If you make eating meat an ideology, that is merely an opinion, a cognitive structure that finds ego's way to justify this. As far as I have understood - reading on animal philosophy, vegan lifestyle, and vipassana meditation - meat eating can be both necessary but also avoidable.

First one does not need to eat meat everyday as some of you may be doing. This is merely the development of the last century, as before humans ate very different assortment of things, as meat was not available in such animal farm quantities. And this bring me to the point of animal suffering: these farms have not been here either until very recently. In long term, they will produce viruses that will kill these farms, and demand a lot of water that will also not be renewed in such a fast pace as what meat eaters want. No need to believe this, as nature knows best how to balance the equation.

Regardless of the philosophical accounts, one can also argue that meat eating may or may not be good and/or necessary for the body and mind. Certainly the proteins are superior to any other plant-based proteins, but then again, I consider myself very, very athletic and muscular, meaning that my soyproteins were very much enough for muscle building. And as such, meat is not needed.

But how does meat eating make you feel? This is the question. I have cravings for meat, but not everyday. Mothers who nurture kids need iron and feel the need for meat. A balanced lifestyle is needed, but eating meat in large quantities every day is linked to cancer and other cardiovascular diseases. So there is that research as well. One should think food as feeling it in the body, as the body requires. Not as identifying with this group or that group. I know friends who have stomach problems with soy-based or vegetable-based foods. So they must eat meat. Can't help.

In the end, we are what we eat. It would best for humankind to be more connected to nature. For meat eaters, this would imply that you kill the pig yourself. Would you be able to do it? Grow the pig for many years, take care of it, feed it in your own little countryside, make friends with it even, and then look it into the eyes kill it at the end. Skin it, bone it, cut the meat, freeze it. Would you be able to do it? Very few of us would be. We are not all butchers. We have given this position to other people, as capitalism wants us to do. Specialisation.

It is as though we rely on third-parties, as we do with banks. We don't want to know how money works, as much as we don't want to hear or see animal suffering, as we eat it.

I could go on and on, but you get the point.

Be happy.

ville. www.kokkomaki.com

test

Hi @_arshbot, I share your thoughts. I also wrote about this in my blog www.kokkomaki.com . I worked at a crypto custody company, read lots of regulation and upcoming changes (TRP, MiCA, and all FATF suggestions), and came to the same conclusion: Bitcoin is neutered effectively. It is a dystopia compared to the original dream. Only outlaws will have privacy.

However, I do not think it is an attack per se. Or yes, regulators know what they are doing and to whom. Yet I believe it is more akin to path-dependence and adapting crypto to the existing system of regulations and financial institutions. Thus, it is more neutral act than as if there was a targeted and coordinated attack.

Bitcoin is certainly becoming a walled garden in the US, EU and China. But it need not be elsewhere.