Did I misunderstand your response? I read it as you defending Naoza’s claim that everyone switching to veganism would do “Literally Nothing to help”, by pointing out methods of animal agriculture that are (ecologically) better than veganism. It’s undeniable that everyone going vegan would massively decrease US agricultural GHG production. My example was an approximation of a very specific case, but I still think it’s a decent example of how inefficient most of our animal agriculture is. There are plenty of studies giving industry-wide numbers, and they’re not great.
If the argument is that veganism alone doesn’t solve climate change, then yeah,of course. No one thing, socialism included, will fix it.
@Churba do you have a source on veganism driving palm oil production? I took a quick look and found a couple articles tying it to reductions in trans fat consumption, but nothing tying it to veganism. Either way the vegan community has frequent discussions about it (5 posts on r/vegan in the past week) and many people consider it non-vegan. As for South America, the largest contributors are pastures and soy, with the soy primarily being for animal feed.
In this case, it is absolutely the product, not just the system, because there is no system that can sustainably produce animal products at the rate that people are consuming them. Your (I’m talking generally; I don’t know what you personally eat) diet will need to change at some point, so you might as well start now. Otherwise capitalism is an excuse.
As discussed earlier, economic factors make it difficult or impossible for a number of people to go vegan. Outside of food deserts, I argue that number is much smaller than people think (queue Naoza and “Purity Politics”).
Long-term, absolutely banning (my preference) or massively reducing and regulating animal agriculture is the only way to go.