Understanding modern vegetarianism?

Question

It's only in the lifetime of my living parents that being vegetarian in the UK (not the Amazon rain forest) has become a viable option for everybody. If you look at the food available to the normal working people during the 1940/50s and then overlay discussions from this forum about what fruits, vegetables, pulses and supplements ensure a healthy vegetarian diet, you will notice a problem. If these items were available, it wouldn't have been something a normal person could have afforded - especially when you consider the calorific requirements of yesteryear.

For the sake of my arguement, now look to a future end of the oil age. Whilst someway off, people are today talking of mining plastic from rubbish dumps. There's likely to be a violent adjustment as the world fails to support all of it's inhabitants. Food riots are already taking place around the world. It's not difficult to see that crops will be difficult to secure and people may be forced to compete for anything edible. Meat will be prized - and not for vanity or flavour.

Even as an omnivore, I agree that vegetarianism is a sound ethical option right now, but has it always been and will it always be? If not, are we afforded a choice of being able to be vegetarians (and alive at the same time) by a western decadence that could well exist for only a tiny portion of human history?

All views or findings are welcome.

Answer 1

its an extremely valid point. some of these vegetarians are thinking on a very small scale, i dont think a person under extreme poverty  in south america, india, africa, southeast asia, etc would be able to access meatless meatballs, dont you?  i think a better future approach would be re evaluating how land is used and citys are planned, to allow for agriculture on a small scale, i e a good sized area for growing produce, climate permitting. ideally, i suppose the use of roof gardens would allow a space saving approach to this, however like everything its not ideal for those without the accomodations, or ability to maintain. it comes down to the fact that with malnutrition already widespread, governments need to figure out more earth and people friendly methods to crop production. another interesting point is there are much more animal protein based foods than one imagines. insects have much higher amounts of protein per ounce than beef, and they are much more economical to raise than a cow or other  bovine/ungulate animal in large numbers. insects are delacacies in many countries,  problem is the very limited scope of vision by those of us here in the west. we dont beacuse we think its "icky".

bottom line, we need to manage ourselves, our people and our animals much better than what we are doing now.  

Answer 2

Excellent question.

Yes, being healthy on a vegetarian diet normally does require eating a variety of different plant foods for various nutrients. Arguably, so does an omnivorous diet, though perhaps the range of foods may be less.

However, bear in mind that not so long ago in an evolutionary sense, the typical human was a "wanderer" over the earth, spending much time looking for different foods, and this would make up a large part of our days. In such wandering, one would likely come across a variety of different plant life, whereby people could get the variety of plant foods required.

Contrast that to now, where most people remain in one location for the majority of the time. Under these conditions, it's likely that turning to what is available (a reduced variety of local foods, including meat because of its quick and easy density of calories) would be the norm. It is only in recent time that widespread mass transport of food (e.g. airplane and trucks) have enabled us, in a sense, to resume this "wandering" practice of having many different foods, and thus vegetarian diets have again become practical.

However, there's little doubt that even on a local level now, a plant based diet is much more efficient and kind environmentally wise than one based on animal products. With today's modern farming techniques it's also possible to grow a greater variety of fruits and vegetables in a small space than ever before. If indeed the end of the oil age is in sight (and all signs are that it is) these farming advances will be critically important in sustaining people and keeping them healthy. With the population we have now, it's doubtful humanity will ever be able to resume a wandering existence for getting the different varieties of plant life we need.

People will of course keep animals post-end of oil. But bearing in mind that large scale animal agriculture has contributed significantly to oil depletion, pollution and climate change (according to the UN) I personally don't feel that at least aiming for as vegetarian a diet is possible is ever a bad thing. Whether or not a full vegetarian diet is practical in a certain age or culture, it's always definitely something to shoot for as much as possible. For the benefit of fellow humans, animals and the environment alike.  

Answer 3

By this point in time, too many people are too ignorant to even try being vegetarian, but if more people would try it, more corporations would take up trying to make vegan or vegetarian foods.

I'm a vegetarian myself, and I'm only 15. Yet, I get looked down on for it, like its some sort of bad thing. I get made fun of for it. My entire family just brushes it off as some rebellious phase or something. But I'm a vegetarian, because I think it's entirely wrong to use animals for our own entertainment. They're living too, they just don't have a voice.

As for the past; I'm not particularly sure for decades ago. But in this century, things have been easier than ever. You can get fake meatballs at the grocery store. Ironic, a bit? Yeah, but, my point is, you can almost get anything you want in tofu or soybean form- without any animal cruelty involved.

Answer 4

Wow, a lot of questions at once to consider:-)

I think most people appreciate what they've got and realise that, through the accident of birth, they happened to be born somewhere where there is regular crop failure then their lives would be very different.

Also, food riots aren't a new thing - they've been going on for 1000s of years. It's just that the location of them changes from time to time depending on where food is scarce.

I don't think the west is decadent either, only a few people who are at the top of the wealth pyramid who have let wealth go to their heads. Similarly I don't think the east is better or worse than us in the west. I think both places have their faults and virtues.

Having studied the last 1000 years of history at A-level and degree I think we in the west have come an incredibly long way in terms of equal rights and quality of life. Hope this goes some way to answering all your questions.

Answer 5

If nature had intended humans to be herbivores our teeth would have developed differently.

I think all you Vegans are on a par with religeous nuts.

Answer 6

No, vegetarianism is no more a viable option than my diet.   I was able to follow this rant until the following statement > a western decadence<  And the it became a very biased rant.

Are you willing to go live in the Amazon with their medicine.  Are you willing to die young like the majority of them.  Are you aware of the number of square miles they must have to sustain their lifestyle.