Quote:
Originally Posted by neotsu  I understood the message. I just find that negativity, or more specifically, having somebody trying to induce negative emotions..... |
Imo, the accusation or link between egg eaters and Nazis is ludicrous for many reasons.
As to WHY the comparison was made, there could be several reasons. I'll start by giving the benefit of the doubt. It could be because Steve actually believes what he wrote; despite the fact that a huge majority would disagree and many would take offense. If he does; then I think he needs a bit more "conscious growth" because he has no clue what motivates those who eat eggs; where they get them, etc. It would be presumptuous to actually believe such an assertion IMO.
I don't take offense personally, but I do find it quite a stretch to make that connection. Maybe there's something else going on; I don't know for sure; and may not because he hasn't really said so if there is.
It may be for shock value; to spur web traffic and generate some clicks. Use of the term "Nazi" often creates an emotional; defensive response from people, which is a perfectly natural response to being insulted, or having judgments made about you from someone who doesn't even know you, what you believe or why you make the choices you do. Some find that akin to being nosy and getting into the business of others where it doesn't belong; especially when it's unsolicited.
It may be to vent some of his own anger or frustration about somehting, but if that's the case, it's unlikely that anyone will ever know.
I can't help but think about the separation thread and Steve's responses to people making judgments about him when they don't know, yet he's making judgments about those who eat a particular food. That's just inconsistent. It's looks like a classic "do as I say; not as I do" stance; despite the fact that everyone on this board was INVITED to share their views and opinions on the separation blog post by Steve himself.
The Nazi analogy is so overused these days, that it no longer even has the impact that it used to. Everyone's a Nazi these days for one reason or another it seems. I doubt that many even think the assertion through completely. They may think about Hitler for a moment or two and maybe picture a few images of the holocaust or maybe a concentration camp in their minds, but they probably don't think long and hard enough to put themselves in the shoes of the victims and try and imagine how they must have felt; being slaughtered because they didn't rate high enough in Hitler's twisted society.
As I posted in the actual "Egg Nazi" thread, to compare modern day egg production to the intentional, government sanctioned, racist/bigotry/prejudice/religious intolerance based, wholesale slaughter of innocent humans on a massive scale, all over Europe is ridiculous. Sure, you could say that chickens are rounded up and shipped off to be killed at some plant, but humans eat the products that are produced.
There is a purpose and an end product to egg production. It's called food. Food production isn't always pretty, but it's something that humans do in order to stay alive.
When we go to the store and buy packaged meats, we typically don't think about the blood and the guts that were removed and the death that occurred before it was packaged and put on display.
In Hitler's cruel world, humans weren't killed to provide nutrition or any real benefit to other humans or to ensure that others may stay alive. They were slaughtered as a result of Hitler's hatred of those who by birthright; were unfortunate enough to be born outside of the "super race".
I can't make a judgment call as to whether someone eating eggs is doing something bad, or wrong, but I can pose a question to make everyone think, and answer that question for themselves.
It boils down to whether or not humans are "better" than animals, plants, etc.
So , the question is; instead of having eggs for breakfast tomorrow or next year, who would choose to kill and eat their child, their spouse, their best friend instead?? If not; WHY not??
If we're no better or no worse than the other members of the animal and plant kingdoms, then killing and eating our family and/or friends should be no more difficult than eating an egg, a chicken or a tomato sandwich.
We could even make the question a bit less shocking and reduce that choice down to eating either eggs, or our dogs and cats, or hamsters or Guinea Pigs; or favorite pet, or even the horse down the road that we have no attachment to, but we know that someone else probably does. The analogy is still the same. Why do we choose one living thing over another?? It has to be because we place a higher value on one of the two, or three or a thousand. There is no other reason.
AS to the "why" of the original assertion and comparison in the original blog post, we can all speculate but only Steve can supply the final and true answer because it was his question based on his beliefs.
But, it ultimately seems to still boil down to one or two questions; "what is the value of human life as compared to other creatures and are we wrong, or is it truly unethical to produce and harvest our food the way we do"??
These are ethical and moral questions, and if; according to Steve's belief system that we live in a subjective universe that exists to ultimately serve us and our own growth and happiness; as well as our needs and/or desires, then morality HAS TO BE subjective as well along with everything else, or the whole subjective reality theory falls flat on it's face so no; this issue is neither right or wrong in a subjective universe or subjective version of reality according to Steve's own claims. There can be no true morality in such a world; only what we choose to be moral, immoral or amoral will fall into those categories, and each one of us can choose what is right or wrong to us.
The notion of "do no harm" also falls flat in a subjective world, because one man's harm is another's good deed, or benefit. Morality cannot exist in such a world; so killing chickens or eating eggs, or killing your son or daughter is of no consequence at all, because there is no right; and no wrong. I can't help but wonder if Hitler himself held a similar view of reality; because what most of us consider 'wrong" didn't seem to matter to him at all; which his actions have clearly shown.
I don't buy into that view personally because common sense shows me how bad such a model would be if it were true, but this Nazi/egg issue has caused me to ask some questions about a few different things during the course of trying to figure out the "why" of the post. That too could be the reason that the post was made and the questions posed; to make us think; but not necessarily about chickens, eggs and Nazis, but about bigger things; such as who we really are and the nature of reality.
If that was the original intent of the post; it definitely worked; and it also showed me personally that subjective reality is something I don't believe in (not that I did, but I'm even more convinced now that I don't and won't) and that SR is a model that I would definitely not want to live under. When it comes to morality and right and/or wrong, it just falls very short because it negates true morality and the concept of right and wrong.
In a subjective world, anything goes, which means that we can hurt anyone or anything with no worries about whether our actions are right or wrong. We all know better; that right and wrong in fact DO exist at some level; despite the fact that these concepts do differ at times and sometimes change over time; but there are certain things that almost everyone considers right or wrong, like murdering and torturing children and many other things so; thanks for the post Steve; it was mildly enlightening and made me really think about; and reject the concept of SR; even if I actually missed your original intent and motivation behind the original post.