Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, I should maybe have said “I doubt we’d think it’s Okay to do this to humans”.
Yeah, but it seems we do think it's okay, after all North Korea has been doing that for decades and people don't care whatsoever. NK contractors continue to be employed all over the world. Instead people are outraged about the dictators in the middle east etc. Whatever you wanna say about the Gaza atrocities - it applies 100x to North Korea. And yet, nobody cares. I think that's the real thing you can take away from…
New farm bill would condemn pigs to a lifetime in gestation crates
211–220 of 236 posts
Re: New farm bill would condemn pigs to a lifetime in gestation crates
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Farmed animals could live happy, healthy lives and then be culled in a humane way. Breeding animals _specifically for killing them_, no matter how they are killed, is not what I'd consider humane. If we take 'humane' literally, it means to be treated as you would treat a human. I doubt we'd do this to humans. So the only way to be okay with this is adhering to a form of specieism.
> specieism Wait, do we not agree that people are inherently more valuable than pigs?
Re: New farm bill would condemn pigs to a lifetime in gestation crates
#213The sooner we get to true lab grown meat the better Meat is nice but would be better if we can skip the whole suffering thing
lab grown meat is cancer. Good luck eating that.
Re: New farm bill would condemn pigs to a lifetime in gestation crates
#214The sooner we get to true lab grown meat the better Meat is nice but would be better if we can skip the whole suffering thing
In nature, animals are routinely torn apart and devoured while still breathing. In a proper rending facility, a captive bolt pneumatic/hydraulic pistol punctures their skull and sends a shockwave through their brains, killing them like Tony in the last scene of the Sopranos.
Re: New farm bill would condemn pigs to a lifetime in gestation crates
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
you assume that capitalism implies that everyone gets to participate. but that is not a necessary condition. you can have a capitalist system where not everyone participates. slaves did not participate in capitalism, but their owners did. one might even argue that employees do not participate in capitalism either (i am not familiar enough with the specific definitions to state that with certainty however).
No! The owners were not participating in capitalism either, precisely because their whole business is predicated on violating private property. If you wish, you can express it as a matter of degree. That by having ones bodily autonomy stripped, one is engaged less capitalistically, and the same for those which strip that autonomy. The violation taints both ways.
Neither system has ever existed in its purest theoretical form -- probably cannot, and even more probably should not.
I don't think this is a useful point of argument.
Re: New farm bill would condemn pigs to a lifetime in gestation crates
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, but it seems we do think it's okay, after all North Korea has been doing that for decades and people don't care whatsoever. NK contractors continue to be employed all over the world. Instead people are outraged about the dictators in the middle east etc. Whatever you wanna say about the Gaza atrocities - it applies 100x to North Korea. And yet, nobody cares. I think that's the real thing you can take away from…
I can't invade North Korea. I can avoid eating pigs.
Re: New farm bill would condemn pigs to a lifetime in gestation crates
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a false dichotomy. The choice is not lab grown or suffering. Farmed animals could live happy, healthy lives and then be culled in a humane way. The problem is that it costs slightly more and our society is more concerned with cost than animal suffering.
> Farmed animals could live happy, healthy lives and then be culled in a humane way. Breeding animals _specifically for killing them_, no matter how they are killed, is not what I'd consider humane. If we take 'humane' literally, it means to be treated as you would treat a human. I doubt we'd do this to humans. So the only way to be okay with this is adhering to a form of specieism.
Also many domesticated animals would be completely extinct if we didn't eat or farm them, which isn't a great prize, but it isn't nothing either.
Personally I don't believe, until energy is so plentifully produced to be approaching on free for individuals, that we can even really afford to forgo animal agriculture. Oh yeah sure, we use farmland to grow animal feed and not human feed, but the animal feed we grow is often much easier to grow, and in many cases reduces artificial fertilizer usage which is a huge usage of fossil fuels. Take cows for example, they are fed 90% grass or alfalfa to grow, yeah their last month or two of life they are given grain to fatten them up (which is optional but customers prefer it), but that alfalfa they ate for 90% of their growth required no fertilizer or pesticides, and even produces nitrogen fertilizer in the ground, while harvesting consists of mowing it down and packing it into bails, and can be stored for years almost anywhere, including outside or in just random pits or 100 year old barns. Dent corn does require fertilizer (especially if you don't rotate with alfalfa or other legumes), however dent corn can also be stored for years with no more processing than is done within 10 seconds of harvest by the combine that is harvesting it, and can be fed to animals directly, while sweet corn is far more delicate, less fertilizer efficient, and doesn't store for long without refrigeration, canning, or freezing. Also animals like pigs are often fed otherwise bad or inedible food.
Meat/animals it also a great emergency store of food for disaster. A volcano can reduce global yields by 30%, and while crop subsidization will help as we might have an extra 10% growing to start with, that still may end with shortages because people keep fighting crop subsidization to keep it low not understanding why it exists (to prevent famine which it has successfully done for over 100 years in every country that implements it). But you can give yourself an extra few years of food from animal stores by slaughtering them down and feeding them on old animal feed stockpiles, either just to wait for overall crop yields to increase again, or to give time to increase farming efforts.
In a more ideal world I would definitely go along with reducing or even eliminating most animal agriculture, but in the world we currently live in it seems like a liability to me. I simply don't trust the people controlling most of our capital and wielding most of the power of human civilization to manage it well enough now or anytime in the near future. Not to mention the educational requirements to most cultures to switch to a pure vegetarian diet without all sorts of side effects from poor nutritional balance.
Re: New farm bill would condemn pigs to a lifetime in gestation crates
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you misinterpreted GP's emphasis. But still, egg and dairy animals are culled when productivity drops. The human equivalent would be killing all male babies, and females after age ~40. This does not seem more "humane" than the human equivalent of meat farming, where all human offspring would be harvested at age ~15.
Yup exactly. And when animals are bred specifically for milk, they aren't treated well even before they are killed. Dairy cows need to be kept continuously pregnant / in lactation state through artificial insemination. They don't magically produce milk all-year round. And pregnancy is _hard_ on animals (including humans), it changes your physiology and psychology. Even if we take for granted that a cow isn't as consc…
Re: New farm bill would condemn pigs to a lifetime in gestation crates
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
In their current implementation, yeah, they’re pretty bad. There is a need for something like it, though. A sow will absolutely lay down on her piglets and suffocate them.
> A sow will absolutely lay down on her piglets and suffocate them. This makes me really curious because that behavior seems very maladaptive for a species. That leads me to wonder if something else, ie. the environment or domestication, is leading to this behavior rather than pigs being really, really prone to wiping out their own species. Does anyone know why they do this in a farm environment?
Some of the loss likely is due to keeping them penned up, however there are also losses for not keeping them penned up and letting baby pigs run among a herd of many adult pigs, some of which will attempt to kill piglets, especially females who have not had piglets yet. Pigs can be absolute viscous as hell and will readily eat other living animals if they think they can get away with it, including other pigs, and some mother pigs have been known to cannibalize their young even under ideal situations. Pig farmers have themselves been killed by pigs from passing out or getting knocked out in pig pens and the pigs seeing them as a free meal not to be wasted.
Re: New farm bill would condemn pigs to a lifetime in gestation crates
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where is the inconsistency in being ok with killing an animal and eating it and wanting the time leading up to their death to not be misery?
How it can be more miserable than it already is - being animal slave from birth to guaranteed death (don’t tell me animals can’t feel it from adjacent room/building)?
They were treated not much different than a dog that eats grass, and had no idea they were food. The worst they knew is sometimes a new calf would appear, sometimes an old cow would be loaded up and drove away. All of them named, although they were mostly on-the-nose, our biggest cow was 2400 pounds and we called him Big Mac.
All that said, that is nothing what factory farming is like which is what most people are eating their food from. But there are ways to raise food animals "humanely", we did it for thousands of years up until the industrial revolution because it was the only way we knew how or could manage them. Without solid walls, hefty steel bars, and a cocktail of drugs and antibiotics when disease inevitably infects those overcrowded facilities, it is pretty difficult to keep most animals contained if they aren't happy, domesticated or not.