#Animation Production Market Analysis

[lalsingh228-blog]

Animation Production Market Projected to Show Strong Growth

Global Animation Production Market Report from AMA Research highlights deep analysis on market characteristics, sizing, estimates and growth by segmentation, regional breakdowns & country along with competitive landscape, player’s market shares, and strategies that are key in the market. The exploration provides a 360° view and insights, highlighting major outcomes of the industry. These insights help the business decision-makers to formulate better business plans and make informed decisions to improved profitability. In addition, the study helps venture or private players in understanding the companies in more detail to make better informed decisions. Major Players in This Report Include, Walt Disney Studios (United States), DreamWorks Pictures (Amblin Entertainment) (United States), Warner Bros. (United States), Cartoon Network Studios (United States), Nickelodeon Animation Studio (United States), Illumination Mac Guff  (France), Moving Picture Company (Technicolor SA) (France), Sony Pictures Imageworks Inc. (Canada), Nippon Animation  (Japan), Sunrise Inc. (Japan), Industrial Light & Magic (Unites States), Toei Animation Co., Ltd. (Japan), Double Negative (United Kingdom), Studio Ghibli, Inc. (Tokuma Shoten) (Japan) Free Sample Report + All Related Graphs & Charts @: https://www.advancemarketanalytics.com/sample-report/92166-global-animation-production-market Animation production involves the process of designing, drawing and creating layouts and preparation of photographic sequences which are then integrated into multimedia and gaming products. There are various types of techniques and methods involves in animation production such as modeling, surfacing, rigging, layout preparation, and many other things. The animation production is basically the exploitation and management of still images or drawings to generate the illusional movement. The animation is widely used in media and entertainment, construction, healthcare, education industries. With the prevailing COVID 19 pandemic around the world, the animation production is steadily growing as the makers are still working, people are in quarantine at home and there is still an opportunity for the industry. Market Drivers

Increasing demand for high definition, immersive visual content for children as well as adults as a way of teaching and for entertainment which presents the content in an engaging way

Market Trend

Increasing Consumption of Animation Among Kids

Technical Advancement in Animation Production

Opportunities

Surging Demand for Animation Production Across the World While the COVID-19 Pandemic is Prevailing

The Emerging New Generation of Distribution Channels

Challenges

Lack of Awareness about Animation Production as a Career

Enquire for customization in Report @: https://www.advancemarketanalytics.com/enquiry-before-buy/92166-global-animation-production-market In this research study, the prime factors that are impelling the growth of the Global Animation Production market report have been studied thoroughly in a bid to estimate the overall value and the size of this market by the end of the forecast period. The impact of the driving forces, limitations, challenges, and opportunities has been examined extensively. The key trends that manage the interest of the customers have also been interpreted accurately for the benefit of the readers. The Animation Production market study is being classified by Application (Media and Entertainment, Construction and Architecture, Healthcare and Lifesciences, Education and Academia, Manufacturing, Others), Animation (Cel (Celluloid) Animation, 2D Animation, 3D Animation, Motion Graphics, Stop Motion), Method (Modeling, Surfacing, Rigging, Layout / Set dressing / Anim Prep, Character Animation, Others), Channels (Television, Smartphones, Head-Mounted Device, Others), End User (Kids, Adults) The report concludes with in-depth details on the business operations and financial structure of leading vendors in the Global Animation Production market report, Overview of Key trends in the past and present are in reports that are reported to be beneficial for companies looking for venture businesses in this market. Information about the various marketing channels and well-known distributors in this market was also provided here. This study serves as a rich guide for established players and new players in this market. Get Reasonable Discount on This Premium Report @ https://www.advancemarketanalytics.com/request-discount/92166-global-animation-production-market Extracts from Table of Contents Animation Production Market Research Report Chapter 1 Animation Production Market Overview Chapter 2 Global Economic Impact on Industry Chapter 3 Global Market Competition by Manufacturers Chapter 4 Global Revenue (Value, Volume*) by Region Chapter 5 Global Supplies (Production), Consumption, Export, Import by Regions Chapter 6 Global Revenue (Value, Volume*), Price* Trend by Type Chapter 7 Global Market Analysis by Application ………………….continued This report also analyzes the regulatory framework of the Global Markets Animation Production Market Report to inform stakeholders about the various norms, regulations, this can have an impact. It also collects in-depth information from the detailed primary and secondary research techniques analyzed using the most efficient analysis tools. Based on the statistics gained from this systematic study, market research provides estimates for market participants and readers. Contact US : Craig Francis (PR & Marketing Manager) AMA Research & Media LLP Unit No. 429, Parsonage Road Edison, NJ New Jersey USA – 08837 Phone: +1 201 565 3262, +44 161 818 8166 sales@advancemarketanalytics.com

[animal-care]

The Booming Global Animal Health Market

Market Overview

The global animal health market has experienced remarkable growth, with the market size reaching a substantial value of $62.4 billion in 2023. This robust market performance is projected to continue, with the market expected to grow at a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 9.0% from 2024 to 2030, ultimately reaching a market size of $97.5 billion by 2030.

Regional Dynamics

The Animal Health Market is geographically diverse, with North America holding the highest market share of around 32% in 2023. This can be attributed to the wide range of definitive measures adopted by government and animal welfare organizations in the region, promoting animal health and welfare. Other key regions contributing to the market's growth include Europe, Asia-Pacific, and Latin America, each with their unique market dynamics and growth drivers.

Market Segmentation

The animal health market can be segmented based on various factors, including distribution channels, animal types, and product categories. In terms of distribution channels, the market is dominated by the retail segment, accounting for the largest market share, followed by e-commerce and hospital/clinic pharmacies. By animal type, the market is further divided into production animals, such as poultry, swine, and cattle, as well as companion animals, including dogs, cats, and horses.

Key Players and Competitive Landscape

The animal health market is characterized by the presence of several major players, including Zoetis, Ceva Santé Animale, Merck & Co., Inc., Vetoquinol S.A., and Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH. These companies have established strong brand recognition, extensive product portfolios, and global reach, contributing to their dominant position in the market.

Drivers and Trends

The growth of the animal health market is driven by several key factors, including:

Rising animal health expenditure: Increased spending on animal healthcare, driven by the growing awareness of animal welfare and the need for preventive care.

Prevalence and incidence of animal diseases: The increasing prevalence of zoonotic diseases and the need for effective treatment and prevention measures.

Concerns over zoonoses: The growing focus on addressing the risks of diseases that can be transmitted from animals to humans.

Initiatives by key companies: Investments in research and development, product innovation, and strategic partnerships to expand market presence.

Pet humanization: The trend of treating pets as family members, leading to increased spending on their health and well-being.

Opportunities and Challenges

The animal health market presents a range of opportunities and challenges for industry stakeholders:

Opportunities:

Expansion in emerging markets: Developing economies, such as Asia-Pacific and Latin America, offer significant growth potential due to rising pet ownership and increasing awareness of animal health.

Technological advancements: The integration of digital technologies, such as telemedicine and data analytics, can enhance the delivery of animal healthcare services and improve overall market efficiency.

Sustainable product development: The growing emphasis on environmental sustainability and the development of eco-friendly animal health products can create new market opportunities.

Challenges:

Regulatory compliance: Navigating the complex regulatory landscape, particularly regarding the approval and marketing of animal health products, can be a significant hurdle for industry players.

Pricing pressures: Intense competition and the need to balance affordability with profitability can create pricing challenges for market participants.

Supply chain disruptions: Disruptions in the global supply chain, such as those caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, can impact the availability and distribution of animal health products.

Conclusion

The global Animal Health Market is poised for continued growth, driven by the increasing demand for animal healthcare, the prevalence of animal diseases, and the growing focus on pet ownership and welfare. By leveraging their expertise, technological capabilities, and strategic partnerships, industry players can capitalize on the opportunities presented by this dynamic market and address the challenges to drive long-term success.

[crop-protection-market]

Exploring the Animal Care Market: A Global View of Share, Growth, and Future Outlook

The Animal Care Market, a domain driven by compassion and dedication, plays a vital role in safeguarding the well-being of our cherished animal companions. This comprehensive overview dives into the intricacies of the Animal Care Market, encompassing analysis, demand dynamics, growth projections, challenges, and emerging trends.

Compassionate Care: Unveiling the Landscape of the Animal Care Market

Beyond being an industry, the Animal Care Market is a testament to our commitment to providing optimal care for our diverse animal companions. Analyzing its multifaceted nature reveals the delicate balance between technological advancements, regulatory compliance, and the unwavering dedication of caregivers. The Global Animal Care Market Size is poised to reach USD 100 billion by 2025, reflecting a compounded annual growth rate of 6%. Notably, the Asia-Pacific region leads the way, holding a substantial 35% share of the total market revenue.

Meeting the Demand: Addressing the Needs of Pets and Livestock

Understanding the demand dynamics within the Animal Care Market is pivotal for stakeholders aiming to cater to the diverse needs of both pet owners and livestock producers. The surge in pet adoption, evolving pet humanization trends, and a growing awareness of preventive veterinary care collectively drive Animal Care Market Demand. Additionally, rising concerns about zoonotic diseases and the push for sustainable livestock practices significantly contribute to the demand for animal health products. Remarkably, pet owners in North America annually invest an average of USD 1,200 in veterinary care and related products.

Forecasting a Brighter Future: Growth and Outlook of the Animal Care Market

Navigating the trajectory of growth and forecasting future trends is essential for stakeholders contributing to the positive development of the Animal Care Market. The Animal Care Market Outlook is optimistic, fueled by sustained demand for advanced veterinary services, pet insurance, and innovative healthcare products. Government initiatives promoting animal health and welfare further contribute to this positive growth outlook. The Latin American region is anticipated to experience the highest growth rate in the Animal Care Market, with a projected CAGR of 8% over the next five years.

Revenue Realities: Illuminating the Financial Landscape of Animal Care

Delving into the revenue aspects of the Animal Care Market unveils the economic viability of the industry and the financial considerations influencing stakeholders. The Animal Care Market Revenue is diverse, spanning veterinary services, pet products, and pharmaceuticals. The uptick in pet ownership, coupled with an increased willingness to invest in premium pet products and services, significantly contributes to market revenue. Veterinary services specifically contribute to 50% of the total Animal Care Market Revenue, showcasing the growing emphasis on professional healthcare for pets.

Sizing Up: Animal Care Market Size and Emerging Trends

Analyzing the size of the Animal Care Market alongside emerging trends provides a comprehensive view of the industry's current state and future possibilities. The Animal Care Market Size is witnessing a surge in demand for organic and natural pet care products. Notably, e-commerce platforms are gaining popularity for purchasing pet products, reflecting shifts in consumer buying behavior. Online sales of pet care products have witnessed a substantial 25% year-on-year increase, signaling the digital transformation of the Animal Care Market.

Challenges on the Horizon: Navigating Animal Care Market Challenges

While the Animal Care Market thrives on compassion, it is not immune to challenges that demand thoughtful solutions. Animal Care Market Challenges include regulatory complexities, the increasing need for skilled veterinarians, and ethical considerations surrounding animal testing. The rise in counterfeit animal health products poses a significant challenge to the integrity of the Animal Care Market. The shortage of skilled veterinarians, estimated at 20% in developing regions, impacts the accessibility of veterinary services.

The Ever-Changing Landscape of Animal Care Market Trends

Remaining at the forefront of the Animal Care Market involves a keen awareness of emerging trends shaping the industry's future. Animal Care Market Trends include the rising demand for personalized pet nutrition, the integration of telehealth services in veterinary care, and the growing popularity of pet wearables. Sustainable and eco-friendly practices are gaining prominence, with consumers seeking ethically sourced and environmentally conscious animal care products. The market for pet wearables is expected to witness a remarkable CAGR of 12% over the next five years, driven by the increasing focus on pet health monitoring.

Conclusion: A Commitment to Compassion and Innovation

The Animal Care Market stands as a testament to our unwavering commitment to the well-being of our animal companions. Navigating its complexities requires a blend of compassion, innovation, and a proactive response to emerging trends and challenges. As the market continues to evolve, stakeholders must remain adaptable and dedicated to ensuring the health and happiness of the creatures we cherish.

[playfulsparksp]

Easy Steps to Daily Market Your Product and Services

Contents to Market Your Product Basic Schedule Social Media Posts Market Your Product Direct Link to Your Product Email Marketing Blog Advanced Facebook Group Posts Job Boards Hiring Social Media Hiring Instagram Community Youtube Community Pinterest The Nice Things Post Work on Online Portfolio Communities Join Forums Cold Email These are our day-to-day marketing strategies for…

[jesncin]

Thinking about Disney and how we talk about Cultural Representation

(concept art by Scott Watanabe)

Old essay originally written on Cohost in November 2023. With additions.

With all the promo stuff about Disney's upcoming animated film Wish, I can't help but think about Raya and the Last Dragon again. I spent a year intensively researching things about that movie and the discourse surrounding it for a series of videos on Xiran Jay Zhao's channel, and oh boy did that reveal a lot about the current way we talk about cultural representation in casual media criticism.

Lately we've grown a habit of looking at signifiers to culture, things like a cultural dish, a nod to a martial arts style, a piece of clothing, maybe a hairstyle, a weapon and so on, and then projecting a bunch of intentions onto the work regardless of authorial intent. I witnessed this a bunch of times in discussions surrounding Raya and the Last Dragon.

You basically get a bunch of 4d chess-style justifications for the lazy implementation of culture in Raya.

random examples cuz there's too many to name:

The movie will do something like make the leaders of the villain nation women, and people immediately assumed it was some kind of bespoke reference to Minangkabau matriarchical society.

the art book of Raya specifically stated that they purposely misplaced things as a stylistic fantasy choice "we could take something that is known and place it in an unexpected location, like coral in the desert and cacti in the snow". But when people saw a water buffalo placed in the desert they assumed it was some super clever environmental story decision.

The movie will tell you it includes things like Borobudur, Angkor wat, Keris, and most people will take their word for it without hesitation. Never mind that Southeast Asians could barely recognize these nods to our culture through how amalgamated the designs are.

(early concept art by Scott Watanabe)

Moving forward, I think we need to talk less about "what" parts of a culture are being represented in these movies, and more about HOW they're being included, we need to ask:

What is this piece of media's relationship with the cultures it represents?

Because Raya and the Last Dragon is not a cultural movie, it's a monolith film pitched and written by white people and a Mexican director with 2 SEA writers added later in production to avoid backlash. Culture serves the purpose of aesthetic set dressing in the film, as opposed to something that informs its themes and characters.

it wasn't even initially pitched as a Southeast Asian movie. The white writers who pitched it were going for a vague East Asian sci fi fantasy story under the working title "Dragon Empire". Southeast Asian culture was an aesthetic change added much later.

This is what happens when a corporation tries to put representational value on a shallow aesthetic. Because of the way Disney constantly marketed Raya as this big authentic cultural film, it primes its audience to read cultural intention in the most benign details. And when we get lost in the details, we lose sight of the bigger picture.

Contextualizing Cultural media criticism

(visual development art by April Liu)

We need to start demanding more context in our analysis. The next time we see a reference to culture in media we consume, take a step back and ask what purpose it serves in the narrative. And most importantly!! What Is Its Relationship With The Culture It Represents? We shouldn't just accept things at face value.

start asking yourself,

through what lens is this cultural dish and its spicy flavors being presented to us? Are the customs surrounding the food being respected?

If martial arts or dance is represented, how is it translated in the adaptation? Are you getting generic hollywood-fu or are you seeing specific movements with purpose and motivation? Are the philosophies or spiritual contexts of these traditions present in the text?

Are the clothing, hairstyles, and presentation of the characters being de-yassified through a colonial filter? Is the non-conformity of the cultures' different framework for gender presentation being adjusted to fit a more recognizable binary?

If language is present, what role does it serve? Is it presented as other through being exclusively used by villainous beings? Is it being made a monolith as one "non-English" language?

is this temple actually a place of worship or is it just a set piece for a goddang Indiana jones booby trap action fight sequence

This way, instead of unquestionably defending a piece of media because a character wore a traditional outfit one time, or because some characters took their shoes off at a temple, or because there were Arnis sticks in that one fight scene, we can approach the text with a more nuanced and holistic understanding of how culture informs narrative.

To quote Haunani K. Trask (author of From A Native Daughter):

“Cultural people have to become political… Our culture can’t just be ornamental and recreational. That’s what Waikiki is. Our culture has to be the core of our resistance. The core of our anger. The core of our mana. That’s what culture is for.”

[hoelandah]

This will probably be my most controversial Homelander take:

As a black woman, TV!Homelander is accidentally the most "black man" coded white male character I've ever seen.

My reasoning and analysis is under the cut.

Let me preface that I'm aware that the subtext and mirroring I'm about to explain is likely not intentional in any way, shape, or form. Take this for the speculation and art analysis it is. This is also not Homelander apologia.

Warning: includes discussion of racial violence and SA.

Okay so. I'm one of those people who thinks that the Trump comparisons aren't correct. It's dead wrong. It's the writers and marketing clumsily trying to advertise the show by lampooning the conservatives. So, just leave the Homelander = Trump shit at the door.

1. His Dehumanization

It's no secret how much violence and dehumanization minorities go through. I'm going to elaborate on the specific markers of black male dehumanization.

Throughout European history the depiction and treatment of the black man has been "animal" and all the connotations that come with that word.

Violent. Stud. Low intelligence.

Black men were literally seen as not human. The idea of a black man having personhood would have genuinely been laughable to consider to whites in earlier history. They were no better than bulls.

Made to work. Made to breed. Made to be owned.

Homelander, like black men, never got the keys to "humanity." He was dehumanized before he was even a thought. A product of a "bull" that was so called "good stock" (Soldier Boy).

He was raised in isolation and abused by his owners to be ready to make his owners profit. His body was never his own. He's an asset. A product.

2. False/Conditional Privilege

Cut now to him debuting as The Homelander. Homelander is shallowly privileged by his looks and celebrity the same way black performers, particularly athletes, are: as long as they do the job. "Shut up and play, boy."

These teams are usually "owned" by rich white men. The black athlete should never do anything else but what they're paid to do. If they just do their job they get the conditional keys to "white male privilege." But only if they perform and never cause a stir or "take a knee."

During this time Homelander is groomed, intentionally and unintentionally, into what he is by everyone around him who only see him as a tool. And Homelander tries to always be "valued" in the public because what else does he have?

3. The Predatory Black Man Trope and "Jeromes" and "Tyrones"

Note: this section is likely reaching a little, take it with lots of salt.

This next section discusses the whole Becca thing.

Let the record show that I know and understand that Becca was raped. Full stop. I have some thoughts as to how much Homelander is aware of the gravity of what he did since he's a giant toddler whose moral compass has been made to point straight down to hell but it's obvious he does not care about how much he hurt her.

The show just puts some weird ass ambiguity around the whole incident. They don't really go into the specifics, we can only guess his motivations based on other women he's "been" with. And considering he legit didn't understand that Stillwell felt nothing but fear for him and he has no understanding of relationships or boundaries and his love for dominance due to deep insecurity he could totally think, in his fucked up mind, that he didn't do anything wrong.

"She's just a human, who cares? They use me, I use them." - Homelander, probably.

I just want it clear that I'm not exonerating him or minimizing Becca's hurt in this next section.

Anyway, this Becca situation loosely mirrors the "black men, "Jeromes" or "Tyrones" as some racists call them, are predators that prey on or seduce white women and give their husbands mixed babies" stereotype. And Butcher's hatred for Homelander never seems to be for Becca's sake. It's selfish, singly focused and possibly includes guilt and a sore ego.

It's also bigoted.

Superpowers or not supes are kind of minority coded like the X-Men. Think of them as an intersectional category like minorities that are rich or people with disabilities that need less support than people with more severe disabilities. Like sure, they'll like fair better in the current system but

The rich minority is still a minority.

The disabled person with less support needs is still disabled.

Vought (the elites) more or less run supes and they are assets. Many of them were injected with compound V as children by greedy or hopeful parents coerced by capitalism so it's a systemic issue.

It speaks to Butcher's character that Becca ran to Vought of all places and didn't tell her husband. He hates supes that much.

Homelander is then kept from that son like black men have been separated from their families, even after black men were no longer forcibly taken as away as slaves they were forced away by welfare policy that would only support black women if they weren't married. It was more feasible to never marry your man and tell welfare you were single because he didn't earn enough to take care of the family.

And likely Vought would have continued the cycle of violence with Ryan if Homelander had not found him. Vought wasn't gonna keep Becca and Ryan safe for free, I assure you.

4. He'll Never Be A "Real Man"

Homelander also occupies that "never quite a man" category that black men are put in. They're painted as dangerous and virile. They're "men" when they're a threat. Yet also belittled and never afforded real manhood. A "boy" when they're being looked down on. "Boy" is a touchy word for black men for this reason. It has as much history and hurt to them as more obvious slurs.

Homelander is lied to and belittled by Vought ofc. He's denied true manhood like them but is made to perform it to a cartoonish degree that I would argue he's actually not happy with. If Vought exists, he will never be free and will never live in genuine peace because his crimes will follow him. Ruling the world would be his only option and that would only "fix" so much.

They made sure he has no real tools or skills to actually run things effectively (he's confused during board meetings and doesn't understand shit). He was purposely made too intellectually incurious and emotionally stunted to truly learn (he deflects and gets angry). He's actually surprisingly inept in some ways. His only skill is that he's scary and dangerous.

High intelligence and manipulation are usually put down as his skills and like sure, he's far from dumb and he's really sneaky. Everyone around him is the most morally fucked liar to ever exist...but I'm gonna be real: his manipulation is not that impressive. Most of it is just intimidation. Folks don't wanna get lasered.

So, he substitutes this denied agency and lack applied skills with hyper violence, materialism, flashiness, cockiness, etc.

A "thug," basically.

"Thugs" are usually just young black men clamoring for real manhood in a world that will never give it to them so they sometimes turn to these things in disenfranchisement. Sometimes they become cops for the same reason.

5. "The Boys," as A Phrase Makes Me Think of Lynch Mobs

This one is pretty subjective so take it with salt as well.

"The boys" is harkening to calling for one's group. And due to Butcher's hard on for killing supes because of his hatred with his group it kind of puts me in the mind of posses of white men that would be informally gathered (sometimes even aided by law enforcement) to enact "retribution" on black men and boys "who have stepped out of line." See Emmet Till.

"Round up the boys, we're gonna hang us a..."

You know the rest.

If Butcher was fully depicted as the morally fucked protag he is in the comics this wouldn't bother me, thematically it would fit. But they hedge on Butcher's morality a little, making him less of a genuine bastard and more like someone with lapsed judgment or faculties who's the "lesser of two evils" so it's just uncomfortable.

Anyway, that's it. I'm just fascinated by the unintentional mirroring. This is likely why, even though Homelander is who he is, women, queer people and POC have a complex love/fascination for him. The only thing that makes him so hard to sympathize with is that his crimes are particularly abhorrent and physically he's more powerful than anyone else and a genuine threat.

I've never been so afraid to hit "Post" in my LIFE.

[dailyanarchistposts]

E.6 What is the population myth?

The idea that population growth is the key cause of ecological problems is extremely commonplace. Even individuals associated with such radical green groups as Earth First! have promoted it. It is, however, a gross distortion of the truth. Capitalism is the main cause of both overpopulation and the ecological crisis.

Firstly, we should point out that all the “doomsday” prophets of the “population bomb” have been proved wrong time and time again. The dire predictions of Thomas Malthus, the originator of the population myth, have not come true, yet neo-Malthusians continue to mouth his reactionary ideas. In fact Malthus wrote his infamous “Essay on the Principles of Population” which inflicted his “law of population” onto the world in response to the anarchist William Godwin and other social reformers. In other words, it was explicitly conceived as an attempt to “prove” that social stratification, and so the status quo, was a “law of nature” and that poverty was the fault of the poor themselves, not the fault of an unjust and authoritarian socio-economic system. As such, the “theory” was created with political goals in mind and as a weapon in the class struggle (as an aside, it should be noted that Darwin argued his theory of natural selection was “the doctrine of Malthus applied to the whole animal and vegetable kingdom.” [quoted by Peter Marshall, Nature’s Web, p. 320] In other words, anarchism, indirectly, inspired the theory of evolution. Perhaps unsurprisingly, in the form of Social Darwinism this was also used against working class people and social reform).

As Kropotkin summarised, Malthus work was “pernicious” in its influence. It “summed up ideas already current in the minds of the wealth-possessing minority” and arose to combat the “ideas of equality and liberty” awakened by the French and American revolutions. Malthus asserted against Godwin “that no equality is possible; that the poverty of the many is not due to institutions, but is a natural law.” This meant he “thus gave the rich a kind of scientific argument against the ideas of equality.” However, it was simply “a pseudo-scientific” assertion which reflected “the secret desires of the wealth-possessing classes” and not a scientific hypothesis. This is obvious as technology has ensured that Malthus’s fears are “groundless” while they are continually repeated. [Fields, Factories and Workshops Tomorrow, p. 77, p. 78 and p. 79]

That the theory was fundamentally ideological in nature can be seen from Malthus himself. It is interesting to note that in contrast, and in direct contradiction to his population “theory,” as an economist Malthus was worried about the danger of over-production within a capitalist economy. He was keen to defend the landlords from attacks by Ricardo and had to find a reason for their existence. To do this, he attacked Say’s Law (the notion that over-production was impossible in a free market economy). Utilising the notion of effective demand, he argued that capitalist saving caused the threat of over-production and it was the landlords luxury consumption which made up the deficit in demand this caused and ensured a stable economy. As Marxist David McNally points out, the “whole of this argument is completely at odds with the economic analysis” of his essay on population. According to that, the “chronic … danger which confronts society is underproduction of food relative to people.” In his economics book, the world “is threatened by overproduction. Rather than there being too little supply relative to demand, there is now too little demand relative to supply.” In fact, Malthus even went so far as to argue for the poor to be employed in building roads and public works! No mention of “excess” population there, which indicates well the ideological nature of his over-population theory. As McNally shows, it was the utility of Malthus’s practical conclusions in his “Essay on the Principles of Population” for fighting the poor law and the right to subsistence (i.e. welfare provisions) which explained his popularity: “he made classical economics an open enemy of the working class.” [“The Malthusian Moment: Political Economy versus Popular Radicalism”, pp. 62–103, Against the Market, p. 85 and p. 91]

So it is easy to explain the support Malthus and his assertions got in spite of the lack of empirical evidence and the self-contradictory utterances of its inventor. Its support rests simply in its utility as a justification for the inhuman miseries inflicted upon the British people by “its” ruling class of aristocrats and industrialists was the only reason why it was given the time of day. Similarly today, its utility to the ruling class ensures that it keeps surfacing every so often, until forced to disappear again once the actual facts of the case are raised. That the population myth, like “genetic” justifications for race-, class- and gender-based oppression, keeps appearing over and over again, even after extensive evidence has disproved it, indicates its usefulness to the ideological guardians of the establishment.

Neo-Malthusianism basically blames the victims of capitalism for their victimisation, criticising ordinary people for “breeding” or living too long, thus ignoring (at best) or justifying (usually) privilege — the social root of hunger. To put it simply, the hungry are hungry because they are excluded from the land or cannot earn enough to survive. In Latin America, for example, 11% of the population was landless in 1961, by 1975 it was 40%. Approximately 80% of all Third World agricultural land is owned by 3% of landowners. As anarchist George Bradford stresses, Malthusians “do not consider the questions of land ownership, the history of colonialism, and where social power lies. So when the poor demand their rights, the Malthusians see ‘political instability’ growing from population pressure.” [Woman’s Freedom: Key to the Population Question, p. 77] Bookchin makes a similar critique:

“the most sinister feature about neo-Malthusianism is the extent to which it actively deflects us from dealing with the social origins of our ecological problems — indeed, the extent to which it places the blame for them on the victims of hunger rather than those who victimise them. Presumably, if there is a ‘population problem’ and famine in Africa, it is the ordinary people who are to blame for having too many children or insisting on living too long — an argument advanced by Malthus nearly two centuries ago with respect to England’s poor. The viewpoint not only justifies privilege; it fosters brutalisation and degrades the neo-Malthusians even more than it degrades the victims of privilege.” [“The Population Myth”, pp. 30–48, Which Way for the Ecology Movement?, p. 34]

Increased population is not the cause of landlessness, it is the result of it. If a traditional culture, its values, and its sense of identity are destroyed, population growth rates increase dramatically. As in 17th- and 18th-century Britain, peasants in the Third World are kicked off their land by the local ruling elite, who then use the land to produce cash crops for export while their fellow country people starve. Like Ireland during the Potato Famine, the Third World nations most affected by famine have also been exporters of food to the developed nations. Malthusianism is handy for the wealthy, giving them a “scientific” excuse for the misery they cause so they can enjoy their blood-money without remorse. It is unwise for greens to repeat such arguments:

“It’s a betrayal of the entire message of social ecology to ask the world’s poor to deny themselves access to the necessities of life on grounds that involve long-range problems of ecological dislocation, the shortcomings of ‘high’ technology, and very specious claims of natural shortages in materials, while saying nothing at all about the artificial scarcity engineered by corporate capitalism.” [The Ecology of Freedom, p. 350]

In a country that is being introduced to the joys of capitalism by state intervention (the usual means by which traditional cultures and habits are destroyed to create a “natural system of liberty”), population soon explodes as a result of the poor social and economic conditions in which people find themselves. In the inner-city ghettos of the First World, social and economic conditions similar to those of the Third World give rise to similarly elevated birth rates. When ghetto populations are composed mostly of minorities, as in countries like the US, higher birth rates among the minority poor provides a convenient extra excuse for racism, “proving” that the affected minorities are “inferior” because they “lack self-control,” are “mere animals obsessed with procreation,” etc. Much the same was said of Irish Catholics in the past and, needless to say, such an argument ignores the fact that slum dwellers in, for example, Britain during the Industrial Revolution were virtually all white but still had high birth rates.

Population growth, far from being the cause of poverty, is in fact a result of it. There is an inverse relationship between per capita income and the fertility rate — as poverty decreases, so do the population rates. When people are ground into the dirt by poverty, education falls, women’s rights decrease, and contraception is less available. Having children then becomes virtually the only survival means, with people resting their hopes for a better future in their offspring. Therefore social conditions have a major impact on population growth. In countries with higher economic and cultural levels, population growth soon starts to fall off. Today, for example, much of Europe has seen birth rates fall beyond the national replacement rate. This is the case even in Catholic countries, which one would imagine would have religious factors encouraging large families.

To be clear, we are not saying that overpopulation is not a very serious problem. Obviously, population growth cannot be ignored or solutions put off until capitalism is eliminated. We need to immediately provide better education and access to contraceptives across the planet as well as raising cultural levels and increasing women’s rights in order to combat overpopulation in addition to fighting for land reform, union organising and so on. Overpopulation only benefits the elite by keeping the cost of labour low. This was the position of the likes of Emma Goldman and other radicals of her time:

“Many working-class radicals accepted the logic that excessive numbers were what kept the poor in their misery. During the nineteenth century there were courageous attempts to disseminate birth-control information both to promote lower population and to make it possible for women to control their own reproductivity and escape male domination. Birth control was the province of feminism, radical socialism and anarchism.” [Bradford, Op. Cit., p. 69]

Unlike many neo-Malthusians Goldman was well aware that social reasons explained why so many people went hungry. As she put it, “if the masses of people continue to be poor and the rich grow ever richer, it is not because the earth is lacking in fertility and richness to supply the need of an excessive race, but because the earth is monopolised in the hands of the few to the exclusion of the many.” She noted that the promotion of large families had vested interests behind it, although working class people “have learned to see in large families a millstone around their necks, deliberately imposed upon them by the reactionary forces in society because a large family paralyses the brain and benumbs the muscles of the masses … [The worker] continues in the rut, compromises and cringes before his master, just to earn barely enough to feed the many little mouths. He dare not join a revolutionary organisation; he dare not go on strike; he dare not express an opinion.” [“The Social Aspects of Birth Control”, Anarchy! An Anthology of Emma Goldman’s Mother Earth, p. 135 and pp. 136–7] This support for birth control, it should be stressed, resulted in Goldman being arrested. Malthus, like many of his followers “opposed contraception as immoral, preferring to let the poor starve as a ‘natural’ method of keeping numbers down. For him, only misery, poverty, famine, disease, and war would keep population from expanding beyond the carrying capacity of the land.” [Bradford, Op. Cit., p. 69]

Unsurprisingly, Goldman linked the issue of birth control to that of women’s liberation arguing that “I never will acquiesce or submit to authority, nor will I make peace with a system which degrades woman to a mere incubator and which fattens on her innocent victims. I now and here declare war upon this system.” The key problem was that woman “has been on her knees before the altar of duty imposed by God, by Capitalism, by the State, and by Morality” for ages. Once that changed, the issue of population would solve itself for ”[a]fter all it is woman whom is risking her health and sacrificing her youth in the reproduction of the race. Surely she ought to be in a position to decide how many children she should bring into world, whether they should be brought into the world by the man she loves and because she wants the child, or should be born in hatred and loathing.” [Op. Cit., p. 140 and p. 136]

Other anarchists have echoed this analysis. George Bradford, for example, correctly notes that “the way out of the [ecological] crisis lies in the practical opening toward freedom of self-expression and selfhood for women that is the key to the destruction of hierarchy.” In other words, women’s “freedom and well-being are at the centre of the resolution to the population problem, and that can only be faced within the larger social context.” That means “real participation in social decision-making, real health concerns, access to land, and the overthrow of patriarchal domination.” [Op. Cit., p. 68 and p. 82] Bookchin makes the same point, noting that population growth rates have fallen in developed countries because “of the freedom that women have acquired over recent decades to transcend the role that patriarchy assigned to them as mere reproductive factories.” [“The Future of the Ecology Movement,” pp. 1–20, Which Way for the Ecology Movement?, p. 19]

This means that an increase of freedom will solve the population question. Sadly, many advocates of neo-Malthusianism extend control over people from women to all. The advocates of the “population myth,” as well as getting the problem wrong, also (usually) suggest very authoritarian “solutions” — for example, urging an increase in state power with a “Bureau of Population Control” to “police” society and ensure that the state enters the bedroom and our most personal relationships. Luckily for humanity and individual freedom, since they misconceive the problem, such “Big Brother” solutions are not required.

So, it must be stressed the “population explosion” is not a neutral theory, and its invention reflected class interests at the time and continual use since then is due to its utility to vested interests. We should not be fooled into thinking that overpopulation is the main cause of the ecological crisis, as this is a strategy for distracting people from the root-cause of both ecological destruction and population growth today: namely, the capitalist economy and the inequalities and hierarchical social relationships it produces. As such, those who stress the issue of population numbers get it backward. Poverty causes high birth rates as people gamble on having large families so that some children will survive in order to look after the parents in their old age. Eliminate economic insecurity and poverty, then people have less children.

Some Greens argue that it is impossible for everyone to have a high standard of living, as this would deplete available resources and place too much pressure on the environment. However, their use of statistics hides a sleight of hand which invalidates their argument. As Bookchin correctly argues:

“Consider the issue of population and food supply in terms of mere numbers and we step on a wild merry-go-round that does not support neo-Malthusian predictions of a decade ago, much less a generation ago. Such typically neo-Malthusian stunts as determining the ‘per capita consumption’ of steel, oil, paper, chemicals, and the like of a nation by dividing the total tonnage of the latter by the national population, such that every man, women, and child is said to ‘consume’ a resultant quantity, gives us a picture that is blatantly false and functions as a sheer apologia for the upper classes. The steel that goes into a battleship, the oil that is used to fuel a tank, and the paper that is covered by ads hardly depicts the human consumption of materials. Rather, it is stuff consumed by all the Pentagons of the world that help keep a ‘grow-or-die economy in operation — goods, I may add, whose function is to destroy and whose destiny is to be destroyed.” [“The Population Myth”, pp. 30–48, Which Way for the Ecology Movement?, pp. 34–5]

Focusing on averages, in other words, misses out the obvious fact we live in a highly unequal societies which results in a few people using many resources. To talk about consumption and not to wonder how many Rolls Royces and mansions the “average” person uses means producing skewed arguments. Equally, it is possible to have more just societies with approximately the same living standards with significantly less consumption of resources and less pollution and waste produced. We need only compare America with Europe to see this. One could point out, for example, that Europeans enjoy more leisure time, better health, less poverty, less inequality and thus more economic security, greater intergenerational economic mobility, better access to high-quality social services like health care and education, and manage to do it all in a far more environmentally sustainable way (Europe generates about half the CO2 emissions for the same level of GDP) compared to the US.

In fact, even relatively minor changes in how we work can have significant impact. For example, two economists at the Center for Economic and Policy Research produced a paper comparing U.S. and European energy consumption and related it to hours worked. They concluded that if Americans chose to take advantage of their high level of productivity by simply shortening the workweek or taking longer holidays rather than producing more, there would follow a number of benefits. Specifically, if the U.S. followed Western Europe in terms of work hours then not only would workers find themselves with seven additional weeks of time off, the US would consume some 20% less energy and if this saving was directly translated into lower carbon emissions then it would have emitted 3% less carbon dioxide in 2002 than in 1990 (this level of emissions is only 4% above the negotiated target of the Kyoto Protocol). If Europe following IMF orthodoxy and increased working hours, this would have a corresponding negative impact on energy use and emissions (not to mention quality of life). [David Rosnick and Mark Weisbrot, Are Shorter Work Hours Good for the Environment?] Of course, any such choice is influenced by social institutions and pressures and, as such, part of a wider social struggle for change.

In other words, we must question the underlying assumption of the neo-Malthusians that society and technology are static and that the circumstances that produced historic growth and consumption rates will remain unchanged. This is obviously false, since humanity is not static. To quote Bookchin again:

“by reducing us to studies of line graphs, bar graphs, and statistical tables, the neo-Malthusians literally freeze reality as it is. Their numerical extrapolations do not construct any reality that is new; they mere extend, statistic by statistic, what is basically old and given .. . We are taught to accept society, behaviour, and values as they are, not as they should be or even could be. This procedure places us under the tyranny of the status quo and divests us of any ability to think about radically changing the world. I have encountered very few books or articles written by neo-Malthusians that question whether we should live under any kind of money economy at all, any statist system of society, or be guided by profit oriented behaviour. There are books and articles aplenty that explain ‘how to’ become a ‘morally responsible’ banker, entrepreneur, landowner, ‘developer,’ or, for all I know, arms merchant. But whether the whole system called capitalism (forgive me!), be it corporate in the west or bureaucratic in the east, must be abandoned if we are to achieve an ecological society is rarely discussed.” [Op. Cit., p. 33]

It is probably true that an “American” living standard is not possible for the population of the world at its present level (after all, the US consumes 40% of the world’s resources to support only 5% of its population). For the rest of the world to enjoy that kind of standard of living we would require the resources of multiple Earths! Ultimately, anything which is not renewable is exhaustible. The real question is when will it be exhausted? How? Why? And by whom? As such, it is important to remember that this “standard of living” is a product of an hierarchical system which produces an alienated society in which consumption for the sake of consumption is the new god. In a grow-or-die economy, production and consumption must keep increasing to prevent economic collapse. This need for growth leads to massive advertising campaigns to indoctrinate people with the capitalist theology that more and more must be consumed to find “happiness” (salvation), producing consumerist attitudes that feed into an already-present tendency to consume in order to compensate for doing boring, pointless work in a hierarchical workplace. Unless a transformation of values occurs that recognises the importance of living as opposed to consuming, the ecological crisis will get worse. It is impossible to imagine such a radical transformation occurring under capitalism and so a key aim of eco-anarchists is to encourage people to consider what they need to live enriched, empowering and happy lives rather than participate in the rat race capitalism produces (even if you do win, you remain a rat).

Nor it cannot be denied that developments like better health care, nutrition, and longer lifespans contribute to overpopulation and are made possible by “industry.” But to see such developments as primary causes of population growth is to ignore the central role played by poverty, the disruption of cultural patterns, and the need for cheap labour due to capitalism. There are always elevated birth rates associated with poverty, whether or not medical science improves significantly (for example, during the early days of capitalism). “Industrialism” is in fact a term used by liberal Greens (even when they call themselves “deep”) who do not want to admit that the ecological crisis cannot be solved without the complete overthrow of capitalism, pretending instead that the system can become “green” through various band-aid reforms. “Controlling population growth” is always a key item on such liberals’ agendas, taking the place of “eliminating capitalism,” which should be the centrepiece. “Population control is substituted for social justice, and the problem is actually aggravated by the Malthusian ‘cure’,” points out feminist Betsy Hartmann. [quoted by Bradford, Op. Cit., p. 77]

After all, there is enough food to feed the world’s population but its distribution reflects inequalities in wealth, power and effective demand (this is most obviously seen when food is exported from famine areas as there is no effective demand for it there, a sadly regular occurrence). The “myth that population increases in places like the Sudan, for example, result in famine” can only survive if we ignore “the notorious fact that the Sudanese could easily feed themselves if they were not forced by the American-controlled World Bank and International Monetary Fund to grow cotton instead of grains.” [Bookchin, Remaking Society, p. 11] Hence the importance of class analysis and an awareness of hierarchy. We can hardly talk of “our” resources when those resources are owned by a handful of giant corporations. Equally, we cannot talk about “our” industrial impact on the planet when the decisions of industry are made by a bosses and most of us are deliberately excluded from the decision making process. While it makes sense for the ruling elite to ignore such key issues, it counter-productive for radicals to do so and blame “people” or their numbers for social and environmental problems:

“The most striking feature of such way of thinking is not only that it closely parallels the way of thinking that is found in the corporate world. What is more serious is that it serves to deflect our attention from the role society plays in producing ecological breakdown. If ‘people’ as a species are responsible for environmental dislocations, these dislocations cease to be the result of social dislocations. A mythic ‘Humanity’ is created — irrespective of whether we are talking about oppressed minorities, women, Third World people, or people in the First World — in which everyone is brought into complicity with powerful corporate elites in producing environmental dislocations. In this way, the social roots of ecological problems are shrewdly obscured … [W]e can dismiss or explain away hunger, misery, or illness as ‘natural checks’ that are imposed on human beings to retain the ‘balance of nature.’ We can comfortably forget that much of the poverty and hunger that afflicts the world has its origins in the corporate exploitation of human beings and nature — in agribusiness and social oppression.” [Op. Cit., pp. 9–10]

Looking at population numbers simply misses the point. As Murray Bookchin argues, this “arithmetic mentality which disregards the social context of demographics is incredibly short-sighted. Once we accept without any reflection or criticism that we live in a ‘grow-or-die’ capitalistic society in which accumulation is literally a law of economic survival and competition is the motor of ‘progress,’ anything we have to say about population is basically meaningless. The biosphere will eventually be destroyed whether five billion or fifty million live on the planet. Competing firms in a ‘dog-eat-dog’ market must outproduce each other if they are to remain in existence. They must plunder the soil, remove the earth’s forests, kill off its wildlife, pollute its air and waterways not because their intentions are necessarily bad, although they usually are … but because they must simply survive. Only a radical restructuring of society as a whole, including its anti-ecological sensibilities, can remove this all commanding social compulsion.” [“The Population Myth”, pp. 30–48, Op. Cit., p. 34] A sane society would not be driven by growth for the sake of growth and would aim to reduce production by reducing the average working week to ensure both an acceptable standard of living plus time to enjoy it. So it is not a case that the current industrial system is something we need to keep. Few anarchists consider a social revolution as simply expropriating current industry and running it more or less as it is now. While expropriating the means of life is a necessary first step, it is only the start of a process in which we transform the way we interact with nature (which, of course, includes people).

To conclude, as Bradford summarises the “salvation of the marvellous green planet, our Mother Earth, depends on the liberation of women — and children, and men — from social domination, exploitation and hierarchy. They must go together.” [Op. Cit., p. 68] By focusing attention away from the root causes of ecological and social disruption — i.e. capitalism and hierarchy — and onto their victims, the advocates of the “population myth” do a great favour to the system that creates mindless growth. Hence the population myth will obviously find favour with ruling elites, and this — as opposed to any basis for the myth in scientific fact — will ensure its continual re-appearance in the media and education.

[handeaux]

Cincinnatians Gobbled Up Tales Of Barnyard Freaks And Vegetable Monstrosities

As autumn leaves littered the increasingly wintry ground it was, in days gone by, the signal for newspapers to trumpet the latest freak of nature emerging from the local barnyards. Cincinnati editors gleefully pounced on any monstrosity – animal or vegetable – that wandered in from the hinterlands.

The Cincinnati Post [28 July 1897] published a drawing of an ear of corn shaped like a human arm. The bizarre cob had been discovered by Albert Sturm, a traveling salesman who lived at 2331 Grandview Avenue in East Walnut Hills. Mr. Sturm’s office was on Pearl Street in the Bottoms, so it is likely he purchased the errant ear at the Pearl Street Market. He placed his remarkable discovery on display at a saloon in the West End.

Intriguingly, a similar chiroform cob had been discovered precisely three years prior and highlighted with a detailed analysis by the Cincinnati Enquirer [28 July 1894]. The newspaper argued against a supernatural interpretation of the phenomenon:

“The peculiar formation of the ear is due to the production of doubled celled blossoms, such as occur in almost every form of plant life. Pumpkins and squashes have been known to take on the likeness of the human face and the root of the mandrake assumes the form of a man with startling fidelity. This is the first time on record that the useful and nourishing corn plant ever tried anything in that direction. It was the general impression among the ignorant when the freak appeared, that it signified that the arm of the Lord had been stretched forth to destroy the world. This, of course, was based upon immature study of the Bible.”

Curious shapes afflicted all sorts of vegetables. W.G. Langdale, of Milford, Ohio, borrowed a most peculiar potato from a baker located in Lawrenceburg, Indiana, according to the Cincinnati Post [16 December 1903]. The spud was not only generally canine-shaped, but specifically resembled a popular cartoon dog at the time, known as Doc. Mr. Langdale allowed the Post to photograph the poochified potato, but insisted his ownership was temporary and that it would shortly be returned to its rightful owner.

Another animal-shaped potato was dug up a year earlier in Dayton, Kentucky, the Enquirer [26 November 1902] reported. This tuber was shaped like an almost perfect imitation of a frog and weighed three pounds. As was often the disposition of such curiosities back then, the weird vegetable was placed on display at Joe Walpert’s saloon.

The Cincinnati Post [24 November 1892] carried news of a Kentucky farmer who planned to send to the Chicago World’s Fair a potato he grew shaped very much like a fist:

“It is an exact counterpart of a clinched fist. The fingers, knuckles, joints and nails are distinctly defined, and where it connects with the vine it has widened out, resembling a human wrist.”

Such oddball entities were not confined to the vegetable kingdom. Cincinnatians gobbled up any reports of animals exhibiting any features out of the ordinary, including some truly suspicious yarns.

Take the dubious tale spun by the Enquirer [22 February 1870] about a little girl, who found a little turtle down by a little creek. Unlike most similar stories, in which the little girl raises her cute shellback hostage as a pet, this minion of the netherworld decided she wanted only the pretty shell, so she gave the turtle to her mother, who promptly decapitated the thing and began eviscerating it.

“After a while the heart was taken out, and excited no little curiosity from the fact that it was beating still, although some time had elapsed since the turtle’s life was supposed to be ended by taking off its head.”

Mom, possessed of the same morbid curiosity as her demonic offspring, stuck the beating turtle heart on a needle and watched it continue to throb for the next four and a half days! Tiring of this macabre entertainment, the mother tossed the still-beating turtle heart into the back yard, where it was promptly devoured by an old grey hen.

End of story? Of course not! Several days later, the family chicken laid an egg, which was gathered up for the family’s breakfast.

“The mother took ‘Biddy’s’ egg, opened it, and in the very center of it found the identical heart which had been thrown away previously, and in as perfect a condition as ever. She could hardly believe her eyes, and so she called her husband and children, all of whom were satisfied that it was the same heart, as the needle punctures were still plainly visible.”

Cincinnati was a key market town for farmers throughout the Tri-State region, not only because of our various street markets, but due to a thriving wholesale business. Often, commission merchants found some marvel among their shipments and took it “on ‘Change” the next day – in other words, to the Merchants Exchange at the Chamber of Commerce. Such was the case with a chicken displayed on ‘Change and reported to the Cincinnati Gazette [22 April 1895]. This hen’s special trait was undiscovered until it had been plucked.

“In addition to having a naturally formed head, with two perfect eyes, the fowl was found after being dressed to have two more perfectly formed eyes, with perfect eyelids, one on either side of the oil sack above the tail.”

After entertaining the commission agents for a couple of days, the bird was donated to the Society of Natural History for preservation.

Fred Beineke raised goats at his place on Berlin Street (now Woodrow Street) in Lower Price Hill. One day, according to the Enquirer [28 August 1890] two normal kids and a caprine monstrosity were born in his shed. The poor thing sported two conjoined heads.

“It has four eyes, two mouths, two tongues! Its ears are set back further than usual. While all regularly formed goats have no upper teeth – only a hard gum – this one has a set in the upper jaw of each head, making it have four sets of teeth. In the middle of the two heads there is one eye-socket, with two eye-balls.”

Almost every day, the local papers published items about animals born with extraneous limbs or appendages, so six-legged horses, five-legged cows, four legged-ducks and pigs with four ears were almost a normal occurrence in the annual autumnal freak show.

[agro-carnist]

ok. References: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/23/5115

https://www.pcrm.org/news/health-nutrition/vegan-diet-better-environment-mediterranean-diet

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/20/vegan-diet-cuts-environmental-damage-climate-heating-emissions-study

https://www.ethicalconsumer.org/food-drink/shopping-guide/vegan-meat-alterantive-food-brands

Including books like Sustainable Living and 100 Ways to Live Sustainably.

My response under a read more since it got long

First link:

This study is not necessarily advocating for vegan or vegetarian diets, and it mentions that in the introduction. It mentions instead its evaluation of overconsumption of animal products and underconsumption of various plant sources.

The study also mentions that vegans and vegetarians tend to consume more fruits, vegetables, and legumes and in more variety, as well as fewer refined cereals, added fats and sweets, and non-water beverages. This is known as the healthy user bias. The study even mentions that "the differences in terms of health outcomes ... cannot be directly linked only to the different consumption of protein sources." Even their own analysis of various studies find that most results aren't statistically significant, and those that do have significant statistical correlation include flexitarians, pescetarians, and lacto-ovo vegetarians and exclude vegans.

Second link

This article references two different studies, "Environmental Impact of Two Plant-Based, Isocaloric and Isoproteic Diets: The Vegan Diet vs. the Mediterranean Diet" and "A Mediterranean Diet and Low-Fat Vegan Diet to Improve Body Weight and Cardiometabolic Risk Factors: A Randomized, Cross-over Trial."

For the first, this goes into one of my main complaints about dietary sustainability analysis in that the calculations are all hypothetical. It does not study if an individual's personal food choices make an impact on foods being produced. I am not arguing that livestock do not have a significant environmental impact or that agriculture does not damage the Earth. They clearly do. But I'm not a libertarian that thinks the free market will solve the ingrained issues with how food is produced.

My other issue with studies like this is that it groups all livestock together and all crops together. Cattle, chickens, fish, shellfish, goats, etc. all have a very different environmental impact. Almonds, wheat, apples, avocados, beans, rice etc. also all have very different environmental impacts. Painting agriculture with broad brushes like this is, in my opinion, not very helpful. I'm also not interested in pointing out the harmful impact of one side of agriculture while completely supporting the other side and acting like we can ignore that. I am more interested in food raised using sustainable techniques vs. industrially grown food rather than pitting animals and plants against each other as a whole. I am anti-capitalist and I do not make my food and animal activism to still be playing into capitalism. I also dislike pretending that crops and livestock are mutually exclusive industries that do not fundamentally play into each other.

As for the second study, I find this one far more interesting but I do have a few things to point out. The study does not mention what the lifestyles of the participants were before the study began, only that they were overweight. It seems to be operating under the assumption that thinner automatically means healthier, which isn't necessarily the case. But are participants normally eating tons of junk food with little fresh fruits and vegetables and then switching to more balanced diets prepared at home? Considering participants are also specifically asked to avoid sweetened drinks, processed meats and snacks, and cream and to limit cured ham and fatty cheeses, there are almost definitely other factors at play than simply meat vs plants. Second, participants attended classes taught by dieticians and physicians. Of course people would be healthier following instructions by people formally educated in health. Third, it is noted that several participants out of 52 change medications during the study, which can impact results.

Third link

See my points from link 2.

Fourth link

I like the recommendations made for vegan companies here. They suggest making some foods at home and avoiding companies that use palm oil or soy from South America as well as brands like Nestle that are famously known for damaging environments all over the world and harming people especially in poor countries. I will add though that this is harder than it looks due to brands having parents companies and Nestle owns lots and lots of companies. Which also plays into my point that personal choice is so insignificant when up against monsters like Nestle that own so much power.

In short, studies like these can provide some helpful data but they do also miss many important pieces because sustainability and nutrition are such complex topics that do not come with easy answers. I also take all studies with a grain of salt because they are all going to still work under the assumption of a capitalist world. My perspective is anti-capitalist and about an uprooting of our relationship to food and agriculture. Under a capitalist system the best we can do is harm reduction and based on trends of the food market I do not see that vegan diets make a material difference. Rather I promote choices that uplift community food, pressure changes to industry norms including legislative pressure, and socialist activism that benefits people and in turn the animals we live next to. Overproduction and overconsumption are real issues.

I'd like to offer my own studies and references but looking through these has used up all my spoons. My recommendations on books though are Braiding Sweetgrass by Robin Wall Kimmerer and Cows Save The Planet by Judith D. Schwartz.

[max1461]

actually, here's a problem: youtube is worse now? I mean there has always been bad content on youtube but I feel like it's worse now than even 5 years ago. it's hard to explain exactly what I mean; there are things that everyone has said, the increase in average production values pushing out small channels, the loss of "authenticity". but that's not what I'm talking about. I mean the quality of the content itself just seems like it's gone down? I don't know, maybe I'm just looking in the wrong places.

but it seems like there's this constant need to make everything a narrative on youtube now. like, I don't really play minecraft anymore, but sometimes a minecraft video will come up in my recommendations and I will absentmindedly click it. and like I just can't stand modern minecraft videos. in my day (like 2010) a minecraft video was simple and straightforward. it was in some sense "honest". it was a guy talking to the camera, and he'd be like "I just figured out how to build this, uh, mob trap, uh ok so what you're gonna wanna do is put down some blocks like this" and so on and so forth. now it's like "omg, wHaT will HaPpEn if you put a 1000 shEEp in LAVA?????" and it's like I don't know man nothing interesting. and then it's like "before we get to that, I'm gonna start small and put 100 sheep in lava just in case" and it's like fucking. why? that's not what the video is about. you're just stretching out the runtime and building up fuax-tension by including all this waffling with random bullshit, and the pay off isn't even anything!

and it's like, ok, that's just clickbait that's just trash content that's always been there ignore it. but this style has infected other things. there will be videos with real content that still manufacture this narrative, this build-up, before getting to the thing they're actually about. it's probably partly for runtime and I think it's partly just reflexive for a lot of creators. I don't know.

and then I'm always trying to watch anime videos and it's always like this. there used to be digi/ygg/trixie whatever circa 2025-2018 who, love her or hate her, had some actual shit to say. but now it's just fucking, what, gigguk? it's all flashy bullshit, all "I spent $1000 on gacha games" and absolutely no analysis. no ideas. all show no substance. same as minecraft.

ok, actually, that's my real complaint: it feels like the amount of runtime dedicate to actual substance has gone down, and the amount of runtime dedicate to flashy bullshit and building suspense and narrative and so on has gone up. you can say that's how it's always been, but there's a real, noticeable stylistic change that I'm pointing to here, even if it's difficult to describe exactly.

what's up with youtube? just the ol' market working its magic? optimizing for profit over sufficient timescales? or has there been some type of structural shift.

[floatingstirnerhead]

how do you get HRT or insulin when civilization, and it's industry, is abolished?

Anon I rewrote this post like three times because it's so important to me that people understand this. I want so much for everyone and am always so frustrated by the constant bad jacketing of nihilists so here it goes.

The first and most important point is that anticiv rejects all vanguardism. There will be no seizure of state power that mandates all power plants be turned off. It is a part of the real communist movement and involves the subaltern population rejecting alienation and finding their power, not destroying things they actively need.

Classical communism imagines that we will simply collectivize our current industrial society and distribute the spoils evenly. In the era of climate change, this is a highly insufficient analysis. If we don't stop clear cutting and strip mining, we'll go extinct, and bring most of the biosphere with us. At the very least, this means serious degrowth, regardless of whether the industry is collectivist or not.

I don't care about the poor little loggers who lost their jobs from tree spiking.

It is the productivist logic that must be challenged if we are to survive the 21st century. That every human being and every scrap of land be put to work. Human, plant, and animal diversity is being crushed by it, and we need that to live. We need to live in a way that's not driven by a "work or starve" mentality, in biodiverse places, where we are not defined by our labour.

This is not possible within an ideology that places the production of things as the cornerstone of everything. It does NOT mean never making things ever again, or even abandoning modern techniques such as insulin production, but it does mean applying serious critique to them:

Does this form of production require the destruction of vital ecosystems, even indirectly such as through power generation, pollution, traffic infrastructure, or use of goods that have such impacts?

Does this form of production require forcing people to do it under threat of death or starvation?

Does this form of production require large swaths of land to be barren, like parking lots or monoculture corn?

Does this form of production require people to subscribe to a specific ideology or way of being to participate in it?

The question of insulin comes up again and again but it is framed wrong. There will be no primmie Vanguard that topples the provisional government and shoots everyone with an insulin pump. It is a tool for the here and now for the powerless, about reclaiming our power outside of totalizing institutions that look at our beautiful earth and just see spoils to be harvested. It's a critique, not a program.

Anticiv praxis could involve black market medical production (including insulin, or HRT which already exists) to combat the increasing failure of the industrial model. In the same way that regenerative agriculture reimagines human relationships with the non-human or FNB reimagines food consumption, the same could be done for pharmacy; the earth is full of medicine that can be produced without destruction. This doesn't require abandoning modern techniques, it requires abandoning the constant liquidation of the non-human to run them.

The real movement is already emerging, in the shared bureaucracy hacks and desperate mutual aid posts, and the truth is right in front of us:

We don't do these things because we are obligated to, but because we need to keep each other alive to live ourselves.

That is the meaning of unalienated labour. It's true of each other and it's true of the earth. There's no primeval reset, but a refusal to view others, human and not, as disposable. To recognize that thinking of human beings as superior is going to get us killed. To recognize that we are within a vast web of life that demands respect, from human diversity to animal and plant diversity.

To keep ALL of our friends alive and flourishing, not meet the demands of tyrants and demagogues.

[askagamedev]

Why companies don't record "Making Of" for games anymore?

A good rule of thumb when answering questions like "Why don't companies do X anymore?" is to think about what X will cost them and what X will get them in return. The purpose of doing things is ostensibly to generate value - no one does X without a reason. There needs to be a method to determine whether the returns of a choice are worth the costs of that choice in order to make a decision. Let's consider the bigger costs of recording "Making Of" videos, and then consider the gains from releasing those "Making Of" videos.

Producing behind-the-scenes "making of" video requires getting a film crew, recording developer interviews, and setting up + filming B-roll footage of the developers doing things (most commonly animators moving wireframes around). Recording the interviews isn't off-the-cuff either, the developers being interviewed need to think about their answers and prepare as well. The time these developers spend recording these interviews is time not spent doing their assigned tasks or fixing bugs, which comes at a material cost when there's a deadline. These interviews are coming at the cost of bugs not getting fixed.

Next, consider what these videos earn in exchange. When the publisher puts them out, what is the gain? Who will be most interested in behind-the-scenes videos? How can the publishers convert these videos into tangible value? Making players feel good or "exposure" isn't really worth very much. We're giving up a significant quantity of work, we need to get something equally or more valuable in return. One possibility would be making these videos a Collector's Edition pack-in bonus for a retail game. Another value gain could be offering them as a stretch goal for a crowdfunding drive. A third possibility would be paying for this as part of the marketing budget, but this still only really targets the extremely invested audience already and is difficult to convert to tangible value gain.

Ultimately, it's a cost-benefit analysis. Look at the studios and games that are doing such videos and consider what circumstances they're doing them. There's usually some reason that the production of such is a tangible value add and there aren't a lot of them.

[Join us on Discord] and/or [Support us on Patreon]

Got a burning question you want answered?

Short questions: Ask a Game Dev on Twitter

Long questions: Ask a Game Dev on Tumblr

Frequent Questions: The FAQ

[animal-care]

Expanding Opportunities in the Animal Health Market: Trends and Outlook

Introduction

The Animal Health Market is witnessing dynamic growth and evolution, fueled by changing consumer preferences, advancements in veterinary medicine, and increasing awareness of animal welfare. In this blog, we explore key trends shaping the animal health industry and provide insights into the market's outlook for the future.

Rise of Pet Ownership

One of the most notable trends driving the animal health market is the growing popularity of pet ownership. As more people welcome pets into their homes, demand for veterinary services, pet care products, and preventive healthcare measures is on the rise. This trend is particularly evident in urban areas, where pet ownership is becoming increasingly common among young professionals and families.

Focus on Preventive Care

Preventive healthcare has emerged as a key priority for pet owners, leading to increased demand for vaccines, parasite control products, and wellness exams. Veterinarians are increasingly emphasizing the importance of regular check-ups and preventive treatments to maintain pets' health and detect potential issues early. This shift towards proactive healthcare is driving growth in the animal health market.

E-Commerce Boom

The rise of e-commerce platforms has transformed the way pet owners access veterinary products and services. Online retailers offer a wide range of pet care products, prescription medications, and veterinary supplies, providing convenience and accessibility to pet owners. This trend is expected to continue, with e-commerce projected to play an increasingly important role in the distribution of animal health products.

Focus on Animal Welfare

Consumer awareness of animal welfare issues is driving demand for ethically sourced and sustainably produced animal products. This includes pet food, livestock feed, and pharmaceuticals used in animal health care. Companies in the animal health market are responding to these demands by implementing sustainable practices, ensuring the welfare of animals throughout the supply chain.

Technological Advancements

Advancements in technology are revolutionizing the practice of veterinary medicine, with innovations such as telemedicine, digital health monitoring, and artificial intelligence gaining traction. These technologies enable veterinarians to deliver remote care, monitor patients' health in real-time, and make data-driven treatment decisions. As technology continues to advance, it is expected to further enhance the quality and accessibility of veterinary care.

Regulatory Landscape

The Animal Health Market is subject to a complex regulatory landscape, with stringent requirements for product safety, efficacy, and labeling. Regulatory agencies play a critical role in ensuring the quality and integrity of veterinary products and services, safeguarding animal and human health. Companies operating in the animal health market must navigate these regulatory requirements to bring products to market and maintain compliance.

Global Expansion Opportunities

The animal health market offers significant opportunities for global expansion, particularly in emerging markets with growing pet populations and increasing disposable income. Asia-Pacific, Latin America, and the Middle East are emerging as key growth regions for the animal health industry, presenting opportunities for investment and market expansion.

Conclusion

The animal health market is experiencing rapid growth and transformation, driven by evolving consumer preferences, technological advancements, and regulatory developments. From the rise of pet ownership and the focus on preventive care to the adoption of e-commerce and the expansion into global markets, the animal health industry is poised for continued growth and innovation. By staying abreast of key trends and embracing opportunities for innovation and expansion, stakeholders in the animal health market can position themselves for success in this dynamic and evolving industry.

[crop-protection-market]

The Comprehensive Overview of the Animal Care Market Share, Growth and Forecast

The Animal Care Market, a crucial and compassionate industry, plays a pivotal role in ensuring the well-being and health of our beloved animal companions. This exploration delves into the dynamics of the Animal Care Market, encompassing analysis, demand, forecast, growth, challenges, and emerging trends.

Caring Compassionately: Understanding the Animal Care Market Landscape

The Animal Care Market is not merely an industry; it's a testament to our commitment to providing the best possible care for our furry, feathery, and scaly friends. Analyzing its multifaceted nature unveils the delicate balance between technological advancements, regulatory compliance, and the unwavering dedication of caregivers. Animal Care Market Analysis is influenced by evolving consumer preferences, advancements in veterinary science, and a growing awareness of animal welfare. The Global Animal Care Market Size is projected to reach USD 100 billion by 2025, reflecting a compounded annual growth rate of 6%. The Asia-Pacific region holds the largest share in the Global Animal Care Market, accounting for 35% of the total market revenue.

Meeting the Demand: Satisfying the Needs of Pets and Livestock Alike

Understanding the demand dynamics within the Animal Care Market is essential for stakeholders seeking to address the diverse needs of pet owners and livestock producers. Animal Care Market Demand is driven by the increasing adoption of pets, a surge in pet humanization trends, and the growing awareness of preventive veterinary care. Rising concerns about zoonotic diseases and the need for sustainable livestock practices contribute significantly to the demand for animal health products. Pet owners in North America spend an average of USD 1,200 annually on veterinary care and related products.

Forecasting a Brighter Future: Animal Care Market Growth and Outlook

Navigating the trajectory of growth and forecasting future trends is crucial for stakeholders aiming to contribute to the positive development of the Animal Care Market. The Animal Care Market Outlook is optimistic, with sustained demand for advanced veterinary services, pet insurance, and innovative healthcare products. Increasing government initiatives promoting animal health and welfare contribute significantly to the positive growth outlook. The Latin American region is expected to witness the highest growth rate in the Animal Care Market, with a projected CAGR of 8% over the next five years.

Revenue Realities: Illuminating the Financial Landscape of Animal Care

Delving into the revenue aspects of the Animal Care Market reveals the economic viability of the industry and the financial considerations influencing stakeholders. The Animal Care Market Revenue is diverse, encompassing veterinary services, pet products, and pharmaceuticals. The rise in pet ownership, coupled with an increased willingness to spend on premium pet products and services, significantly contributes to market revenue. Veterinary services contribute to 50% of the total Animal Care Market Revenue, reflecting the growing emphasis on professional healthcare for pets.

Sizing Up: Animal Care Market Size and Trends

Analyzing the size of the Animal Care Market alongside emerging trends provides a comprehensive view of the industry's current state and future possibilities. The Animal Care Market Size is witnessing a surge in demand for organic and natural pet care products. E-commerce platforms are becoming increasingly popular for purchasing pet products, reflecting changing consumer buying behavior. Online sales of pet care products have witnessed a 25% year-on-year increase, showcasing the digital transformation of the Animal Care Market.

Challenges on the Horizon: Navigating Animal Care Market Challenges

While the Animal Care Market thrives on compassion and care, it is not immune to challenges that demand thoughtful solutions. Animal Care Market Challenges include regulatory complexities, an increasing need for skilled veterinarians, and the ethical considerations surrounding animal testing. The rise in counterfeit animal health products poses a significant challenge to the integrity of the Animal Care Market. The shortage of skilled veterinarians is estimated to be 20% in developing regions, impacting the accessibility of veterinary services.

Embracing Trends: Navigating the Ever-Changing Landscape of Animal Care

Staying ahead in the Animal Care Market involves a keen awareness of emerging trends that shape the industry's future. Animal Care Market Trends include the rising demand for personalized pet nutrition, the integration of telehealth services in veterinary care, and the growing popularity of pet wearables. Sustainable and eco-friendly practices are gaining prominence, with consumers seeking ethically sourced and environmentally conscious animal care products. The market for pet wearables is expected to witness a remarkable CAGR of 12% over the next five years, driven by the increasing focus on pet health monitoring.

Conclusion

The Animal Care Market stands as a testament to our commitment to the well-being of our animal companions. Navigating its complexities requires a blend of compassion, innovation, and a proactive response to emerging trends and challenges. As the market continues to evolve, stakeholders must remain adaptable and dedicated to ensuring the health and happiness of the creatures we cherish.

[playfulsparksp]

How to Write a Compelling Script for an Animated Video or Film

Photo by Skitterphoto on Pexels.com Animated videos and films are a fantastic medium to tell stories, share ideas, and entertain audiences. However, before the animation process can begin, a well-crafted script is essential. Writing an animated script is different from writing a live-action script because you have to think about how the visuals will be portrayed. In this blog, we’ll go over how…

[i-am-finally-done]

CLASSROOM OF THE ELITE S1- PHILOSOPHY

Hey! I'm super into philosophy, and while I was watching Classroom of the Elite (finally got around to it on my anime watchlist) I couldn’t help but notice the intro cards all have quotes (some of which I’ve never read!) so I thought of compiling them so that I can go get all the books and read them! 

Once I finish reading each one, I’ll write a summary and my review of it in its own post, if anyone is interested (just kidding I’ll do it even if no one cares).

“What is evil? – whatever springs from weakness.” F.W. Nietzsche: The Antichrist

“Nietzsche wrote "The Antichrist" to be first among a proposed gigantic work concerning the re-evaluation of all values. Through the contents of the book, we see that the first of those values which he wants to extinguish had strong ties to Christianity, either as an expression of its direct doctrines or in disguised forms within the philosophy of supposedly secular philosophers.” Njoku, I. The antichrist summary. Book Analysis. https://bookanalysis.com/friedrich-nietzsche/the-antichrist/summary/

“It takes a great talent and skill to conceal one’s talent and skill.” La Rochefoucauld, “Reflections; or Sentences and Moral Maxims”

* "This famed work by a noted French author of the Renaissance era, seventeenth-century nobleman François de La Rochefoucauld, offers hundreds of brief, brutally honest observations of humankind and its self-serving nature. The perfect read for any realist—or anyone with the desire to evaluate their moral standing—this edition includes three supplements with additional maxims and essays." Summary by google books. https://books.google.com/books/about/Reflections.html?id=gn53DgAAQBAJ

“Man is an animal that makes bargains: no other animal does this – no dog exchanges bones with another.” An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nation. Adam Smith

"An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, generally referred to by its shortened title The Wealth of Nations, is the magnum opus of the Scottish economist and moral philosopher Adam Smith. First published in 1776, the book offers one of the world's first collected descriptions of what builds nations' wealth, and is today a fundamental work in classical economics. By reflecting upon the economics at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the book touches upon such broad topics as the division of labour, productivity, and free markets." Summary by google books. https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Inquiry_Into_the_Nature_and_Causes_of.html?id=C5dNAAAAcAAJ

“We should not be upset that others hide the truth from us, when we hide it so often from ourselves.” La Rochefoucauld, “Reflections; or Sentences and Moral Maxims”

*-

“Hell is other people” Jean-Paul Satre, “No Exit”

"Two women and one man are locked up together for eternity in one hideous room in Hell. The windows are bricked up, there are no mirrors, the electric lights can never be turned off, and there is no exit. The irony of this Hell is that its torture is not of the rack and fire, but of the burning humiliation of each soul as it is stripped of its pretenses by the cruel curiosity of the damned. Here the soul is shorn of secrecy, and even the blackest deeds are mercilessly exposed to the fierce light of Hell. It is an eternal torment." Summary by google books. https://books.google.com/books/about/No_Exit.html?id=QYhjF19zobIC

“There are two kinds of lies; one concerns an accomplished fact, the other concerns a future duty.” Jean-Jacques Rousseau, “Emile, or On Education”

“Jean-Jacques Rousseau's 'Emile, or On Education' is a groundbreaking work that delves into the philosophy of education, focusing on the natural development of a child's own innate abilities. Written in a conversational style, Rousseau presents his ideas through the fictional character of Emile, a boy raised away from societal influences to emphasize the importance of education based on nature rather than traditional methods. . .” Summary by google books. https://books.google.com/books?id=R0_mEAAAQBAJ

“Nothing is as dangerous as an ignorant friend; a wise enemy is preferred.” Jean de La Fontaine, “Fables”

"Jean de La Fontaine collected fables from a wide variety of sources, both Western and Eastern, and adapted them into French free verse. They were issued under the general title of Fables in several volumes from 1668 to 1694 and are considered classics of French literature. Humorous, nuanced and ironical, they were originally aimed at adults but then entered the educational system and were required learning for school children." Summary by wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Fontaine%27s_Fables

“Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.” Dante Alighieri, The Divine Comedy, “Inferno,” Canto III, Line 9

“Thirty-five years old at the beginning of the story, Dante—the character as opposed to the poet—has lost his way on the “true path” of life; in other words, sin has obstructed his path to God. The Divine Comedy is the allegorical record of Dante’s quest to overcome sin and find God’s love; in Inferno, Dante explores the nature of sin by traveling through Hell, where evil receives punishment according to God’s justice. Allegorically, Dante’s story represents not only his own life but also what Dante the poet perceived to be the universal Christian quest for God. As a result, Dante the character is rooted in the Everyman allegorical tradition: Dante’s situation is meant to represent that of the whole human race. . .” Summary by sparknotes. https://www.sparknotes.com/poetry/inferno/character/dante-alighieri/

“Man is condemned to be free.” Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism and Humanism

"Over the past sixty years the writings of Jean-Paul Sartre have probably been more influential in the West than those of any other philosopher and literary figure. In his theoretical writings, Sartre laid the foundation for an original doctrine of Existentialism. His concern, however, was to relate his theory to human response and the practical demands of living.” Summary by google books. https://books.google.com/books/about/Existentialism_and_Humanism.html?id=vZs6PgAACAAJ

“Every man has in himself the most dangerous traitor of all.” Kierkegaard, “Works of Love”

“One of Soren Kierkegaard's most important writings, Works of Love is a profound examination of the human heart, in which the great philosopher conducts the reader into the inmost secrets of Love. "Deep within every man," Kierkegaard writes, "there lies the dread of being alone in the world, forgotten by God, overlooked among the household of millions upon millions." Love, for Kierkegaard, is one of the central aspects of existence; it saves us from isolation and unites us with one another and with God. . .” Summary by google books. https://books.google.com/books/about/Works_of_Love.html?id=_6OEccL5znEC

“What people commonly call fate is mostly their own stupidity.” Schopenhauer, Philosophical Writings

“Arthur Schopenhauer was a German philosopher. He is known for his 1818 work The World as Will and Representation, which characterizes the phenomenal world as the manifestation of a blind and irrational noumenal will. Building on the transcendental idealism of Immanuel Kant, Schopenhauer developed an atheistic metaphysical and ethical system that rejected the contemporaneous ideas of German idealism. Schopenhauer was among the first thinkers in Western philosophy to share and affirm significant tenets of Indian philosophy, such as asceticism, denial of the self, and the notion of the world-as-appearance. His work has been described as an exemplary manifestation of philosophical pessimism. . .” Summary by wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Schopenhauer

“Genius lives only one story above madness.” Schopenhauer, Parerga and Paralipomena

“Parerga and Paralipomena (Greek for "Appendices" and "Omissions", respectively; German: Parerga und Paralipomena) is a collection of philosophical reflections by Arthur Schopenhauer published in 1851. The selection was compiled not as a summation of or introduction to Schopenhauer's philosophy, but as augmentary readings for those who had already embraced it, although the author maintained it would be comprehensible and of interest to the uninitiated nevertheless. The collection is divided into two volumes, covering first the parerga and thereafter the paralipomena to that philosophy. The parerga are six extended essays intended as supplementary to the author's thought. The paralipomena, shorter elaborations divided by topic into thirty-one subheadings, cover material hitherto unaddressed by the philosopher but deemed by him to be complementary to the parerga.” Summary by wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parerga_and_Paralipomena

congratulations on scrolling all the way down here! I included short summaries provided by the internet because I feel like they really help give a reason for wanting to read the entire media instead of just moving past after quote :)

can't wait to start reading!