Shocking facts part two

If Animal Rights hasn’t reached many people yet then perhaps it’s time to re-consider our approach, and that might start by becoming less reliant on ‘shocking-facts’.
Back in the 1980’s when the horrors of modern animal farming first came to light everyone was shocked, but soon enough it was ‘business as usual’. Things down on the farm are worse today, but essentially not that much worse in terms of mindless cruelty and indifference. The phrase “hens in cages” is understood to represent how cruel humans have become, but that hasn’t meant people think about it. Yes, we are shocked, yes, we shake our heads in disbelief but we’re not willing to change the habits of a lifetime. We say ‘Be kinder to animals’ but that’s where it stops. That’s why vegans, knowing humans have ‘form’, say “Don’t trust humans around animals. They have a history of abuse”.
As activists we have to start from a ‘rights’ point of view (not welfare) and promote a no-use-animal policy. That’s a long way from the norm and a long way from those who say “But I do eat free range”. Some day every omnivore will have to come to terms with what we know today as ‘vegan principle’ and, in all fairness, they may find it interesting enough … first time round. But they’ll probably want to cross the street, next time they see us, to avoid a repeat session with us, on our pet subject. We all dislike the discomfort of being evangelised by someone who is passionate and righteous with it. That’s surely why Animal Rights should never seem like a church and why vegans shouldn’t preach.
So, if omnivores accuse us of anything let it be for igniting dangerous discussion. We need to be seen as open people, valued for who we are rather than as purveyors of shocking-facts; if we can become a conduit for ideas and information that would be great. That’s all we can expect in these very early days of animal rights consciousness.
Those of us who advocate animal liberation are never short of something to say, but in the beginning we have to be cautious. This is one ticklish subject. We might expect people to be open with us but not if we drop bombs on them. As soon as we get personal, over ‘differences of opinion’, then dialogue ends and fights begin, whereas if we can have a non-judgemental exchange, we can’t go wrong. Somehow, god-knows-how, we need to establish mutual respect, and keep it coming … certainly before we lunge at them with the spear of truth. Whew!
We can say whatever we like … unless we’re uncertain about our own tendency to ‘turn nasty under provocation’. If we feel a ‘violence’ coming on it’s time to leave or change the subject.