The Conscious Kitchen, Veganism and Anarchy with Kenny Palurintano

Anarchast Ep. 318

Jeff interviews Kenny Palurintano from Kenny's Conscious Kitchen, topics include: veganism, vegetarianism, The Road to Anarchapulco, life on the road, rainbow gathering, intentional festivals, off grid communities, cooking and traveling for a living, plans for Anarchapulco 2017, mindful eating, clean food, listening to your body, bad vegan diets, the ethics of meat eating, mass murder of animals, meat was very hard to get in ancient times, caring for your body, energy transference and intention, eat like you love yourself!

The Road to Anarchapulco on Generosity.com:

Anarchapulco 2017:

Anarchast on Facebook:

The Dollar Vigilante:

Anarchast:

Enjoy our content and would like to see us get more amazing guests and spread the word of freedom? A donation to this BTC address will give us more resources to do so: 16AJs5DFEcfCuXkwmx1o54Ld4yXzPP1gVR

48 Comments on The Conscious Kitchen, Veganism and Anarchy with Kenny Palurintano

  1. Thank YOU!! So glad this message is getting out…. Veganism and Anarchy come from the same principle: unbiased Non-exploitation/Non-aggression principle. Fundamentally speaking they are the same thing, Non exploitation. Really frustrates me when i see Vegans”voting left” or Anarchists supporting the enslavement of non human animals. GREAT SHOW!!

  2. I eat meat. I don’t want to ever stop eating meat, but I can not avoid the fact that our current diets are killing us and the planet as a whole.

    • Raising your own animals, keeping them healthy & happy, and then killing them yourself, making use of all their parts, and preparing meat properly would have a huge impact on your body & the planet without having to give up the actual meat-eating.

    • +Kenny Palurintano
      I agree, and I have considered that before. If I’m going to enjoy meat, I should at the very least be the one to kill it. I’m not sure I would eat meat if I had to kill it.

    • I feel like a LOT of people wouldn’t eat meat anymore if they had to actually kill it, not to mention the butchering, dressing, etc. The complete separation from the act itself not only makes it much easier for people to consume huge amounts of meat without really thinking about the consequences, but also makes it less healthy for you I feel like.

      Spending time with the Lakota (and probably many other first nations, though I don’t have that first-hand knowledge), you can see a huge difference in the way they treat the animals they kill for food, the respect and gratitude shown to the animal. My understanding of the universe would lead me to believe that they are most certainly getting more benefit from that meat than someone with the same ratio in their diet, but buying it from the store, or even the butcher/meat market.

      Just from being able to see & smell a factory-farmed cow before it’s killed, most people would never eat beef again. The majority of the meat people eat in the modern world was raised it’s whole life in captivity, surrounded by feces, fed GMO corn & soy to fatten it up, then given antibiotics to help stop the infections that come from eating those things, and so on.

    • +Kenny Palurintano
      Very, very true, I think. I killed 2 animals in my life. Both when I was a child. One I shot with a bb gun (bird) the other, a opossum, I set on fire. I was severely traumatized by both. Not a day passes that I do not remember doing those things. I can’t even kill bugs now. I can not pass a worm on the street without picking it up and putting it back in the grass.

      I’ve always loved dogs. But it confuses ppl when I say I feel that I should be the one to kill them when the time comes. Because I am so gentle with animals. Not so gentle with ppl though. lol

      Dog owners make me very angry. They take animals that have been trained and bred for 1000’s of years 10,000 to be exact, to be a part of humanity, but so often they are treated with less compassion than we show our inanimate property. Left in the backyard. Never walked or shown affection. Forgotten. A dog’s place is next to a man not isolated in a cage alone.

      I feel I should be the one to kill my dogs because I think they have earned the right to end their lives the same as they began them. In the company of friends and family. I don’t want my dog’s final moments to be spent in a cage only to let out by ppl he/she doesn’t know and me no where in sight. (I’ve never been able to let ppl see me cry)

  3. I understand that we have to have responsibility for ourselves, but isn’t law enforcement here to protect us from the bad guys? how would a free society handle crime? also, how would a free society handle public building like roads? don’t we need a centralized platform to do these things?

    • Competing private firms, it is a bit of a complex question for a comment section, I would recommend you check through Tom Woods’, Stefan Molyneux’s, or David Friedman’s work, more specifically “Machinery of Freedom” by David Friedman, also this guys channel generally attracts idiots like Larken Rose and Adam Kokesh who get high and sell society to leftists so, best of luck and stop watching anarchast.

    • Starting with crime, most of what are called “crimes” now have no victim, meaning they aren’t crimes. How crime is handled will be different for different communities, and since most crime is caused by trauma, drug addiction, and other things that can be healed, and are hugely caused & exacerbated by the systemic violence that is government, without that systemic violence you would automatically see less of it.

      Right now, all roads are built by private companies. Not government. The biggest difference is that without the government stealing money from millions of people to build & maintain those roads, only the people/corporations who actually benefit from them would have to pay for them. Guess how much extra profit Walmart (just 1 example) makes by not having to build or maintain the backbone of it’s shipping infrastructure.

  4. I am vegan cause of NAP also, it seems daunting at first to switch to vegan but its just because of our preprogramming, its really a simple switch and it seems silly in hindsight that I would think that consuming animals was necessary for health and happiness or that switching to not eating animals would be a dramatic and radical change for me. I was anarchist long before and came to the conclusion that as an anarchist the only way to effect change was in my everyday life, veganism is a really simple way I can effect change in the world each and everyday.

  5. Would a cow ever ask itself the question whether or not violence against humans is moral? No?
    What, morality only applies to individuals that follow morality?
    Good, I´m going to go eat my steak now.

    • +Kenny Palurintano
      If you read my comment you will notice that I in no way said that you argue for veganism from a moral standpiont. However, lots of vegans do (just read some comments). Also, the thumbnail of this video, which was what mostly inspired me to write this comment, showed a picture off a cow, with the words: “Do they need to die?”, to which I say: “Yes, if I want to get my steak, they do. And I don´t have moral issues with that.”

      “Your question falls into that same old fallacy of “animals do it, so humans should to””
      No, that´s not what I said. I´m not saying you SHOULD eat animals. I´m saying you CAN morally eat animals. You can totally be a vegan and that´s fine.
      My point is that it´s ok to eat animals specifically BECAUSE they haven´t developed the inteligence to understand morality, they are not moral agents.
      Just like it´s not immoral to steal from a thief, because he doesn´t care about property rights, it´s ok to eat animals because clearly they wouldn´t give a second thought about killing and eating you if they could.
      You simply can´t look at morality without considering who you´re trying to apply it to.

      “Personally, I expect a little more from a human than I do from a cow.”
      Yes, of course! That´s why it´s not ok to kill a human (unless he fails that expectation and chooses to not follow morality, in that case he can and should be punished accordingly).

    • So, because a baby does not have the intelligence to understand morality, it is not a moral agent, and you can do anything you want to them? How about a mentally handicapped person?

      Just because your victim doesn’t have an understanding of the immorality of the violence you are imposing on it, does not mean it isn’t immoral.

    • +Kenny Palurintano
      A child will grow into a moral being. Show me a chicken that will at any point of it´s life talk to me about universalities and principles and I promise I will never eat a chicken again in my life.
      A person who is handicapped to the point where he can´t understand the concept of right and wrong can hardly take care of himself. Such a person would have people looking after him, people caring for him, those people would not allow me to harm this person. I can´t go and kill my neighbors dog either.

    • So you are assuming, because humans lack the ability to communicate with any of these other animals, that those animals therefore are without intelligence. Just because we can’t see it ourselves doesn’t mean that it’s not there, only that we are incapable of experiencing it.

      This second paragraph is where your true colors are shown. You are simply stating that you can’t go kill someone who is defended by someone else, but that’s always the case. Either it is moral to kill everything incapable of “being a moral agent”, or the burden of morality is on the murderer, and not the victim.

    • +Kenny Palurintano
      Are you thumbing up your own comments? Because there is no one else in this discussion and I don´t expect someone to read your comments both within 4 minutes. Whatever, lets get to the arguments.

      “So you are assuming, because humans lack the ability to communicate with any of these other animals, that those animals therefore are without intelligence.”
      No. I assume they are not intelligent because they show no signs of intelligence. When I wrote my comment, I thought about whether or not I should say something like: “Chickens don´t express any signs of higher intelligence in their behavior.”
      Then I assumed you would understand that when I just say: “Show me a chicken that talks”. I was wrong.
      If you want to debate that, go ahead.

      “You are simply stating that you can’t go kill someone who is defended by someone else,…”
      No, I am stating that you can´t destroy things that belong to other people.
      I´m sorry, this may sound harsh to you, but if someone is so mentally handicapped that he can´t understand any concept of right and wrong (it doesn´t have to be deep principles, just understanding the concept that you don´t do certain things just because it´s wrong to say, hurt other people), then you can hardly assign full self-ownership to him.
      Such a person would at least to some degree belong to his relatives or whoever takes care of him the same way a dog would. And while I still want people like that well and taken care of, I just can´t see how they would have the same rights everyone else has.

  6. Just eating more fruit would be great for you health Jeff! You live in Mexico, there must be high quality fruit there. Eat as many mangoes as you can for breakfast and see how you feel.

    • The fruit selection is amazing down there! I’m always excited to get back south for the variety of mangoes, avocadoes, sepotas, and much more that never make it north of the border.

  7. I eat fish and eggs, but not fowl or mammals. This is entirely for my own spiritual needs. It has nothing to do with killing animals. Sapient beings have rights. Intentionally harming them or trespassing against their property is criminal. Non-sapient beings do NOT have rights. They are property. Where to draw the line is largely a religious issue. My opinion: Humans usually become sapient during their first year after birth. Apes and chimpanzees and whales and dolphins may be sapient. Other animals and unborn mammals? Not.

    • Your definition of “sapient” beings is purely hypothetical, and 100% subjective. Just because we don’t have the ability to communicate with an animal doesn’t mean it’s any less intelligent or “sapient” than us, simply that we are not capable of communicating with it.

  8. Carnism is a religion just like statism. They both rely on mass hypnosis, the denial of reality and violent domination to exist. Correct eating is anarchism for your body my brothers and sisters. And thanks Kenny for the awesome raw choco cookies last year. They were EPIC!!!! Been craving them since 🙂

  9. The Mongols, Colonial Argentina, the Inuit are all examples of cultures
    that depended predominantly if not exclusively on animal products for
    their survival. Pretty much everyone else relies on omnivore based
    diets. What cultures exclusively depended on solely  plant based diets
    for hundreds of years? 0

    • Indian culture. Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism all recommend or require vegetarian diets.

      Pre-agriculture, most everyone would have eaten mostly plants, as there was not cattle available to just slaughter on demand. This especially goes for everything before we started working with spears, as humans had almost no chance of catching an animal before that. The modern human brain developed on a plant-based diet.

  10. You have to get enough protein. I eat a lot of vegan food, but I eat the best legal milk in the world, because when the cows get old they are not slaughtered. Last year I drank raw milk, but there’s only one guy who has it and doesn’t kill his older cows. As a member of the TM Movement, I-so-to-speak-worship cows. That protein requisite comes in the content of balance. Many systems seek balance but Ayur-Veda especially Maharishi Ayur-Veda creates the most consciousness for gaining balance.

    • Yes, you do have to get enough protein. Luckily, it is EXTREMELY easy to get enough protein on a vegan diet. Nuts, seeds, legumes, greens, etc etc. The “need more protein” argument is purely an argument from ignorance.

    • Thank you Kenny. I respect your experience and knowledge in the matter. The main point was one of balance based on body type: vata, pitta, kapha, plus their combinations. Nuts, seeds, and most legumes do not sit well for pitta types and for vata types (who also have to reduce greens) also. Vegan works for kapha types the best. It’s actually almost mandatory for kapha types. But the most profound point is one of consciousness which alone can guarantee balance in the physiology.

  11. In order to liberate humans you must first must liberate the animals. Look up Dr. Will Tuttle he wrote the world peace diet.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*