We ban cannabis [and other psychedelics] but let people eat as much meat as they want. That makes… [rather limited] sense.
But the reason we have prohibition is nothing to do with preventing social harm. It’s about the queasiness politicians feel about legalising something that they perceive still has a huge social stigma attached, even though the public is now firmly in favour of legalisation … It’s perhaps not surprising that [current “war on some drugs”) prohibition is based on social… [correctness] rather than rationality.
Which brings me to the vegan burger. Take a step back and it seems bonkers that our political leaders hold firm on outlawing weed but seem loth to invoke the… State where it’s most needed: in avoiding catastrophic climate change. We won’t succeed in this unless we persuade people to fly less and eat less meat and dairy. That’s a gargantuan task, made harder by the demotivating knowledge that your own efforts are only likely to matter if others match them. Yet the most politicians do is half-heartedly conjure up a few green taxes in the hope they’ll nudge people in the sort of right direction. But they’re not effective enough, and also hit the poorest most. [Is it] Time for the [State] to get more radical? …Should [we] start by banning altogether things that have literally no function, such as bottled water in a country where it’s actually safer to drink tap water. And take a leaf out of wartime Britain – climate change is no less existential a threat – and ration activities such as flying and eating meat.
Original Article (The Guardian):
We ban cannabis but let people eat as much meat as they want. That makes no sense.
Artwork Fair Use: Jem Yoshioka