I think we don’t have the same thing in mind behind the concept of a “conventional farm”. You seem to have in mind something I would call industrialized, while I have in mind something you may call traditional.
For your aliens story, if you want to make it match our relationship with farm animals, you have to let them first breed humans into races that are dedicated to some of their needs so they specialize us. For thousands of years they should not care about how we would survive without them, but make some specialized for our meat, some for our hair, some for our milk, some for what ever matter to them but has no chance to help us in any way. And after thousands of years of total alienation of those of our kind, some would suggest to keep industrialize their process, some would suggest to release us in some corner of wild they may let us (but they don’t know which yet) and some would suggest to keep take care of us but in a better way. The second’s wish is very beautiful, but has great chances to leed to our extinction if we aren’t able to take care of ourselves anymore. The third’s wish is the one in which we would have a chance to gain back an existence as animals without race, without a specialization nor optimization to serve others ; as animals able to live for ourselves. Choice would not be ours, but does the second really seems obviously better to you?
Conventional meaning where some odd 70-90% of meat production comes from industrial farms globally. Also including extractive farming in which land is strip of nutrients as effectively as possible and fossil fuels are mine, shipped and processed to both power the mechanisasion of those farms and flood the soil with synthesized fertilizer to reduce times between extractive crop production. Mainly to produce feed stock that is easily fed into factory farms.
That is currently the norm. People like me with chickens in the garden or my neighbors with goats in their pastures are by in large the minority.
Still fairly obvious. If I, an alien, cared about the animals (in this case humans) the third option of seeing likely reduce stage and output from human habitats to be extracted in exchange for people to have more autonomy and a pathway to non-exploitive existence.
It seems we at the very least agree that industrialization of agriculture comes with an environmental cost which is too high (and probably not substainable on the long run).
Also, we seem to agree to do not let farm animals survive by selselves in the wild, but keep some human rise some (in good conditions).
But so, I am not that sure on what we disagree. I would guess that vegans in your place may allow rising animals? Here, they had many movements to free some farm animals from their fields claiming it is better for them to die early and free than to live in slavery… While I see the beauty of the aim, I find the consequences scary.
Adventurism is always a tight rope of pros and cons. Arguably it hurts they’re short term profits and therefor helps stem the bleeding and expansion of factory farming some, but without a popular movement along with it, it is kind of just a short term bump in the road.
Overall most vegans I know or hear talk are quite content on people just not buying animal products or having vegan options to be served.
I guess I support them in the aim, if they stopped 70-90% of global meat consumption we would stop a significant source of wilderness destruction, global warming, and it would have to hit factory farming to reach those numbers. Ethical animal raising is just so rare that vegans are just right more often then my nuance is.
I guess I understand, even if in my view the fight against consumerism and (the linked) productivism seem to be more effective. But I live in a place where ethical rising is turning into a norm, while industrial farming is regarded as a very low quality ; and may it shapes my point of view…
Totally fair. What do you think has helped ethical raising be the norm most in your area? I’d love that here, at least near the towns. I am in the center of conventional crop land and some graizing
Also it had started prior to that, the “mad cow” has been a huge trigger here. Not only it has forced to reconsider the things done by industrial farms (like “may it is not nice to feed cows with flour made of dead animals”) ; but also it has pushed consumers to avoid low cost meat and accept to pay more for some secure meat from good farms. Without big surprises, when the focus is made on quality rather than on cost reduction, the quality is better. That made more demand for both quality and safety, and so for better farming. In the same time, farmers were also willing to go for better practices, for many of them ; industrial practice were reducing their land’s quality, they could not be proud of their doing, and the cost reduction logic was also pushing on their selling prices making it hard for them to make a living of their production. So both producers and consumers easily agreed to rise quality even if it rises prices.
Low quality at low price still exists here, but some even try to pretend to do not be that low thanks to “quality labels”…
Yet if you ask to those meat eaters who claim they really love meat, most will also tell you they even prefer hunt animal’s meat. And it should soon be obvious for them that the fact an animal had a real life (eat its natural food, at will but without excess, and has a natural space to evolve in, with enough space) makes a better quality of meat. Most of them should easily admit that they do not really want to eat bad quality meat, especially not with health risks for themselves. The fact that it makes agriculture substainable for future generations, that it may rise their pride at supporting good and local farmers, and that it is better on a moral point of view are just bonus on top of it.
More recently, it became clear that we (european) eat too much meat for our health. It increased the desire to reduce the quantity and rise again the quality. The trend is at trying to find producers selling directly to consumers, to pay farmers more while not paying supermarkets margin, but also because so we can see the farm. The idea being that if we prefer to eat the products of those farmer proud of their practices.
Also, if we accept to live in little homes, to move to few, and to eat whatever cheap premade food home delivered, would we not be putting ourself in living conditions weirdly similar to animals in industrial farms? Not yet the exact same, sure, ours is still far better… but I think we should consider respecting ourself better than we actually do, to be less productive, less cost effective, and to give more time to our needs of walking in natural environments, and preparing real food from scratch.
I think we don’t have the same thing in mind behind the concept of a “conventional farm”. You seem to have in mind something I would call industrialized, while I have in mind something you may call traditional.
For your aliens story, if you want to make it match our relationship with farm animals, you have to let them first breed humans into races that are dedicated to some of their needs so they specialize us. For thousands of years they should not care about how we would survive without them, but make some specialized for our meat, some for our hair, some for our milk, some for what ever matter to them but has no chance to help us in any way. And after thousands of years of total alienation of those of our kind, some would suggest to keep industrialize their process, some would suggest to release us in some corner of wild they may let us (but they don’t know which yet) and some would suggest to keep take care of us but in a better way. The second’s wish is very beautiful, but has great chances to leed to our extinction if we aren’t able to take care of ourselves anymore. The third’s wish is the one in which we would have a chance to gain back an existence as animals without race, without a specialization nor optimization to serve others ; as animals able to live for ourselves. Choice would not be ours, but does the second really seems obviously better to you?
Conventional meaning where some odd 70-90% of meat production comes from industrial farms globally. Also including extractive farming in which land is strip of nutrients as effectively as possible and fossil fuels are mine, shipped and processed to both power the mechanisasion of those farms and flood the soil with synthesized fertilizer to reduce times between extractive crop production. Mainly to produce feed stock that is easily fed into factory farms.
That is currently the norm. People like me with chickens in the garden or my neighbors with goats in their pastures are by in large the minority.
Still fairly obvious. If I, an alien, cared about the animals (in this case humans) the third option of seeing likely reduce stage and output from human habitats to be extracted in exchange for people to have more autonomy and a pathway to non-exploitive existence.
What kind of existence do you?
It seems we at the very least agree that industrialization of agriculture comes with an environmental cost which is too high (and probably not substainable on the long run).
Also, we seem to agree to do not let farm animals survive by selselves in the wild, but keep some human rise some (in good conditions).
But so, I am not that sure on what we disagree. I would guess that vegans in your place may allow rising animals? Here, they had many movements to free some farm animals from their fields claiming it is better for them to die early and free than to live in slavery… While I see the beauty of the aim, I find the consequences scary.
Adventurism is always a tight rope of pros and cons. Arguably it hurts they’re short term profits and therefor helps stem the bleeding and expansion of factory farming some, but without a popular movement along with it, it is kind of just a short term bump in the road.
Overall most vegans I know or hear talk are quite content on people just not buying animal products or having vegan options to be served.
I guess I support them in the aim, if they stopped 70-90% of global meat consumption we would stop a significant source of wilderness destruction, global warming, and it would have to hit factory farming to reach those numbers. Ethical animal raising is just so rare that vegans are just right more often then my nuance is.
I guess I understand, even if in my view the fight against consumerism and (the linked) productivism seem to be more effective. But I live in a place where ethical rising is turning into a norm, while industrial farming is regarded as a very low quality ; and may it shapes my point of view…
Totally fair. What do you think has helped ethical raising be the norm most in your area? I’d love that here, at least near the towns. I am in the center of conventional crop land and some graizing
Also it had started prior to that, the “mad cow” has been a huge trigger here. Not only it has forced to reconsider the things done by industrial farms (like “may it is not nice to feed cows with flour made of dead animals”) ; but also it has pushed consumers to avoid low cost meat and accept to pay more for some secure meat from good farms. Without big surprises, when the focus is made on quality rather than on cost reduction, the quality is better. That made more demand for both quality and safety, and so for better farming. In the same time, farmers were also willing to go for better practices, for many of them ; industrial practice were reducing their land’s quality, they could not be proud of their doing, and the cost reduction logic was also pushing on their selling prices making it hard for them to make a living of their production. So both producers and consumers easily agreed to rise quality even if it rises prices.
Low quality at low price still exists here, but some even try to pretend to do not be that low thanks to “quality labels”…
Yet if you ask to those meat eaters who claim they really love meat, most will also tell you they even prefer hunt animal’s meat. And it should soon be obvious for them that the fact an animal had a real life (eat its natural food, at will but without excess, and has a natural space to evolve in, with enough space) makes a better quality of meat. Most of them should easily admit that they do not really want to eat bad quality meat, especially not with health risks for themselves. The fact that it makes agriculture substainable for future generations, that it may rise their pride at supporting good and local farmers, and that it is better on a moral point of view are just bonus on top of it.
More recently, it became clear that we (european) eat too much meat for our health. It increased the desire to reduce the quantity and rise again the quality. The trend is at trying to find producers selling directly to consumers, to pay farmers more while not paying supermarkets margin, but also because so we can see the farm. The idea being that if we prefer to eat the products of those farmer proud of their practices.
Also, if we accept to live in little homes, to move to few, and to eat whatever cheap premade food home delivered, would we not be putting ourself in living conditions weirdly similar to animals in industrial farms? Not yet the exact same, sure, ours is still far better… but I think we should consider respecting ourself better than we actually do, to be less productive, less cost effective, and to give more time to our needs of walking in natural environments, and preparing real food from scratch.