401:
One might consider the idea of veganism as a small raindrop landing on a duck’s back – the idea of it may easily enter the imagination but if it seems impossible, too painful, too daunting, then it’s likely we’ll shake off the raindrop, we’ll ditch the whole idea (despite how obvious the advantages might seem to be). No one opts for pain.
Even if one had to contemplate a vegan lifestyle and had read a couple of books about it, it might still remain beyond the pail ... to do it. Why, for example, would we voluntarily opt for living ‘vegan’ if the pleasure of it still eluded us? You’d surely agree, that if you can’t come at ‘being vegan’ you can never be of much help to the animals because if you’re not vegan it follows that you’re still eating them. How could you ever trust yourself? How could the animals ever trust you to be their spokesperson? You’d be quite the traitor if you were still helping to kill them whilst trying to save them.
Friday, January 27, 2012
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Farm animals for 'the eating’
400:
The most abused animals are the food animals. What if they could speak? What would they say about caged hens and machine-controlled cows? What would they say about denuded forests and the latest frightening changes to the weather? They’d give us such an ear-bashing.
It’s just as well they’re voiceless. But it’s sad. Omnivores are responsible for so much of this sadness. And what’s worse they don’t admit to the part they play in the killing.
That act of animal sabotage happens in the clinical, mechanised surroundings of the modern abattoir or in the backyard at the hands of the farmer. It’s the same terror for the animal in the type of death it suffers. It’s murder, slaughter, execution or torture - call it what you like, it happens to every domesticated animal used for food, weather killed for its carcass or to end its life when its productivity has ended and keeping it alive no longer makes economic sense.
If you care to read the next 600 words you’ll see how an animal being killed is difficult and how it impacts on the more tender hearted person - it’s a depiction of a pig being slaughtered in the nineteenth century, not behind closed doors but out in the open, a familiar process then, yet no easier than it ever was or has become.
A passage from Jude The Obscure by Thomas Hardy - The killing of the pig
It was thick snow, and the pig-killer was over-due. It seemed he was not coming and the pig had to be killed that day since Jude and Arabella had run out of barleymeal mixture the day before. The pig had been starving since then. Jude says to his wife Arabella, “What - he has been starving?”
“Yes. We always do it the last day or two, to save bother with the innerds. What ignorance, not to know that!”
“That accounts for his crying so. Poor creature!”
“Well - you must do the sticking - there’s no help for it. It must be done”.
He went out to the sty ... and placed the stool in front, with the knives and ropes at hand. A robin peered down at the preparations from the nearest tree, and not liking the sinister look of the scene, flew away ... Jude, rope in hand, got into the sty, and noosed the affrighted animal, who, beginning with a squeak of surprise, rose to repeated cries of rage. ...they hoisted the victim onto the stool, legs upward, and while Jude held him Arabella bound him down, looping the cord over his legs to keep him from struggling.
The animal’s note changed its quality. It was not now rage, but the cry of despair; long drawn, slow and hopeless.
“Upon my soul I would sooner have gone without the pig than have had this to do!” said Jude. “A creature I have fed with my own hands.”
“Don’t be such a tender-hearted fool! There’s the sticking-knife - the one with the point. Now whatever you do, don’t stick un too deep.”
“I’ll stick him effectually, so as to make short work of it. That’s the chief thing.”
“You must not!” she cried. “The meat must be well bled, and to do that he must die slow. We shall lose a shilling a score if the meat is red and bloody! Just touch the vein, that’s all. I was brought up to it, and I know. Every good butcher keeps un bleeding long. He ought to be eight or ten minutes dying, at least.”
“He shall not be half a minute if I can help it, however the meat may look,” said Jude determinedly. Scraping the bristles from the pig’s upturned throat, as he had seen the butchers do, he slit the fat; then plunged in the knife with all his might.
“ ‘Od damn it all!” she cried, “That ever I should say it! You’ve over-stuck un! And I telling you all the time - ”
“Do be quiet, Arabella, and have a little pity on the creature.”
... However unworkmanlike the deed, it had been mercifully done. The blood flowed out in a torrent instead of in the trickling stream she had desired. The dying animal’s cry assumed its third and final tone, the shriek of agony; his glazing eyes riveting themselves on Arabella with the eloquently keen reproach of a creature recognizing at last the treachery of those who seemed his only friends.
“Make un stop that!” said Arabella. “Such a noise will bring somebody or other up here, and I don’t want people to know we are doing it ourselves. Picking up the knife from the ground whereupon Jude had flung it, she slipped it into the gash, and slit the windpipe. The pig was instantly silent, his dying breath coming through the hole.
“That’s better,” she said.
“It is a hateful business!” said he.
“Pigs must be killed.”
The most abused animals are the food animals. What if they could speak? What would they say about caged hens and machine-controlled cows? What would they say about denuded forests and the latest frightening changes to the weather? They’d give us such an ear-bashing.
It’s just as well they’re voiceless. But it’s sad. Omnivores are responsible for so much of this sadness. And what’s worse they don’t admit to the part they play in the killing.
That act of animal sabotage happens in the clinical, mechanised surroundings of the modern abattoir or in the backyard at the hands of the farmer. It’s the same terror for the animal in the type of death it suffers. It’s murder, slaughter, execution or torture - call it what you like, it happens to every domesticated animal used for food, weather killed for its carcass or to end its life when its productivity has ended and keeping it alive no longer makes economic sense.
If you care to read the next 600 words you’ll see how an animal being killed is difficult and how it impacts on the more tender hearted person - it’s a depiction of a pig being slaughtered in the nineteenth century, not behind closed doors but out in the open, a familiar process then, yet no easier than it ever was or has become.
A passage from Jude The Obscure by Thomas Hardy - The killing of the pig
It was thick snow, and the pig-killer was over-due. It seemed he was not coming and the pig had to be killed that day since Jude and Arabella had run out of barleymeal mixture the day before. The pig had been starving since then. Jude says to his wife Arabella, “What - he has been starving?”
“Yes. We always do it the last day or two, to save bother with the innerds. What ignorance, not to know that!”
“That accounts for his crying so. Poor creature!”
“Well - you must do the sticking - there’s no help for it. It must be done”.
He went out to the sty ... and placed the stool in front, with the knives and ropes at hand. A robin peered down at the preparations from the nearest tree, and not liking the sinister look of the scene, flew away ... Jude, rope in hand, got into the sty, and noosed the affrighted animal, who, beginning with a squeak of surprise, rose to repeated cries of rage. ...they hoisted the victim onto the stool, legs upward, and while Jude held him Arabella bound him down, looping the cord over his legs to keep him from struggling.
The animal’s note changed its quality. It was not now rage, but the cry of despair; long drawn, slow and hopeless.
“Upon my soul I would sooner have gone without the pig than have had this to do!” said Jude. “A creature I have fed with my own hands.”
“Don’t be such a tender-hearted fool! There’s the sticking-knife - the one with the point. Now whatever you do, don’t stick un too deep.”
“I’ll stick him effectually, so as to make short work of it. That’s the chief thing.”
“You must not!” she cried. “The meat must be well bled, and to do that he must die slow. We shall lose a shilling a score if the meat is red and bloody! Just touch the vein, that’s all. I was brought up to it, and I know. Every good butcher keeps un bleeding long. He ought to be eight or ten minutes dying, at least.”
“He shall not be half a minute if I can help it, however the meat may look,” said Jude determinedly. Scraping the bristles from the pig’s upturned throat, as he had seen the butchers do, he slit the fat; then plunged in the knife with all his might.
“ ‘Od damn it all!” she cried, “That ever I should say it! You’ve over-stuck un! And I telling you all the time - ”
“Do be quiet, Arabella, and have a little pity on the creature.”
... However unworkmanlike the deed, it had been mercifully done. The blood flowed out in a torrent instead of in the trickling stream she had desired. The dying animal’s cry assumed its third and final tone, the shriek of agony; his glazing eyes riveting themselves on Arabella with the eloquently keen reproach of a creature recognizing at last the treachery of those who seemed his only friends.
“Make un stop that!” said Arabella. “Such a noise will bring somebody or other up here, and I don’t want people to know we are doing it ourselves. Picking up the knife from the ground whereupon Jude had flung it, she slipped it into the gash, and slit the windpipe. The pig was instantly silent, his dying breath coming through the hole.
“That’s better,” she said.
“It is a hateful business!” said he.
“Pigs must be killed.”
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Altruism and optimism
396:
Out of optimism comes stability, and if our optimism persists, stability increases, and it brings a sense of permanence. The sort of change that is made by people who ‘go-vegan’, as it stabilises and as habits form and as the practical difficulties are ironed out, brings about a sense of being ‘vegan-for-life’. There’s a sense that we’ve got past the temptation stage where we may slip back into our old ways, and find that even those things we thought we’d definitely miss ... somehow they fade in importance.
No one was more surprised at this than I was.
To achieve this change, to get to the point where I felt entirely at home being vegan, was rather strange in a way, because I knew that I lived in a society where most people have never even given ‘going-vegetarian’ any serious thought. Their meat and dairy foods, and their woollens and their leather shoes, are part of their everyday life - so much so that it might seem impossible to maintain a lifestyle where these foods and commodities don’t play a major part. That’s what I thought but it’s not how I think now, especially because other interesting bits of life open up.
Vegans, once established in their food and clothing regimes, are free to look ahead into other interesting areas, all of which are quite out of the question for anyone still using abattoir products. Those who are still omnivores will find it impossible, for example, to explore the principle of harmlessness, which is central to a vegan lifestyle. Vegans understand that a lot of the negativity which omnivores feel against us, is coming out of a frustration of, daily, being so closely connected with the violence of the Animal Industries ... so for them there’s bound to be some pessimism about the world and its future in general. If any of us allow this pessimism to dominate our reality, we might come to believe in the inevitability of ‘The Coming Catastrophe’.
Pessimism can bring us to believe that change is only made possible by the use of force - “change has to be big and fast, otherwise it won’t work. It will soon fade through lack of momentum”. Something like veganism doesn’t seem dramatic enough to set off the chain reaction major social change needs.
But here is where I think we have it all wrong - veganism establishes the basis for reform. It might seem hardly noticeable to those who can still ignore it but when it enters your life it establishes itself deeply. Veganism is so profound that most people hardly recognise it for what it is. If it suggests any sort of solution it can easily seem unreachable or unrealistic. It represents a fundamental change in the way we view life - it’s an unpopular philosophical view on life which is easily dismissed.
However, popular or not, it is precisely in tune with the character of the 21st century. It’s thoroughness and optimism promotes a root-and-branch change, despite the fact that it might not show any signs of ‘flowering’ during our own lifetime.
Is that long-term prospect off-putting?
The two reactions Society might make - “It’s already too late, so why bother?” and “I don’t give a stuff about the future anyway”, are merely expressions of pessimism and selfishness, neither of which will impress future generations one little bit when it’s their turn to analyse the history of the early part of the century. That particularly negative outlook is certainly not characteristic of ethically driven vegans.
Out of optimism comes stability, and if our optimism persists, stability increases, and it brings a sense of permanence. The sort of change that is made by people who ‘go-vegan’, as it stabilises and as habits form and as the practical difficulties are ironed out, brings about a sense of being ‘vegan-for-life’. There’s a sense that we’ve got past the temptation stage where we may slip back into our old ways, and find that even those things we thought we’d definitely miss ... somehow they fade in importance.
No one was more surprised at this than I was.
To achieve this change, to get to the point where I felt entirely at home being vegan, was rather strange in a way, because I knew that I lived in a society where most people have never even given ‘going-vegetarian’ any serious thought. Their meat and dairy foods, and their woollens and their leather shoes, are part of their everyday life - so much so that it might seem impossible to maintain a lifestyle where these foods and commodities don’t play a major part. That’s what I thought but it’s not how I think now, especially because other interesting bits of life open up.
Vegans, once established in their food and clothing regimes, are free to look ahead into other interesting areas, all of which are quite out of the question for anyone still using abattoir products. Those who are still omnivores will find it impossible, for example, to explore the principle of harmlessness, which is central to a vegan lifestyle. Vegans understand that a lot of the negativity which omnivores feel against us, is coming out of a frustration of, daily, being so closely connected with the violence of the Animal Industries ... so for them there’s bound to be some pessimism about the world and its future in general. If any of us allow this pessimism to dominate our reality, we might come to believe in the inevitability of ‘The Coming Catastrophe’.
Pessimism can bring us to believe that change is only made possible by the use of force - “change has to be big and fast, otherwise it won’t work. It will soon fade through lack of momentum”. Something like veganism doesn’t seem dramatic enough to set off the chain reaction major social change needs.
But here is where I think we have it all wrong - veganism establishes the basis for reform. It might seem hardly noticeable to those who can still ignore it but when it enters your life it establishes itself deeply. Veganism is so profound that most people hardly recognise it for what it is. If it suggests any sort of solution it can easily seem unreachable or unrealistic. It represents a fundamental change in the way we view life - it’s an unpopular philosophical view on life which is easily dismissed.
However, popular or not, it is precisely in tune with the character of the 21st century. It’s thoroughness and optimism promotes a root-and-branch change, despite the fact that it might not show any signs of ‘flowering’ during our own lifetime.
Is that long-term prospect off-putting?
The two reactions Society might make - “It’s already too late, so why bother?” and “I don’t give a stuff about the future anyway”, are merely expressions of pessimism and selfishness, neither of which will impress future generations one little bit when it’s their turn to analyse the history of the early part of the century. That particularly negative outlook is certainly not characteristic of ethically driven vegans.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Greater good revisited
394:
I suppose I’m arguing that to ignore animal issues is dangerous. In body terms it’s like being passive about an illness when a deadly virus is taking us over. We think we can ignore it and carry on as usual, doing what everyone else is doing, getting away with it ... thinking we can grow sufficiently in the comfort of a consumer-istic atmosphere, without any ill effects.
If we want our society to be a strong force for good on the planet then we have to set personal standards. We have to let our enthusiasm for the greater good move freely with the other great forces we recognise in life - altruism and optimism.
Altruism is probably not very much different to optimism since both deal in a combination of good intention and satisfying outcome. When you set out for good results and it works for you, you tend to feel optimistic; perhaps optimism is the result of setting standards for self-pleasure that are directed by an altruistic urge to be unselfishly-useful. When it works (and how can it not work?) we recharge our energy. We experience the pleasure of discharging energy for others’ benefit, and being involved with each other in that way often results in reciprocation and a beneficial mutual exchange.
Optimism shows up like a light. Others can’t help but see it, especially when it isn’t a show-off but simply seen operating our daily habits. And that needn’t be anything special if only because we all enjoy habits which involve some self-discipline. Just as lifeguards love to be on the beach to save lives when people get into difficulties, we all like being useful. We like to be needed. Whole relationships can surely be based on this same pleasure-service principle.
As we develop new and sometimes not-so-easy-to-install habits, for example in setting up a vegan lifestyle, the main driver is usually optimism. We look forward to a better, more pleasure-giving habit, a more useful way of living based on give and take. When we act optimistically, habits fall into place. Maybe, like kids settling in on their first day at school, new habits are a bit shaky at first. It’s optimism that gets us over the hump, in our habit-building. We are, if we did but know it, preparing for the repair-journey ahead. Perhaps we instinctively know that new habits are preparing us for change, for what we will have to get used to soon enough.
I suppose I’m arguing that to ignore animal issues is dangerous. In body terms it’s like being passive about an illness when a deadly virus is taking us over. We think we can ignore it and carry on as usual, doing what everyone else is doing, getting away with it ... thinking we can grow sufficiently in the comfort of a consumer-istic atmosphere, without any ill effects.
If we want our society to be a strong force for good on the planet then we have to set personal standards. We have to let our enthusiasm for the greater good move freely with the other great forces we recognise in life - altruism and optimism.
Altruism is probably not very much different to optimism since both deal in a combination of good intention and satisfying outcome. When you set out for good results and it works for you, you tend to feel optimistic; perhaps optimism is the result of setting standards for self-pleasure that are directed by an altruistic urge to be unselfishly-useful. When it works (and how can it not work?) we recharge our energy. We experience the pleasure of discharging energy for others’ benefit, and being involved with each other in that way often results in reciprocation and a beneficial mutual exchange.
Optimism shows up like a light. Others can’t help but see it, especially when it isn’t a show-off but simply seen operating our daily habits. And that needn’t be anything special if only because we all enjoy habits which involve some self-discipline. Just as lifeguards love to be on the beach to save lives when people get into difficulties, we all like being useful. We like to be needed. Whole relationships can surely be based on this same pleasure-service principle.
As we develop new and sometimes not-so-easy-to-install habits, for example in setting up a vegan lifestyle, the main driver is usually optimism. We look forward to a better, more pleasure-giving habit, a more useful way of living based on give and take. When we act optimistically, habits fall into place. Maybe, like kids settling in on their first day at school, new habits are a bit shaky at first. It’s optimism that gets us over the hump, in our habit-building. We are, if we did but know it, preparing for the repair-journey ahead. Perhaps we instinctively know that new habits are preparing us for change, for what we will have to get used to soon enough.
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Consistent ethics
393:
Most people think that we can only be effective if we have specialist knowledge, but what expertise is needed to know that the animal business is wrong and to know to keep well clear of it? When something isn’t right we know it in our gut, it comes from intuition and inborn values. A familiar comment from new vegans is, “Why didn’t I see it before?”
From my own experience, as soon as I tap into instinct, things become clearer, and then I’m more likely to gravitate towards ‘the greater good’... only because it seems so obvious. What counts, I think, is optimism and faith and you can’t sustain much of that if you are hanging around the gates of the abattoir, figuratively speaking. Following convention without questioning it, eating food which we haven’t examined ethically, doesn’t bode well for the future.
When any of us choose not to buy something that we may want, and we stop ourselves for ethical reasons, we make an important statement. We say, for instance with animal food, that we can’t eat what shouldn’t even exist - namely foods associated with animals.
By setting an example in one field but not in another equally important field, we lose credibility. It’s the same problem we have in any advancement, whether it’s our career, lifestyle, relationships or spiritual progress. By neglecting any one vital issue, simply because it doesn’t suit our convenience, we introduce too much incompleteness into our life, and that surely leads to double standards.
In the end, if we can’t muster sufficient personal power to change any faulty parts of our own daily existence, then we have less personal authority ... without which we can’t fight corruption or change the system we live in.
Most people think that we can only be effective if we have specialist knowledge, but what expertise is needed to know that the animal business is wrong and to know to keep well clear of it? When something isn’t right we know it in our gut, it comes from intuition and inborn values. A familiar comment from new vegans is, “Why didn’t I see it before?”
From my own experience, as soon as I tap into instinct, things become clearer, and then I’m more likely to gravitate towards ‘the greater good’... only because it seems so obvious. What counts, I think, is optimism and faith and you can’t sustain much of that if you are hanging around the gates of the abattoir, figuratively speaking. Following convention without questioning it, eating food which we haven’t examined ethically, doesn’t bode well for the future.
When any of us choose not to buy something that we may want, and we stop ourselves for ethical reasons, we make an important statement. We say, for instance with animal food, that we can’t eat what shouldn’t even exist - namely foods associated with animals.
By setting an example in one field but not in another equally important field, we lose credibility. It’s the same problem we have in any advancement, whether it’s our career, lifestyle, relationships or spiritual progress. By neglecting any one vital issue, simply because it doesn’t suit our convenience, we introduce too much incompleteness into our life, and that surely leads to double standards.
In the end, if we can’t muster sufficient personal power to change any faulty parts of our own daily existence, then we have less personal authority ... without which we can’t fight corruption or change the system we live in.
Saturday, January 14, 2012
An end to pessimism
391:
For over sixty years vegan activists have been forming teams of animal advocates, each working to stop the juggernaut before it swallows us whole, doing it by boycotting the animal-abuse industry and all the other highly destructive industries. What we do is done in the spirit of optimism, helping each other to drop our ingrained pessimistic belief, that whatever we do we won’t even scratch the surface.
We do what we can do - we change to eco-friendly light globes, recycle newspapers, support organic farming if we can afford to and, most importantly, eat plant-based foods. Everything we do in this way is valuable, but if we think what we do “won’t make a scrap of difference to the world” then we’re doomed before we’ve even started. If we can drop our pessimism we’re more likely to avert Earth’s downfall.
If optimism is to gain strength, to become something more than just a nice idea, it must be substantial enough to carry us over the tough spots. It must be based not on personal success but on the greater good ... with ‘my interests’ put second. Then nothing can possibly go wrong.
For over sixty years vegan activists have been forming teams of animal advocates, each working to stop the juggernaut before it swallows us whole, doing it by boycotting the animal-abuse industry and all the other highly destructive industries. What we do is done in the spirit of optimism, helping each other to drop our ingrained pessimistic belief, that whatever we do we won’t even scratch the surface.
We do what we can do - we change to eco-friendly light globes, recycle newspapers, support organic farming if we can afford to and, most importantly, eat plant-based foods. Everything we do in this way is valuable, but if we think what we do “won’t make a scrap of difference to the world” then we’re doomed before we’ve even started. If we can drop our pessimism we’re more likely to avert Earth’s downfall.
If optimism is to gain strength, to become something more than just a nice idea, it must be substantial enough to carry us over the tough spots. It must be based not on personal success but on the greater good ... with ‘my interests’ put second. Then nothing can possibly go wrong.
Friday, January 13, 2012
Investing in vegan principle
389:
If the number one fear for most of us is killer disease and degenerative illness then number two must be fear of energy-loss. The energy that can keep deterioration away is almost horded.
Energy equates with health and any energy spent must be justified and purposeful. It isn’t something we use up for no reason, so for ‘unsupported’ causes like veganism people may not want to invest in it if they don’t think it stands a chance of coming to anything. If we see no ‘me-advantage’ in the vegan deal, perhaps we’re likely to be stingy with our energy.
If we take up any major cause we probably want to believe that it will make a difference, otherwise our efforts will be wasted. And there’s the rub. We’re all afraid of backing the wrong horse (horrible expression) and no one wants to be associated with a bunch of losers.
It’s a gamble going vegan. We gamble with energy, time and money. We gamble on very long-odds.
Taking up veganism as an idea is hard enough but to engage our minds in it, invest in it, expect so much of it, squander energy on promoting it … perhaps we say to our self “What a waste of time”.
Having faith in this one single idea is a big ask.
If the number one fear for most of us is killer disease and degenerative illness then number two must be fear of energy-loss. The energy that can keep deterioration away is almost horded.
Energy equates with health and any energy spent must be justified and purposeful. It isn’t something we use up for no reason, so for ‘unsupported’ causes like veganism people may not want to invest in it if they don’t think it stands a chance of coming to anything. If we see no ‘me-advantage’ in the vegan deal, perhaps we’re likely to be stingy with our energy.
If we take up any major cause we probably want to believe that it will make a difference, otherwise our efforts will be wasted. And there’s the rub. We’re all afraid of backing the wrong horse (horrible expression) and no one wants to be associated with a bunch of losers.
It’s a gamble going vegan. We gamble with energy, time and money. We gamble on very long-odds.
Taking up veganism as an idea is hard enough but to engage our minds in it, invest in it, expect so much of it, squander energy on promoting it … perhaps we say to our self “What a waste of time”.
Having faith in this one single idea is a big ask.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Reconciliation
386:
Playing the ‘blame game’ is popular with some vegans. The Animal Industry and consumers in general make for an easy target. So why not give them some curry?
It helps to release our anger and frustration. But, constructively speaking, there isn’t much to be gained from apportioning blame. What’s done is done and can’t be undone.
After the apartheid era in South Africa there was a need to move on, towards reconciliation, to avoid a blood bath. It showed a deliberate moving away from the idea of revenge. It’s often revenge that lets us enjoy, for a moment, the misfortunes of those who aren’t like us and who deserve ...what?
This is where true compassion shows through. It’s hard to imagine how one can be reconciled to the meat-heads because their species-apartheid is so mean, especially because it’s so safe.
Nevertheless there’s a great need for vegans and non-vegans to make a point of contact, to be talking together about their differences – it’s the only way we’re ever going to deal with the very worst mistakes we’ve each already made.
We all need to turn into compassionate folk - isn’t it as simple as that? First off it’s a personal thing, concerning food choices. Then to the principle of non-violence and being non-judgmental. Then it’s about feeling at peace with our detractors ... not excusing what we each do but being on friendly terms whilst discussions are underway … with the aim of restructuring our habits. Once we see each other making an attempt to accommodate the expectations of the other we’ll automatically move past the accusing stage and be on the road to repair. Once we can feel some movement, albeit small progress, we can experience optimism, perhaps for the first time.
Ultimately (surely!) our overall goal is to focus on increasing the world’s optimism about itself. We can’t do that if we’re pessimistic or if we’re forecasting the end of the world or thinking, “Why should I change” ... “the world is fucked”.
Vegans have certainly got to get over their judgement-based looking-down-their-noses at those who aren’t vegans - yes, we have to realign our attitudes, for sure. But for people in general there are hard times to come when we are all judged by future generations - if we don’t do anything about animal slavery now, history will say we were an uncaring people. Future generations will accuse us, quite rightly, of being too casual about a potentially catastrophic problem ... and there will be no excuses since the records will show that we knew everything we needed to know to make the necessary changes.
Playing the ‘blame game’ is popular with some vegans. The Animal Industry and consumers in general make for an easy target. So why not give them some curry?
It helps to release our anger and frustration. But, constructively speaking, there isn’t much to be gained from apportioning blame. What’s done is done and can’t be undone.
After the apartheid era in South Africa there was a need to move on, towards reconciliation, to avoid a blood bath. It showed a deliberate moving away from the idea of revenge. It’s often revenge that lets us enjoy, for a moment, the misfortunes of those who aren’t like us and who deserve ...what?
This is where true compassion shows through. It’s hard to imagine how one can be reconciled to the meat-heads because their species-apartheid is so mean, especially because it’s so safe.
Nevertheless there’s a great need for vegans and non-vegans to make a point of contact, to be talking together about their differences – it’s the only way we’re ever going to deal with the very worst mistakes we’ve each already made.
We all need to turn into compassionate folk - isn’t it as simple as that? First off it’s a personal thing, concerning food choices. Then to the principle of non-violence and being non-judgmental. Then it’s about feeling at peace with our detractors ... not excusing what we each do but being on friendly terms whilst discussions are underway … with the aim of restructuring our habits. Once we see each other making an attempt to accommodate the expectations of the other we’ll automatically move past the accusing stage and be on the road to repair. Once we can feel some movement, albeit small progress, we can experience optimism, perhaps for the first time.
Ultimately (surely!) our overall goal is to focus on increasing the world’s optimism about itself. We can’t do that if we’re pessimistic or if we’re forecasting the end of the world or thinking, “Why should I change” ... “the world is fucked”.
Vegans have certainly got to get over their judgement-based looking-down-their-noses at those who aren’t vegans - yes, we have to realign our attitudes, for sure. But for people in general there are hard times to come when we are all judged by future generations - if we don’t do anything about animal slavery now, history will say we were an uncaring people. Future generations will accuse us, quite rightly, of being too casual about a potentially catastrophic problem ... and there will be no excuses since the records will show that we knew everything we needed to know to make the necessary changes.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Not being too obvious
383:
It’s understandable, with pessimism being in vogue, that we’re beating-ourselves-up, with shame and guilt about the mess we’re in and our inability to clean it up. Personal shame is all turned inwards. We make ourselves forget about some of the trickier world issues. If we can’t get a clear run at major global problems because we think we are too insignificant and they are too complicated, we give up trying to run at them at all. And since we believe everything is out of our control anyway, why go to all the inconvenience of taking on a vegan lifestyle in the first place?
Animal consumers are practising members of an animal-abusing society. The Kill-Club is everywhere on the planet and most people are umbilically linked to it, so we feed the very problems we’re aiming to solve … because so many world problems trace their origins back to animal exploitation.
Once we can see the part we play in all this and want to do something about it, we may feel as though we’re on the move. But often we decide to pull back by only going half way – eaters of red meat switch to eating chicken and fish, the vegetarians stop at another point. Neither gets close enough to the problem to be an effective advocate for the animals. Vegans, however, can be effective advocates … but when no one notices us or even makes fun of us, we go on the defensive. Or we attempt to pre-empt that by showing off, by telling everyone what we’ve done and why they should too.
Inevitably we get a bad reaction which surprises and disappoints us. Then we get angry (obviously frustrated because no one’s paying attention). Then we go for broke, with anger, invective and disassociation. Still nothing really changes.
Nothing can change if we are focusing on the wrongs of ‘animal-attack’ when we then use another sort of attack on those who disagree with us. Perhaps we shouldn’t be phased at all by disagreement - at least we’ve stimulated opinion.
If we don’t come across as unlikeable, when we’re not agreed with, then it’s more likely something of what we are saying will sink in, be it ever so subliminally.
It’s understandable, with pessimism being in vogue, that we’re beating-ourselves-up, with shame and guilt about the mess we’re in and our inability to clean it up. Personal shame is all turned inwards. We make ourselves forget about some of the trickier world issues. If we can’t get a clear run at major global problems because we think we are too insignificant and they are too complicated, we give up trying to run at them at all. And since we believe everything is out of our control anyway, why go to all the inconvenience of taking on a vegan lifestyle in the first place?
Animal consumers are practising members of an animal-abusing society. The Kill-Club is everywhere on the planet and most people are umbilically linked to it, so we feed the very problems we’re aiming to solve … because so many world problems trace their origins back to animal exploitation.
Once we can see the part we play in all this and want to do something about it, we may feel as though we’re on the move. But often we decide to pull back by only going half way – eaters of red meat switch to eating chicken and fish, the vegetarians stop at another point. Neither gets close enough to the problem to be an effective advocate for the animals. Vegans, however, can be effective advocates … but when no one notices us or even makes fun of us, we go on the defensive. Or we attempt to pre-empt that by showing off, by telling everyone what we’ve done and why they should too.
Inevitably we get a bad reaction which surprises and disappoints us. Then we get angry (obviously frustrated because no one’s paying attention). Then we go for broke, with anger, invective and disassociation. Still nothing really changes.
Nothing can change if we are focusing on the wrongs of ‘animal-attack’ when we then use another sort of attack on those who disagree with us. Perhaps we shouldn’t be phased at all by disagreement - at least we’ve stimulated opinion.
If we don’t come across as unlikeable, when we’re not agreed with, then it’s more likely something of what we are saying will sink in, be it ever so subliminally.
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Cool fashion
379:
Vegans want people to change attitude towards using animals. We don’t just want a local change amongst family and friends, we want it amongst LOTS of people. So we need to be aiming for change on a grand scale. People will change if they think it’s in their best interests. For example, they’ll be very willing to change to keep abreast of fashion - no one likes being old-fashioned. Neither do they want to be seen as anything but ‘normal’ - normalcy helps us hold down a job and keeps a certain reputation within the group. If we want to seem cool we’ll keep in with hairstyles or clothing, to keep pace with fashion and to be sure we’re never very far from peer acceptance.
So when it comes to a radical change of lifestyle, like going vegan, it might seem like social suicide to voluntarily act in such a different way to all our friends. We’d hope to persuade friends to follow suit, but to go vegan means, at first, we do risk going it alone, the aim obviously being to lead a fashion. It requires some bravery. Ultimately, though, it needs a cool enough head to strike out into the unknown territory of new fashion - leading fashion not following it. Relatively easy with a new hairstyle but with a whole different eating regime, based on ethical principles, it calls for some considerable strength of character ... and a considered approach to others, to attract them to change in the same way.
We know ‘shaming’ won’t inspire people to change, but what might move them is their fear of falling behind the current fashion. Once people feel that there is a trend towards compassionate eating they might want to get in early, to be ahead of the bandwagon.
If we try to use ‘guilt’ to get people to change, they’ll probably oblige us, eventually … but it’s likely not to be a permanent change. It’ll weaken back to nothing over time. If the ‘coming fashion’ is overlaid with ethics it is likely to have a much more powerful effect on habits and a better chance of escaping the gravitational pull of convention.
Vegans want people to change attitude towards using animals. We don’t just want a local change amongst family and friends, we want it amongst LOTS of people. So we need to be aiming for change on a grand scale. People will change if they think it’s in their best interests. For example, they’ll be very willing to change to keep abreast of fashion - no one likes being old-fashioned. Neither do they want to be seen as anything but ‘normal’ - normalcy helps us hold down a job and keeps a certain reputation within the group. If we want to seem cool we’ll keep in with hairstyles or clothing, to keep pace with fashion and to be sure we’re never very far from peer acceptance.
So when it comes to a radical change of lifestyle, like going vegan, it might seem like social suicide to voluntarily act in such a different way to all our friends. We’d hope to persuade friends to follow suit, but to go vegan means, at first, we do risk going it alone, the aim obviously being to lead a fashion. It requires some bravery. Ultimately, though, it needs a cool enough head to strike out into the unknown territory of new fashion - leading fashion not following it. Relatively easy with a new hairstyle but with a whole different eating regime, based on ethical principles, it calls for some considerable strength of character ... and a considered approach to others, to attract them to change in the same way.
We know ‘shaming’ won’t inspire people to change, but what might move them is their fear of falling behind the current fashion. Once people feel that there is a trend towards compassionate eating they might want to get in early, to be ahead of the bandwagon.
If we try to use ‘guilt’ to get people to change, they’ll probably oblige us, eventually … but it’s likely not to be a permanent change. It’ll weaken back to nothing over time. If the ‘coming fashion’ is overlaid with ethics it is likely to have a much more powerful effect on habits and a better chance of escaping the gravitational pull of convention.
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Manipulation
378:
I want to let people know how they’re being manipulated into buying “yummy” foods made from animals. Of course, in order to push my point home, I’d love to talk more about people’s ‘addiction’ to these foods but that would touch a very raw nerve.
So, that’s my difficulty. How do I explain my reasons for being optimistic without mentioning my reason for boycotting? It’s almost impossible to do that without offending most people. People make great daily use of all the stuff I’d be suggesting they avoid. I could talk about saving money by not wasting it in buying rubbish. I could talk about the health benefits of eating only from the plant world. But mostly I am drawn to talk about the crimes committed by the Animal Industries and, by implication, the consumer’s crime of supporting them. The very mention of crime would win me no friends. I realise it would distance me from non-vegans. And I don’t want to be seen as shame-merchant - that’s not going to help if I want to change peoples’ attitudes.
I want to let people know how they’re being manipulated into buying “yummy” foods made from animals. Of course, in order to push my point home, I’d love to talk more about people’s ‘addiction’ to these foods but that would touch a very raw nerve.
So, that’s my difficulty. How do I explain my reasons for being optimistic without mentioning my reason for boycotting? It’s almost impossible to do that without offending most people. People make great daily use of all the stuff I’d be suggesting they avoid. I could talk about saving money by not wasting it in buying rubbish. I could talk about the health benefits of eating only from the plant world. But mostly I am drawn to talk about the crimes committed by the Animal Industries and, by implication, the consumer’s crime of supporting them. The very mention of crime would win me no friends. I realise it would distance me from non-vegans. And I don’t want to be seen as shame-merchant - that’s not going to help if I want to change peoples’ attitudes.
Friday, January 6, 2012
Optimism
375:
Are we generally optimistic about the future? Do we have reason to be? I’d say most people see no future. They’re pessimistic and it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy - if enough people see the future in that negative way, our collective consciousness will self-destruct. Maybe we won’t be around to see it happen … but ….
Is this ‘pessimism’ - the reason we don’t care about repairing things properly now? If so, isn’t that spectacularly selfish of us, as well as bad karma? And who wants to be selfish? It’s so unattractive. Is it that we seek pleasure in life (and it seems there’s plenty to be had) above all things ... so “why not make hay while the sun shines?” The thought of tightening our belts and imposing personal disciplines isn’t a pleasant idea.
What we’d prefer to do is simply coast along. But the warnings about systems-collapse are everywhere. Our ecosystems, our economy and our ethics are going downhill rapidly. Most of us realise that something has to be done. To ignore all the warnings would seem crazy and yet if we waste a lot of energy trying to repair the unrepairable, we figure that it won’t be appreciated by people who come after us. And what’s more, they’ll say we didn’t address our problems because we “didn’t care enough” ... and that’s the ultimate put-down.
But how can they ever know what we went through? How can they know why we are no longer optimistic?
Every older generation, out of self pity, asks the succeeding generation that. And every new generation blames the last of being irresponsible. They, in turn, leave the same legacy to the next, and so it goes on, without there being any substantial change in human nature.
And if there’s something one would want to change in our world today, wouldn’t it be ‘human nature’?
So ... we ‘live now, pay later’, preferring the payment’s made after we’re gone from this world. Could it be this which has brought about our infamous irresponsibility - not caring about a world fifty years hence? If so, then that’s surely the ugliest face of pessimism, and the weight of this cynical outlook on life signifies an inability to see how things could be.
How do I envisage what is going to come about, and if I’m a pessimist, does it bear down heavily on me? Is it that I can’t seem to deal with my own personal problems, let alone global problems? Do I ignore the significance of my own obvious shortfalls, simply because they feed on my pessimism - preventing me from seeing beyond my own familiar reality?
And all of us - is it that we’ve given up? Are we mesmerised by one dead-end thought - that in this day and age (of huge, powerful, political corporations who make decisions for us and do so many things we disagree with) that there’s nothing we (the ordinary people) can do to stop them?
If most pessimistic people feel as though they are falling to their doom, is it because we can’t see how anything (big) can be fixed? Could it be that we don’t see the most obvious ‘best switch’ to flip, caught up as we are in a world of destruction, constant day-by-day non-constructivity and pessimism about the world’s future? And what’s worse, we don’t know how to stop the mega destructive people in our society, who do all the big-scale destructive things.
Surely, everything changes when we personally boycott everything we don’t agree with. Others can’t ... yet ... but optimism says they will. And their slowness shouldn’t provide us with an excuse not to get on with our own programme-of-boycotting.
Are we generally optimistic about the future? Do we have reason to be? I’d say most people see no future. They’re pessimistic and it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy - if enough people see the future in that negative way, our collective consciousness will self-destruct. Maybe we won’t be around to see it happen … but ….
Is this ‘pessimism’ - the reason we don’t care about repairing things properly now? If so, isn’t that spectacularly selfish of us, as well as bad karma? And who wants to be selfish? It’s so unattractive. Is it that we seek pleasure in life (and it seems there’s plenty to be had) above all things ... so “why not make hay while the sun shines?” The thought of tightening our belts and imposing personal disciplines isn’t a pleasant idea.
What we’d prefer to do is simply coast along. But the warnings about systems-collapse are everywhere. Our ecosystems, our economy and our ethics are going downhill rapidly. Most of us realise that something has to be done. To ignore all the warnings would seem crazy and yet if we waste a lot of energy trying to repair the unrepairable, we figure that it won’t be appreciated by people who come after us. And what’s more, they’ll say we didn’t address our problems because we “didn’t care enough” ... and that’s the ultimate put-down.
But how can they ever know what we went through? How can they know why we are no longer optimistic?
Every older generation, out of self pity, asks the succeeding generation that. And every new generation blames the last of being irresponsible. They, in turn, leave the same legacy to the next, and so it goes on, without there being any substantial change in human nature.
And if there’s something one would want to change in our world today, wouldn’t it be ‘human nature’?
So ... we ‘live now, pay later’, preferring the payment’s made after we’re gone from this world. Could it be this which has brought about our infamous irresponsibility - not caring about a world fifty years hence? If so, then that’s surely the ugliest face of pessimism, and the weight of this cynical outlook on life signifies an inability to see how things could be.
How do I envisage what is going to come about, and if I’m a pessimist, does it bear down heavily on me? Is it that I can’t seem to deal with my own personal problems, let alone global problems? Do I ignore the significance of my own obvious shortfalls, simply because they feed on my pessimism - preventing me from seeing beyond my own familiar reality?
And all of us - is it that we’ve given up? Are we mesmerised by one dead-end thought - that in this day and age (of huge, powerful, political corporations who make decisions for us and do so many things we disagree with) that there’s nothing we (the ordinary people) can do to stop them?
If most pessimistic people feel as though they are falling to their doom, is it because we can’t see how anything (big) can be fixed? Could it be that we don’t see the most obvious ‘best switch’ to flip, caught up as we are in a world of destruction, constant day-by-day non-constructivity and pessimism about the world’s future? And what’s worse, we don’t know how to stop the mega destructive people in our society, who do all the big-scale destructive things.
Surely, everything changes when we personally boycott everything we don’t agree with. Others can’t ... yet ... but optimism says they will. And their slowness shouldn’t provide us with an excuse not to get on with our own programme-of-boycotting.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
How vegans are perceived
374a
How is it that some of us are passionate advocates for animals and some people are completely indifferent? How is it that to us vegan principles seem so enlightened and meat-eating so primitive? But then how is it that meat-eaters are so confident and feel so sophisticated for using animal products and don’t feel fazed by a veganism?
There are different, totally different attitudes and lifestyles and yet we all live alongside each other. The fact is that our differences aren’t really that clear - there are so many important things to be different about. Vegans probably aren’t that much brighter or kinder or healthier but we do have more self discipline because we do so much more boycotting. And, creatively speaking, we are busier discovering alternatives to animal foods and products and new ways of meal-making. We’re more used to thinking about ethical issues. We do more questioning and arguing of our case ... and all this gives us a strong point of view and an ability to sustain it. Even as a tiny minority within a predominantly omnivorous population our strength and sense-of-right could intimidate those who hold opposite views. We have a double job, to allay their fears and to guide them towards a whole new lifestyle.
How is it that some of us are passionate advocates for animals and some people are completely indifferent? How is it that to us vegan principles seem so enlightened and meat-eating so primitive? But then how is it that meat-eaters are so confident and feel so sophisticated for using animal products and don’t feel fazed by a veganism?
There are different, totally different attitudes and lifestyles and yet we all live alongside each other. The fact is that our differences aren’t really that clear - there are so many important things to be different about. Vegans probably aren’t that much brighter or kinder or healthier but we do have more self discipline because we do so much more boycotting. And, creatively speaking, we are busier discovering alternatives to animal foods and products and new ways of meal-making. We’re more used to thinking about ethical issues. We do more questioning and arguing of our case ... and all this gives us a strong point of view and an ability to sustain it. Even as a tiny minority within a predominantly omnivorous population our strength and sense-of-right could intimidate those who hold opposite views. We have a double job, to allay their fears and to guide them towards a whole new lifestyle.
Monday, January 2, 2012
Vegans facing opposition
374:
I know that my feeling of empathy and compassion for animals is right ... of course it is, because it’s anti-slavery. It feels right in the same way as non-violence feels right. I’ve never heard anyone denounce vegan principle or say that it was in any way wrong.
But the subject agitates people. They show plainly that they don’t want to discuss it. They don’t like me voicing my opinion on animal matters in general. And if I attack their views, if my arguments get at all heated, I know I’ve gone too far and then I prefer to withdraw.
I’m always having to remind myself that, in a free world, each person is entitled to their own opinion and it’s ridiculous to wage war over a puff of smoke ... I don’t need everyone to agree with me, I don’t need to take on every red neck I meet ... I don’t need to parry every joke made at my expense ... and by the same token I mustn’t feel intimidated by what others say, even if they’re powerful political figures or corporations.
Vegans can be confident simply by virtue of the fact that they are vegan. In the end my own example is the most powerful weapon I have. If I start to get aggressive it means I’m afraid of defeat. And I know I needn’t be afraid of anyone since no one has ‘the bottle’ to take any of us on in serious debate.
As far as I know, this is the only subject which non-vegans have never dared to thoroughly talk about in public.
I know that my feeling of empathy and compassion for animals is right ... of course it is, because it’s anti-slavery. It feels right in the same way as non-violence feels right. I’ve never heard anyone denounce vegan principle or say that it was in any way wrong.
But the subject agitates people. They show plainly that they don’t want to discuss it. They don’t like me voicing my opinion on animal matters in general. And if I attack their views, if my arguments get at all heated, I know I’ve gone too far and then I prefer to withdraw.
I’m always having to remind myself that, in a free world, each person is entitled to their own opinion and it’s ridiculous to wage war over a puff of smoke ... I don’t need everyone to agree with me, I don’t need to take on every red neck I meet ... I don’t need to parry every joke made at my expense ... and by the same token I mustn’t feel intimidated by what others say, even if they’re powerful political figures or corporations.
Vegans can be confident simply by virtue of the fact that they are vegan. In the end my own example is the most powerful weapon I have. If I start to get aggressive it means I’m afraid of defeat. And I know I needn’t be afraid of anyone since no one has ‘the bottle’ to take any of us on in serious debate.
As far as I know, this is the only subject which non-vegans have never dared to thoroughly talk about in public.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)