Lots of animals eat nothing but or nearly all meat and suffer no ill effects because of it. Man, an animal, eats a lot of it, too, and the evidence is that a meat-based diet is good for man. And, vice versa, that an entirely plant-based diet is not so good. An all-veggie diet becomes more and more dubious for animals who are more designed (by evolution or whatever) to eat meat.

Of course, it matters where the meat comes from. It’s right to be suspicious of whatever it is processed food companies push as meat (to man or beast) in raw or cooked forms. Surely at least some of that stuff can’t be good to eat. I don’t know of anybody who disagrees with that, so we’ll let it pass.

Quality meat, including that which you stalk, kill, and process yourself is exceptionally healthy. Meat produced by many quality farmers might be second best, not for the quality of the meat, but because the thrill of the hunt is missing.

Even with all this good news, there is an increasing push by our elites against eating meat. Why?

There are, as I see it, two thrusts: (1) Meat should not be eaten because animals are people, too, and (2) meat is bad for “the planet”.

Now (1) is just silly. If we ban rising up, killing and eating, because animals must die, and animals have “rights” (or whatever), then we’d have to police the entire animal kingdom to stop the relentless, continuous, bloody red slaughter. Didn’t anybody pay attention to those nature documentaries? Meat-eaters rule. It is an ineradicable built-in fact of our fallen world that in order for some animals to live other animals must die.

It’s organizations like PETA who push bans on man eating meat. They argue it would make men manlier. Yet who would want to look like the PETA fellow in the picture heading this post? If you can stomach it, they have an entire video (complete with lousy music) with him and others in it.

Strange PETA would claim celery makes men manly, especially in a climate that condemns masculinity. All elites say it’s “toxic.” Increasing masculinity would thus increase toxicity. Thus we’re right to doubt PETA is telling the truth about wanting more manliness. Incidentally, the Babylon Bee wins the best headline: “Least Masculine Society In Human History Decides Masculinity Is A Growing Threat“.

Push (2), where meat must be eschewed and not chewed because it is “bad” for “the planet” is being backed by organizations like Kellogs. It is probably just a coincidence companies who back the organization pushing veganism do not sell meat. Anyway, somehow man eating meat will harm “the planet”, but that other animals eat meat won’t.

The organization that wants you to buy the products by global food companies because these products are supposedly better for “the planet” is EAT: “a global, non-profit startup dedicated to transforming our global food system through sound science, impatient disruption and novel partnerships.”

Impatient disruption?

Don’t we hear that kind of thing from social justice warriors? Answer: Yes, we do.

EAT says don’t eat meat. “Human diet causing ‘catastrophic’ damage to planet: study.”

It is, as it should go without saying, impossible that eating meat will cause “catastrophic” damage to “the planet.” The planet will be just fine, and will survive whatever it is we might be able to do to it. We, however, may not survive what our elites want us to do to each other.

EAT says their planet-saving ” diet allows for about seven grammes (a quarter of an ounce) of red meat per day.” That’s about as much meat as you can balance on your pinkie fingernail, maybe less if you have large manly hands like I do.

Even this won’t save us, say these scientists. “‘We can no longer feed our population a healthy diet while balancing planetary resources,’ said The Lancet editor-in-chief Richard Horton.”

This is like saying “It’s us or the planet, and I choose the planet.”

It again should be obvious and go without saying that if so many people are so sick because farming practices are so bad, that the mostly veggies and carbohydrate processed food diet they’re taking is much more likely a culprit than unprocessed meat. So why not fix that problem? Stopping eating the vast majority of products grocery stores sell in the middle aisles would fix health and bad farming practices, too, since there would not be a need for all processed grains and oils and low-quality meat. Do you think we can get woke corporations and scientists to back that kind of initiative?

And incidentally, if we care so much about farming, do we really need to grow corn for the express purpose of turning it into automobile fuel?

Well, you can shrug all this EAT stuff off as the nonsense it is. But then don’t claim surprise when laws based on their “scientific” findings start being passed. And you’ll start seeing the media pushing the idea that health is right wing and white supremacist.

Share this: Facebook

Reddit

Twitter

Pinterest

Email

More

Tumblr

LinkedIn



WhatsApp

Print



