This is Part 2 of a multi-part series on surviving inflation and food shortages.
Read Part 1: Why You Need a Survival Garden
Why you need to raise small livestock
Following up on Part 1 of this series, what can you do to supplement your diet and cushion your sustenance baseline, apart from keeping a vegetable garden?
One of the commodities that might become scarce or too expensive for the average person to afford during widespread and unrelenting inflation is meat. This is a problem, since most of us rely on meat and other animal products for much of our protein and fat intake. And even if we forego meat in favor of alternatives such as soy, beans and lentils, or the increasingly popular pea protein, there’s still a problem. If everyone is making the same dietary switches at once, the supply will struggle to meet the demand, and more shortages will result.
It is no secret that certain political agendas of those intent on world domination include the ultimate elimination (by force, if necessary) of the meat industry, and even of small-scale meat production. The first big push toward a meatless society may have coincided with the pandemic and its “Great Reset”, “Build Back Better” branding, but the agenda has existed far longer than that.
These narratives will tell you that meat is on its way out as a consequence of technological advancement, environmental necessity, or economic changes. As with all propaganda narratives, this lie wraps itself around a kernel of truth. There are, indeed, market forces disrupting the meat industry. But that disruption on its own does not signify “the end of meat.”
Yes, as technology unveils more options for protein consumption (like 3D printed meat, cultured “meat”, and new processes for making bean substance appear and taste somewhat meat-like), and as people become more concerned (often misguidedly) about the environmental impacts of their food choices, naturally part of the market demand for actual meat will split off toward these other alternatives. However, not all of it will. In the absence of applied pressure from non-market forces, many people would choose to continue eating regular-old meat sourced from animals, just like our species has since time immemorial.
The fact is that the narrativists themselves hold the greatest portion of responsibility for this coming “end of meat.” They funnel enormous amounts of money into the propaganda machine to create the expectation that meatlessness will be a necessary facet of the future, and to create false guilt in people for making dietary choices that supposedly contribute to a coming climatological apocalypse. Meanwhile, they use their extensive and powerful political connections—their think tanks, NGOs, and marionette lawmakers—to further anti-meat legislation in various countries and anti-meat agreements in the international governance organizations. Ideologically driven, they invest billions in the very start-ups that they promise us will replace the meat industry, funding the proliferation of everything from pea protein burgers to insect farms to lab-grown meat analogues.
Would the market, left to its own devices, choose this path to fake foodism? Doubtful.
And then there’s the more obviously deliberate instances of sabotage to global food systems, especially in the livestock and meat industries:
The farm and factory fires that have been taking place at an uncannily high rate since 2019
Laws and regulations restricting small-scale farmers and cottage industry food producers from operating their businesses, mostly at the state legislation level in the US, as well as in European countries
Economic sanctions against Russia that prevent many countries from accessing needed grain and fertilizer that cannot be produced domestically. This means not only grain for human consumption, but grain necessary to feed livestock is increasingly unavailable or prohibitively expensive in many places around the world.
Increasingly common cyberterrorist attacks on food distribution companies and networks
The suspicious 2020 explosion of the Port of Beirut, which decimated Lebanon’s grain supply and has now led to extreme food insecurity in that country (again, this affects not only human grain consumption, but also livestock grain consumption, which impacts the Lebanese people’s access to meat.)
The government-enforced slaughter of millions of often healthy poultry livestock (including backyard chickens) due to ominous-sounding bird flu outbreaks
Since long before humanity walked upright out of the bush and began to domesticate animals, we have relied upon meat to satisfy our nutritional needs. To suggest that the entire human race would benefit from eliminating this nutritional resource—along with the ancient way of life that is farming and ranching—is pure insanity.
And while complaints about the environmental impact of large-scale meat production are certainly not without merit, it is outlandish to think that these issues can only be addressed by the complete eradication of animal husbandry. Environmentally harmonious food production can be achieved without the technocratic reinvention of the food supply, without everyone turning to government-subsidized frankenmeats and larva meal.
But, perhaps most importantly, our very humanity is at stake. Like all facets of the technocratic agenda, the “end of meat” threatens not only our physical survival, but also our freedom, agency, and dignity. In the name of environmental protection, the elites will buy your right to raise animals, so that neither you, your heirs, nor the contractual purchaser of your land can ever legally own livestock again on the same property. They’ll then suggest you plant the same land with monocropped trees (an environmental disaster) in order to contribute to their envisioned carbon credit-based economy. Then they’ll have you paying with those carbon credits for a steak grown in a laboratory that poses more environmental and biological risk than your original livestock operation ever could have. Do you see how this all works?
It is incumbent on us—those of us with enough sense to see the flagrant insanity at play here and enough moral fiber to oppose it—to provide for our own meat consumption, to the extent that is possible for each of us. It is imperative that we protect and defend our right to eat as we choose. And really, it’s past time we took personal and local charge of our own meat production, among other things. Already for decades most of us have been dependent upon dirty, inhumane factory farms for our meat, just as we have depended on dirty, inhumane governments for our stability. It was really only a matter of time before we devolved into livestock ourselves.
Isn’t it time we changed that?
More to come…
I had planned to include in this article a logistical rundown on raising small livestock for family meat consumption, but the post is getting too long, so I’ll be publishing the second half as Part 3 of this series. It will include lots of resources to get you started, so stay tuned.
Thank you for reading!
If you love this essay, please share it. If you’d like more essays (and fiction!) in your inbox, subscribe for free! And if you’d like to support this newsletter and my other projects, please consider the options below.
-Starr
Social Links
Follow me on Twitter
Connect with me on MeWe
Follow me on TikTok
Are you going to do do one on trapping? Raising livestock is great, but there are many that are not in a position to do so. I would wager a majority of the population in the US falls into this category. You might also want to look into some of the apps which seek to facilitate finding local farmers and ranchers.