I listened to part of the amy tiddlywinks show last Saturday. She and her guests were talking about how politics affects what our doctors tell us and how what we eat – they’re vegan or vegetarians – will heal us and prevent cancer, etc.
I started thinking about what they were saying and I started thinking about alternative motives for progressives to push veganism. I came up with a few possibilities. I am not saying that these ideas are actually what they talk about when it’s just them. I am not saying that somewhere in their past the founding fathers of Marxism/Communism/Socialism (which is what progressivism actually is) actually thought this, wrote any of this, talked about this. I am saying, “What if?” No harm in asking the question, right? As they say, “There is no stupid question.” Right?
For instance, they could be for animal rights. Animals are as important and as good, intelligent, or worthwhile as people. Do I agree with those feelings/beliefs? Nope. Do I think that it’s a good idea to think of future dinners as equals? No. That creates a feeling of cannibalism. That chicken that’s going to be my dinner in two months is NOT my equal in any way, shape, or form. Can a chicken write, talk, drive? Nope. Nope. And nope. Can that chicken do simpler things: zip a zipper, fill a glass, tie a shoe? Again: triple nope. Is a chicken capable of even smiling? Nope. Beaks don’t bend. Okay, so that’s a little cheat, but you get the idea. My chicken dinner is not my equal.
Does it have the same capabilities in other areas: does it have the ability to feel pain? Yes, but not the same way we do. Our brains are much more developed than theirs. They may feel pain but their receptors are not as high as ours. In fact, did you know that a chicken once lived for months without its head. Yep. Check it out. Could you do that? If not, then your body/brain connection is much more necessary than a chicken’s. So that makes you more developed than a chicken. You are superior to a chicken.
Lobsters, crabs, invertebrates can feel, think, do even less than a chicken. So we’ll not cover them.
How about beef – cows? Are they capable of doing more than a chicken? Yes. They are more developed than a chicken. Since they have more capabilities than a chicken, we have to ask if they can do something more than a chicken. So, can a cow drive, type a legible sentence, wash a sink full of dishes to food handler’s standards? Nope. Nope. Again, nope. It’s the same answers as a chicken’s. Does that mean that cows don’t feel? No. Does it mean that they should be treated as equals to humans? No. They cannot perform the higher functions. You’ll never see a cow do surgery, will you? You’ll never see a cow teach college, do calculus, or operate heavy machinery.
Does that mean we should torture our food prior to eating it? No. But it also doesn’t mean that they are our equals or that we should give them the same rights we have. After all, they won’t realize that they don’t have them: they are incapable of doing so. It’s like painting a wall blue instead of pink because you perceive it to be a male wall instead of a female wall. Does the wall realize or care which color it is painted? If not, then don’t worry about giving it a coat of whatever color paint you so desire. Same with a cow: it doesn’t realize whether or not it has rights so don’t worry about giving it rights. If it can’t exercise them without us doing so for it, then why bother? Your purse can’t get up and go somewhere you are without your help, so why give it legs?
So the animal rights angle is a possibility, although why they want to give animals rights is another question.
Another possibility is that food is a delineator. Ever see a poor man eat Kobe beef without a rich man buying it for him (a la us paying for obamination’s Kobe beef dinners)? Without anyone eating lobster, Chicken Kiev, Kobe beef, lamb, veal, etc., there can be no delineation between the rich and the poor. It’s all about equality, right? But equality is a two way street: the animals get equality and the people feel more equal. No one can afford any food that is better than the “little guy”. It’s all about “everyone eats rice”.
When it comes to veganism, what could the possibilities be for wanting others to be so, too, besides animal rights?
How about the possibility of taking GOD out of the public picture as a possible motivation? That’s a possibility. Tiddlywinks talked about how food can heal you and talked about the largest study in the history of the world done in China and the food they ate and how food made people get well. You take away the need for GOD to heal you and replace it with food and then you don’t need GOD do you? Take the issue of praying to GOD for healing away and you’ll see the food replace GOD. Isn’t that what it’s all about: food is the healer, thus food replaces the Great Physician? Don’t pray, eat. You’ll be fine! Food will take care of you. Eat kale, don’t pray. (It can be their mantra: “Eat kale, don’t pray! Eat kale, don’t pray!” placards of green…)
Or maybe it’s the idea that it gives Wrongies more power over the rest of us? Take away our food choices via animal rights and who gets to control whom? Yeah. Power is what they want and with animal rights and forced vegetarianism they get it. Is that a possible motivation for pushing vegetarianism? Control is the name of their game. Do you want them to control you?
How about another possibility? Maybe they’re just delusional? Maybe they think that they’re going to replace GOD in their lives with food and that it will do for them what GOD will do if they just turn their lives over to Him and be His child? Maybe that’s their delusion. Maybe that’s the way they choose to deal with the GOD shaped hole in their hearts? Maybe they choose tofu over Creator? If that be the case, that’s their problem and their delusion but it doesn’t mean that they need to get the rest of us into their delusion.
So we have three possibilities about what tiddlywinks and the other progressive Wrongies were talking about. All of them can be applied and used side by side, or they are all stand alone possibilities as well. Whichever way you look at it, there’s another motivation for pushing veganism/vegetarianism. Mark my words. There’s another reason for pushing vegetarianism/veganism. It’s not because they care about you. It’s not that they want you to be healthy. They certainly don’t want me to be healthy! They don’t want George W. Bush, Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney to be healthy (especially not Dick Cheney!). Why would they want that? So it’s not about everyone being healthy.
When it comes to what your physicians won’t tell you – especially about the food you eat and the results it supposedly brings about in your body – do as tiddlywinks encouraged you to do. Think about the politics of it all. Think about what the truth is and how they do things. Think about their history and where the whole vegan movement came from. Think about their past and their previous motivations. Then ask yourself these questions: What is their political motivation for trying to spread vegetarianism? And, do they really want me healthy? Then you’ll have the answer as to why they’re spreading veganism.