The peace show

Saturday 2nd October 2010

We have a tricky subject here. Everything we believe in must be reflected in our daily lifestyle otherwise we’ll be seen as false … because we’re watched; it’s what people see; it’s how a genuine person can make an impact. If someone’s interested in veganism they’ll first look at any vegans they know, and ask if they’re kosher. The personal example illustrates the point – we represent ourselves as ordinary, acceptable people, who one might want to know. We also represent a cause.
For instance, being homosexual one supports the aspirations of fellow gays … but one doesn’t have to like ‘nasty queens’. Likewise being vegan one doesn’t have to like the nasty ones just because they eat the same sort of food. But it’s likely when we do see nasty people, they’re not going to be people we want to emulate. For such a cause as ours, it isn’t hard to let ourselves down. We do it all the time. And then we drag the cause down too. Some of us don’t represent the movement adequately because we’re still dealing with our own ‘aggro’ agenda.
The big problem with ‘nasty’ types is that they don’t or can’t or won’t take control of their hard (unattractive) side. They usually resist open discussions because they’re afraid of their own lack of control. Nonetheless they’re keen not to be seen to be backing out of discussing this subject. What they do, I observe, is attempt to capsize our arguments, to save their face. That’s their m.o. Not for them any interest in being open. Likeable is usually impossible so they go for being intellectually admirable, clever. They aren’t into being open … to increase understanding or increasing personal closeness. They’re too busy showing their ‘nasty’ side.
Once the ‘game is up’, once our nasty side has been spotted, there’s a drop in the affection we feel from others, hence a drop-off in their confidence in us. We’re seen to be using crude techniques to get what we want. (As two-years olds in a tantrum). If one holds on to the ‘hard-nose’ attitudes and loses one’s friends in the process, one is also actively helping to maintain the status quo. (The whole system is based on force). Conventional-ites have a horror of new ideas, especially those dealing with heart.
Although some of us certainly do have a nasty side to our character (a contemptuousness that’s difficult to keep in control or to improve upon) we might be making the attempt - to deal with it. And THAT ATTEMPT makes all the difference. It shows us to be vulnerable, yes, but willing to learn, willing to admit mistakes and willing to ‘work’ on them. It’s this willingness and intention, this sense of contributing regularly to the greater good, that let’s people take comfort from us. We, like them, feel alone, but we’re up to showing them they aren’t. We are (unselfconsciously) nurturing affection, are we not? Every day of our hum drum lives? Instinctively each one of us knows this – that we are capable of giving others hope in us, as people. We see potentials everywhere, don’t we? When we do I think it lends confidence to what we are saying … and through that comes the chance for a proper discussion (of this subject).
The more vulnerable we are the more likely we’ll be to empathise with the even more vulnerable, namely the domesticated animals. Empathy is the key here. It’s the interface between ‘me’ thoughts and thoughts about another, entering the world of egalitarian co-operation. The vulnerable look a bit weak to our eyes, since we’re so used to the presence of force in our society, but something else is in the wind. And lots of people seem to sense it and act on it. They discover their vulnerability with some pride, not shame. It’s, damn it, the very opposite of the weakness-look. Instead it is at the heart of our interconnective empathetical awareness. A strength indeed if we can access it. The vulnerable seem to be the trend setters of the future. The future is soon not to be led by the hardened carnivores. Their views are painfully on the way out.
We all might feel trapped by our own hard-nosed-ness: and we’ll probably stay that way, if only to keep rationalising the status quo. In turn the system allows us to manifests our ‘nasty side’ without our seeming odd. Specifically, for omnivores, it justifies the use of animals: it allows omnivores to be comfortable about having animals on their plates. It allows a contempt for animals and allows one to experience a certain comfort from eating them.
If vegans are similarly trapped it’s by another sort of hard-nosed-ness. Then they (we) too have our work cut out. Hard-nose thoughts, actions, meals, even clothes – heck, hard nose is everywhere you look. It seems. Whereas being soft-nosed is persona non grata, denigrated. In our society life’s difficult for softies. So the softy, sickened by being put down, attempts to win kudos elsewhere. They try to achieve. And then cream them by boasting their achievements. To the outsider it’s very off-putting! It’s such a big turn off. (In Australia we have a rule number one of never ‘big-noting’ ourselves). Boasting looks desperate. It’s almost like violence, since it shows a similar lack of self-security … which always impels us to deliberately attract attention and then force approval (i.e. milk a compliment). Our need for others to praise us isn’t much different to the greedy landlord demanding rent from the tenant who can’t pay. Force, whether blackmail or persuasion, is hopefully the predominant element just about to walk off the stage. I don’t think any of us have rights to enter another’s heart or their brain. We can’t even attempt to go there if we don’t have their approval. Righteous self justification is not a ticket to enter. And yet many vegans stand behind the skirts of the Animal Rights message and poke fun at passers by. If we vegans are ever to amount to anything, beyond food and vanity, it will be for their peace-making abilities.