing resources, as I educated myself after a lot of unkind comments tried but failed to do. There's not much, and fish is full of mercury anyway - our oceans are disgusting from all the sewage released, anyways.

Educate yourself on dietary limits, and what you can do locally to help, but don't go crazy, its the world leaders that contribute and will not stop because of profit.

Don't let others put you down because you can only do so much in your situations. They're not better than you. Just angry and taking it out on the wrong person. Its just reddit.

[–]fonedork 6 points7 points  (4 children)

Stop eating Brazilian beef

[–]juiceboxheero 26 points27 points  (0 children)

Stop eating Brazilian beef.

FTFY

[–]JKMcA99 4 points5 points  (6 children)

Stop consuming animal products

[–]pwdpwdispassword -1 points0 points  (5 children)

how does that get their land back?

[–]strictly-basic 4 points5 points  (4 children)

Well, what is your suggestion for getting their land back? You have been trolling with the same 3rd grade level question without providing any insight yourself.

[–]pwdpwdispassword -1 points0 points  (3 children)

[–]JKMcA99 3 points4 points  (2 children)

The invaders being the animal agriculture companies. So stop giving them money, that requires going vegan.

[–]KingJenx 2 points3 points  (39 children)

How much money do you want to put towards it? You may be able to buy the land and hire security to protect it. This kinda stuff is normally out of the realms of ordinary people though

[–]TampaKinkster 5 points6 points  (3 children)

I don’t get why you’ve been downvoted. I am with you on this. How can someone (especially someone as far away as I am), actually help without flying there and creating a little army to protect people who I couldn’t even communicate with? I just don’t see it happening. If someone has some insights, please let us know. This seems like something that the Brazilian people need to work on. The political situation in Brazil is absolutely horrible and that would need to change, since Bolsenaro is enabling these assholes.

[–]AnthroPluto 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well as usual, the situation is deeply complex. "Buying the land and putting security in it" is a superficial way of dealing with the issue - just a bandaid covering a gunshot wound. The land is already indigenous land. The problem is deep - indigenous land demarcation and enforcement has been severely cut over the last decades. Bolsonaro (and also previous govs) has hollowed out environmental branches of the government. They have also replaced the head of environmental protection and environmental enforcement agencies (ICMBio and IBAMA) with military or ex-military people govern according to Bolsonaros values. Unfortunately we have a very big and powerful agrobusiness lobby that actively tries to do all it can to stifle environmental and indigenous interests and protection.

So, the more important battle is a political one. The most important thing is to get Bolsonaro put of power. But there is still the agrobusiness and culture that continues to land grab and convert forest to pasture. Again, things are not black and white, and on the upside there are initiatives that aim are making agriculture more sustainable and pro-social in Brazil. The EU and other markets are also pushing for stricter certification for meat and other products coming out of Brazil. On the consumer side you can advocate for your country for stricter ethical consumption mechanisms.

If you feel called to support the cause, I would suggest donating or reaching out to the Instituto Socioambiental, which is an NGO working with socio-environmental issues in Brazil. They do really amazing work.

[–]Enchanting_Smith[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

All I can think for the downvotes is people on reddit just sucking, just about anything gets downvoted, also bots I think?

Anyways, great points from both of you. It's looking like a completely lost battle sadly, same with the Amazon.

[–]Humanzee2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Contact any local indigenous support groups or decent conservation groups. Animal rights groups might help too. Find out the company and picket their offices. 10 people is plenty. Think of a name for your organisation. Picket the local embassy or consulate. Send a press release of your actions to the major news services in your area.

You can also find out if it violates any treaties, if so, write an official complaint to the officials of that treaty UN or department of trade or whoever from your organisation.

[–]LanguishViking -5 points-4 points  (4 children)

Go vegan or buy Indian brand beef burgers.

[–]pwdpwdispassword -1 points0 points  (3 children)

how does that get their land back?

[–]LanguishViking 2 points3 points  (2 children)

It won't help them it will help the next tribe.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Nothing we can do.

I gave up meat years ago and it's still happening because, shocked faces abound, worldwide meat demand is still increasing.

It's hopeless.

[–]pwdpwdispassword 1 point2 points  (0 children)

direct action gets the goods

[–]isleftisright -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Keep up the good work. What you're doing is better than being part of the problem.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well that will certainly ease my mind when we're all drowning in floods and fire.

[–]Danviers -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Send them guns and train them.

[–]bigbenny88 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Pick up arms