We should present veganism as commendable, and offsetting as a legitimate stopping point for individual supporters.
I like the concept here, though Iâm a little sceptical that itâll lead to the best consequences because Veganism might just be a simpler idea than Offsetting.
AFAIK the idea of offsetting was first shared in reference to emissions from flights. My (non quantitative) take is that this wasnât very successful. A lot of flights offer some sort of charity donation at the end of the purchasing process, but they donât usually make the claim that you are offsetting your specific flight, and I donât think it would commonly be accepted by people who care about the climate that it is morally neutral to take a flight if you offset it. If anything it would generate more ireâyou are covering your ass.
Iâm hopeful that this could go better with Veganism, but this scepticism (and my falsifiable take on the non-success of offsets for flights) mean Iâm only a weak agree.
Would you say your skepticism is mainly tied into the specific framing of âoffsettingâ as opposed to just donating? How would your answer change if the offset framing was dropped and it was just a plain donation ask?
I was surprised (and I assume Farmkind was too) that the Rethink survey found specifically contrasting donations against diet change didnât have any positive effect. If that pans out in the real world and the Veganuary offsetting campaign doesnât have better results than Farmkindâs normal donation asks, I wonder how different it would seem to folks to just have an identity around donating as âmembershipâ in the movement, similar to the NRA, Sierra Club, and other mass membership movement organizations.
Would you say your skepticism is mainly tied into the specific framing of âoffsettingâ as opposed to just donating? How would your answer change if the offset framing was dropped and it was just a plain donation ask?
I think if it is just donating then there isnât anything very revolutionary here⊠animal welfare charities donât only market to vegetarian/âvegans.
I both take it to be true that offsetting is the new and exciting angle here, and that common sense morality doesnât have much of a place for offsetting.
On the identity thingâI think there is something there, though for âmembershipâ to work weâd need to somehow change the identity of members quite a bit. A non veggy/âvegan farm animal welfare member is a bit like an NRA member who doesnât allow guns in the house, or a Sierra Club member who drives a gas guzzler and doesnât recycle. Consequentially not that contradictory, but identity-wise, a bit dissonant.
I like the concept here, though Iâm a little sceptical that itâll lead to the best consequences because Veganism might just be a simpler idea than Offsetting.
AFAIK the idea of offsetting was first shared in reference to emissions from flights. My (non quantitative) take is that this wasnât very successful. A lot of flights offer some sort of charity donation at the end of the purchasing process, but they donât usually make the claim that you are offsetting your specific flight, and I donât think it would commonly be accepted by people who care about the climate that it is morally neutral to take a flight if you offset it. If anything it would generate more ireâyou are covering your ass.
Iâm hopeful that this could go better with Veganism, but this scepticism (and my falsifiable take on the non-success of offsets for flights) mean Iâm only a weak agree.
Would you say your skepticism is mainly tied into the specific framing of âoffsettingâ as opposed to just donating? How would your answer change if the offset framing was dropped and it was just a plain donation ask?
I was surprised (and I assume Farmkind was too) that the Rethink survey found specifically contrasting donations against diet change didnât have any positive effect. If that pans out in the real world and the Veganuary offsetting campaign doesnât have better results than Farmkindâs normal donation asks, I wonder how different it would seem to folks to just have an identity around donating as âmembershipâ in the movement, similar to the NRA, Sierra Club, and other mass membership movement organizations.
I think if it is just donating then there isnât anything very revolutionary here⊠animal welfare charities donât only market to vegetarian/âvegans.
I both take it to be true that offsetting is the new and exciting angle here, and that common sense morality doesnât have much of a place for offsetting.
On the identity thingâI think there is something there, though for âmembershipâ to work weâd need to somehow change the identity of members quite a bit. A non veggy/âvegan farm animal welfare member is a bit like an NRA member who doesnât allow guns in the house, or a Sierra Club member who drives a gas guzzler and doesnât recycle. Consequentially not that contradictory, but identity-wise, a bit dissonant.