He chooses action, a bad action, instead of nonaction in relation to those bad actions. In that case, nonaction is actually preferable. Veganism is opting out of animal exploitation - often described as a non-action.

I understand the intent of calling it an action to stop exploiting animals, because ceasing an action feels like an action in itself, especially if resultingly, it’s replaced by other actions. It’s a change, which is an action of sorts. I use that language too because it’s effective.

But I think it’s interesting that we humans always frame issues related to impacting upon animals and the environment as if we’re “helping” and “taking action” by simply stopping doing something bad/harmful or reducing our harm.

When we talk about becoming vegan, we often say things like “save hundreds of animals a year through reduced supply/demand”, when really we mean more like spare them from the consequences of our own actions. And meanwhile, we never use the language of “saving” someone when a person decides not to kill someone they were considering killing - in the human context. So it feels maybe like we’re still untangling speciesist bias and devaluing or de-individualizing other animals in subtle ways. Where for example, respecting an animal is seen as a virtuous, heroic action, rather than basic moral decency.

For the environment, it’s the same, except less about individuals and more about feeling maybe like we’re so entitled with our human egocentrism/anthropocentrism to use/“harvest”/damage the planet as we please, that deciding to reduce our harm to it is a “supererogatory” action deserving of praise, or that it’s an encouraged option, rather than a moral obligation & duty. Same with animals more or less, except animals are sentient beings so it’s arguably worse.

He said, with an exasperated demeanor, that when vegans make certain arguments against animal exploitation, it makes him want to eat a whole bucket of chicken(s). This knee-jerk response is very interesting and should be the subject of psychological research if it isn’t already - carnism in general has been, and concepts like the meat paradox, so maybe. We could see in real time his worldview unraveling and devolving into basal emotional instincts rather than logic, reason or empathy. Interestingly, the other person in the video said they didn’t have that reaction, and Ben quickly walked back his comment and seemingly felt guilty for it.