Every Thanksgiving we get to hear the left drone endlessly on about how horrible the Pilgrims and other settlers really were to the Native Americans, why we should all be ashamed of our ancestors, those brave men and women that conquered and settled the continent, and how celebrating Thanksgiving is “colonialist”, “imperialist,” or some other form of “ist.”
Well, this year the Washington Post decided to take a different line of attack when going after Thanksgiving: rather than rant about the fate of the Native Americans, it decided to tally the “climate impact” of the holiday and try to get people thinking about how they could save the environment by roasting potatoes instead of mashing them…
That came in an article titled “The Climate Impact of the Thanksgiving Meal Might Surprise You.” In the article, the author, Tamar Haspel, decided to tally the “climate impact” of all the foods traditionally eaten on Thanksgiving, though praising them for being more “climate friendly” than those eaten on July 4th. Beginning, the article says:
“I know, I know, nobody wants to put ‘climate’ and ‘Thanksgiving’ in the same sentence. Tallying the environmental impact of a holiday feast doesn’t seem like it’s in the spirit of the thing. But I’m here to tell you that the news is good. The mainstays of the meal are poultry and plants, which make Thanksgiving a much more climate-friendly holiday” than July 4.
She added that “On the beef-pork-poultry axis of meat, poultry has the lowest greenhouse gas emission levels” before continuing on with how to have more climate-friendly potatoes, saying:
“Potatoes roll in at about one-tenth the greenhouse gas emissions of the poultry (on a per-calorie basis). Of course, the butter and cream increase the tally because dairy is comparable to poultry and pork, and if you want to cut back on those, try roasting your potatoes instead of mashing; go crispy instead of creamy.”
Surprisingly, the author does recommend people go hunting and kill venison to eat, saying venison “is the most eco-friendly food on the planet—if you hunt the deer yourself.”
But, of course, nothing is enough for the left and so the end of the article was a scold about “food waste”:
That’s the rundown of some of the foods we’re most likely to find on a typical American table. Basically, all good! There is a Thanksgiving climate villain, but you won’t find it on the table. You’ll find it off the table, and eventually in the garbage, after the holiday: food waste.
By now, you’ve undoubtedly heard that we waste about a third of our food here in the United States. That means that one-third of all the energy, all the deforestation, all the nutrient runoff that goes into feeding us is for nothing. If you’re interested in reducing the climate impact of your diet, but have found that changing what you eat is difficult, this is where you should focus your efforts.
Admittedly, the article was far less critical of the holiday than it could have been. But still, it misses the point completely: the point of Thanksgiving to to feast, be merry, and give thanks for the bounty given us by God. Not to tally the emissions impact of every green bean on your plate and scold a young cousin for scraping some gravy into the trash can.
"*" indicates required fields