Ethics starts with Non-Violence

1011: 

Talking about ‘diet’ is the peg on which ‘animal’ discussion often hangs its hat, anything to get away from the dark side - the cruelty of farming animals.  But that’s the return-point, where discussion comes back to ‘ethics’.  This is ultimately where we must win people over, otherwise it’s still only about ‘me’ and ‘my health’ and never gets as far as ‘my conscience’ and ‘the other’.  

Apart from veganism being a great diet, it’s also an ethical diet because it’s based on non-violence, meaning that animals don’t ever have to be killed or exploited or violated.  Vegans are at a double advantage in that they have stumbled on a diet which will keep their bodies healthy but, by adopting this diet, they also can live without participating in ‘The Violence’.

           

But now to the next stage: if we accuse someone of being violent because they eat meat or dairy products, that accusation may be construed as a ‘violence’ in itself.  For that reason alone, we should think carefully before making these sorts of accusations.  By pressing our opinion too hard we hint at our own latent aggression, and lose our best chance to discuss things rationally.  Once someone feels they’re being attacked, they’ll counter attack, and then the discussion goes around in circles - the central arguments are forgotten, and their hostile attitude to animal rights will become even more entrenched.  In the future they may only see us as wanting to subvert society by liberating all the animals.  Then it’s only a matter of time before ‘food-denigrating’ becomes illegal, as it is in some parts of USA.  The animal industry, supported by almost all consumers, already has enough political clout to bring this about.