Going Public

1126: 

When we start hurling abuse in public it works wonders, in the short term.  “Meat is murder. Meat will kill you”.  It unifies one’s fellow protesters, it makes us all feel good, and sometimes it looks very brave, striking fear into people’s hearts.  But unless we’re willing to continually escalate that sort of approach it eventually loses its power and fizzles out.  Big talk and dire warnings become easily clichéd.

The aim of any Animal Rights protest should be to win people over, not alienate them.  (And it’s as if people are just busting to be alienated so they can justify feeling more separate).  For our part, we should start with setting a good example of how a highly principled activist behaves.  The way we conduct ourselves in public needs to reflect what we expect of others.  It’s up to us to establish calm in the face of opposition.

If we want to ‘go public’ we have to be prepared to get cold shouldered.  There are no surprises if everyone ignores what we say, since those who’re already feeling a bit guilty will use any excuse to avoid ‘spoilers’.  It’s possible that we might just be able to push through, by keeping on talking, making our points in spite of interruption and heckling, but perhaps that’s not the point.  Communication isn’t just about persistence, not over such personal matters as one’s attitude to animals, eating them, wearing them, etc.  This is a subject you can’t bring up as casually as you would the state of the weather.  It’s a subject people can’t afford to be too interested in, because it’s too confronting and it touches too many raw nerves.

We can’t casually bump into people on the street corner and converse with them on this very personal matter.  “Tell me, do you still eat meat?”  New ideas, especially as radical as these ideas, don’t circulate easily.  Some, who are ready to make changes, might not find such new ideas being discussed in the media.  At first, they’ll wonder why, until they realise the media itself is tightly controlled.  When it comes to this subject, it’s unlikely we’ll have both sides of the ‘animal argument’ presented, and that will inhibit our attempts to weigh up arguments, and therefore to arrive at conclusions.

But, all is not lost.  In fact we now have the Internet, where anyone can go searching for information about new or radical ideas.  But beyond the cyber world, when connecting with ‘live’ people in order to discuss the issues, it soon becomes obvious why this subject is kept under wraps - Animal Rights or veganism is highly inconvenient.  So, for us, it’s always going to be a long haul to even get people thinking and talking about it all.  Any progress we make will need a patient, step by step approach.

The first step is to make a connection.  And that means showing we’re genuine, ready to answer questions and not afraid of disagreement.  Obviously there’ll be differences of opinion.  And we must be there not just to answer questions but to bridge the gulf of opinion, in a non-threatening way.  Our overall job is to convince others that we only want to help, and that we’ve got no other agenda.

I’d like to stand with microphone in hand, in front of a crowd of eager listeners, and lecture them, but that’s not reality.  The soap box is dead.  I need to communicate in a more intimate way, in the spirit of a one-on-one conversation, and be prepared to cover a whole range of related issues.  So, when talking on this subject of animal-use, my first words will set the tone.  Talk usually starts by answering questions.  As an example:

“You’re a vegan then?”

“Yes.”

“Why?”

“It’s something I feel passionately about.”

         

If ever I get this far I’m usually tempted to go into too much detail, but that isn’t necessarily what anyone wants to hear, especially if it sounds like I’m bragging.  Superior ethics mixed with ‘passion’ will almost certainly make them regret asking the question, and then they’ll try to get off the subject.

I prefer not to show my hand too soon.

“You’re what?”

It’s meant to make me go on the defensive. 

“y….e .. s, go on …”, waiting to pounce on my first foolish statement, when they can go in for the kill.

So I’d prefer the less obvious approach.  I’d rather try to coax the conversation along by seeming to be a bit vulnerable, even innocent, because if I don’t seem too eager, they may show some interest.  I’d be trying to lure them into asking me to explain myself.  And that’s really where I want to get to, eventually.

         

I know they want a chance to justify themselves, by exploding my righteous position on all this.  But it’s just as likely they’re curious anyway, so I need to be ready to drop tactics and just be useful to them.  Our job is not to waste a genuine opportunity to pass on information, but always in a non-confrontational way.

Ideally, they must feel as if they are simply being informed, not put off.  Perhaps they’re out-manoeuvred, perhaps I’ve been cornered, but this is not about winning, it’s about the art of communicating and making friendly connections.  It’s about a stage-by-stage learning process, for us and for them.