Manipulation and dilemma

1657: 

Vegans want to let people know how widespread is the manipulation of the consumer, and how easily we can be convinced into buying 'yummy' foods made from animals. Of course, in order to push our point home, we’d love to talk more about people’s 'addiction' to these foods, but that would touch on a very raw nerve.

         

So, that’s our difficulty. We see a bright future ahead for resolving so many of our ethically-based problems, especially our complicity in the crime of animal abuse. The ending of that is to start mending many problems afflicting all forms of life. But the ending of this one human habit is easier said than done for most people, who can't seem to stop eating the animals and their secretions. Even if only sub consciously, most animal-eating people are aware they're doing something morally wrong. So, how do we explain our own reasons for being optimistic without mentioning our reasons for boycotting animal products? It’s almost impossible to do that without causing offence. The fact is that people make great daily use of all the stuff we are strongly suggesting they have nothing to do with.

We could talk about saving money by not wasting it buying rubbish. We could talk about the health benefits of eating only from the plant world. But mostly it's the invisible danger of being part of a conspiracy against these enslaved animals, and the equally invisible effect all this has on the well-being of the consumer. Broaching these matters brings the animal advocate into a veritable minefield of disagreement; when we start to talk about the crimes committed by the Animal Industries and, by implication, the consumer’s crime of supporting them, we can expect to ignite considerable hostility. We are labelled 'shame-merchants' - and that’s not going to help us change peoples’ attitudes. But if we don't mention it in terms of a crime, then we're misrepresenting the whole issue. That's the dilemma.