>>2853942The vegan perspective opposes animal use, as using other living beings is prone to harm them.
Especially animal ownership for financial exploitation is problematic, as funds for animal wellbeing are dependent on profitability.
Animal exploitation for food is massively contributes to multiple apocalypse level threats - which a rational mode of production would avoid:
Zoonosis
Efficient animal agriculture is an incubator for animal borne disease, and there are regular outbreaks of such diseases that have killed millions, and this will continue killing millions, constantly, there is a risk of covid-level pandemics or worse popping up.
Leading killer diseases
Animal products are known to contribute to the leading causes of deaths by causing cancer, ciabetes and cardiovascular disease, which is just not the case for equivalent plant foods. This leads to millions of early deaths, years of disease and disability.
Global warming
Huge emissions come from animal agriculture. Most crops are grown for animals, while only a small part of our protein and energy intake comes from animals. Most arable land is used for animals, most deforestation is done to further animal agriculture.
Some aestimations put the contribution to about 20% of carbon equivalent emissions.
To me, it just makes sense to both adopt vegan ethics and consumption behaviour in order to prefigure a rationally planned economy. Furthermore if comrades go vegan, they may even have more time and energy to enact the change we would like to see.
Also vegan nutrition is cheaper even in the developed world, elsewhere it's even more of a luxury.
This is why the global north leads in the consumption of animal products.
Going vegan just makes sense.