Sometimes, I go back to a webcomic that I’ve reviewed to see what the artist has done with it since. I decided to check out Vegan Artbook, and found that it had two updates, one of which addresses a point that I’ve made in the review.
As much as I’d like to think that this means that the author has read the review and has taken it to heart, taking it as an impetus to improve, if you were to read her latest update, you’d see that this is not the case. The point that I made was that veganism propagated through dishonesty and predation on ignorance.
Here is what Vegan Artbook has to say about that:
You can see what I meant about the comic declining in artistic quality, but that’s not what I’m arguing against here.
Putting aside that she speaks of meat and vegetable industries as though they were in competition, the main problem with her argument (putting aside her incessant use of straw man fallacies) is her use of cherry-picking, which stands out like neon breast implants. She mentions those huge celery, pear, grape, and peach industries as those who don’t “hire PR agencies to write newspaper articles for them every week”. This says nothing of the apple industry, or for that matter the broccoli, turnip, mushroom, or even the mammoth, heartless, soulless zucchini industry, with their briefcases packed with freshly-printed hundred dollar bills. Did she leave them out because they do this?
I know that the typical vegan worldview pictures the meat and vegetable industries as being in some kind of competition. But in reality, the two fall under the banner of “agriculture”, and are happily married. They do stuff with each other, and they even have awesome children such as hamburgers. And jockish duds such as gummy candies.
So, why does the meat industry want PR articles written? The answer should be obvious: because vegans make up lies about them incessantly. Priya is the cause of the problem that she’s complaining about! What she’s doing is called defamation. However, it’s pretty hard for an industry to go after ordinary members of the public for a civil defamation suit. It’s more cost-effective to use PR to undo the damage that they cause.
No surprise; vegans lie to propagate their cause. Here are a few examples:
- A few years back, vegans said that eating meat made it more difficult for men to maintain an erection. If this were true, you’d think that vegans would make up a higher percentage of the population by now.
- They said that the Bible promotes a vegetarian lifestyle. It does not.
- They say that it takes N gallons of water to produce a pound of beef. Like with the gender wage gap, the fact that the number fluctuates so wildly indicates no consistent source, and someone is making it up.
- They also say that vegans are smarter. The vitamin deficiencies of a vegan diet directly results in irreversible neurological damage.
And there’s more. I can keep going. Their willingness to lie is symptomatic of the post-truth mentality that plagues left-wing fringe movements, which are already predisposed to the thinking that lies are justified if they somehow benefit the cause, rather than the liability they should be viewed as.
I’m going to conclude this with the same point that I’ve made in my review of Vegan Artbook:
If it’s necessary to lie to get people to accept what you’re trying to sell them, perhaps you shouldn’t believe it, either.