they’re eating an animal product. so, by the most basic definition of “exploit” which is as a synonym of “use”, yes.

gorillas are not vegan. they eat their butt cookies (an animal product), and they eat bugs. but besides that, veganism is an ethical stance, and there is no proof they have ever considered the ethics of animal exploitation.

if being vegan actual changed the animal ag industry and stopped it from growing, you might be right. it doesn’t, though.

what is human nature? whatever you say? well i say you’re wrong and human nature is working together for everyone’s benefit. i’ve also presented exactly as much evidence as you have.

one of it’s specific meanings is raising animals for food or other products.

agriculture

yes it is

word have meaning and by diluting “genocide” you are being dishonest and cheapening real genocides

you can’t kill something before its lifespan. when it dies, that is the end of its lifespan.

the goal isn’t to wipe them out. it’s not genocide

that is genocide

I’m not harassing or block evading. i don’t know how to clarify any further, honestly.

so far, I have only encountered one other user on this instance, and in two threads.

I browse by new comments, so I primarily encounter people with similar interests who have overlapping hours of use. I think it’s to be expected that would necessarily entail that I would encounter a limited number of users.

i told the admins exactly why i wanted a slrpnk.net account. i’m using it exactly as i explained i would.

so you don’t have proof

hmm… do you have any proof of this?

https://mastodon.social/@core@lemmy.blahaj.zone/112058113572030165

how hard is this?

new york times

washington post

given how ubiquitos links to these war-hawking publications are, your objection to al jazeera can’t be motivated by the fact that tehy are f unded by bad people. it must be something else.

From my perspective it seems like you are excusing authoritarian behavior under the guise that leftists do it for others and thus are obligated to do so for Hamas.

i never suggested any obligation. i’m saying that it’s unreasonable to disqualify factual reporting on the basis that you don’t like the people that funded it. object to the framing, or even to the actors themselves, but the reporting of facts is done by all kinds of actors, and it’s up to readers to understand biases in even factual reporting and come to their own conclusions.

What specific US based leftist media are you accusing

none, but there is plenty of us corporate and state sponsored propaganda posted in these communities and i don’t see accusations of shilling for the pentagon and cia being thrown around like the accusations of shilling for putin/trump

your characterization doesn’t determine the veracity of anyone’s politics.

what have they published that has been proven to be false?