Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

I think that's a fair summary of my position. Although I'd love to see society evolve to no longer need or want religion (or animal based products :D), I just don't see it happening hence I'll take the lesser of two evils and embrace the live and let live philosophy.

It IS in our best interest to be tolerant, isn't it? Because intolerance, in the face of things outside one's control, is actually doing a disservice to ourselves--our well being. Those who anger/irritate you, conquer you. But, there are situations when tolerance is not desirable, or even acceptable--even when change seems improbable and efforts, futile. Radical Islam and Sharia law are two examples. They should be opposed and not tolerated on any level. I am not a moral relativist. Some things are flat out wrong. Period.
 

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

I feel great compassion for the Jewish holocaust under Hitler. What I find enraging is how so many other Jewish-affiliated groups and icons have appropriated that suffering and used it as a pretext to invalidate fierce probing of their behaviour. Ariel Sharon. r.i.p.

I agree. And that is absolutely the biggest hypocrisy I can think of. Victims justifying victimizing. It is just repeating the cycle of abuse. They, of all people, should know better, right?!
 
Last edited:

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

I regard both Carnism and Theism as profound mental illness.

I agree, if I am to be honest. Illnesses of the mind. Delusion, denial, and willful ignorance ARE manifested in cognitively impaired brains. Symptoms of brain diseases--mental illnesses, if you will.


The appropriate response is both compassion and political action. What enrages me about Morrissey is that he uses the debate about Carnism as a personal bauble to self-aggrandise his personal narrative without any subsequent commitment to political action.

BINGO! And this is what irritates me most. What happened to the notion of putting your money where your mouth is? He must have never heard that one. Or chooses to dismiss it--willful ignorance.

He eats in Carnist restaurants, doesn't support vegan restaurants, cavorts in front of dairy cows, wears cashmere wool, and overall seems to use the suffering of other humans and animals to emote his own ridiculous victim-script. He has the wealth, time and baseline intelligence to use his cultural power and financial resources to create demand for a vegan option via tour riders, hotel catering, clothes endorsements, etc. But he does very little other than to troll these debates for brief, inflammatory publicity. I'm very clear he's not a serious artist and i suspect many others now agree with me. The fact that he's an 'institution' for Boomers who can't face the pain that all that sweat and drama at gigs was before a false idol is very understandable...

:thumb:

but some of us have to actually live the Outsider script, not just mock it for notorieity and Ker-ching!

You are the real deal.
 
Last edited:

123xyz

Well-Known Member
Subscriber
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

I feel great compassion for the Jewish holocaust under Hitler. What I find enraging is how so many other Jewish-affiliated groups and icons have appropriated that suffering and used it as a pretext to invalidate fierce probing of their behaviour. Ariel Sharon. r.i.p.


Hey Brum , did you ever read The Holocaust Industry by Norman Finklestein ? Deals with exactly the point you've made - that the Holocaust has , in the hands of some , been transformed into a club with which to bash opponents of , say , unreconstructured Zionism ...
 
Last edited:

123xyz

Well-Known Member
Subscriber
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

I get that argument. I think there is a flaw in its primary assumption though, and that is, as a vegetarian I want to take away your rights to consume meat. I don't. It's a choice I make for myself. Would I like it if the world became vegetarian overnight? Absolutely! But I am in no way prepared to enforce my habits to make that happen.

You can likewise make a similar argument that we as atheists want to take away society's freedom to worship. Sorta true but mainly not.



It's an interesting point you raise , Iona. As a vegetarian , how far am I prepared to go ? How far should I let anyone go in defence of animal well-being ? I don't know ... I'm tempted to say that an animal's freedom from harm/suffering is more important than Western societies' freedom to eat meat products ...
 

Iona Mink

Despitemybetterjudgement
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

It IS in our best interest to be tolerant, isn't it? Because intolerance, in the face of things outside one's control, is actually doing a disservice to ourselves--our well being. Those who anger/irritate you, conquer you. But, there are situations when tolerance is not desirable, or even acceptable--even when change seems improbable and efforts, futile. Radical Islam and Sharia law are two examples. They should be opposed and not tolerated on any level. I am not a moral relativist. Some things are flat out wrong. Period.

But not all sharia is highly controversial. If you are willing to tolerate kosher foods, why not halal? And should those options be available in schools? My local supermarket has its own halal butcher. Sharia law affects my day to day.

Happy with synagogues? Then you have to allow for mosques. If prayer areas are fine in airports, then that is sharia again. Our society allows for Islamic banks and finanical institutions, Muslim funeral services and Muslim charities. The thing is there are quite a number of examples where sharia is already in operation.

I don't like it. I don't think we should indulge it. But if we indulge it for one group (Christians insisting on wearing their crucifixes while in uniform, Orthodox Jewish women subject to the whims of their husbands for divorce in the Beth Din) aren't we hamstrung and thus compelled to indulge it for all?
 
Last edited:

Iona Mink

Despitemybetterjudgement
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

It's an interesting point you raise , Iona. As a vegetarian , how far am I prepared to go ? How far should I let anyone go in defence of animal well-being ? I don't know ... I'm tempted to say that an animal's freedom from harm/suffering is more important than Western societies' freedom to eat meat products ...

I would say you are right but where I always get caught is that I feel my position is no more worthy or right or valuable than anyone else's. And while it is legal to eat meat then I, as a member of society must tolerate people making that choice.

We are all free agents. My beliefs don't trump someone else's just because we cannot agree on shared values.

(Of course, that's not to say people shouldn't be political and try to change the laws and cultural values of society but while I am not an active participant in that movement, it would be hypocritical of me to pontificate otherwise. I think Johnny Barleycorn said something the other day about people having time to mount arguments on an internet noticeboard but not to do anything to effect real change beyond the computer.)
 
Last edited:

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

Hey Brum , did you ever read The Holocaust Industry by Norman Finklestein ? Deals with exactly the point you've made - that the Holocaust has , in the hands of some , been transformed into a club with which to bash opponents of , say , unreconstructured Zionism ?

Would the State of Israel exist if the Holocaust never happened? Probably not. Zionists were scouting for a homeland, in the early 1900s--pre-Nazi Germany. Palestine was chosen because it was possible, not because it was ideal. Most of the early Zionists were secular. They were not on a theocratic quest to take back the holy land. It was a political move. Of course, they did want to be free of persecution and anti-Semiticsm. This is quite understandable. But after the horrors of Shoah were exposed to the world, the world became sympathetic to the plight of the Jewish people. And thus, the State of Israel came to fruition, in 1947. My guess is it would have not materialized so soon--if ever--if not for Shoah.
 
Last edited:

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

I would say you are right but where I always get caught is that I feel my position is no more worthy or right or valuable than anyone else's. And while it is legal to eat meat then I, as a member of society must tolerate people making that choice.

We are all free agents. My beliefs don't trump someone else's just because we cannot agree on shared values.

I completely disagree. I am NOT a moral relativist. Some ways of doing things ARE better than other ways. Some values, beliefs, and behaviors are false and harmful, and should be abolished/changed. Is it OK for some people to believe women are inferior to men? Is it OK for some people to believe that twelve is an acceptable age for a female to marry? Is stoning ever OK? I say absolutely not to all of them.

(Of course, that's not to say people shouldn't be political and try to change the laws and cultural values of society but while I am not an active participant in that movement, it would be hypocritical of me to pontificate otherwise. I think Johnny Barleycorn said something the other day about people having time to mount arguments on an internet noticeboard but to do anything to effect real change beyond the computer.)

Yes, I read that. But being an activist is not everyone's cup of tea, for various reasons. Some are working sixty hours a week to provide for their families and don't have the luxury to participate fully in politics. Belief is not negated by lack of agency. You can indeed feel something is truly morally wrong without joining the boycott industry/picket line. It is only problematic when belief is inauthentic--like in the case of Morrissey. He says one thing, and does another. He is not being authentic. Living an authentic life takes courage.
 

Iona Mink

Despitemybetterjudgement
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

I completely disagree. I am NOT a moral relativist. Some ways of doing things ARE better than other ways. Some values, beliefs, and behaviors are false and harmful, and should be abolished/changed. Is it OK for some people to believe women are inferior to men? Is it OK for some people to believe that twelve is an acceptable age for a female to marry? Is stoning ever OK? I say absolutely not to all of them.

To believe it? Sure. To act on it? No. It's against the law. Perhaps if you grew up in an age or a culture where women are/were seen as the weaker sex you wouldn't feel the way you do. To channel Brummie (or someone else, I can't remember), maybe it's your cultural privilege speaking.

There are lots of things people believe in that I don't agree with. Things that I believe are inherently wrong and unjustifiable while living in the society that we do. Eating meat is one of them.

Yes, I read that. But being an activist is not everyone's cup of tea, for various reasons. Some are working sixty hours a week to provide for their families and don't have the luxury to participate fully in politics. Belief is not negated by lack of agency. You can indeed feel something is truly morally wrong without joining the boycott industry/picket line. It is only problematic when belief is inauthentic--like in the case of Morrissey. He says one thing, and does another. He is not being authentic. Living an authentic life takes courage.

Again, it's the difference between belief and acting. I believe it that society shouldn't eat meat. I don't act on it. I don't do anything to change the world therefore I cannot claim that my morals should take precedence over another. Especially when it is not against the law to eat meat. While the laws remain as they are, I am a vegetarian in a meat eaters world. Majority rules.
 
Last edited:

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

To believe it? Sure. To act on it? No. It's against the law.

There are lots of things people believe that I don't agree with. Things that I believe are inherently wrong an unjustifiable. Eating meat is one of them.



Again, it's the difference between belief and acting. I believe it that society shouldn't eat meat. I don't act on it. I don't do anything to change the world therefore I cannot claim that my morals should take precedence over another. Especially when it is not against the law to eat meat. While the laws remain as they are, I am a vegetarian in a meat eaters world. Majority rules.

Yes, I see. But you DO think it is OK for others to work on changing things through legislation?
 

Iona Mink

Despitemybetterjudgement
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

Yes, I see. But you DO think it is OK for others to work on changing things through legislation?

Without question. For those who have the capability and desire, I would enthusiastically encourage it.
 

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

But not all sharia is highly controversial. If you are willing to tolerate kosher foods, why not halal? And should those options be available in schools? My local supermarket has its own halal butcher. Sharia law affects my day to day.

I don't agree with kosher or halal slaughter. I think all animals should be rendered unconscious before slaughter. I DON'T believe in making exceptions for religious reasons.

Happy with synagogues? Then you have to allow for mosques. If prayer areas are fine in airports, then that is sharia again. Our society allows for Islamic banks and finanical institutions, Muslim funeral services and Muslim charities. The thing is there are quite a number of examples where sharia is already in operation.

Who said I am happy with synagogues? Or churches, for that matter? I am not. Especially because they pay no property taxes. I say get rid of all buildings of religious worship. Maybe keep the beautiful ones around for historical and aesthetic purposes. Turn them into public museums.

I don't like it. I don't think we should indulge it. But if we indulge it for one group (Christians insisting on wearing their crucifixes while in uniform, Orthodox Jewish women subject to the whims of their husbands for divorce in the Beth Din) aren't we hamstrung and thus compelled to indulge it for all?

I say, don't indulge ANY of them. But get rid of the worst offenders first. There is a bit of an urgency there.
 

Iona Mink

Despitemybetterjudgement
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

Who said I am happy with synagogues? Or churches, for that matter? I am not. Especially because they pay no property taxes. I say get rid of all buildings of religious worship. Maybe keep the beautiful ones around for historical and aesthetic purposes. Turn them into public museums.

My argument wasn't personal. I am not accusing you.

I just think for some people (not you) racism plays a part in their rejection of Islam. While they (again, not you) find some religious practices harmless find the equivalent Islam belief abhorrent.

Is there urgency? It doesn't seem like it. I would say more pressing matters await such as re-writing US gun laws.
 

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

My argument wasn't personal. I am not accusing you.

I just think for some people (not you) racism plays a part in their rejection of Islam. While they (again, not you) find some religious practices harmless find the equivalent Islam belief abhorrent.

I think that is the case in persons who are racist--in general. Same people who regard Judaism as a race as well, I bet. But as you and I know, Islam is a religion, NOT a race. Religion is fair game, as far as I am concerned. It should be afforded no protection against scrutiny.

Is there urgency? It doesn't seem like it. I would say more pressing matters await such as re-writing US gun laws.

Guns don't kill. People kill, with guns. All killing, unless done in self-defense or just wars (What the hell is a just war?), is due to faulty thinking/decision making. In that way, it is much like religion. Islam is fraught with false beliefs and dangerous practices. I consider it a highly urgent matter, indeed.
 
Last edited:
A

Anonymous

Guest
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

And neither does Morrissey, really, when you think about it. He is all talk and no action. Because the man consumes diary and owns pets.

This here is a very interesting point and would love to hear Morrissey himself address it. As someone who is constantly happy to speak up about animal rights, he doesn't fully embody these quotes that he speaks unless he is a vegan - which he isn't - as the poster above says.
 

Anaesthesine

Angel of Distemper
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

There are many, many ethical vegetarians/vegans in the public eye these days. The list of actors and musicians (and even politicians) is quite long: female, male, young, old, barnstormers and quiet believers. Paul McCartney is probably the one who has the most influence, since he's arguably the most famous (and the most famously even-tempered). He gets through to people of all ages and persuasions, and his arguments make regular appearances (and are taken seriously) in forums devoted to various disciplines. A lot of people may find Macca somewhat tedious, but the man fights for his beliefs in a very effective way. He never wrote a "Meat is Murder," it's true, but he's been pragmatic and steadfast in his promotion of animal welfare. Poor Linda - she fought the good fight to her dying day.

Morrissey is a different animal altogether, and his continued prominence in the headlines (even here in the US) is due in no small part to the fact that he is loved and hated in equal measure. Unlike most other activists, Morrissey chooses to blurt out highly-controversial (even disgraceful) pronouncements to gain eyeballs and eardrums. My question is the same as many others at this point: why?

Is he just looking to stay in the public eye at any cost, or does he think he's supporting the cause? I think he's killing two birds with one stone (unfortunate metaphor, I know). You have to hand it to him: the (to my mind) very valid (and complex) argument of Meat = Holocaust is getting play in the media, which is a good thing. The fact that it is being proposed by someone who is rapidly being viewed as an old crank may, unfortunately, mitigate the power of the argument somewhat. Morrissey should take care: the moment he does more harm than good to the cause of animal rights is the moment he undermines not only his credibility as an activist, but his legacy as a credible artist.

James Baldwin said it so well (and I'm sure Morrissey took it to heart): "Artists are here to disturb the peace." Not all disturbances are created equal, however.
 

Librarian On Fire

Active Member
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

Crikey if there is one modern day urban myth that I hate and that is "Hitler was a vegetarian". Lets clear this up. Hitler ate a mainly plant based diet because he suffered from cronic flatulence. He wasn't vegetarian for ethical or moral grounds. He just had a delicate tummy.
 

Famous when dead

Vulgarian
Moderator
Re: Meat, Morrissey and Mein Führer.

Crikey if there is one modern day urban myth that I hate and that is "Hitler was a vegetarian". Lets clear this up. Hitler ate a mainly plant based diet because he suffered from cronic flatulence. He wasn't vegetarian for ethical or moral grounds. He just had a delicate tummy.
Yes, seems to be huge variance of opinion.
Without getting into the over-personalised debate,
historically, there is much argument over how much truth there is in the concrete assertion that he was totally vegetarian.
One such site that summates some of the other argument:
http://michaelbluejay.com/veg/hitler.html
Not über academic, but presents a counter argument.
There's certainly enough differing evidence that talking in definitives is erroneous.
(And beyond tenuous relating the debate to Moz).
Regards,
FWD
 
Last edited:
M

MozMOzMoz

Guest
I'm sorry if I'm stupid - but, I can't comprehend the idea of comparing Nazis / Auschwitz to eating meat. I think such a claim is offensive, racist and a hyperbolic reaction to meat-eaters (99% of the population!)
 
Top Bottom