75% of the anti-piracy discussions I see rarely blame companies like Nintendo or Disney and always try to talk about how piracy is immoral, and you should feel “dirty” for doing it. My question is why do people seem to hate those who pirate more than the bad practices of mega-corporations or the fact that they don’t want to preserve their media?

  • Angel [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Same reason vegans hate on omnivores - they’ve taken the high road and the benefits are small while the cost is high.

    This “vegans have a superiority complex” take is a thought-terminating cliché ultimately rooted in projection. Since vegans make you feel self-conscious about the unethicality of your carnist tendencies, you divert to accusations of a “superiority complex” when that is just the result of you internally grappling with the cognitive dissonance you have when it comes to funding animal exploitation that you have no proper justification for.

    Veganism is a justice movement, and vegans express disdain for non-vegans because they often double down on their oppressive tendencies that keep animals enslaved, exploited, and slaughtered. I don’t think I’m superior to you because, just like me, you have the capacity to understand why you shouldn’t support the oppression of sentient beings. Not only do you have the capacity to understand it, but you can take that to its logical conclusion and live in a way that is in accordance with said understanding.

    Also, the framing is off here. A principled ethical vegan doesn’t see veganism as a “benefit;” we see it as a moral obligation and baseline. Saying that veganism comes with “benefits” is like saying that refraining from calling racial minorities ethnic slurs comes with “benefits,” when it’s actually just basic decency toward BIPOC.

    • Are_Euclidding_Me [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Oh my, I literally read the comment you’re replying to backwards! I thought they said that carnists hate vegans. I’m glad you’re here to read properly and give a great response!

    • antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      There’s no projection. I feel no guilt for eating the diet of every single one of my ancestors. Zero. I do not believe animals to be sentient, and I do not equate death or servitude with suffering. It’s not that I don’t understand vegans. I do. But it’s like a religion - you have a fundamental belief, not in god, but in the consciousness of animals. Because we differ on that fundamental belief, we can reach no understanding about the ethics beyond that.

      And I think it is a fair comparison. People who pay for media may also see it as an ethical baseline to pay for what you consume. And in both the case of vegans, and those who pay for streaming, the perceived benefit of that choice is in my opinion fundamentally flawed. But it’s really not a big deal to me. I was just trying to answer OPs question. I think your response only validates my analogy. Thank you.

      • The_sleepy_woke_dialectic [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Why do you think animals do not have consciousness? Do human animals have consciousness? And are non-human animal brains not remarkably similar to our own? Did we not come out of the same stuff, live on the same earth, and evolve from the same common ancestors? It seems the logical default to assume that non-human animals do experience the world in much the same way you or I do.

      • Angel [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I feel no guilt for eating the diet of every single one of my ancestors.

        Appeal to tradition.

        I do not believe animals to be sentient, and I do not equate death or servitude with suffering

        Objectively false belief. Source

        Also, saying “I do not equate death or servitude with suffering” is just using an absurd personal opinion to invalidate objective considerations. It’d be like me saying, “I don’t associate shouting slurs at racial minorities with racism,” to validate such an act. In either case, neither distortion serves as a justification for this wicked behavior.

        But it’s like a religion - you have a fundamental belief, not in god, but in the consciousness of animals.

        False equivalence. One belief is speculative and far more abstract, but the other belief has legitimate concrete evidence to support it. Once again, read the very comprehensive analysis.

        People who pay for media may also see it as an ethical baseline to pay for what you consume.

        Again, this is a false equivalence, and it seems that you are abusing the notion of morality being subjective in order to justify an immoral act. You could also easily say something like “People who refrain from assaulting innocent people see it as an ethical baseline, but I don’t” as a bad attempt at justifying assaulting innocent people, but it won’t hold weight on its own. You have to provide a solid basis for why such an equivalence actually makes sense, but you do not. You just state it like it’s plainly obvious and doesn’t need further details.


        This is so copey that it hardly deserves a full-fledged response. Please know that this comment isn’t the “own” you think it is. You’re embarrassing yourself.

        • Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 minutes ago

          OOC if I had a pet pig. Loved it. Gave it a full and happy life safe and warm in my house until one day it died of old age. Would it be okay to give the body to my destitute neighbours so they can feed their dogs?

      • BeamBrain [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        I do not believe animals to be sentient

        And why do you believe that?

        I do not equate death or servitude with suffering.

        So you wouldn’t have any objections if you were taken as a slave and worked to death, right? Because those aren’t suffering?

      • Angel [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 hours ago

        How so? I literally stated that they have the exact same capacity as me to understand why veganism is a moral obligation. Such an understanding isn’t hard to grasp, and I’m no ascended, especially enlightened person for being vegan. If I believed myself to be, I’d have no reason to hold others to the same standard. The incentive lies in the fact that carnism comes with victims; veganism isn’t about me.

        Regardless, this is an ad hominem and, as I stated, a thought-terminating cliché. It’s a loophole to avoid engaging with ideas via focusing on the people expressing such ideas instead. Do you have any actual insight regarding the assertions I’m making or is it just cope?

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          they have the exact same capacity as me to understand why veganism is a moral obligation.

          This is a “begging the question” logical fallacy

          this is an ad hominem and, as I stated, a thought-terminating cliché.

          veganism is a moral obligation

          carnism comes with victims

          is it just cope?

          What thoughtful discussion arises from someone repeatedly telling you that they’re morally superior to you for choosing one specific diet over another? You’re projecting here.

          I have no issues with someone being vegan, but I take issue with self-righteous people such as yourself who can’t help but talk about how superior their choices are.

          • Angel [any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 hour ago

            This is a “begging the question” logical fallacy

            How is asserting “It doesn’t seem morally superior to hold others to the exact same moral standard as me” circular reasoning? Explain in detail; don’t just say it like it’s obvious and a “no shit” kind of take.

            What thoughtful discussion arises from someone repeatedly telling you that they’re morally superior to you for choosing one specific diet over another? You’re projecting here.

            You are disingenuously undermining what veganism is by phrasing it as a trivial dietary choice. And once again, this isn’t about whether vegans are “morally superior” or not. You can engage in ideas without using such an ad hominem as a cushion for your own guilt, but you are still actually refusing to do so. There is no reason why veganism, as a subject, should get an automatic quick dismissal via accusations of a “superiority complex” than any other subject. For instance, I take it and hope that you wouldn’t say “anti-racists think they’re so superior to racists 🙄,” but doing so holds the exact same amount of weight as what you’re doing right now with veganism. You’re using a thought-terminating cliché to degrade the person asserting an idea rather than discussing the idea itself.

            I have no issues with someone being vegan, but I take issue with self-righteous people such as yourself who can’t help but talk about how superior their choices are.

            There is a reason why I said “veganism isn’t about me.” You are committing victim erasure by glossing over the fact that I made very clear that veganism is a justice movement that takes a stand for victims. And once again, you are just repeating the same exact issue of ad hominem and a thought-terminating cliché by calling vegans “self-righteous” and disingenuously strawmanning them as people who just want to circlejerk about the “superiority of their choices” rather than engage in and advocate for a justice movement.

          • BeamBrain [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            I have no issues with someone not supporting animal torture, but I take issue with self-righteous people such as yourself who can’t help but talk about how superior their choices are.

            There is no functional difference between your original text and my bolded replacement. To be a carnist is to, through your actions, support animal torture.

      • The_sleepy_woke_dialectic [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Lets say you see a moral wrong that others ignore, often while admitting that they’re wrong to do so, and you alone act against that moral wrong despite it being hard and being mocked for your decision. How else would you feel? If you felt that being vegan was morally equal then you wouldn’t have become a vegan for ethical reasons in the first place. So by definition, you must believe yourself (in this specific area) morally superior, and based on that one data point, it’s probably safe to generalize that you’re morally superior to the majority of non-vegans, just like how you probably consider yourself morally superior to people who litter or hit their kids.

    • Are_Euclidding_Me [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Oh my, I literally read the comment you’re replying to backwards! I thought they said that carnists hate vegans. I’m glad you’re here to read properly and give a great response!