"The attempt to claim that veganism is somehow antithetical to the interests of the marginalized is particularly demented. The global meat industry is especially bad for many marginalized humans; a vegan world would have much less hunger, environmental destruction that particularly harms people in poor countries, and disease."
I think you're missing a core aspect of common-sense morality and justice. Morality and justice have to do with people that are near us (in whatever sense is most salient/applicable given the context). Eating only vegan would be bad for poor people in the U.S. because it's unpleasant to eat only vegan food. And that is the group of people that common sense morality says we should be most concerned about when we talk about policies. Invoking issues about people in other countries is of little relevance. See the field of "political philosophy" for more on this.
It's always interesting when you reference Omelas, which is, of course, an anti-consequentialist thought experiment that invites us to admire people who are following some weird kind of virtue ethic, neither freeing the child, nor punishing anyone, nor apparently attempting to expose the situation to the wider world.
"Those who defend ethical veganism are often claimed by those who defend left-wing positions to be “speaking from a position of privilege,” or “failing to speak up for the marginalized.” Many on the far left seem to believe there to be a fundamental tension between the injunction not to eat meat when one can and advocacy for the oppressed."
You didn't provide a source for the claims so I googled it and found this attitudinal research which found that 35% of Nonhuman Animal rights activists identified as Democrats, while 37% identified as (mostly left-leaning) Independents, and 14% identified as Republicans: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/016224399201700402 You might fear that it's out of date, but recent surveys find similar results:
This Pew Research Center survey found that 15% of liberal democrats are vegan or vegetarian, as compared to only 4% of Republicans
Animals are the most marginalised group by far. If anyone is a minority, it’s those who are killed and exploited on farms and in slaughter houses.
"The attempt to claim that veganism is somehow antithetical to the interests of the marginalized is particularly demented. The global meat industry is especially bad for many marginalized humans; a vegan world would have much less hunger, environmental destruction that particularly harms people in poor countries, and disease."
I think you're missing a core aspect of common-sense morality and justice. Morality and justice have to do with people that are near us (in whatever sense is most salient/applicable given the context). Eating only vegan would be bad for poor people in the U.S. because it's unpleasant to eat only vegan food. And that is the group of people that common sense morality says we should be most concerned about when we talk about policies. Invoking issues about people in other countries is of little relevance. See the field of "political philosophy" for more on this.
Thank you for speaking out on this.
It's always interesting when you reference Omelas, which is, of course, an anti-consequentialist thought experiment that invites us to admire people who are following some weird kind of virtue ethic, neither freeing the child, nor punishing anyone, nor apparently attempting to expose the situation to the wider world.
"Those who defend ethical veganism are often claimed by those who defend left-wing positions to be “speaking from a position of privilege,” or “failing to speak up for the marginalized.” Many on the far left seem to believe there to be a fundamental tension between the injunction not to eat meat when one can and advocacy for the oppressed."
That's weird, every vegan I ever talked to was left-wing but you seem to be suggesting some sort of conflict between the two groups. I mean EA is 76.8% left-leaning https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/AJDgnPXqZ48eSCjEQ/ea-survey-2022-demographics#Politics but maybe that doesn't count because not all of them are vegan.
You didn't provide a source for the claims so I googled it and found this attitudinal research which found that 35% of Nonhuman Animal rights activists identified as Democrats, while 37% identified as (mostly left-leaning) Independents, and 14% identified as Republicans: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/016224399201700402 You might fear that it's out of date, but recent surveys find similar results:
This Pew Research Center survey found that 15% of liberal democrats are vegan or vegetarian, as compared to only 4% of Republicans
https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2016/12/01/the-new-food-fights/
This Gallup poll says that democrats are 11% vegetarian and 5% vegan whereas conservatives are 2% vegetarian and 2% vegan.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/238328/snapshot-few-americans-vegetarian-vegan.aspx