“Is it R****t to not want to eat bugs?”
Jan 21, 2023 08:42:15 #
Rene Descartes, one of the founding minds of modern philosophy, famously considered animals to be mere machines; this is not a Christian view. A Cartesian robotic cow has nothing to do with a loving God. But Descartes’ thought was the foundation stone that defined modern livestock systems. This is why farms are reduced to factories: if animals are simply machines, why not make them part of an assembly line?
Machines can be reduced to interchangeable mechanical parts, quantitative statistics can measure their performance, and they can be tooled to do what is necessary. And they can be treated as though they have no conscious mind. A machine never feels claustrophobic; it can be repaired if it breaks.
Now replace the word ‘machine’ in the paragraph above with the word ‘pig.’ Or ‘cow,’ or ‘chicken.’ That’s what the Cartesian capital-chasing “farmers” (let’s call them “machinists”) of contemporary America have done, but when the reality of animality eventually asserts itself, the system begins to fail. That’s when the machinists try to fix the animals – they try to force t***h to conform to their mechanistic ideal:
Oh, pigs go crazy and attack each other if they’re too crowded? Cut off their tails at birth so that other pigs can’t bite them off. Oh, chickens get sick when they never see the sun or hunt for bugs? Administer antibiotics when they’re young (bonus – it also makes them (and us) fatter). Technologies are gradually refined to help animals behave more like the machines the government believes and wants them to be.
When I say “the government” above, I mean more than the state. The government includes a whole range of institutions, including corporations, universities, and media organizations, all united by a shared worldview: a liberal, Cartesian worldview. A quantitative worldview that practices strange doublespeak: the government claim to secure liberty, and yet it insists that every aspect of life be included and accounted for in its knowledge base. This is obvious when we look at modern livestock production, which emerged from the collaboration between the state, corporations, and universities: Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs, or “factory farms”) are quantitative projects. Feed numbers go in; meat numbers come out.
When animals become numbers, humans as numbers are not far behind. For the past several hundred years, since the imaginations of Descartes and other enlighteners permeated our power structures, people have been treated as machines or numbers – abstract variables that can be manipulated to achieve specific goals. This is how the current system exercises its power through an upside-down form of Christian “pastoral” leadership.
A hilarious World Economic Forum article says, “Is it R****t to not want to eat bugs?”
Even if it were r****t not to want to eat bugs, I still wouldn’t want to. Some fates are worse than r****m. But r****m isn’t the real reason we won’t eat the bugs. It’s not just that bugs are gross or that they tend to carry harmful parasites. The reason is much more profound: We are what we eat, and we don’t want to be bugs.
Impossible Foods’s mission is to eliminate livestock production by replacing real meat. They say animals create too much carbon dioxide and methane, they’re stinky, and our planet can’t afford to go on like this. This makes Impossible Foods more than a simple profit-seeking operation: the company is political and an element of the government.
Reducing meat consumption is a major goal of the government.
Again, we must ask why. Is the point to “fight c*****e c****e,” to protect animal rights, or to reduce human vigor?
So, how have we come to this state you should ask?
What I see happening comes on the First Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Bad choices on that day can ruin your life.
Machines can be reduced to interchangeable mechanical parts, quantitative statistics can measure their performance, and they can be tooled to do what is necessary. And they can be treated as though they have no conscious mind. A machine never feels claustrophobic; it can be repaired if it breaks.
Now replace the word ‘machine’ in the paragraph above with the word ‘pig.’ Or ‘cow,’ or ‘chicken.’ That’s what the Cartesian capital-chasing “farmers” (let’s call them “machinists”) of contemporary America have done, but when the reality of animality eventually asserts itself, the system begins to fail. That’s when the machinists try to fix the animals – they try to force t***h to conform to their mechanistic ideal:
Oh, pigs go crazy and attack each other if they’re too crowded? Cut off their tails at birth so that other pigs can’t bite them off. Oh, chickens get sick when they never see the sun or hunt for bugs? Administer antibiotics when they’re young (bonus – it also makes them (and us) fatter). Technologies are gradually refined to help animals behave more like the machines the government believes and wants them to be.
When I say “the government” above, I mean more than the state. The government includes a whole range of institutions, including corporations, universities, and media organizations, all united by a shared worldview: a liberal, Cartesian worldview. A quantitative worldview that practices strange doublespeak: the government claim to secure liberty, and yet it insists that every aspect of life be included and accounted for in its knowledge base. This is obvious when we look at modern livestock production, which emerged from the collaboration between the state, corporations, and universities: Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs, or “factory farms”) are quantitative projects. Feed numbers go in; meat numbers come out.
When animals become numbers, humans as numbers are not far behind. For the past several hundred years, since the imaginations of Descartes and other enlighteners permeated our power structures, people have been treated as machines or numbers – abstract variables that can be manipulated to achieve specific goals. This is how the current system exercises its power through an upside-down form of Christian “pastoral” leadership.
A hilarious World Economic Forum article says, “Is it R****t to not want to eat bugs?”
Even if it were r****t not to want to eat bugs, I still wouldn’t want to. Some fates are worse than r****m. But r****m isn’t the real reason we won’t eat the bugs. It’s not just that bugs are gross or that they tend to carry harmful parasites. The reason is much more profound: We are what we eat, and we don’t want to be bugs.
Impossible Foods’s mission is to eliminate livestock production by replacing real meat. They say animals create too much carbon dioxide and methane, they’re stinky, and our planet can’t afford to go on like this. This makes Impossible Foods more than a simple profit-seeking operation: the company is political and an element of the government.
Reducing meat consumption is a major goal of the government.
Again, we must ask why. Is the point to “fight c*****e c****e,” to protect animal rights, or to reduce human vigor?
So, how have we come to this state you should ask?
What I see happening comes on the First Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Bad choices on that day can ruin your life.
Jan 21, 2023 09:30:49 #
Jan 22, 2023 22:56:38 #
Capt-jack wrote:
Rene Descartes, one of the founding minds of moder... (show quote)
Self loathing Luddites, Deacons of The First Vegan Church Of Modern Day Chickenlittlests, Doomsday Sayers In Burlap, Paid Parrots In Lab Coats, all bent on restructuring the world with themselves in charge.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.