Both Ruth L. Ozeki, the author of My Year of Meats, and Timothy Pachirat, the author of A Politics of Sight use ideas to promote political and social change in society. Both of the authors create this political and social change through the use of different techniques such concealment in society and points of view, in an attempt to convince the readers of the negative consequences of the meat industry and how not monitoring it can prove to have many negative consequences. Ruth L. Ozeki uses concealment and visibility in the television industry to convince readers of the negative implications of hiding away the gruesome meat industry. Throughout the novel, the author uses examples of how corrupt the meat industry is and how it only focuses …show more content…
The author of My Year Of Meats, Ruth L. Ozeki talks about concealment through the perspective of hormones that are put into the meat and the negative aspects that concealing the beef industry has on society. Pachirat argues that concealment through the brutality and corruption of slaughterhouses in the United States and how ignorant society is of the true horrors going on behind the walls of the slaughterhouses. Both of these authors are approaching the same goal of trying to make a political change in the way society runs but both of them do so through different ideas and techniques. Both of these techniques are equally as effective when forcing the reader to consider the negative consequences of trusting the meat industry that is so cleverly concealed from the sight of society. It is these ideas and implications that make the texts important to make a shift in society and what may result in a political change such as one that happened in Chicago in the …show more content…
They both use different techniques in order to attempt to get the reader to think about these ideas, both of them use an idea of concealment and point of view however they use different techniques in order get the reader to think about how much they actually know about the topic. The importance of society maintaining visibility and clarity when it comes to issues such as the corruption and hormone mismanagement within slaughterhouses is an idea that is highlighted by both texts and used to further the idea of societal, both political and social,
The argumentative article “More Pros than Cons in a Meat-Free Life” authored by Marjorie Lee Garretson was published in the student newspaper of the University of Mississippi in April 2010. In Garretson’s article, she said that a vegetarian lifestyle is the healthy life choice and how many people don’t know how the environment is affected by their eating habits. She argues how the animal factory farms mistreat the animals in an inhumane way in order to be sources of food. Although, she did not really achieve the aim she wants it for this article, she did not do a good job in trying to convince most of the readers to become vegetarian because of her writing style and the lack of information of vegetarian
Gabriel Kolko is one of American historians and authors. He wrote a book named “The Triumph of Conservatism: A Re-interpretation of American History, 1900-1916”, and “Meat Inspection: Theory and Reality” is an article in that book. It introduced about Meat Inspection Act in Progressive Era: the main reasoned why it happened, how it affected on legislation, and how government- especially president Roosevelt- executed the new law. Through this article, Kolko also showed his opinion about supporting “free market” and condemning “political capitalism”.
These were only some of many examples in The Jungle about deceit and corruption exhibited in the meat packing industry. Nonetheless, plants had government inspectors to check for tubercular animals, but Sinclair explains that these inspectors were usually the kind of people who would be easily distracted by those passing, and would not regret missing dozens of other animals. Therefore, people’s faith in those government inspectors had been betrayed, and their health needs were relentlessly ignored. However, Sinclair’s exposing of the scheming meat packing industry increased the awareness of such practices occurring daily.
Did they have a good quality of life before the death that turned them into someone’s dinner?” (Steiner 845). With these questions the author tries to hook up his audience and make them think about how and where does everyday meat comes from.
Muckraking the Meat-Packing Industry. " Constitutional Rights Foundation. N.p., n.d. Web. The Web. The Web. 11 Mar. 2014.
Olson, Kirby. "Gregory Corso's Post-Vegetarian Ethical Dilemma.(Gregory Corso)(Essay)." Journal Of Comparative Literature And Aesthetics 1-2 (2004): 53. Academic OneFile. Web. 4 Dec. 2013.
...hen rules and the enforcement of them in the meatpacking industry and slaughterhouses. However, Schlosser disregards to provide a solution. He simply points the finger and leaves the reader depressed, without means or logic to correct the situation. After reading, we enthusiastically agreed with Schlosser when he pulled on our emotional series. His logic was also substantial in this chapter with his thorough research and extensive truthful support. However, because he does not offer any solution to the problem, it diminished significantly from his argument. Although Schlosser's argument cannot be labeled an attack, in our minds, it certainly became nothing short of an overly emotional, well-jointed rage. Schlosser uses these numbers to show the errors of certain meat packing companies and in turn, how this has caused massive illness and injury to the general public.
However, Hare’s pro demi-vegetarian argument provides an unequivocal view on the discussion of economic, ecological, and moral topics. While the look into market trends of meat is lacking Hare discusses a reality of the meat industry and its food competitors, that being the cost behind animal rearing and husbandry. While the high costs incurred does not entail permissibility the surrounding circumstances do. If fodder is grown on terrain only suitable for a pasture, then as a result husbandry and animal domestication (and later slaughter) is permissible because the economic consequences of harvesting crops would greatly outweigh the benefits and as such the community improves more from the meat/animal byproduct industry. This economical and ecological argument is one of several that Hare provides in his article Why I Am Only A Demi-Vegetarian, in addition to the market term being coined and reasoning behind
In the early twentieth century, at the height of the progressive movement, “Muckrakers” had uncovered many scandals and wrong doings in America, but none as big the scandals of Americas meatpacking industry. Rights and responsibilities were blatantly ignored by the industry in an attempt to turn out as much profit as possible. The meat packers did not care if poor working conditions led to sickness and death. They also did not care if the spoiled meat they sold was killing people. The following paper will discuss the many ways that rights and responsibilities were not being fulfilled by the meat packing industry.
...es of cattle, which resulted in the increase of suicidal reports. Slaughterhouses and meatpacking companies have amplified the amount of cattle slaughtered each hour to fulfill the amount of meat consumed in the United States due to the cause of fast food. The damage that fast food had placed on illegal immigrant workers and sanitary workers that are employed in slaughterhouses are as much as murdering the men and women, minute by minute. The growth of fast food is too fast for our voices to be heard and fast food had implemented too much innovation in agriculture today for us to fix. We can still change the society that we live in today, as long as we withdraw our arrogant and selfish thoughts on fast food and think of ways to improve and recover what the fast food industry had done.
Food Inc. addresses many political issues during the film to draw in the audience. Issues such as: the environment, education, workers’ rights, health care, climate change, energy control, to name a few. Director Robert Kenner exposes secrets about the foods society eats, where the food has come from and the processes the food went through. It is these issues that are used as politics of affect in both an extreme visual representation and a strong audio representation that has the biggest impact on the audience and their connection to what they are being told. This paper aims to discuss the film Food Inc. and the propaganda message for positive change, as well as, the differences between seeing food and deciding...
“If you live in a free market and a free society, shouldn’t you have the right to know what you’re buying? It’s shocking that we don’t and it’s shocking how much is kept from us” (Kenner). For years, the American public has been in the dark about the conditions under which the meat on their plate was produced. The movie, Food Inc. uncovers the harsh truths about the food industry. This shows that muckraking is still an effective means of creating change as shown by Robert Kenner’s movie, Food Inc. and the reforms to the food industry that followed its release.
“The assumption that animals are without rights, and the illusion that their treatment has no moral significance is a positively outrageous example of Western crudity and barbarity. Universal compassion is the only guarantee of morality."(Schopenhauer). I always wondered why some people are not so drawn to the consumption of meat and fed up with only one thought about it. Why so many people loathe of blood, and why so few people can easily kill and be slaughter animal, until they just get used to it? This reaction should say something about the most important moments in the code, which was programmed in the human psyche. Realization the necessity of refraining from meat is especially difficult because people consume it for a long time, and in addition, there is a certain attitude to the meat as to the product that is useful, nourishing and even prestigious. On the other hand, the constant consumption of meat has made the vast majority of people completely emotionless towards it. However, there must be some real and strong reasons for refusal of consumption of meat and as I noticed they were always completely different. So, even though vegetarianism has evolved drastically over time, some of its current forms have come back full circle to resemble that of its roots, when vegetarianism was an ethical-philosophical choice, not merely a matter of personal health.
In the book Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer, the author talks about, not only vegetarianism, but reveals to us what actually occurs in the factory farming system. The issue circulating in this book is whether to eat meat or not to eat meat. Foer, however, never tries to convert his reader to become vegetarians but rather to inform them with information so they can respond with better judgment. Eating meat has been a thing that majority of us engage in without question. Which is why among other reasons Foer feels compelled to share his findings about where our meat come from. Throughout the book, he gives vivid accounts of the dreadful conditions factory farmed animals endure on a daily basis. For this reason Foer urges us to take a stand against factory farming, and if we must eat meat then we must adapt humane agricultural methods for meat production.
As we can now observe, vegetarianism has become something fashionable, and the number of people who reject eating meat is constantly increasing. In Britain, for instance, over 5 million people have done it so far. It is obviously connected with the recent animal diseases, but this tendency is likely to spread on the other regions of the world. However, it is not only a fashion or fear of illnesses. I myself became a vegetarian about 2 years ago, and I can see a number of reasons why people should stop eating meat. They are mainly of ethic, economic and health type. Those who think in an ecological way should also be aware of how this meat consumption ruins our environment. I don’t have an intention to force anybody to become a vegetarian, but I hope that my argumentation would be strong enough to make some people think about it, at least. In this essay I will try to present this point of view, expressing my personal feelings and showing scientific facts about the problem.