Are vegetarian societies less violent? Are there less gruesome murders?

Question

I think hunting is a cruel sick sport that encourages brutality and lack of empathy for another life. This is my personal opinion and I am entitled to it. And yes, I am fully aware of what hunting is and how it's done.

That said, I believe hunting, meat eating, and processing animals inhumanely for food has kept us as savages. I believe these killings have led to an increase in a lack of regard for humans, and an environment which promotes brutal violent killings. Obviously some cases are solely due to mental illness, but I question how much these additional factors play a role.

Does anyone have any data to support/suggest that vegetarian societies as being less prone to violent incidents?

Feel free to discuss.

Thanks.

Answer 1

You may or may not be right.  But I will continue to eat meat.

Answer 2

I am not sure how a person's dietary choices has anything to do with being violent or not.  Its almost redundant.  Oh for added information they make MRE's which are meal for military soldiers ,  they have vegetarian meals.  For those solider out in the field.

Answer 3

I don't think there is any scientific research as of yet that studies the correlation between diet and violence (who would be willing to fund it, anyway?) However, we can examine some cases of vegetarian societies and their attitudes towards violence, although this sort of study will necessarily be less precise and accurate.

Those societies that come to mind are mostly Eastern religions like Jainism, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Sikhism. Of these, Jains adhere to vegetarianism most strictly, while the other three religions advocate a vegetarian diet, but do not require it.

Among these religions, the primary reasons for not consuming meat and animal products are non-violence and compassion for all living beings. Following these principles, violence toward other humans is usually unjustifiable. As a result, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find violent acts committed by strict Jains, Buddhists, or Hindus. While most Sikhs are nonviolent, some have adopted a stance of violence as a means to end political and religious tyranny. I don't know whether these militant Sikhs are also vegetarians.

These examples show a relationship between religious beliefs and vegetarianism, but I couldn't find any research about vegetarianism outside of religion. I'd suspect that vegans and vegetarians motivated by ethical reasons are also less likely to be violent individuals.

Answer 4

There are no "vegetarian socities" in existence so it would be quite difficult if  not impossible to corroborate or dispute your opinion. The Inuits, perhaps the most "meat eating society" and subsist on mostly hunted meat are not known for violence. Neither are the Quakers, the Amish, Mennonites etc. Many countries like Japan, have very low violent crime rates despite high meat consumption.

I am glad you said "opinion" because though you are certainly entitled to make one, it does not necessarily mean you are correct or accurate. Hunting, for example, is a way of life, not a sport for many people.

Answer 5

Ya know, you may be right!!!! Everytime I eat a steak, I want to slaughter a PETA member!

Answer 6

I would'nt call hunting a "sport". In a true sport, both sides should have an equal chance of winning. When you shoot an animal from 100 yards away, that's not much of a sport, is it ? Now fight a bear with a stick,and win, that's what I'd call fair.

  You might like to read "The Tao of Pooh". A begginers book on Taoism. He believes our real problems started only after we started to eat meat.

Answer 7

I agree with the above poster but there is a little correlation.

Well, many Hindus in India, a predominantly vegetarian society, did not actively support vicious warfare and conquest, even when invaders like the Turks and the British occupied.

Buddhists advocate non-violence and a vegetarian diet, they are generally peaceful people.

Answer 8

So while I am fairly certain that if such a correlation existed there would not be much data to support a discussion my thought is that those societies which were less violent were conquered, pillaged, and murdered by societies who were more violent...

Answer 9

In fact, they are more violent to each other but more subservient to their masters in higher castes.  In ancient times, lower caste member were forbidden to eat meat.  This, a vegetarian diet was called the "Slave's diet."

And what about violence?  Keep the cop honest when they know the general citizen can strike back and claim self defense.

Answer 10

Unfortunately this can't really be looked at by society, but there is definitely a link between violence toward animals and violence toward humans.  Here are some links that give a lot of great info on the connection:

http://www.animalsvoice.com/PAGES/writes...

http://www.animaltherapy.net/animal%20ab...

http://www.americanhumane.org/site/PageS...

http://www.cause-for-paws.net/amatteroff...

EDIT:  the reason that this would be difficult to look at in the format of societies is that there are other factors to consider.  You would have to have a vegetarian society and an omnivorous one that were the same race, same socioeconomic status, same predisposition (or lack) to violent behavior, etc.  There are simply WAY to many factors to say whether vegetarianism is the cause of lesser violence.  The best way to look at it is by the animal violence and human violence connection.