the ethics of food : eating : what’s wrong with vegan convenience foods?

Vegan convenience foods are a nice starter for anybody who wants to turn planty in their eating behaviour. But in the long run I assume that any vegan person will find out about the limitations of a dependency on ready-made foods.

First: preparing foods is an important part of learning about foods and their nutritional values.
Secondly, vegan foods should be affordable; a lot of those nice and tasty convenience foods tend to cost more than we should or can spend on our daily eating habits.

If we want to inform others about our vegan lifestyle, we should keep in mind that many people can’t spend tons of money on foods and we should gain ourselves and pass on an informed healthy eating plan.

I myself just started a recipe site, mainly cos of the reason that I want to spread the idea of understanding vegan cooking as something basic and healthy in it’s very straight and pure form.

Learning how to use herbs and spices, using staple foods to get the right nutritional benefits that a vegan diet should ideally entail. Learning about how to prepare foods in a reasonable way, that’s what i think needs some focus.

My recipe site is in German (the link to it is on the right sidebar), but maybe some of you guys get the idea also and share it.


some people think they should put as much money as possible into supporting vegan products and companies. Sure, but supporting sanctuaries still ought to have the highest priority before anything else.

universities – ‘institutionalized’ thinking

Universities – ‘institutionalized’ thinking

Why criticize universities, they are the only real location where you can develop your free thinking together with others on an intelligent and sensible plane … ???

The reality of universities is more than an ambiguous one. Hanging between reasonable discourse and hierarchical oppression. Language, logics, proof, deduction, induction, theories, argumentation, discussions cloak so many truths unspoken of.

Without the noble and legitimate dress

a naked truth glimpses through, that seeks to escape another type of truth. One that you can only find in the nightlight, within the space inbetween being and notbeing.

… but compassion


is not something
that’s FELT from a higher position up

imagine your are in a prison
feeling compassion for your tortured co-inmate

you feel her/his pain, because you
You KNOW their pain.

when I feel sorrow for somebody I can’t understand, then my understanding might stay on the level of only feeling pity for somebody who suffers an injustice or fate that I wouldn’t want to suffer. I stay distanced to him or her.

when I feel the PANGS of compassionate feelings, that only those kinds of feelings can produce, then an understanding must have preceded this emotional response in me.


All included

the political ramifications of:

what I say, whereever I happen to be
what I do where I am
how i decide, and how I come to a decision
how I influence my environment posivitely

You say that only politcal parties are political?
I say:

whatever you do, and whatever I do
has political ramifications
on the grassroots level
no matter what

It depends on what you consider “political” to be.

The plane in life of deeds and words is a large and impactful one.

Why Suckerberg is a speciesist? Cos there are too many of them

Why AR people in particular should not use Facebook and start using Diaspora

A person doesn’t even have to have a “typical” blemish on his track record in regards to human rights or environmental issues to be proven on the wrong side of morality.

Being a pronounced speciesist is a problem that should make us AR people take a decision on such a morally vain person, especially if the person even acts up upon his or her speciesist attitudes and actually engages in harming and/or killing nonhuman animals.

Facebook makes politics with the individual image of it’s founder Suckerberg. And exactly that’s why you should take his “personal activities” serious enough to leave the services of his company FB alone, if you were ever on there or freeze your usage of it down to a minimum.

Suckerberg stands for the individual that explicitly socially lives out our commonday societal collective egotism. And he is hiped exactly for this. Socially shared egotism is the “social” phenomenon that FB triggered most predominantly. (Someone rightly noted that FB tuned the term “to LIKE something” into a useless word, an interesting observation about the warped psychology of Facebook and its users.)

UPC’s Karen Davis has written about Suckerbergs speciesism and she sheds a light on the gruesomeness of his stance towards nonhuman animals life:

Both, our views on the world based on an abstract scientifically led philosophy of life-as-a-whole and otherwise also our religiously influenced views, they both fail to allow a non-homoncentric approach towards our co-species. If a person is set within either a biologically driven view or stands in a religious tradition of one of the abrahamic religions at least, we can probably not expect him or her to understand more of the world than that it should be subjugated to what we suppose to be the human concern. This is a gigantic problem.

(Also, a person being rich and enormously skilful in these our societies, does not prove for this person not to be a whackjob at the most important moral concerns.)

Well, and for the sake of it, let’s take a look at Suckerbergs human rights track anyway. In which way is FB involved in human rights violations “indirectly” …

This video by gives you an overall idea

Diaspora* Next Online Revolution

To close this, see the Diaspora creators and join a pod or set a branch up yourself

the privacy aware, personally controlled, do-it-all distributed open source social network