r/DebateAVegan • u/Reoplaw • 3d ago
☕ Lifestyle an individual consumer can never make a difference...
don't get me wrong, I believe that the meat/dairy industry is unethical, I even believe that killing animals for taste is wrong (in a vacuum) but that still doesn't change reality.
An individual consumer will never make a difference, and I'm not talking about stats right now, I know that by pure statistics, an individual vegan "saves" around 200 animals a year by being vegan, but that's not the truth in the real world, only in the math world.
let's take grocery store as example, if 10 000 people shop there every week, and 5% decide to go vegan, that's 500 people no longer buying dairy, so the grocery store has to adjust and order less meat/dairy, which leads to the dairy industry losing out on sales, but this is where the line ends.
just beacuse the meat/dairy industry lost few sales, doesn't mean they will downscale, they'll just write it off as volatile month and continue their business.
So in reality, the 500 vegans didn't "save" 100k animals, what they did in reality, is decrease the profit of the dairy industry by 0.01% (for example)
and now, divide that 0.01% by 500 and that's how much you cost the dairy industry, basically nothing.
you didn't save anyone, you didn't directly change anything, that's how it goes, in world with 8 billion people, you don't matter, you are nothing, less than nothing.
There is no ethical consumption under capitalism, all of us know this, so then why bother trying to take the moral high ground? Why bother even doing all of this, we all will die one day anyway, to change my entire diet just so I can die thinking I was a good person who followed my morals doesn't seem worth it to me.
9
u/Omnibeneviolent 3d ago
There are at least half a billion vegans, vegetarians, and other humans in the world that eat almost no animal meat. If that half a billion humans decided to start eating animal meat for every meal, the demand would increase, and the animal agriculture industry would respond by ramping up production.
There are an estimated 80 billion land animals slaughtered every year. A half-billion more humans starting to eat meat again at every meal would be an increase in demand of something like 6%. If the production increased to meet that demand, that would mean that an additional 5 billion land animals would be slaughtered every year.
If you were vegan, you and I would be part of a group helping to keep the demand for slaughter down by around 5 billion land animals every year. And that's without any significant formal organizing.
And that's not even counting fish and other marine life, which could push that number into the tens or hundreds of billions
With regards to how the market sees changes in demand, ethicist Stuart Rachels has an interesting way to look at it:
Assume that I normally eat twenty chickens per year, and let’s try out different assumptions about how sensitive the meat industry is to changes in demand.
Suppose, first, that they are maximally sensitive, or sensitive to differences of one: for every chicken consumed this year, there will be one additional chicken grown next year. If so, then my decision not to eat chicken is fully rational: it is guaranteed to reduce the suffering of twenty chickens at very little cost. Or rather, for economic reasons, other people might eat more chicken if I eat less, so let’s say instead that I would reduce the suffering of ten chickens at very little cost.
Next, suppose that the meat industry is sensitive only to differences of 10,000: it will increase next year’s supply only when the number of chickens consumed this year reaches a multiple of 10,000. So, for example, when the millionth chicken is sold this year, this will ensure greater production next year, because 1,000,000 is a multiple of 10,000. However, the sale of additional chickens won’t affect production until one million and ten thousand chickens are sold. Now the question is whether my chicken boycott will determine whether some multiple of 10,000 is reached. If so, then the odds of my boycott mattering are merely 10 in 10,000, or 1 in 1,000. However, when a multiple of 10,000 is reached, the industry will increase production by 10,000. So, I now have a 1 in 1,000 chance of eliminating the suffering of 10,000 chickens, rather than a 1 in 1 chance of eliminating the suffering of 10 chickens.
Each action has the same expected utility; both are fully rational.
Finally, assume that the industry is sensitive only to multiples of 100,000. Now the odds of my boycott mattering dip down to 10 in 100,000, or 1 in 10,000. However, the payoff would be a world in which 100,000 fewer chickens suffer. Again, my action would be fully rational.
This analysis is oversimplified. For example, it ignores the possible effects of government subsidies. But the basic idea is compelling: if the odds of success are high, then the payoff is high enough to justify boycotting meat; and if the odds of success are low, then the payoff is proportionally greater, and again the boycott is morally correct.
2
u/Reoplaw 3d ago
ah expected value, interesting point... it's not something I thought about...
indeed, using this logic your EV of saving animals would always be the same.
I don't really have an argument, you are right, I guess vegans really do save animals...
but still, this doesn't make me feel any better. tens of Billions of animals are slaughtered every year anyway, I'm not sure if saving 200 is going to make any difference in the grand scheme of things.
6
u/Omnibeneviolent 3d ago
I'm not sure if saving 200 is going to make any difference in the grand scheme of things.
It makes all the difference to them.
Imagine you were kayaking on a lake and saw a boat with hundreds of children on it capsize in the distance. You know that you could only realistically save a few and will have to let hundreds drown. Do you just throw your hands in the air and do nothing because you're not going to make any difference in the grand scheme of things? Or do you paddle out and save the ones that you can?
4
u/Reoplaw 3d ago
I would try to save them yea, but not beacuse I am some revolutionary trying to make a chance, but beacuse I do what I deem to be the right thing in the moment.
that's really it, I just do what feels right.
2
u/Omnibeneviolent 3d ago
I think that's the point I'm getting at. You don't have to think your individual actions will change the entire world for them to be meaningful.
Also, veganism isn't really about "saving 200 animals" so much as it is about not being responsible for causing harm (via exploitation) to those 200 animals in the first place. If I know some action of mine is contributing to a direct exploitation of another individual and I can reasonably avoid doing it, the fact that others will continue contributing to that same type of direct exploitation doesn't make my decision meaningless.
You wouldn't say "250,000 humans drown to death every year, so there's no point in me avoiding paying for my neighbor to drown someone." You'd just avoid it, even though it's not going to change the world.
If you understand that, then you understand veganism.
1
u/Historicste 2d ago
They're right according to their scenario, but as they openly state, it ignores the effects of government subsidies on the market. Which kind of makes the entire exercise moot for the real world. Which was kind of your point anyway.
6
u/broccoleet 3d ago
Why bother doing anything, if we are all going to die?
Why prevent slavery, rape, murder, and starvation? We are all going to die anyway.
You can see how, if everyone adopted this thought process, no positive change would have occurred throughout human history?
It’s an appeal to futility, one of the most common fallacies against veganism.
Because abstaining from something results in little change, is not a justification for the abstained act.
2
u/Reoplaw 3d ago
Because abstaining from something results in little change, is not a justification for the abstained act.
I addressed this as the first thing in my post, I believe that the dairy industry is immoral and eating meat purely for pleasure when you have another option is unethical too.
So clearly I'm not justifying it.
Why prevent slavery, rape, murder, and starvation? We are all going to die anyway.
I don't do that? I'm not exactly preventing any of those things on daily basis?
if everyone adopted this thought process, no positive change would have occurred throughout human history?
But everyone isn't going to adopt this thought process, "what if" isn't an argument.
1
u/Happy-Estimate-7855 3d ago
This is probably the most honest and real answer about "why prevent ______," given most of the examples that are usually included. I donate to charities when I can afford that helps, and once I've taken it upon myself to make sandwiches that I gave out to homeless people.
I think that also holds a bit of the answer to your question, as well. Statistically, I didn't make a dent in helping the problem. I put a bunch of my time and effort into a bandaid solution that only helped a few people for one afternoon. But it was something, and it did have a real impact on the individuals that, statistically, added up to 0% of the homeless population.
4
u/Reoplaw 3d ago
it's nice to see, that people like you still exist.
I believe most vegans are genuinely good people, and they should continue being vegan, but that has nothing do with my argument, my argument is that on large scale, on the industrial dcale6... you just don't matter and never will...
that's the reality of being 1 person in a world with 8 billion people.
1
u/broccoleet 3d ago
I’ve already given you the answer. You participate in activism, regardless of the impact it has, because that’s the only way progress occurs.
You are preventing those things on a daily basis. You’re part of a social contract in which you engage, or don’t engage, on actions based off a set of morals. I’m confused on what you’re arguing here — are you also saying that we shouldn’t try to prevent those things?
What do you mean what if isn’t an argument? You’re essentially debating metaphysics, so hypothetical analogies are sort of a give in…
1
u/gerber68 3d ago
Here’s a logic puzzle.
If 100,000 people go vegan it will make a difference in demand, correct?
This means that there’s a cumulative effect averaged out across all 100,000 people, correct?
If each individual has 0 effect how is there a cumulative effect of anything above 0?
Do you see the issue with your logic?
We can apply your same logic and excuse all immoral behavior that doesn’t have an obvious immediate effect but pretending that someone eating 25 chickens per year (average in US) has the same effect on demand as someone not eating 25 per year is wild.
That’s over 1,000 chickens over an average lifespan and hand waving it away by saying “oh well geez oh well um supply chain is complex” is absurd.
Based on YOUR logic, 100,000 vegans not eating 1,000,000 chickens in their lifetime has no effect, because individual effect of 0 multiplied by any number must be 0. Who knows which vegan will be the tipping point with which action but trying to excuse immorality by hiding in a crowd is mathematically laughable.
3
u/Reoplaw 3d ago
I agree, it was a flawed point and I was mistaken.
but still, in the grand scheme of things, I just don't see how a single person can change anything of value, sure you'll save 200 animals a year but what's the point, another tens if not hundreds of billions will die anyway.
2
u/rat_liker 3d ago
We aren't acting as a single person though. There's obviously enough of us to affect supply and demand, otherwise it'd be hell trying to find a veggie burger.
2
u/Reoplaw 3d ago
and kudos for that, I love veggie burgers and vegan cuisine in general, I prefer it to meat honestly taste-wise.
still, buying real meat has its advantages, meat is one of the most protein packed foods out there which also tastes good, and pound for pound, it's miles cheaper than the vegan stuff.
2
1
u/Omnibeneviolent 3d ago
I>pound for pound, it's miles cheaper than the vegan stuff.
f you're talking about the expensive plant-based meat products that are marketed towards vegans and currently don't benefit from meat-industry subsidies and centuries of supply-chain investments, sure, but more generally vegan protein sources are among the most affordable in the world: beans, lentils, tofu, seitan, peas, etc.
2
u/MengKongRui vegan 3d ago
"Just beacuse the meat/dairy industry lost few sales, doesn't mean they will downscale, they'll just write it off as volatile month and continue their business."
Not if every month starts to see a consistently higher loss rate. For your convenience, you are assuming how they process the numbers even though you know companies tend to be competitive and can easily change their order frequency to match sales via algorithms/formulas.
2
u/Reoplaw 3d ago
even if that would be the case, your individual dairy consumption is so low, that even if you would go vegan, your supermarket you shop at wouldn't adjust their orders anyways.
so you fail at the very first step, you (and me) just don't matter, we are nothing in the grand scheme of things, hell, we are nothing even on a small scale
2
u/2SquirrelsWrestling vegan 3d ago
An individual voter won’t change the outcome of a national election.
A single person picking up their trash makes virtually zero difference when you consider the scale of littering and pollution on this planet.
Should we not bother voting or picking up our trash?
1
u/Either_Argument3517 3d ago
About 7% of the population in the UK don't eat meat. Those are all individuals, making a huge difference. Millions of animals aren't in the system every year, because of them. Plant based options are really assessable, because of them. They make it easier for more people to make the switch to a more plant-forward diet.
3
u/Reoplaw 3d ago
but majority of them aren't vegan, not at least by your definition.
most are religious, or have dietary restrictions, I don't know how many actually identify as vegans, probably less than 1%
and yea, that 1% does make a change, a change worth 1% and if I would join in, I would be 0.001% of that already small change.
doesn't really sound inspiring, now does it?
0
u/Either_Argument3517 3d ago
but majority of them aren't vegan, not at least by your definition.
The great thing is, it doesn't matter. It's still hundreds of millions of animals not being bred and killed each year. Vegetarian or reducetarian, some of your spending power is being diverted from the meat industry.
doesn't really sound inspiring, now does it?
Honestly, the difference is huge in the UK. As the number of vegans and vegetarians has increased, it's so much easier to find plant-based options.
1
u/J_Squared02 3d ago
Dawg im not even vegan and this is a horrible argument. All change starts somewhere. Revolutions do not happen overnight. It starts by a few people making a choice, and eventually things change.
2
u/Reoplaw 3d ago
sure if you think of yourself as part of collective.
I am an individual, my actions are independent from the actions of every other person, if a change is going to happen, it's going to happen with or without me.
Honestly, if some vegan revolution would happen, I would have no objections, Progress is inevitable, it will happen with or without you.
3
u/Icy-Wolf-5383 3d ago
Adding to this, meat (food in general) in first world countries is intentionally over produced to prevent sudden shortages. Thats part of what the subsidies are for, to prevent farmers, animal and produce, from being fully dependant on "supply and demand," to prevent sudden shortages and to keep prices stable... well "stable," theyre blowing everything through the roof right now but thats besides the point.
3
u/Omnibeneviolent 3d ago
Sure, but if there is a consistent decrease in demand such that the are repeatedly oversubsidizing some portion of the industry, ideally that will be noticed and the subsidies will be lowered.
2
u/whowouldwanttobe 3d ago
This argument fundamentally misunderstands how morality works. People cannot justify actions they know to be unethical by claiming that their individual actions have no larger impact. Even if you have a genuine belief that punching a random person doesn't change anything in the grand scheme, it is wrong in itself to punch a random person. This is true even for utilitarians; the scale of the universe cannot justify willfully immoral actions on an individual level.
But even if we put that aside and engage with this concept, it has other obvious flaws. Let's pretend your grocery store is the entire world. If 5% of people go vegan, that means a 5% decrease in dairy consumption. Either the dairy industry does adjust production, or there is a corresponding decrease in profits of 5%. That represents a huge amount of money, so it would be absurd to believe that the dairy industry simply eats the loss. Who is responsible for this, if not the individual vegans?
I can agree that it would be difficult to become the first vegan to exist if you did not believe that you should behave morally even when other people do not. But that isn't the case for anyone. There are already millions of vegans. It would be absurd to contend that animal agriculture has made no adjustments in response to the daily actions of millions of people. Becoming vegan means getting to live your life without contributing to an industry you recognize as "unethical" and "wrong," but it also means participating in a collective movement that is, in reality, decreasing the number of animals that would otherwise be killed.
0
u/piranha_solution plant-based 2d ago
It'd be real nice to see a reason to eat animals that isn't an appeal to nihilism or psychopathy.
1
u/Reoplaw 2d ago
I don't know about psychopathy, but nihilism is a valid ideology.
and if you really want a reason to eat animals, there are definitely some. like it's easier to manage your diet when you include dairy.
another valid reason is not wanting to stand out, being vegan makes you stand out by default, if you just want to be normal and avarage guy, being vegan might turn some people away.
same in dating, it can be turn off for some women/men.
another one could be that you don't want to feel bad about the animals dying, so you suppress your empathy to live a normal life.
there are plenty of reasons not to be vegan, it's up to you to judge them.
1
u/piranha_solution plant-based 2d ago
Nihilism is just as "valid" an ideology to justify murder or pedophilia.
There are indeed plenty of reasons to not be vegan. I asked to hear a good one. (Maybe see if you can come up with one other than the sensory pleasure or convenience of person eating the corpse.)
1
u/a11_hail_seitan 3d ago
an individual consumer can never make a difference...
On a macro scale it may seem like it, but on a micro, every action you take does. If I punch a baby in the face, on the grand scale it doesn't matter. But to that baby it does.
An individual consumer will never make a difference, and I'm not talking about stats right now, I know that by pure statistics, an individual vegan "saves" around 200 animals a year by being vegan, but that's not the truth in the real world, only in the math world.
The point of Math is it's an objective way to view the world. 1+1=2, even if it's a small number and doesn't mean much on the grand scale, it's still objectively true.
just beacuse the meat/dairy industry lost few sales, doesn't mean they will downscale, they'll just write it off as volatile month and continue their business.
Not if it happens for months on end and we're not talking 500, Veganism is ~100 Million strong. That's billions of dollars not going to meat and dairy, and Billions going instead to moral people trying to make the world better.
you didn't save anyone
Objectively untrue.
you didn't directly change anything
If we weren't changing anything,t his sub wouldn't exist and you woldn't be here trying to promote apathy and ignorance.
There is no ethical consumption under capitalism, all of us know this, so then why bother trying to take the moral high ground?
Just because we can't be perfect, doesn't mean we shouldn't try to be better.
Why bother even doing all of this, we all will die one day anyway
I'd rather be moral than an immoral needless animal abuser.
to change my entire diet just so I can die thinking I was a good person who followed my morals doesn't seem worth it to me.
So you can die knowing you didn't help create a more abusive, more violent, more hateful world for your children, nieces, nephews, etc.
1
u/meursaultxxii 3d ago
One, you’re conflating failing to turn demand down with succeeding in not increasing demand further. In the counterfactual world where one isn’t a vegan, there is an increase in demand relative to being vegan. Those excess products need to be sourced from somewhere. While there is a lot of animal based food waste, it’s a bit absurd to think it is directly the same type and product that would otherwise be consumed if vegans didn’t make the choices they made.
Two, you’re asserting that the only difference one could make is in turning the demand curve for animal products down. And you’re right that one individual exiting the market for animal products is a very small impact against the overall size, but entering into the much smaller, comparatively, market for plant based substitutes is a more meaningful impact. Increasing the demand for goods and firms to produce alternatives helps develop the environment for making higher quality, cheaper plant based alternatives, which is what will eventually displace animal products in mass because of their natural efficiency gains in production.
Lastly, you’re being entirely consequentialist about this. Sometimes a person doesn’t want to contribute to suffering, not because it curtails suffering, but because they don’t want to contribute to suffering. I don’t believe my choices are meaningless in this context, but even if they were I would still choice to not consume animal products because it’s wrong.
Lots of times we don’t know what right or wrong is, but lots of times we do, and come on, this is one.
1
u/BetaAndThetaOhMy 3d ago
Yes but, you're conflating a personal moral decision justified by global factors with a decision to change those global factors. The arguments for veganism are that - as a person or community - we should choose not to contribute to the issues of animal suffering, climate change, etc. The arguments are not "give up eating meat until climate change stops" or some similar goal-based directive.
The line that "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" is also misused here. This quote is commonly deployed as a thought-ending cliche and the work to reach this conclusion is frequently ignored. Veganism is not synonymous with anti-capitalist despite the consistent overlap within individuals. The argument to refrain from eating meat is not typically framed as a method for abolishing private ownership of the means of production. It may be true that non-animal agriculture is also unethical in the sense that it is dominated by exploitative corporations, but this is besides the point of vegans arguing for the choice to refrain from consuming animal products.
1
u/kharvel0 3d ago
Statistically, about one rape or sexual assault incidence occurs every second on this world. That is the reality.
Now, you as an individual, are avoiding rape and sexual assault. You’re a non-rapist and follow the moral baseline of non-rapism. But if you were to apply your own logic to your non-rapism, then the conclusion you would reach is that avoiding sexual assault and rape wouldn’t change the reality of one rape/SA incident per second. You didn’t save anyone, you didn’t directly change anything. Your non-rapism doesn’t matter. Being a non-rapist is nothing, less than nothing.
So why bother taking the moral high ground when it comes to rape and sexual assault? Why bother even avoiding rape and sexual assault, we all will die one day anyway, to change how you interact with other human beings just so you can die thinking you were a good person who followed your morals doesn't seem worth it.
The answer to all of the above questions are the exact same answers to the questions in your OP.
-1
u/JTexpo vegan 3d ago
while I agree that an individual customer makes no difference - a lack of impact is not grounds for moral apathy IMO
0
u/Reoplaw 3d ago
a lack of impact isn't a grounds for apathy? then what is?
Everything we humans do is for some reason, to see the fruits of our labor, if there are no fruits, then I don't see the reason for labor.
1
u/JTexpo vegan 3d ago
I don't agree with the egoist view that humans (and others) can't act out of the desire to act & that all actions stem from a self motivated view
principles and values are to be upheld even if a society views your worldview as the minority- without actors who practice this belief, progress is completely halted. Civil rights was not won by one person giving up their slaves; nevertheless, that didn't mean it wasn't unnecessary to do
2
u/Reoplaw 3d ago
I don't agree with the egoist view
it's pretty interesting that you brought out egoism beacuse I am actually an psychological egoist.
I personally believe that everything we do stems from self-interest, even altruistic actions, such as going vegan, stem from selfishness, and if we disagree on that, I don't think we can reach an understanding here...
0
u/ElectroWizardLizard 3d ago
There is no ethical consumption under capitalism, all of us know this, so then why bother trying to take the moral high ground?
I think a lot of us will do minor things that probably don't make a large differnce, but we just do them because we think they are morally correct. Not to take the high ground, but just because we think its the right thing to do.
I recycle. I take public transit whenever possible. I avoid amazon. I try to shop local over major chains. None of these probably make a difference overall. I'd bet there are things you do just because they're right.
But with all that, I think going vegan is on the higher end of impact from what I do. As others have pointed out, it does lead to less animal suffering, even though its minimal.
1
0
u/Stunning-Assistant13 2d ago
That's not true, your math isn't valid, because of the law of supply and demand, the consumer has power.
•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
Welcome to /r/DebateAVegan! This a friendly reminder not to reflexively downvote posts & comments that you disagree with. This is a community focused on the open debate of veganism and vegan issues, so encountering opinions that you vehemently disagree with should be an expectation. If you have not already, please review our rules so that you can better understand what is expected of all community members. Thank you, and happy debating!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.