Getting good and judgmental

493: There are many industrialists and decision-making people acting irrationally, worsening the mess we’re in instead of improving it. Vegans are making a stand against the self-interest of the decision makers, simply by boycotting the Animal Industries. Vegans are proposing a straightforward solution. Nothing could be simpler for people to grasp, but the mass of people are continuing to ignore it. For us it’s frustrating. We know people have the intelligence to understand our arguments but something is not connecting. What’s missing is willingness. So we wait. During which time we hope to find out why some ordinary people, once they know about the horrors, decide to act while other ordinary people aren’t similarly affected by the horrors and carry on as usual. Why? I’m always looking for clues to the question of the huge differences between people. Are people neatly divided between those who are empathetic and those who are not? I doubt it. Other animal activists feel more sure about it and choose to hurl rocks at the windows of the un-carers. There’s trouble in the ranks down at the Vegan Detective Agency. Some, like me, look for clues to solve the crime of un-caring, others just want the culprits punished. Some of us never give up trying to appeal to omnivore intelligence and good nature, others just get annoyed and judge them negatively. I’d say this is the major divide amongst vegan animal advocates, between those who want to issue “fatwas” on those they consider the enemy and others of us who simply want to get through, who want to educate them. The first sort of vegan gets angry – it makes them feel good to get it ‘off their chest’. They judge ‘the animal eater’, and that makes them look good, strong and decisive. It lets them feel empowered. The second sort of vegan believes that by condemning others we automatically separate from them and appear ‘better-than’. On any important subject, as soon as one person takes the higher moral ground the other feels it They defend themselves (however ridiculously) and the whole dialogue ends in a quarrel. It’s terrible when that happens with people we’re close to. Over this particular matter, because the belief we hold is strengthened every time we eat, changing sides is very difficult. The meat eaters are not trying to convert vegans, it’s always the other way around. The onus is always on us to avoid quarrelling so it’s us who have to come up with some sort of solution to this vexed problem. It isn’t just a case of coming up with a good argument to convince the unbeliever, it’s more subtle than that. Once we’re talking about animals having rights, the gulf between vegans and non-vegans shows up very quickly; within seconds, we can separate from someone, just by ‘making a stand’, just by getting a bit personal about it. So, what am I suggesting here? Simply, avoid quarrelling, because after any quarrel, it’s an uphill slog trying to restore balance. ‘Angry’ goes to judgement goes to unnecessarily complicating issues. First up, I want to feel as though I’m standing on firm ground. I want to establish some mutual respect, before imparting ANY information. The reason ‘mutual separation’ occurs, over this animal question, isn’t just because I may have different views about food, health and cruelty to you. It’s because of MY value judging you about your ‘contempt’ for animals or YOU value judging my hypersensitivity by saying “they’re just animals”. I consider each animal as a sovereign, irreplaceable individual and you consider the animal to be dumb and that we can do as we please with them. On this basis we might be far apart, so far apart that we can’t hear what the other is saying. Any chance of discussion is made almost impossible when all we can read is each other’s ‘outrage’. My shock and disappointment in you is matched by your seeing me as a self-righteous do-gooders. Inevitably, each of us begins to take umbrage, offended by the dismissiveness of the other, and that leads to disliking ... and if we don’t like our ‘adversary’ we show it. That’s my reasoning for trying to avoid separation and inevitable quarrelling. As soon as you feel me disliking you, however good my argument is you will oppose it. If there’s no anger or disliking we won’t waste precious moments when we might be using that time to assess the sort of person we’re talking to. I think it’s important to spend just a few microseconds, gauging where to pitch our remarks, and deciding which (if any) facts we going to bring to someone’s attention. Facts, how loaded they can be. Facts - the idea is to avail someone of facts NOT assail them with facts! Once I can learn to keep that at the forefront of my mind I can sail safely past wanting to be judgemental. And you’ll appreciate that more than anything, I’m sure of it.