Had an old block of tofu that needed to be used. Crumbling up tofu by hand is so much more satisfying than breaking up ground beef in a pan. I tossed it in double fermented soy sauce and squid brand fish sauce and baked it at 350F until it browned. The beans were kidney, black, garbanzo, and some tiny guys called “rice beans”
You must log in or # to comment.
I don’t give a shit whether it’s vegan or not that sounds amazing. Pescatarian as hell. Good job!
There’s clearly more than 4 beans in that chili…
Fuck, you’re right!
Your edit made me think of that scene from Boondocks Saints,
How many bodies, Greenly?
Eight. Ah, shit! I forgot about that one! Nine! Nine?
While Greenly is out getting coffee does anybody else want anything?
Cause I’m an expert in… numberology.
So glad that reference landed lol
Looks delicious! I’d eat that in pretty much any situation/meal.
And it sucks that once again, the ever-predictable vegans have to come in and rub their obnoxious shit on everything in the comments. I knew there’d be drama just by reading the title.
Eh, I kinda expected it and inadvertantly invited it by using the word I guess. I try not to let the snarky stuff get to me though. I let them vent and move on.
I take it the sour cream and fish sauce are the non vegan parts?
In any case, ain’t no bad way to pack umami in chili that I’ve run across. Never did it with fish sauce, but soy sauce is pretty good at that job. Isn’t my first pick overall, I tend to favor worcestershire and peanut butter. But it’s a solid option for sure.
If I remember right Worcestershire sauce is actually a lot like a western fishsauce, being largely flavored by fermented anchovies. I think it traces back to garum, an old fermented anchovy condiment that is essentially just fishsauce from the Mediterranean region
Pretty much, yeah. It ends up roughly the same, particularly when as an ingredient rather than a condiment.
You can also get flakes of MSG which will do the same thing. Replace 1/3 of your salt with it and you’re golden. Or just keep all the salt in. I’m too weak to deny myself that salt
Yessir. For a haphazardly thrown together pot, it was damn good. Might add some worcestershire in the next bowl to test it out.
Isn’t it technically 5 bean Chili?
I am a firm believer in the idea that if it has beans it’s not chili. I am sure this was a tasty stew though.
I’m moreso in the ‘if it has meat it’s not chili’ camp. 😄
That’s… not how chili works…
The more vegan I go, the more the point is in replacing unhealthy animal products.
Chili absolutely works without meat, but it does take some skill and/or good substitutes.
Chili without meat is like chili with beans… just stew. Chili is a specific dish, you are basically saying that you can make chicken nuggets without chicken. There are some decent facsimiles, but they aren’t chicken nuggets.
Well that’s the whole point-- a decent facsimile that tastes close enough to meat. They have these “Gardein” vegan meatballs at the local store that are absolutely incredible… no way would I be able to tell them apart from meat in a blind taste test. And they’re much better than the “Impossible Meat” brand.
If I made chili with that stuff, a lot of people would be legitimately fooled. Hence… chili, effectively. That’s all that matters to me, not living up to some definition or belief system that some may cling to.
I mean… do you feel the same way about AI slop for instance? It’s okay if whoever is showing it to you can trick you into thinking it isn’t AI? I’m happy that you can make good food but words have meanings for a reason.
That’s a crazy poor analogy to me, but whatever. The meat substitutes aren’t lazy slop in any way, shape or form.
Words have meanings sure, but the meanings of words shift over time, and sometimes all it takes is half a generation for that to happen. Also, food substitutes are common in recipes, and recipes also shift over the years. Pizza for example used to have nothing whatsoever to do with tomatoes before they were introduced via the New World, and now they’re standard. Similar story with cheese.
Can’t even taste the torture.
“Almost vegan” isn’t a thing. And it’s not even vegetarian.
This kind of comment is why people turn away from veganism.
If you expect nothing but perfection from the people who try, they won’t bother.
Ask yourself if you actually want people to use fewer animal products, or if you just want to feel morally superior.
Of course it is. The concept is harm reduction. If you aren’t able to make the entire leap-fine, reduce your reliance on animal products instead. Gatekeeping and belittling people ain’t it bud.
I mean im trying to reduce but hes right its not vegan. it is a type of vegetarian though but pescatarian has come in as vogue for it. My goal would be lacto-ovo vegetarian
I’m not arguing that what you did was vegan. I’m challenging his assertion that you can’t describe something as approaching veganism without meeting the threshold of actual veganism. It’s weird and gatekeepy.
I don’t understand why you are so against using the accurate and more flexible term “plant-based” instead of “vegan”.
Why do you insist on bastardizing veganism? I don’t get it. Like I told you earlier, labels matter and this just breeds confusion on what’s vegan and what’s not. People already are confused about veganism because of nonsense like this. Just call it “mostly plant based” and call it a day.
“Veganism” is total abstinence from animal products.
Something is either vegan or it’s not. It’s completely binary. Either it contains animal based products or it doesn’t.
Food that is mostly plant based is way better for the environment and animals than your average meat and dairy based meals, but it’s just not “almost vegan”. Labels have meanings and it should be like that so there’s no confusion.
For someone so keyed in on definitions you seem to have missed the definition of the word ‘almost’. Things can be more similar to one thing than another. For instance using fish sauce in dishes vs easting a hamburger. But thank you for sharing your apparently very binary view of the world.
Have you heard anyone say “almost halal” or “almost kosher”? No?
This is just as ridiculous.
I don’t understand your argument. Those are religious definitions, you also don’t say your “almost christian”.
Have you heard someone say “almost dry” or “almost complete”? Because “dry” and “complete” are also binary things.
It’s almost like context matters.
veganism is a philosophy of harm reduction on animals. while it is not perfect it is not intentional. therefore your dish is no where near vegan.
It is almost plant based though.
the definition is rather important to lots of people and this is the reason you are getting some push back.
He said almost vegan. As in not vegan but closer to it than other diets. Why are you so concerned with not using vegan as the far end of a spectrum of diets? It makes you look incredibly performative.
Veganism is not a diet. I think this is the source of your confusion.
I suppose I can get behind this distinction. Veganism is a philosophy that results in following a vegan diet. And so I am saying his diet approaches a vegan diet, I don’t know the motivations for such- so I can agree that perhaps it isn’t motivated by a vegan philosophy. But it is not debatable that his diet is “almost vegan” in nature (it is definitely much closer to vegan than an average Western diet for example) even if their philosophy may not be. That being said- trying to belittle people for a lesser form harm reduction when vegan philosophy is literally a harm reduction practice seems counterintuitive and elitist.
My bad for using incorrect terms. *Meatless.
