A lot of people seem extremely eager to be on the right side of history, but just pretending to be wise does not give you wisdom. Radical changes in how humanity lives should be approached with extreme caution. Survival, to this point, has not been accomplished at the end of an equation or analysis, it happened over the corpses of those who tried something different.

Perhaps that contextualizes why I'm less than eager to join the performatively moral brigade saying animal meat will be phased out without my lifetime. They think I support animal torture, or any of the routine horrors of society? Of course I don't. But I support humanity, even with a grotesque cost, and I worry we've found far too many ways to accidentally tumble into extinction.

It's also worth pointing out, there is a share of hypocrisy here – aren't these same exact people constantly lecturing us on the hyper-efficient products of capitalist food production? That mechanically recombined ingredients and preservatives are somehow going to kill us, and that whole, natural foods are essential to human health – until we want meat, then they recommend whatever hot-off-the-lab-bench product helps them feel like a champion for history's future.

Don't get me wrong, I find myself googling about fake meat every six months or so. I'm curious, no doubt. I've tried those soylent drinks. But removing meat altogether is far too much a change for me. It makes me deeply concerned about any society that attempts it, not that dissimilar to my concern over people attempting communism. You think you can replace heritage with a (fairly small) amount of reasoning? If they advocated adopting the exact diet of an older culture, that would make perfect sense – but instead they want a Standard American Diet... without meat. And there's nothing I can imagine that's less tested than that.

I think, for people who want to be on the right side of history, they aren't reading the same history I have.