The concept of a vegan world is like communism
Nice in theory, disaster in practice.
Whenever I ask about all the negative side effects like ‘what happens to all the excess farm animals and their many many many leftover corpses if we just let them die rather than use them for meat’, ‘What about the increase in insects from using gmo and pesticide free crops which will also take up more land and destroy more of the environment?’, ‘Just how far does animal exploitation go? What about the people saying pets should be destroyed and ‘freed’ from their owners because they were bred for humans and therefor against nature?’, ‘What will define what an ‘animal’ is? Will it extend to fish and bugs, even though if the world switched to bugs it would be a much more sustainable food source?’, ‘What about the fact that you’re destroying cultures all around the world because food is culture and there are some foods that absolutely cannot exist without dairy or eggs?’, ‘What about the impact on the economy, veganism is infinitely more expensive to maintain and provide for?’
and they just
they give half answers
they give all these ideal scenarios without really answering how to deal with the problems because all they can give are solutions with no thought put in to the ramifications of these ‘simple solutions’. No matter how smart they try to word things, no matter how many facts they give, they never give answers to the obvious problems that would surface from attempting a vegan world.
I’m sorry but
Be vegan, fine
But you can’t control the entire world and force them to go vegan unless you want to be a fucking animal free dystopia.
prince zuko got you all out here thinking every dark haired antagonist boy is gonna do right in the end when zuzu was the exception not the rule
I really wish it weren’t though? I think it’s really telling that a lot of people like redemption arcs because we want to see people be good despite their pasts. The fact that there are so little redemption arcs in media is very upsetting because it just sends the message that people can’t change which we know is not true. I absolutely don’t mean this for characters like Kylo Ren though lol
Redemption arcs are hard and Zuko’s was successful for a couple of reasons:
1) Zuko wasn’t the worst character in the Fire Nation. From really early on it was shown that, compared to Zhao, Azula, and other Fire Nation leaders, Zuko was consistently more noble. He tried to be a good person and do the right thing, even when doing so led to him suffering for his actions.
2) Zuko suffered for his mistakes. He suffered when he turned away from Iroh, he suffered when he betrayed Iroh, and he suffered even after his face turn. There were consequences for his mistakes; he didn’t get off scot free because his childhood was hard. He was still held accountable by the narrative and made to take responsibility for the wrongs he did.
3) Zuko made tangible amends to the people he hurt. He rescued Hakoda, helped Katara get closure, and became Aang’s firebending master. He put in work to make up for the things he did and rebuild bridges with his new allies.
Most redemption narratives fail because the guilty party is guilty of much greater crimes than failing to capture the hero, never works to make amends, and never suffers for their mistakes. You wanted to see Zuko redeem himself because he had the capacity, wanted to do the work, and paid dearly for his mistakes.
you’re right and you should say it
also never forget about WHY he was exiled in the first place. because he dared to care about the people in his kingdom rather than consider them expendable pawns.
The only people who get upset when you set boundaries are the ones who benefited from you having none.
That’s why they perceive it as a personal attack— because your boundary encroaches on space they’re used to owning: eg, yours.
disappointed-pero-not-surprised:
This isn’t because Burger King is nicer in Denmark. It’s the law, and the US is actually the only so-called “developed” country that doesn’t mandate jobs provide a minimum amount of paid vacation, sick leave, or both.
kinda debunks that claim that they can’t afford to pay their workers those sort of wages and still make a profit
Its corporate greed, plain and simple.
It is the same in Sweden. It is so funny every time an american company opens up offices here and then tries to do it the american way and all the unions go “I don’t think so”.
Like when Toys ‘r Us opened in sweden 1995.
They refused to sign on to the union deals that govern such things as pay/pension and vacation in Sweden. Most of our rights are not mandated by law (we don’t have a minimum wage for example) but are made in voluntary agreements between the unions and the companies.
But they refused, saying that they had never negotiated with any unions anywhere else in the world and weren’t planning to do it in Sweden either.
Of course a lot of people thought it was useless fighting against an international giant, but Handels (the store worker’s union) said that they could not budge, because that might mean that the whole Swedish model might crumble. So they went on strike in the three stores that the company had opened so far.
Cue a shitstorm from the press, and from right wing politicians. But the members were all for it, and other unions started doing sympathy actions. The teamsters refused to deliver goods to their stores, the financial unions blockaded all economical transactions regarding Toys ‘r Us and the strike got strong international support as well, especially in the US.
In the end, Toys ‘r Us caved in, signed the union deal, and thus their employees got the same treatment as Swedish store workers everywhere.
The right to be treated as bloody human beings and not disposable cogs in a machine.
and that story right there? is exactly why Republicans in the US work so hard to bust unions. it’s because unionizing WORKS and they’re terrified of workers actually having some power.
I
