Veganism has nothing to do with climate change. Veganism is a moral philosophy on the treatment of non-human animals. The fact that animal abuse contributes to climate change is incidental.
this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2026
388 points (100.0% liked)
Memes of Production
269 readers
1233 users here now
Seize the Memes of Production
An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the “ML” influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.
founded 3 days ago
MODERATORS
That is your reason for being vegan. There are people that don't give a single fuck about animals but use the lifestyle to reduce their carbon footprint.
No, that is what veganism IS. I didn't make it up. And you sure as fuck didn't make it up.
The people you are describing are not vegan. The term you haven't learned yet is "plant-based". The distinction is significant and meaningful. And since you have nothing to do with either, have not done even the most cursory research on the subject, maybe you should STFU and listen.
I have been vegan for the past decade. I have done my research, plant based products are products that can't be labeled as vegan because they for example use the same grill to cook plant based products and meat. That makes it none vegan.
Even the wiki article from veganism states, that people that follow the vegan diet for environmental reasons are called vegans. Maybe you should stfu and read. Maybe your assumption about veganism is based off of the same things you base your assumption off of, that I don't have anything to do with veganism.
Gentlemen, please; we're all on the same team here. Veganism for any reason is good for the environment and the environment includes animals, in which not eating them is generally good for them.
No need for any of us to name call or get upset with each other over this stuff. We're all trying to make the world a better place, even if our methods are slightly different, we all believe the current way of life is unsustainable for humanity and are taking what steps we can to help.
We need to unite, not divide.
Veganism for any reason is good for the environment
it would be, if it stopped the environmental impacts. it doesn't.
You are absolutely right.
The vegan society in the 40s, originally the vegetarian society, made the term to specifically get around the issue of people conflating being vegetarian for other things. Much easier to say vegan than ovolacto-vegetarian.
Please just use the term plant based if you don't value ethics.
You mean not fucking up the planet is not caring about ethics? You can call whatever you are doing plant based. Vegan is the rejection of animal products, if you do that because you are a lunatic or whatever is your thing I guess.
Think for three seconds. Just because one thing has to do with one system of ethics, and a second thing has to do with a second system of ethics, does not mean both things have to do with the same system of ethics as each other!! ETHICAL SYSTEMS ARE NOT INTERCHANGEABLE.
What is making you this confidently ignorant?
Why don't you go read the basic article on Wikipedia and then come back with what you learned and tell us why we are wrong. Because right now you're just making shit up for god knows what reason.
Ok here is what I learned from the basic Wikipedia Article about veganism
Veganism is the practice of abstaining from the use of animal products and the consumption of animal source foods, and an associated philosophy that rejects the commodity status of animals. [...] People who follow a vegan diet for the benefits to the environment, their health or for religion are regularly also described as vegans.
Well, times change and so does what words mean. Vegetarianism and veganism used to be somewhat radical philosophies, but nowadays, at least to me, they are normalised eating habits. I know all kinds of people who are vegetarian or vegan, with reasons ranging from health concerns to just not liking the taste of meat.
And in any case, I think gatekeeping veganism this way does no good at all.
That's like saying, "I know people who don't think women should be able to own property and vote, but they really love and support women, so that makes them feminist." No, it doesn't. Feminism and veganism are both moral philosophies. That means something. If you do not hold the respective philosophy, then you are not a vegan or feminist respectively.
Veganism is more than just not eating animals. You don't know what you are talking about, and you are arguing with people who do. Your arrogance is obscene.
You are the arrogant twat.
i think they prefer "jerkface"
veganism has a specific history, and it has nothing to do with the environment. the vegan society was founded by the person who coined the term, and they have a definition.
You guys should correct the wiki article.
maybe you can
Doesn't look like a large hurdle to me.
have at it
I think the article is correct, why should I want to change it.
if you think the article is correct, why would you think others should change it? you're fucking trolling.
It makes sense when the article is wrong doesn't it? Provide them the evidence and change it. If you are right it will be accepted.
if your expertise comes from the article, that's just circular reasoning. maybe you should look for external sources to evaluate whether the article is accurate, especially in face of the fact that people are telling you it's not.
This screenshot says anybody who thinks it's wrong can just request the change on the talk page.
buffer overflow from vegan to canabilism interesting
Eating billionaires is vegan because they consented by being billionaires.
You can also compost the billionaire if you don't want to consume them and allow the plants to do that for you.
Mr Wu and his pigs can help too.
Hoopleheads every where I turn.
It's an appeal to futility to say that you shouldn't do the good you can because you can't do the good you want to.
A world with no billionaires and no cars that still supports the industrialized slaughter of billions of sentient beings for the sensory pleasure of a privileged minority is still an evil place. That's billionaire shit, right? Profiting off of the suffering of countless others who are trapped in a system that exploits them?
Sure, the climate needs systemic change and one person can't stop it, but do you think people who aren't even willing to change their own lives are gonna change the whole system? Of course not. The first step is finding your courage and changing yourself. Then you work your way outwards and build community and then movements and then you change the system.
@Deceptichum sadly, the demise of any billionaire frequently creates several more toxic billionaires via inheritance (example: the Waltons).
So you're telling me it's a buffet??
His family too
Ferb, I know what we’re gonna do today.
same thing we do every night pinky
Seems a bit naive. The assets in one way or another would most likely just be redistributed to other billionaires.
They'll get the message eventually
This is a controversial statement.
The existence of billionaires is why i will never check my green house gas emmisions.
Nothing i could ever do would equal the lives of those bastards and what they produce.
This is moral self-licensing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-licensing
I think that people who can convince themselves their bad behaviour is okay when they are not billionaires are the same people who can convince themselves that their bad behaviour is okay when they are billionaires.
Here in Australia lots of people don't want our government to regulate our mining industry, because China pollutes more
I understand what you're going for, but "eliminating all of one person's worth of carbon emissions does more than reducing part of one person's worth of carbon emissions" is a bit of a "well duh" statement...
Por que no los tres?