Where on the Scale are Militant Vegans?

[MM1988]

They should be green because they have so much emphaty that they care about every animal, yet they do things that seem very psychologically immature like starting fights with people who are fishing, or throwing blood at customers.

 

I mean, I'm a politically left and symphatize with a lot of green ideas but how exactly are these People ABOVE me?

[Soulbass]

My guess is : Green.

Does it mean a Vegan become "yellow" when he/she eat animal products again ?

Depending on circumstances, it doesn't have to be an "ego" thing (don't tell everybody you'r vegan or vegetarian).

When I'm at home with family, I eat whatever is cooked, even tho I don't eat meat (especially beef & pork) when I'm on my own.

I eat fish (small fishes) and chicken from time to time. I've heard big fishes have mercury in it.

[MM1988]

But how can a yelling hysteric vegan throwing blood buckets be more psychologically mature than a stage blue fisherman calmly going about his day?

 Something doesnt make sense here for me.

[Soulbass]

There is "good" and "bad" in every stages. By that I mean reasonable and extreme people.

I think your judgement/criticizing is a good example of violence, for yourself.

[Rilles]

every stage has healthy/unhealthy parts,  An African Purple tribe circumcising women is just as bad as an Orange company tearing down the jungle they live in. 

[Hero of Time]

I do not simply exist at one zone. My zone is an average of where I am in my entire value and belief system.

What one decides to eat is one part of a person’s value system. You might find a person who is very blue in their belief about marriage while being very green about what they eat, while dipping into yellow when it comes to accepting the value of others’ belief systems.

It seems to me to be a mistake to place a person in a zone based on a singular belief system.

 

 

 

[Ed76]

Have you ever heard  of a straw man argument.....

 

[Ed76]

How can a thinking adult who derives his income from plundering the living oceans..tearing out sentient beings who like him want to be happy....decapitating them, gutting them...feasting on their flesh.....motivated only by greed, taste and culture, - be above a simple vegan..tending their allotment and  eating  some beans?

-Thats a demonstration (you caricature a position in order to knock  it down and make it look ridiculous) 

If you look up - The Banality  Of Evil - you can see  the even the most extreme acts of cruelty can be conducted with an air of ease and - 'business as usual' - That what Orange does best!..

Anyway who needs buckets of blood these days when - you have footage of slaughter houses - Probably water off a ducks back for most Oranges though.....Meat...GOOD,    Chicken...GOOD..... Bacon & sausages GOOD.....why identify with farm animals....im not one!

 

 

[Leo Gura]

What you have to understand about such Green people is that they are doing it out of an ideal of equality, in reaction against Blue & Orange.

They really care about the animals. So much so that it goes overboard.

Green cares too much, you could say. That is its strength and weakness.

The life of an animal is worth more than throwing blood on some customer -- in Green's eyes. You can't put a price on life.

They are more conscious than you in the sense that they see the equality of all life. An ego-filled person cannot see that an ant is worth as much as a human.

[Ether]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

What you have to understand about such Green people is that they are doing it out of an ideal of equality, in reaction against Blue & Orange.

They really care about the animals. So much so that it go overboard.

Green cares too much, you could say. That is its strength and weakness.

Its not that they worry too much, its that their worry turns into dislike, that dislike into hate.

 

Edited June 25, 2018 by Ether
a

[Charlotte]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

They really care about the animals. So much so that it go overboard.

Green cares too much, you could say. That is its strength and weakness.

This is part of my life summed up in 2 small paragraphs

[Socrates]

@MM1988 I was thinking about this and the vegans you are trying to portrait are 1 out of a million, those people have just turned veganism into a kind of crusade and react emotionally. To get you to understand it, imagine if someone murdered a loved one of yours in front of you, how would you react? calmly? It's exactly the same here, every time they see something non-vegan they see murder and react emotionally. Although we are totally green as vegans some people overdo it. Don't get it mistaken though, someone who is shaking the boat is not a "bad guy". We need people to disrupt the status quo, and the fact people get upset is proof that we are correct and some change needs to occur. Why don't you notice the fact that people get extremely defensive and sometimes act aggressively against just vegan dialogue, that's because we hit their meat-eating indoctrination to the nerve and the cognitive dissonance triggers flight or fight mode. Change comes from civil dialogue. The conservatives hold the mankind back, not the progressives.

[Socrates]

@Etagnwo Obviously challenging your lifestyle is interpreted as an attack on you and people don't have the foresight that by being challenged they can grow.

[Sea]

Yeah, and Vegans aren't even the worst example of the so-called green stage. After thinking long about it, I just don't see a way for me to believe in spiral dynamics. It's too simplistic of a model.

[Leo Gura]

Stop judging Green, and maybe then you'll have a shot at growing into it.

Green consciousness is quite evolved. Orange cannot fathom the shift that opens up Green. It's a pretty radical shift. You're not going to get to it through logic or debate or science. You must open your heart.

The difference between Orange and Green is that Green has opened his heart and Orange denies there is such a thing.

Don't think you can just skip over Green. It will take many of you Orange people 5 to 10 years of work before you start to see what Green is really about.

If you're thinking that Green is about becoming a militant vegan, you're totally missing the point.

[Zweistein]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Stop judging Green, and maybe then you'll have a shot at growing into it.

Green consciousness is quite evolved. Orange cannot fathom the shift that opens up Green. It's a pretty radical shift. You're not going to get to it through logic or debate or science. You must open your heart.

The difference between Orange and Green is that Green has opened his heart and Orange denies there is such a thing.

Don't think you can just skip over Green. It will take many of you Orange people 5 to 10 years of work before you start to see what Green is really about.

If you're thinking that Green is about becoming a militant vegan, you're totally missing the point.

@Leo Gura 

Here I=you=we are back at moralizing, lol. Now turn your statement around ("Byron Katie -style")

Can you see the brilliance of it?

Have you stopped judging Green?

Have you opened your heart?

We are almost there ?

[Scholar]

I don't know if being vegan necessarily equates to being stage green. I would say the root of vegan philosophy is probably a stage green personality product but the adoption of it can easily be done by stage blue or orange. Though I don't know, it's strange that there are people who simply do not understand the vegan argument and that there are others who easily do. I guess a stage green personality would more easily adopt it?

There are a lot of vegans who lose motivation and then stop being vegans, but I think they are usually mostly orange people. The argument is usually health, though you can mostly tell that it is an excuse due to the fact that they do not consume non-sentient meat sources instead, like mussels. That's when you know they don't even really want to try, though it's probably a simplification of what really is happening in their minds. I can only say how it is for me personally, but I don't struggle whatsoever while being a vegan. For me it's common sense, at this point I even get confused by people having the capacity to choose pleasure over the absence of suffering and death of other almost same level-sentience beings. To me it's on the common-sense level of not raping someone. It's simply not a struggle, and I don't even identify as vegan at all.

Though I am a little confused about one thing. There are many stage green people who seem to have never been stage orange, like for example SJW-types or as you'd call "militant"-vegans. I feel like a lot of these people are the exact opposite of stage orange, like people who have been bullied in school and didn't take care of themselves, and put their frustration into group identity thinking. Though I don't know if these people would be stage blue or green? They clearly haven't gone through stage orange, unless I misunderstand something about that process, though they do try to protect minority groups. Is it possible that this could be a part of stage blue thinking as well? They are usually very angry about injustice, and I would say that is more of a blue quality, so maybe militant vegans are also stage blue as they are motivated by injustice primarily?

In fact, I just checked out a chart about spiral dynamics, stage has these as negative traits:

"Shy, lonely, isolated, lack of empathy, bitter, critical.", which is a perfect description of SJWs and probably of most militant vegans, too. So I think it comes down to stage blue and stage green both adoption the same philosophy and acting differently, because they both are group oriented thinkers. Of course stage blue are probably not as empathetic so they will not as often encompass other species into their empathetic spectrum as stage green do, so that is why militant vegans are the small minority among vegans in general. Ex-vegans are explained due to stage orange personalities being motivated to be vegan to "be a better version of themselves" and to "not harm the environment because it's irrational and will in the end harm the human species". These are actually two arguments that you hear very often from people, that eating meat is so destructive for the environment, when you then ask them why that is a bad thing, they will argue that it will have negative consequences for the entire human species, including themselves and their own agenda. So they are becoming vegan out of a selfish argumentation over an empathetic one. The destruction itself is not the problem, but the consequences it will have for them, or how it will make them look if they support such destruction. That is why once the veganism becomes an annoyance, or they lose motivation, they go back to being non-vegan.

I remember I once suspected Leo to be motivated in the same way when he posted a video on his blog about the ecology. He argued that you would need to be ecological to be a developed human, which to me sounds very much like stage orange reasoning. It's still self-centered, but maybe I am actually confusing it with stage yellow. Either way, from a stage green perspective, if I am correct about my analysis that I actually am partly stage green, it does not really require reason to be ecological. You simply look at the destruction and you make the decision not to be part of it, to the extend that you can, the same way you would not rape someone. It's not something that you need to rationalize at all. You see the suffering you are causing and you don't do it anymore. I think this is actually a good pointer to a stage green person, you simply have to show them a video of what is happening and they will themselves change their actions. With lower stages you will need to use philosophy to explain to them why it's "bad", unhealthy, not good for the environment and thus not good for humans etc.

 

Edited June 27, 2018 by Scholar

[Sea]

@Scholar That sounds like a No True Scotsman fallacy. Here is a video of Lierre Keith, she was both vegan and an ardent feminist (still is the latter afaik, I hope this this is enough to show she's in green), but ceased to be vegan due to deteriorating health: 

 

[Scholar]

3 hours ago, Sea said:

@Scholar That sounds like a No True Scotsman fallacy. Here is a video of Lierre Keith, she was both vegan and an ardent feminist (still is the latter afaik, I hope this this is enough to show she's in green), but ceased to be vegan due to deteriorating health: 

 

As I said in my post, the reason why that is most likely not the case is because she could simply eat mussels, a non-sentience meat source that wouldn't cause direct harm. The fact that she either didn't research it or is not willing to make the pleasure sacrifice is already enough to tell me about her character, but I did actually listen to a debate with her once and I disagree that she is green, I would say she is mostly yellow and partly green. Though I don't think it is necessary to be vegan for someone to be green, I do think that she is not genuine.

And I'm not sure if that is correct, but it seems like she went vegan for personal health, which is not necessarily green thinking at all. And I also disagree that being a feminist makes you green, I would consider it more of a yellow movement (individual freedoms for your own ingroup), if you are a male and you are a feminist, you are more likely to be green.

Edited June 27, 2018 by Scholar

[Sea]

@Scholar "Mostly yellow and partly green" - yellow is above green so wouldn't that make her more conscious? Or do you mean orange?