Vegan Dishonesty Part 1 | Is Meat Murder & Carnism a Religion?

in veganism •  6 months ago


I critique Larken Rose's latest video on Dishonest Vegans where Larken outlines some of the generalisations and dishonest arguments made by Vegans. In Part 1 of this video I address the animal rights slogan 'Meat is Murder', whether murder extends to other non-human animals and whether Carnism is a belief system.

"Animals are our brothers and sisters. Animals have been endowed with life, feelings, ideas, memory, and industry. The only thing animals may be said to lack which sets humans apart from them is the gift of speech. If they had it, should we dare to kill and eat them? Should we dare to commit these fratricides?"

• twitter:
• instagram:
• TKJ Podcast iTunes:

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

It is almost universally accepted among vegans that consuming roadkill is morally permissible. He is creating a strawman when he argues against supposed vegans who believe that the mere presence of meat is murder. You cannot honestly extrapolate this position from someone for simply using the term 'meat is murder'.All he is actually saying here is that vegans need to express themselves more correctly. But I seriously doubt that anyone who interprets 'meat is murder' the way he has honestly believes that this is the argument vegans are making. Clearly it is merely a PR slogan and not meant as an exhaustive moral position. It is dishonest to pretend to not know that when vegans proclaim 'meat is murder' that they are saying that the slaughter of animals for situations other than when survival necessitates is equitable to murder.
When he did acknowledge the actual vegan position that slaughtering animals is murder, he attempted to argue against it by quoting a LEGAL DEFINITION. Which is obviously a joke coming from an anarchist.


I made the same argument in the video I made. Will post it today. In fairness though, Larkens arguments against Veganism were the best I’d heard for some time. ‘The Grey line’ argument was a good point. I countered that argument with the fact that the line vegans/vegetarians draw is more logically consistent.

Good point in how carnism is indeed a belief or ideology. Larken makes the same argument statists and collectivists have used to justify domination of human populations for thousands of years. Not to mention humans ate mostly plants if any meat for thousands of years before fire was cultivated.

I think the strongest and most moral argument against eating animal products though, at least one that covers people who don't value non-human animals, is health and vitality. Self-interest is evident in nature, and for human beings who want and must survive, eating meat is detrimental to this pursuit. Interestingly, health and ethics go hand in hand.


True. That's the approach Jains take. Ahimsa is actually about not injuring oneself. Jains believe that by harming others, you harm yourself. That being said, needless to say, you can't force someone to do things that are in their self-interest. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Larken can't be right about everything, I guess ;-)

Top video.


True, I love how he keeps saying 'Timeout' don't strawman my position when he's making statements that he knows will be interpreted as an appeal to nature fallacy. It's an improvement on his 2015 post about Vegans and Vegetarians.


He's using semantic jiujitsu to make his argument seem more sophisticated than it actually is.