More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Josh Tetrick

GET UPDATES FROM Josh Tetrick

Building a Humane Economy

Posted: 07/11/11 07:00 PM ET

"Why the light bulb?" a young entrepreneur once asked Thomas Edison. "I find out what the world needs, then I proceed to invent."

And our 2011 world has a lot of needs. One of them, though, is particularly ripe for a new brand of capitalism.

See, we wouldn't tolerate someone ripping our dog's teeth out (baby pigs); stuffing him in a cramped wire cage (egg-laying chickens); or searing the tip of his nose off with a hot blade (broiler chickens). But sixty billion animals suffer from that type of cruel and inhumane treatment behind the walls of warehouses called factory farms. And 99 percent of all animals eaten or used to produce milk or eggs are factory farmed.

All of this violence fuels a $140 billion-plus a year industry. An industry so entrenched that it feels bizarrely invisible. We're not only being fed meat by this violent system; we're also being fed lies... But not everyone took the blue pill (see: The Matrix):

• 18% of college students are vegetarian
• There are more vegetarians in college than Catholics
• There are more vegetarians than students enrolled in any major, except for business
• 76% of American say that animal welfare is more important than low meat prices

Compassion now has a market. And we're seeing even wider cracks in the system of factory farming, including this week's historic agreement between the Humane Society of the United States and the egg industry. As an entrepreneur, there are a lot of reasons to care about all this, but here's one to remember: selflessness is profitable.

This isn't a story about being a martyr; it's a story about thriving.

Skeptical?

Tal Ronnen didn't just use his culinary skills to launch another steak house; he helped build a booming line of animal-friendly food products. Donna Oakes didn't just use her fashion sense to start another clothing company; she's using it to bring world-class (and ethical) designers to the marketplace. Greg Dollarhyde doesn't only see consumer demand for animal products; he sees a band of conscious consumers waiting in line at his hip West Coast restaurant chain.

Sacrificing yourself to the beast of conventional wisdom is a 21st century race to a better spot in the unemployment line. Enjoy the wait -- the economy still isn't looking that good.

Billions of dollars and one hundred years later, Edison's answer captures how some entrepreneurs are responding to the needs of so many animals -- and the values of so many consumers. The system of factory farming craves your ignorance -- but it also fears your creativity. And that is a big fact.

 

Follow Josh Tetrick on Twitter: www.twitter.com/joshtetrick

"Why the light bulb?" a young entrepreneur once asked Thomas Edison. "I find out what the world needs, then I proceed to invent." And our 2011 world has a lot of needs. One of them, though, is partic...
"Why the light bulb?" a young entrepreneur once asked Thomas Edison. "I find out what the world needs, then I proceed to invent." And our 2011 world has a lot of needs. One of them, though, is partic...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 281
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
07:52 PM on 07/15/2011
And now for something completely different...

A Way to Save America's Bees: Buy Free-Range Beef
http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/07/a-way-to-save-americas-bees-buy-free-range-beef/241935/
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
06:05 PM on 07/16/2011
Awesome that you're supporting a move away from factory farming -- AKA, where 95%+ of our food comes from. I'm betting that more will follow ya.
07:59 PM on 07/16/2011
cont...

If you want to support sustainable agriculture, stop spending your energies demonizing the very notion of meat and farming with animals. Biodiversity is essential to sustainable ag. Industrial ag, both plant and animal, has very real problems. Creating false polemics to demonize meat is part of the problem, not the solution. Sustainable food systems must mirror natural systems, which work in dynamic webs of complex, biodiverse interrelationships, not oversimplified binary polemics like "meat bad, vegetables good."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
05:29 AM on 07/14/2011
The article said that 18% of college students are vegetarian and that there are more vegetarians in college than Catholics. I know that both of these statements are something that Jonathan Safran Foer tossed out on a book signing tour. Other than that, is there any other source that supports these figures? If HE'S the only source, well ... pfft! I seriously doubt that there's any reliable data on how many college students are vegetarians (not that these figure mean much in any event). And I wonder how many of those "vegetarian" college students eat fish ... or even chicken.
10:50 AM on 07/14/2011
Self-reported "vegetarianism" is completely unreliable, since, as you point out, so many people are of the "I'm a vegetarian, except . . . " sort. (The other term for "vegetarian, except" is "non-vegetarian".)

One good piece of evidence of this is how confused many food service workers are in regard to what constitutes vegetarianism. Back when I was a vegetarian (prior to my, now, ex- vegan days), there was more than one occasion when I would go into a restaurant and ask about their vegetarian options, and the server would say things like, "well, we have a chicken caesar salad", or "you might want to try the seafood platter". Why? Probably because some self-declared so-called "vegetarian" came in the week before and ordered the chicken caesar salad or the seafood platter. Can you blame servers for being confused?

(. . . not to mention the fact that when it comes to college students, you're dealing with people who are typically "trying out" all sorts of philosophies and lifestyles, and the vegetarian freshman may well be turn out to be the "paleo"-eating sophomore, and who knows what after that.)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
01:24 PM on 07/14/2011
I have a friend who illustrates both the points you made - and she's many decades beyond being a college student, a demographic to which your observations apply in spades. She touts herself as a vegetarian, but she eats fish and occasionally even small amounts of chicken. She has no objection to foods made with meat based stocks and broths. It almost goes without saying that she eats eggs and dairy, but at least that's a recognized sub-set of vegetarianism -- ovo-lacto. It turns out that her "vegetarianism" consists of not eating beef, lamb, or pork. She also holds herself out as a Buddhist (sometimes Tibetan, sometimes Zen), even though in actuality she's a nice Jewish girl from Long Island who is completely secular and whose "Buddhism" consists largely of being somewhat interested in it, having a few thangkas hanging on her walls, and taking the occasional long weekend break at Tassajara Hot Springs.

I wonder how many of the 18% of college students who are, according to Safran Foer (and Josh), allegedly vegetarians rely on Top Ramen as one of their dietary staples?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
06:07 PM on 07/16/2011
Honey B - Keep pushing people away from a system that just doesn't sync w/our values. I'll see you on the next post, I hope.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
06:06 PM on 07/16/2011
E- Like others on here, you're standing against factory farming, and I'm proud to stand w/you in that fight. Appreciate you reading and commenting.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
12:07 AM on 07/14/2011
Hatcheries -- whether for egg-laying hens or broilers -- typically supply both factory farm and cage-free/free-range operations. This, in many ways, is the central weakness of "sustainable agriculture," which is itself a radical improvement on the status quo (read: animals flowing from windowless sheds, confined w/out soil and sun).

Money that flows to sustainable farms ends up supporting a key cog in industrial ag: Hatcheries. Again, though, family farms, although tiny in percentage of animals sold, are an important step towards living our shared values. (this para recently added for clarification)
12:27 AM on 07/14/2011
My thoughts? Yet more anti-sustainable ag rhetoric from a vegangelical. Can't say that I am surprised.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
01:30 AM on 07/14/2011
Am I factually incorrect? If yes, how? Specifically.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
12:40 AM on 07/14/2011
In what respect is this a "central weakness of sustainable agriculture"? It's hard to have "thoughts" on such a cryptic observation (and even harder when half of one's comments are being "scrubbed").
09:48 AM on 07/13/2011
Since I have run out of "reply" buttons to push, I am going to start over and ask that you correct the part about "ripping out" piglets teeth, and use the correct terminology, "clipping". If you do not know the difference, I suggested in another article you clip a finger nail, then rip one out, that will clear up any confusion.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
11:03 AM on 07/13/2011
I guess if you were taking a pair of pliers to my teeth, I might say: "stop ripping out my teeth!" From a Vet: "Cut the teeth as close as possible to the gums." (see link below) And the "correct" terminology for confinement is "housing"; for slaughtering "processing." Terms are often used to obscure the real meaning.

With that said, I appreciate that you -- as a farmer -- are helping others see that there is a different way. And i wish you'd tell us more about it here. Thanks, Grumps.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
12:22 PM on 07/13/2011
You just can't admit that you were wrong, can you?
photo
FaunaAndFlora
Daughter of Pan
02:02 PM on 07/13/2011
Processing is what you do after the animal is killed. Housing refers to the building that animals live in regardless of whether or not they're confined.

Do yourself a favor and put down the shovel. You were wrong. Admit it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sunshine saguaro
for you, a thousand times over
11:31 AM on 07/13/2011
Am I correct in understanding that clipping teeth doesn't cause pain to the pigs? Even if there is some pain involved, if it leads to a more healthy life for the piglets and the mama pig it's a good thing. I don't understand why some people think animals are entitled to live a life completely free of pain. Human life is not completely free of pain. For example, getting your wisdom teeth or appendix removed is painful, but ultimately it's the best, healthiest choice. Animals are not exempt from these practicalities. A practical and wise farmer can tell what procedures are necessary for the ultimate health & comfort of the animal. I also find it interesting that Josh mentioned castration as a negative "behavior tool". There are a million reasons to castrate an animal, among them cutting down on reproduction and avoiding cancers. I wonder if he is against spaying & neutering pets, as well.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jumbotron16
a slight improvement over jumbotron15
01:32 PM on 07/13/2011
This is a very good point. People get up in arms about procedures that cause an animal a few moments of pain or discomfort, but to me they are irrelevant when compared to how the animal spends the bulk of its life. In other words, being trapped in a gestation crate, unable to walk or turn around, for months or years, is infinitely worse than having your teeth clipped as a piglet. They are not comparable.
02:04 PM on 07/13/2011
If it hurts, I don't think it hurts much, I have clipped more than I can count.
Bianca S
You can't go trick-or-treating. Ever. For a week
05:17 PM on 07/12/2011
I have seen too many vegan articles on this site, from this author, Kathy Freston and the like, where thoughts are 'implied', or artfully worded, as to not reveal the true intent of their vegan agenda, which is "Vegterianism/Veganism= Good, Eating meat=Evil".
Especially unnevering, is when the article is supposed to be about 'Factory Farming", but they will make a 'fact' 'or 'statistic' about the health benefits of vegetarianism abd toss in a self-righteous dig about how much more 'compassionate' it is too.
Then, when commenters come out and disprove fallacious statements about veganism and how self righteous they are, the bloggers come out and say "Hey, that's not what we said". Well, it's what you meant and 'implied', and we can tell the difference.
I am totally onboard about the atrocities of factory farming, and do my best to eat locally and humanely, but you immediately lose me as a supporter when your article about 'factory farming', becomes yet another condescending, self righteous platform to tell me how much more 'compassionate' YOU are than me.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
05:58 PM on 07/12/2011
Hey Bianca - Awesome that you're "onboard about the atrocities of factory farming, and do (your) best to eat locally and humanely." That's a move that we can all support. You felt the piece above was saying "others are better than you?" If that's what you drew from it, you picked up on something that I didn't intend to communicate.
Bianca S
You can't go trick-or-treating. Ever. For a week
05:51 PM on 07/13/2011
Your polarizing stance on Factory Farming is doing more harm than good bc it once again, reinforces the false ideology that in order to be 'truly compassionate' and environmentally sustainable, once must be absolutist and avoid eating meat entirely. This will only further delay and drive away meat eaters into being proactive, because, in the mind of a vegan, "Good isn't good enough".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sunshine saguaro
for you, a thousand times over
10:07 PM on 07/12/2011
Fanning you, smart lady!
photo
FaunaAndFlora
Daughter of Pan
03:56 PM on 07/12/2011
How about doing some real research instead of relying on the same ol' vegan/animal rights misinformation? For example, take the first sentence in the third paragraph. It reads, "See, we wouldn't tolerate someone ripping our dog's teeth out (baby pigs); stuffing him in a cramped wire cage (egg-laying chickens); or searing the tip of his nose off with a hot blade (broiler chickens)."

First, no one rips the teeth out of baby pigs. Piglets are born with needle teeth that they use as weapons against their littermates when trying to establish "ownership" of a teat. They can also injure the sow with these teeth when suckling. Some hog farmers clip (not rip out) the needle teeth to prevent these injuries.

Second, I know too many people who keep their dogs locked in cramped cages (i.e., "pet carriers") for as long as eighteen to twenty hours a day, six days a week. Chaining a dog in the backyard isn't much better. Nor is locking a dog in a house all day long. Dogs are social animals. They need companionship. They also need to roam and explore. Of course acknowledging the way most dogs are treated would mean they can't be used to make an emotional appeal for veganism.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
04:25 PM on 07/12/2011
Good article - Most Pig Producers Can Do Without Clipping Teeth: http://www.agriview.com/articles/2005/05/26/livestock_news/feature_stories/producer03.txt

And re your points about how some treat their dogs. That's cruel, and I'm glad you're shining a light on it.

Thanks for reading it, and supporting a move away from factory farming.
photo
FaunaAndFlora
Daughter of Pan
09:15 PM on 07/12/2011
I'm the one who gave you the link to that article. LOL!!!
11:34 AM on 07/12/2011
There are few things more bizarrely ironic then when vegan propagandists employ the ridiculous argument that because only a small percentage of animal ag is currently eco-ag, veganism, which represents an infinitesimal percentage of the people on the planet, and an infinitesimally infinitesimal percentage of eco-ag, is the answer. Sustainable animal ag is a rapidly growing multi-multi billion dollar industry practiced all over the planet, but there are only a handful of veganic gardening farms, most of which go out of business pretty quickly because it is an expensive and ineffective way to grow things.

Animals are essential to every major form of sustainable agriculture from permaculture to biodynamic farming because the healthiest farms are biodiverse. Josh Tetrick's "meat bad, vegetables good" polemics are part of the problem, not the solution. Nature works in complex, dynamic webs of complex interrelationships, not oversimplified binary polemics.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
04:28 PM on 07/12/2011
The "farms" (aka, warehouses/factories) I note above are certainly not biodiverse, and I'm glad you're taking a firm stand against them. A move away, any move away, from all that is a win in my book.
01:01 AM on 07/14/2011
No doubt there are very real problems with industrial agriculture, both plant and animal. I don't fault you for being concerned about the problems with industrial agricultur­e. I fault you for wrongly suggesting that the very notion of meat is to blame, and misleading people who don't know any better to believe that becoming a vegan somehow solves the problem, which is nonsense. It is just as absurd as the notion that personally abstaining from vegetables will solve the damage caused by plant agricultur­e. It is the wrong way of looking at the problem.

By creating a false polemic of "meat bad, vegetables good," by demonizing farmers for the act of raising animals, and by belittling the impact of sustainabl­e farmers, it diverts attention away from the real issue; that we need to holistical­ly develop the most sustainabl­e food systems possible. The most sustainabl­e food systems, in fact every major form of sustainabl­e agriculture, have biodiversi­ty at their core, and that means animals.

When you mislead people into believing that the problems of industrial agricultur­e will be solved by eliminatin­g animals from agricultur­e all together, you become part of the problem, not the solution. Veganism does nothing to create more sustainabl­e food systems. It is no coincidenc­e that as of late, many of the most prominent vegan activist organizati­ons such as Farm Sanctuary and PetA have been teeming up with anti-eco-ag, anti-small farm, anti-local­ism, pro-GMO, industrial ag shills such as James McWilliams­.
09:23 AM on 07/12/2011
They don't "rip out" baby pig teeth, they clip the 4 needle teeth so they do not shred the sows udder.
09:31 AM on 07/12/2011
Hey grumps - just curious, what about wild pigs? Do the babies shred their mothers' udders? Is it a kind of "design flaw"?
02:35 PM on 07/12/2011
I don't know about wild pigs. I do know litter size makes some difference, I will have to admit I occasionally did not get all the teeth clipped. Litters that have less pigs tend not to fight so much for udder space. "Shredding" might be too dramatic of a term, but they do quite a bit of damage, often leading to mastitis and other infections. They also did a lot of damage to each other.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
09:44 AM on 07/12/2011
I'm aware that the industry thinks all the "behavior tools" (see: teeth clipping, tail removal, castration, and confinement) are absolutely required by the behavior tool that came before it. It's all about balance, of course. Except... Not tall farmers buy it. Just ask the farmers who actually let their pigs be, well, pigs.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
11:56 AM on 07/12/2011
So do you support farmers who let their pigs be pigs even if the pigs will eventually be eaten?
photo
FaunaAndFlora
Daughter of Pan
01:49 PM on 07/12/2011
http://www.agriview.com/articles/2005/05/26/livestock_news/feature_stories/producer03.txt

From the link:

Based on the results from farms where teeth clipping has been abandoned, Reese sees "no strong justification for teeth clipping" on most farms. However, he does note that some producers who've stopped clipping teeth have felt the need to go back to it, generally for one reason.
"Facial lesions resulting from intact teeth favor the development of greasy pig disease in some herds," Reese says. Often a problem in newly established gilt herds, greasy pig disease is caused by bacteria that lives on the surface of the skin and is allowed to enter the body through lesions. Because more lesions are likely when teeth are not clipped, some producers who've tried to stop clipping have noticed more piglets with greasy pig disease and have therefore resumed clipping.
07:21 AM on 07/12/2011
Some of these comments are so disturbing. I am continually amazed that people seem to think this earth is just for people. They live in the world of "I". "I want, I need." Animals have a right to live outside the realm of their usefulness to people. Great article my friend.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
09:46 AM on 07/12/2011
You know, in a lot of ways it's just odd. We're living inside a system that makes it easy for good people (possibly even those commenting here) to sometimes support practices that are hostile to their most cherished values (read: kindness, compassion, honesty). Love your work, your vision, and your heart. And thanks so much for reading the post.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
12:02 PM on 07/12/2011
We have been living in a world in which animals, both wild and domestic, have been used for food ever since there were humans. What's odd is people who think there's something "disturbing" about THAT. The bad practices of factory farming, which SHOULD be ended, are no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water, and no reason to assume or imply that anyone who doesn't share your vegan dogma lacks kindness, compassion or honesty.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
surfcityart
Soylent Green is dead people!
12:45 PM on 07/12/2011
Its called ignorance.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
01:13 PM on 07/12/2011
Based on my familiarity with the people commenting here on "the other side" -- who are NOT supporting factory farming, by the way, and who include at least one former vegan and two former vegetarians -- they are far from ignorant and are actually much better informed about food production and the practical and philosophical limits of veganism than the people who are "high-fiving" the author.
04:32 AM on 07/12/2011
"Greg Dollarhyde . . . sees a band of conscious consumers waiting in line at his hip West Coast restaurant chain". "Conscious consumers"? As opposed to comatose consumers strewn about on the sidewalk in front of the entrance to the restaurant?

Seriously, I can't help begging people to learn the difference between "conscious" and "conscientious".

I still get a laugh every time someone mentions the title of Tal Ronnen's book, "The Conscious Cook". Well, yeah, even if your expectations of a cook aren't particularly high, I think we can all agree that a person working in the kitchen should be conscious - i.e., awake, alert, capable of response to sensory input, with pupils equally round and reactive to light and accommodation.

Didn't he mean, "Conscientious Cook"? I don't agree that the vegan diet Ronnen espouses is more conscientious than a conscientious omnivorous diet, but at least he could use correct grammar.
07:34 AM on 07/12/2011
I think it comes from the new agey "consciousness," as in mass consciousness (will lead to world peace and the fall of walmart) or raising consciousness (also known as becoming "evolved"), etc.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
09:54 AM on 07/12/2011
Just means a sense of awareness. I'm sure we can all agree being "aware" isn't a negative thing.
07:53 AM on 07/12/2011
Oh, and I also meant to say you are spot on -- that's exactly what I think when I hear phrases like "Conscious consumers" and "Conscious Cook" -- certainly they would be preferable to the alternative... :-)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
12:57 AM on 07/12/2011
Why are you touting Donna Oakes and her "pleather" clothing? Are you unaware of the HUGE adverse environmental and human health effect of the manufacture of that stuff? Even in China -- CHINA! -- where it's made, workers think it's too dangerous to work in a pleather factories for more than a couple of years. So what's "ethical" about Donna Oakes for using that stuff instead of leather? It's OK to poison humans and the environment as long as "an animal didn't die"?
04:07 AM on 07/12/2011
I suppose the idea is that factory farming is SO bad for people (workers and consumers alike), the environment, AND animals, that even something as detrimental as "pleather" is preferable.

But, AS USUAL, no mention is made in this article of the fact that factory farming is not the only model of animal husbandry out there, nor that industrial plant agriculture causes many of the same problems as industrial animal agriculture, nor of the fact that non-vegans can find factory farming just as abhorent as vegans do (to admit that would be to throw a wrench into what our friend wildisthewind refers to as the "oversimplified polemics" of veganism). For example, Lierre Keith has said in several talks that, despite her well-known anti-vegan stance, she feels that factory farming should just be made flat out illegal, and Anthony Bourdain (who is not just dismissive of, but downright caustic toward, the vegan crowd) allowed in a debate with Jonathan Safran Foer that, despite his love for bacon, the way pigs are raised in factory farms "borders on the criminal".

But mention attitudes like these to the vegans, and you're met with dismissive responses about how "humane farming represents only a tiny fraction of the meat/eggs/dairy produced in this country", which, in my opinion, is PRECISELY the sort of defeatist attitude which helps to keep factory farming in place as the dominant model.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
05:23 AM on 07/12/2011
Of course, if a person is going to include everything back to the "factory farm: when comparing leather to pleather, then everything back to the oil well has to be included as well for pleather production, not just the manufacturing of the end product. Otherwise, it's an apples and oranges situation. I think a lot of vegans/AR activists simply don't think through these issues, just as they don't think through how their own food is produced, which allows them to maintain the delusional belief that no animals died for their diet.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
09:56 AM on 07/12/2011
Honeybear - I'm curious. If you believe that factory farming in indeed a violent system, why not spend your time here talking about that? The post above wasn't "attacking" family farms.
02:11 PM on 07/12/2011
I'm very happy that you too are concerned with environmental and human rights. I would love it if you would check out my website to see what the products are really made of. So much progress has been made in recent years in the area of environmentally sound fabircs. The clothing in my shop is made from one or more of the following sustainable materials - organic cotton, hemp, tencel, cupro or some type of recycled fabric. Many of the shoes are made from recycled materials also - like the Beyond Skin shoes which are made from a material called DINAMICA - it is durable and made from 100% recycled materials. It emits the lowest levels of polluting emissions during production and uses no toxic polluting chemical substances - unlike most other real or synthetic suedes. Ethics and fashion can go hand in hand.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
10:40 PM on 07/12/2011
I'm glad you're using a lot of recycled materials and aren't using pleather manufactured using DMF. But even DMF-free PU synthetic leather is petroleum-dependent and ultimately unsustainable, and while its use may not "proximately cause" the deaths of animals, looking at the big picture and the long-range consequences of its use, animals are certainly going to die as a result of that petroleum connection, so it doesn't really add up to a more "ethical" option than real leather from sustainably-raised animals, IMO.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Karl Wilder
10:10 PM on 07/11/2011
This is a brilliant article and it is my sincere hope that you are correct and a more compassionate thoughtful version of business replaces what we have.

My skeptical view is that big business will hire more P.R. people and find new ways to lie to us.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
11:29 PM on 07/11/2011
Means a lot to have your thoughts, Karl. And, yea, humane companies need their own PR, too.
04:59 AM on 07/12/2011
"Humane companies need their own PR, too":

Just out of curiosity, Josh, would you accept the consumptio­n of meat, eggs, and/or dairy products if they were truly (not just as a matter of labelling) humanely produced, or are you of the branch of veganism that considers all forms of animal "exploitat­ion" equally unacceptab­le?

In the commentary section of another article, I had a vegan blast me for supporting the UEP's agreement to improve the conditions of laying hens in industrial egg operations­, since believing that supporting such improvemen­ts implies acceptance of the use of animals for any human purpose whatsoever­, and I was told by that person that ANY egg consumptio­n supports cruelty, regardless of whether the hens are in battery cages or in your backyard.

It seems to me there are really two types of vegans: radical animal rights sorts who consider even keeping a pet rescued from a shelter to be a form of "enslaveme­nt", and others who are basically "conscient­ious omnivores" who, for whatever reason, choose not to go to the bother of finding humane sources of meat, eggs, and dairy products.
05:53 AM on 07/12/2011
paragraph 2 - I meant "believing in", not "believing that" - I realize that as it stands that statement didn't make much sense!
09:53 PM on 07/11/2011
One important element of this discussion is how many people in the (animal) ag industry view veganism and alternatives to the modern models of husbandry as dangerous, subversive threats to their livelihoods. (As well as good ol' American tradition.) It is worthwhile to consider this, as it is to a degree true. However, the same might be said of drug dealers or pimps facing the legalization (or crack down...ha ha) of their trade; or with slave owners. And so on. Just because many, many people make a living off of animal agriculture does not make it right and ethical--whether de facto or de jure. But we should be sensitive to their situations, which would mean that pushing an animal-free agenda should also consider how people in this industry could be retrained, given new opportunities, and allowed to contribute successfully to a healthy, ethical economy. I have not seen a lot of this sort of thinking, sadly.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
11:30 PM on 07/11/2011
You know, J, that's an excellent point -- and I've never heard it brought up before. But, it matters. And we should be talking about it.
01:10 AM on 07/12/2011
It's "an excellent point" to compare farmers to slave owners?!?! And you expect to be taken seriously? Good luck with that.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:48 PM on 07/12/2011
Try making a living by farming without the use of animals (& that includes animal byproducts) first before you do any "retraining".

I don't need any retraining, but I'm pretty sure the majority of vegans are in need of farm training.
09:13 PM on 07/12/2011
Actually, I have spent lots of time on sustainable agriculture, thanks. I think that animals do have a place on a farm. But having them as members of the farm community is not the same as raising animals primarily for using, and making money from, their byproducts.
07:28 PM on 07/11/2011
Great article Josh really gives people something to really think about :)
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
09:19 PM on 07/11/2011
Thanks so much, Sammy :).
07:20 PM on 07/11/2011
Excellent piece Josh. One of my NextGenNow leaders. How can I interview and these folks?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
joshtetrick
09:21 PM on 07/11/2011
Hey Carol - They're pretty cool, I know. And thanks a lot for your kind words. I'm at joshuatetrick@gmail.com (or just friend me on FB/DM on Twitter). Happy to talk, and connect you.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:08 AM on 07/12/2011
When you interview Donna Oakes, ask her if she cares about the environmental contamination and the adverse human health effects that result from manufacturing the pleather she uses. Not exactly MY idea of "ethical" but I guess for some people all that matters is that "no animal died." Absurd and myopic.
04:29 PM on 07/12/2011
Hi Kathleen. I assure you that I am very much concerned about environmental and human rights. If you are interested in knowing more about what the products in my shop are really made from, you can see my reply to elcerritan a few posts above. Or, you can check out my website and look at the individual products - you might be pleasantly surprised.