This has nothing to do with seeing the harm being done. Sacrificing the animal has always been a part of human experience in traditional societies.
Even today, in my country, sacrificing a pig before Christmas is a cherished tradition, that friends and family gather together for, and enjoy the meat immediately after.
I believe that the justification is simple - people care for the animals and try to give them a good life (in pre-industrial agriculture, not the horrific meat factories we get most food from now). Then, there comes a day when one animal's life must end, as is the natural circle of life. The sacrifice itself is performed in a way which is perceived as decent (though by modern standards, we now realize it is often not decent).
Essentially, the humans have given the animal their care, and then the animal 'gives' the humans its meat. It's a simple quid-pro-quo, if you want to look at it purely rationally.
It's still significantly better than what would happen to the animals if they were living in the forest - unlike many other animals, we at least kill them before eating their flesh.
Unfortunately, all of this has been turned gruesome by moder industrial practices, and that IS a part that benefits from staying out of sight.
My comment wasn't about whether it's wrong or not to kill animals - I absolutely prefer than an amimal's death is witnessed by those who will profit from it. It's the case where, particularly in the sheltered west, we have people who happily eat meat and yet would not kill the animal themselves to do so, and would save a cute animal from suffering if given the opportunity when they see it, but do nothing to stop suffering from happen when they cannot see it.
As you say, it is the purpose of the industrial machine to hide these horrors from us. But it's shameful for those who ignore that it exists and still profit from it.
Even today, in my country, sacrificing a pig before Christmas is a cherished tradition, that friends and family gather together for, and enjoy the meat immediately after.
I believe that the justification is simple - people care for the animals and try to give them a good life (in pre-industrial agriculture, not the horrific meat factories we get most food from now). Then, there comes a day when one animal's life must end, as is the natural circle of life. The sacrifice itself is performed in a way which is perceived as decent (though by modern standards, we now realize it is often not decent).
Essentially, the humans have given the animal their care, and then the animal 'gives' the humans its meat. It's a simple quid-pro-quo, if you want to look at it purely rationally.
It's still significantly better than what would happen to the animals if they were living in the forest - unlike many other animals, we at least kill them before eating their flesh.
Unfortunately, all of this has been turned gruesome by moder industrial practices, and that IS a part that benefits from staying out of sight.