Light switches and dark rooms

624:

The status quo of animal-use is like a lump of concrete - at present it is set strong. It’s stronger than anyone’s good intentions to change it. Those of us who aren’t involved in the abuse have to deal with it. We have to acknowledge this reluctance-to-change, and the disappointment that comes with it. It shouldn’t put us off. It will always be hard to persuade the carnivores to switch across, and just as difficult with those vegetarians who are rightly proud of the progress they’ve already made, in getting away from eating meat.

If an attitude is locked, it shuts out any chance of progress. If, for instance, you regard animals as little more than things, your attitude won’t let you see them as sentient individuals.

However far we’ve already come, the concrete attitude sits there blocking our way. But it’s useful for us too. It could act as a springboard for re-evaluating where we’re coming from, just in case we’re held back by another sort of attitude block.

            I think vegan reasoning points to the ideal, up ahead; it doesn’t show us how to get there but it explains why we should be moving in that direction, to discover how our reality can make sense of those who aren’t yet aware of it.

Humans are in dark rooms, looking for a light-source, groping about at random instead of discovering what should be obvious (like where the light switch is in this dark room). Once we locate the light switch suddenly everything is clear. We regret the time wasted spent searching in darkness for such an obviously more appealing reality.

On one level we already know that there’s a parallel reality to the one we’re familiar with, and in that ‘reality’ we can see things from the opposite perspective. For me it was a surprise. It made me want to be less obedient to authority and more intent to discover if there was any order behind the chaos.

The following of sequences brings us from one reality to another. I think a vegan diet, for example, is a more intelligent way to go (simply because it’s safe and ethical and more energy-producing.) The same goes for non-violence or compassionate attitude – it’s wiser if only because it makes us feel less ashamed. And that can’t be a bad thing.

Always in front of us is the common aim: to eventually rescue the animals as well as our own souls. In other words, the sooner we can relax about the hugeness of the challenge, the sooner we’ll be able to entertain another reality, consciously. That will be one which satisfies our need to be working for a great cause (whether it be to get people to go vegan or to get people to be non-violent). 

Gratitude

623:

The effects of veganism on one’s whole organism, just by going vegan, is so beneficial to oneself. For my own part, out of that came an urge to pay back – my gratitude made me want to spend up big, in order to promote what I’d discovered. I thought to myself, “Hey, I’ve got an aim! At last it’s clear. I know what to do ... so bring it on”.

            No amount of effort would be enough to pay for so much strength of purpose. Most activists I know are so grateful for what veganism has shown them that they’re constantly energised by it. For my part I know I’d do anything to further this ‘clean-up’ campaign, to ease the animals’ pain and to ease my own conscience. So, that’s why it feels so natural to want to build a strong support base for animal liberation. 

Momentum

622a:

Optimism becomes more of a reality when you think of work as something pleasurable - the whole task of trying to change vast numbers of people’s minds isn’t so much about its ‘impossibility’ as its challenge. We just don’t need the lead-weight mind-set of inevitable failure; we certainly can’t afford to fail before we’ve started.

It helps for us to remember just what has to happen, the sequence of things, and how it was for us when each barrier fell only to expose the next one, which in turn falls to the next, and so on. The struggle makes it all the more satisfying when change happens.

            Here we are, moving from a basically, fairly selfish life (human-centred) to another type of life, with a different perspective, doing something for ourselves as that merges with ‘doing something for others’. ‘Work’ doesn’t have to be boring or driven by reluctant effort if there’s a purpose behind it. Why should the odds against us have to be a problem? As long as we’re going in a consistent direction, day by day, that pulse is enough to hold our interest and prevent us giving up.

Communication and optimism

622:

An optimistic vegan is like a small boat in a rough sea, facing up to impossible odds, everyone wants to sink us, the carnivores for speaking out against them, the vegetarians for undermining their reality and even fellow vegans who just want to lash out at anyone disagreeing with them. As optimists we have to be single minded, and not get upset by blasts of criticisms or ridicule. Our job is to hold out for the port in the distance even though we can’t see it, only knowing it’s there, somewhere.

            How big would the turn-around have to be, for most people to swing our way? The challenge of that keeps us on our toes. But unless we keep optimistic we’re merely fighting a rear-guard action. Our optimism is our forward momentum, based on the strength of this one single idea and the practice we get from standing up to detractors.

            Both omnivores and some within the Animal Rights Movement refuse to see anything much changing for the better. Consequently they try to squash optimism, saying how impossible our task is, and how humans won’t ever change. They haven’t taken into account that people wise up to things when too many ‘stabilities’ collapse (as animal food is linked with animal cruelty and ill health) and things have to be re-thought.

People do change. Just look at the many vegetarians there are today after a mere thirty or forty years, where before that there were practically none. And now there are those who are practising vegans, who are willing to speak up about animal issues, who know it’s dangerously counter-productive to be defeatist. In Animal Rights, since we’re at such an early stage of consciousness-change, our work shouldn’t be weakened by those who talk about ‘the pointlessness of it all’. Somehow each of us has to find a way of getting over that, in order to maintain the momentum of change. 

Rocky road

621:

Convincing people of the link between food and the slavery of animals should be dead simple. But it isn’t. We are seen as the ‘spoilers’, for trying to do just that. But so what? We know it might seem that way when we open our mouths, trying to alter attitudes. But we know our intentions are good - the very opposite of spoiling people’s eating pleasures. It just doesn’t seem that way to the onlooker.

            Attitude colours everything we think about. Pleasure pushes its way to the front so, for omnivores, eating comes before thinking; their insistence on pleasure delays personal ethical development. Vegans can only clear the path and wait. Our insisting that a lot of what’s eaten is ethically wrong is simply removing heavy rocks from a path to make travelling on it smoother, and the bigger the rock the more useful vegans are for trying to remove it.

            Learning how to lift these attitudinal rocks is what vegans do; we pick up rocks wherever we find them and ultimately that’s the best training we can get, for communicating this awkward subject.

Our aims and the license to speak about them

620:

Our common aim is profound enough to draw energy from. Our aim is reached by eating plant-based foods and seeing the connections between the food we boycott and the treatment of ‘food’ animals. This is why we decide to become vegan in the first place, to protect certain values connected with humanity; humans are losing their grip on ethical values in relation to their food and what is condoned, in respect of the way animals are being treated. The animal-eaters are talking themselves into becoming monsters, and vegans are trying to talk them out of it. We see a role here for talking about animal issues. As talking-vegans, we need to know how to talk effectively.

The job of public-addressing involves outlining the sequences we go through in the waking-up process. First our attention is caught by seeing how cruelty and animal products go together; everyone should be aware, by now, of the worst abuses of chickens in cages and pigs in sow stalls. Then we start to see how ‘clean’ food leads to a clearing of our view of world events - if people were vegan, animals would be spared, our health improved, world starvation a thing of the past and the threat of global warming massively reduced. The sequence of one thing leading to the next, from food to good nutrition to plentiful food supply to cleaner farming impact on the environment, shows how the world could benefit from simple plant based food regimes. The omnivore needs to be helped to see these sequences, but for that to happen vegan advocates must speak with  permission. If it’s not forthcoming then that’s of central importance. And we have to ask why people are so reluctant to talk or listen to matters concerning Animal Rights. Until we make progress on permission we make no progress at all. 

What’s going on here?

619:

Vegans can be so irritating, especially when they invade public space. Of course, they don’t have to be, they can be inspirational.

            There’s a difference between two types of vegan - those who don’t proselytise and those who do; some vegans speak out in public and are sometimes pushy and off-putting, some vegans don’t speak out and seem to be afraid of confronting people. Outspoken vegans do invaluable work, and quiet vegans do too, by setting a fine example in silence. I think both types are valid, but they’re not mutually exclusive. They can coexist in the one person. There are those who don’t ear bash their friends every time they see them but never miss an opportunity to speak out when appropriate, when invited.

If that part of us, which chooses to go into the public arena, is going to become stronger it must be able to deal with opposition, including those who just ignore us. We have to get used to the swagger of the vast majority; they are almost over confident because of that. So, we press on; as advocating vegans we can turn the obstinate public mind simply by enjoying the ‘game of reaching into the public ear’ and not getting huffy when rejected.

But this approach is never nonintrusive, but it’s a balance to stimulate discussion. We can take a few blows to the head, a few insults and jokes at our expense, just so long as we start discussing that most touchy of all subjects, animal issues.

As soon as we beg the public’s indulgence, beg them to listen, we lose them. And there again, as soon as we dispense with any pretence of getting permission, as soon as we challenge them to ‘bring-it-on’, or if we force them to listen, they run. And again we’ve lost them.

So, whereto from here? Humour works sometimes but it gives the impression that this is a light-hearted subject, which it’s not. I suppose one of our main problems is that, already, we have a bit of a reputation; we’re the newest evangelist on the block. They can almost smell us coming from a distance. As soon as I open my mouth they ask themselves - what’s going on here? Is he trying to convert me?

How appealing - a lover!

618:

An animal advocate, fighting the cause of Animal Rights, has a life-long objective, which might look to some like an obsession.

Living according to vegan principle is like having a lover – it’s an ultimate source of satisfaction, as well as being a tester of our own shortfalls. We might becomes enthusiastic to the point of obsession because it fills our lives with meaning. The testing bit we may not like at first, but is concerned for our long-term education and commitment.

Here’s the general aim: we try to free farm animals. To have such a mighty aim calls for mighty changes in one’s personal life, and that sets off a sequence of events which are, perhaps, unnerving at first. The sequence of events obviously starts with food; as we begin to boycott and start implementing vegan principles, it probably signals a major turning point in our life. But as we go deeper, our ‘going vegan’ leads us into a more natural life. It’s like swimming below the water and coming-up for fresh air. We ‘go’ more with Nature and then we go towards a love of Nature, always with animal-liberation in mind.

The whole journey starts with a private diet. And by being more in tune with Nature our vegan lifestyle becomes ever more appealing, first to ourselves and then, by talking about it, to others too. As soon as we’re happy  and at ease with all these changes, we can go on to talk to people and feed people with the sort of food we eat at home.

Our aim is to talk

617:

Once we have an aim, such as going vegan, we’re in a position to be useful. Once we’re eating from plants, clothing ourselves from plants, then we’re in action, boycotting all animal produce. Then we have to learn new ways of preparing food, learn about basic nutrition (for our own safety) and then, moving on from there, learn about modern-day animal-husbandry and why it is making life unsafe for the animals.

To set this ball rolling we need to carve out great chunks of time and energy for the ‘work in hand’ (and that means learning what needs to be learnt, in order to talk about this subject).

But where most work is needed is in convincing people of the connections between what is done to animals and what they, as consumers, buy; as soon as you buy, for example, a quiche, you are supporting the caging of hens. It’s a benign-looking food item. It’s just one of many familiar foods that have been on sale all our lives. Most people wouldn’t have given it any thought beyond its attractiveness for eating. But as soon as you make the essential connection between the finished product and its ingredients a question arises; it is tainted or not; you either take note of the connection between it and the animal or you ignore it.

Now, if you ignore it, then what is really happening? Does it mean you don’t care that your egg comes from a caged hen? Does it mean you don’t care if hens are caged?

If you do care then you can only stop eating quiche. By stopping eating quiche you make a statement of intent, to apply the same reasoning to any other product which is similarly tainted, in order to show that you care. However delicious you might think quiche is, having a clean conscience about what you are eating might be even more ‘delicious’. By making this one decision to deny yourself a pleasure for the sake of a principle you hold dear,  helps you to think more deeply about the violations humans are responsible for.

By developing any one of the many links between food and animal-killing you inevitably come to consider Animal Rights; conscience versus convenience. Each is a strong contender for our attention. By boycotting cruelty-foods you’ll realise there will be no more lobster, and no more of many, many favourite food items. If you don’t boycott the lobster dish you won’t be able to avoid the picture of the lobster being boiled alive (to kill it).

This is more than human inconvenience because it highlights the subtlety of our highly sophisticated taste sensation (pleasure) being put up against our knowledge of the history of animal suffering (guilt). Once we’ve come down on the conscience side, we’re ready to become advocates and better able to talk about things sensibly (non-hypocritically); sensible talk is capable of being interesting talk; interesting talk can become the inspirational agent of radical change.

Now, there is a whole generation of people hungry for information (for the ‘truth’), and that is precisely what vegans can deliver. (Over thirty years I’ve never heard anyone suggest vegans are speaking dishonestly!).

Once we’re established as practising vegans then we can move into advocacy. And that means developing some communication skills, in order to convince people to stop supporting the Animal Industry. But initially anyone cam talk about cruelty to animals because it is so obvious. All we need to do is introduce the whole matter of animal-use to those who’ve never really thought about it. The more details of routine cruelty and speciesism we find the easier it is to convince others that the non-use of animals could become a reality.

Sequences – when deciding to go vegan

616:

Let’s say I consider the possibility of going vegan. My first question is probably going to be why? Why go to all this trouble? Why open this Pandora’s Box? Wouldn’t it better to deliberately NOT consider issues concerning domesticated animals? To leave it on the back-burner?

            We might reason, amongst all the other important and urgent issues facing humanity, that there’s no room for ‘animal issues’. So, we take this one off our ‘to-do’ list. But maybe we know it’s too important for that and start to consider moving towards a vegan lifestyle.

Here’s what I think happens - a plant-based eating regime suddenly lights up all the lifestyle changes that are involved, it lays before us a whole sequence of events which will take place; once started there’s no going back. Then comes the warning, “Don’t retreat at the first hiccup, push through, don’t give up”. Then we’re moving at speed, the idea takes on its own momentum, becoming like a wave we decide to ride. Then, once aloft, we realise if we jump off we must do it quickly, before it picks up speed. After that it will be harder to get back on again, the next time we are moved to try.

Going vegan is not a frivolous day trip activity, we realise that we’re taking on a life-long project, and that we must eventually be relaxed with it. As with the development of speed travel, with aeroplanes for example, veganism starts in one place and moves quickly; it changes us so quickly, showing us what, before, might have been unrecognisable. A tiny biplane using propellers turns into a vast metal construction of speed. If the aim was simply to fly we’d have stayed with all the romance of biplanes, but if we want speed-travel we go with the jet plane. Vegan consciousness is really just a sped-up version of the old lumbering omnivore lifestyle.

Omnivores have given away their greatest asset, independent thinking. They deny logic, and have left themselves with nothing to fend off what vegans are saying, namely that humans have become monsters. The average human is in denial of the fact that terrible things are being done in their name and they are sponsoring these terrible things. Imprisoning sentient animals in cages and pens to extract food from them is just about the most cold calculated and cruel thing anyone can imagine. And yet we’ve done it and we, the consumer, support it. And that is surely enough to earn human the title of monster.

The reason we become vegan is to overcome the omnivore’s denials. We know we’ve got to do whatever needs to be done to get their attention and keep it focused on what we are saying, however uncomfortable it may be for us to say what we have to say or however uncomfortable for them to listen. We’ve got to get them talking, get them to trust us, get them to see our ‘genuine’ natures. We have to keep in mind why we became vegan in the first place, to free the creatures from prison. That reason has to be, for us, more important than any other consideration, and of course there are plenty more reasons to become vegan.

It feels satisfyingly right

615:

 ‘Satisfaction’ and ‘meaning’ are the big drivers in life. As soon as we find meaning (in this case, that animals shouldn’t be used by humans) we see something new arising. In our minds, we experience a private conclusion forming inside our own heads. Before us is an entirely different world, without the barbed wire and then all the potential that implies.

As soon as we decide to contemplate a noble aim, every ramification shows up on the screen, and then it’s decision time when we ask ourselves, “Shall I give it a shot?”

            As we become more concerned for the plight of captive animals we notice, mainly within ourselves, a change of heart, an shift of empathy. And this empathy makes us feel more mature. It feels unquestionable, because it connects to compassion and our role as representatives of our species. Ambassadorially-speaking that feels meaningful. And meaning is the ultimate satisfaction.

The ‘new’ altruism

614:

Altruism is really a perfectly balanced two-way road of selfish and selfless intertwined endeavour.

Take the idea of selflessness which could lead to insufferable saintliness, which then becomes unsustainable. And the opposite is just as ridiculous - the selfish world leads us into the usual inevitable trouble. Altruism has been high jacked by the morality mob and been made to look ridiculous, but it needn’t have been.

When would-be altruists try to take things out towards idealism they show off strong moral positions intended for admiration. It’s meant to give life meaning and also to make one look good but there’s no modifier to keep things in balance. It looks too righteous and it usually doesn’t work.

The saintly and selfless is in a face-off with the selfish and materialistic; extreme good versus extreme bad; black versus white; one side can only work when it has its extreme opposite to relate to, so if we’re really bad we have to do something really good to balance it. But why not just avoid extremes? Why not let our altruism take the form of being useful yet anonymous? Then there’s no chance we’ll be sidetracked by extremes. We can thrive very nicely by operating on low levels of selfish and unselfish motivation. It’s not so impressive and it’s slower to get results, but in the long run its our continuous usefulness and good intention that counts and indeed, that makes us happy.

If this is a new altruism then what does it mean? Does it mean that the slow-but-sure way brings the best results? Maybe, but we are trained to believe the opposite, to ask ourselves, “Who’s got the time to hang around waiting when only results prove progress?” So is altruism asking us to look one level deeper? If results work for us personally we’ll be able to make them work for us collectively. If it works for me and it makes me optimistic about myself then I’m more likely to feel optimistic about the future of our civilisation.

It’s a circular argument that never really gets resolved of course - that we need to ‘do’ altruism (in a balanced way) to feel good about ‘doing’ it in the first place, but feel good about our altruism in order to strike just the right balance.

Perhaps more positive an idea is plain optimism. We need it for brightening our lives, to stop us being gloomy about things. An optimist might say, pragmatically, “So what if all this damage has taken place? It can be fixed”. Optimism ‘ups’ energy. In turn, this ‘upped’ energy creates attitude change, which will start with transitions and move towards transformations.

Going vegan is one of the simplest and most effective transitions anyone can make. And even if the rest of the community doesn’t understand it, on a personal level it can be gold. We do it not because it’s right but because it means we’re optimists, on the road to becoming altruists.

With all the hype, nonsense and untruth of today, veganism stands as a beacon of sanity. It’s optimism is in balance with Nature. It looks good and for a vegan it feels right. It’s as if one is dressed appropriately for the right climate. For vegans, anything we can do to promote vegan principle will inevitably be satisfying, and then the notion of being altruistic doesn’t seem to figure quite so large whichever way it’s seen.

Am I altruistic?

613:

What I want for myself I also want for others - is this altruism or is this un-realism?  I feel a bit stuck with the old meaning of altruism, with its very ‘Western-Christian-Good-Bad’ associations. I think we have to turn this dull, difficult notion into something interesting. A ‘new’ altruism wouldn’t be me-centred or you-centred but a sensible balance between the two, and something with one eye on the future and one eye on the ‘now’. I think there’s something profoundly satisfying in making our own contribution for the betterment of future life, and it doesn’t need to be uncomfortable or bring us any glow or praise; it’s simply a constructive approach that makes our day seem worthwhile.

Altruism itself is leading us towards a more efficient way of interacting with our internal-personal environment and the external-collective one. But it insists on the central question as to whether it works or not - am I convinced by it or not? If I am, if it does work, then the next step is to see how genuine we are about it by looking to see if it exists in our relationships. You might ask what it is, between you and your partner, that makes your partner’s welfare always more important than your own. It’s the same question you could ask of any love-based human to human relationship. But now, step across the species barrier. Is it the same loving feeling we have about animals? Not only with our own companion animals at home, with whom we already have a relationship, but strangers, unseen animals, innocent creatures who aren’t allowed a decent life of their own. Why would you condone the abuse of them? Or again, why would you put yourself out for them? What’s in it for me? You could say - I can’t save all these millions of animals. I can’t be expected to feel the same sort of love for pigs and chickens as I do for my dog. But then altruism isn’t about that same sort of love, perhaps it’s simply about not doing unto others what you wouldn’t want done to you.

Ultimately - why would you want to become vegan? Why would you want to do that to yourself? But you could equally ask yourself, why not?

Selfless or selfish

612:

When we Animal Rightists get serious about repair we like to think we’re doing something big for ourselves and something even bigger for the greater good (which in this case, of course, must include saving animals). To make this work effectively some self-discipline is needed, to purposely stand aside from the habitual and avoid certain foods which are sensually attractive to us but morally illegitimate.

            At first this seems like a massive sacrifice (automatically associated with discomfort). To get past this we obviously need a strongly based sense of intention. But once this first hurdle is overcome (once we’re established as vegans), we can look forward to the next level of enjoyment, towards more repair and more personal satisfaction.

Going vegan starts out as a selfless act, perhaps even the first new habit we’re truly proud of. As our efforts are rewarded, the initially selfless becomes so obviously self-benefiting that we forget that non-vegans cannot possibly see the personally beneficial side. They’ll only see the discomfort.  

Satisfying repairs

611:

A big part of our life should be about repair. Most of us are devoted to something, feel strongly and perhaps act strongly about the most important issues in our lives. It may be care for trees, for children, for peace, or whatever. If it’s broken or harmed it’s only natural for us to want to repair it.

But however noble our repairs are, unless we find ways to enjoy the repair process itself, we won’t keep it up. Eventually the novelty will wear thin and it’ll be too much like hard work; we won’t have enough motivation to do long term repairs.

Whether we get good results or bad results, the thing we want to repair must be so important to us that to risk losing it or see it further harmed should be unbearable. But there again, whatever it is we have to do might well be satisfying in itself, dealing with it, contemplating it and working on it. Maybe it’s a hobby, maybe a fascination, maybe a cause, whatever it is, if it has a controversial element to it then nothing about it will be black or white. It will get a mixed reaction because it will affect people in totally different ways.

Certainly Animal Rights is like that, in as much as the subject (for me at any rate) is always urgent but ever fascinating. It has so many facets and implications.

Here, on the one hand, are the bad guys who do these terrible things to animals – they make a living out of it. They are probably as passionate about their livelihood as we are about ending it. There’s nothing personal about it, it’s just a difference-of-view, about something very important to all parties. The machinery of Society’s acceptance works for them, whereas for us it’s a catastrophe. But in a way there’s something bigger going on here – immediate survival and the long term future of our species. The hard working farmer, busy with thousands of captive creatures, thinks only of business and markets. For the vegan, however, it’s quite different. To me, at any rate, it is all about determining the evolution of our species’ very consciousness. For me, this whole thing of being conscious of consciousness means the human can determine what our whole species may become if we are cooperative about it. All we have to do is to get people together. A very tall order!

If this can be swung around it can be permanent. So, if we want to go off repairing on a grand scale we really have to stick with it.

That may not be quite the problem we think it is. Let’s put it this way – ‘the place of animals in human society’ is a significant subject concerning every human on the planet. Vegans think we need urgent attitude-repair on this one. So, yes, if we’re into repair on this scale, it’s best we get close to the subject itself, commit to it, and then enjoy dealing with it, on whatever level.

            By connecting personal fulfilment with practical repair work, we can make the struggle of change less painful, and we can actually enjoy the work involved. By deciding to become vegetarian we appoint ourselves repairers. Once we no longer use stuff taken from animals’ bodies we not only keep our health but we keep animals off Death Row. When we are into the liberating of animals, then almost anything we do will be primarily done for them, and that’s going to be satisfying to us on all levels. 

The yellow brick road

610

To be constructive, we need to train our thoughts towards how things could be. I don’t mean ‘feeling lucky’ or wishful thinking or romanticising or being idealistic, I mean taking a wide-eyed look at the significance of what’s happening when we are about to change. But why would you bother to change if you didn’t think it worth doing, or if the only reason for changing were to relieve guilt?

‘Change’ - we get stuck in the rut of our habits but we do like the idea of change and yet believe we lack the energy needed to make it happen.

I look at parents sometimes, their time and energy invested in kids and home and careers; they’ve got no time for change. (Whereas for someone like me, with no family responsibilities and far less need to work long hours, it’s the opposite). For most adults there aren’t enough hours in the day, so ‘change’ is not considered. “I’m sorry, but things will have to remain largely as they are”. A radical change of diet, for instance, would seem unrealistic.

So, we stay fixed by habit and time constraints. Any major food change is out of the question. The sorts of changes vegans are suggesting (to fit with animal rights) seem unlikely, especially when it concerns a whole family’s food.

This is where ‘change’ implies action and urgency, as if it feels like all or nothing, since if there is some change it may be too half hearted to work. Perhaps, all in good faith, our attempts to change fail, and that then makes us afraid of change. And yet it might work the other way around; if we are thirsty for success but fail at the attempt, it could be that this one failure could make us even more determined.

What if we say, “Determination is everything”? What if we introduce a little force on ourselves, if we ‘up’ our expectations? It’s likely we might wobble, and in doing so look about for some support.

Wanting support from others is possibly where some vegans go wrong. We’ve wanted others to agree with us. We’ve wanted us all to join hands but we underestimate the enormity of the thing we’re trying to achieve. Perhaps we’ve expected and demanded too much, too soon, and by wanting support we’ve shown desperation, and that’s an unattractive look to anyone who sees it in us.

Support? No. It seems we aren’t going to be given it. So we begin to feel we’ve been let down, which leads to resentment, which brings on anger.

Do we sometimes purposely bring it on, this sequence of events, so that we can feed our own anger to fuel our own righteous indignation? And if so, how do we break that cycle?

As unsupported defenders of animals’ rights we mustn’t ever forget those poor beings who have a lot more to worry about than us. We have to keep reminding ourselves of their much more horrible life and their very real desperation. For this reason we need to shed that ‘poor-me’, that whingeing pessimism and that need for personal success.

We need to be less afraid of looking at the bigger picture - the ‘could-be’ that evolves towards the ‘will-be’. We need to be a bit insistent, even with ourselves. We need to appear to be a little more certain than we actually feel. And feel a little more certain about change happening soon even if it doesn’t seem logical. And then to want for the best even if we aren’t around to see it. (I mean, change happening after our own lives have ended)

The changes which are already happening (especially in people’s attitudes to our non-human, animal friends) are the result of fifty or so years of consciousness-raising. Everyone these days, even kids, knows the worst of it - they know what ‘battery hens’ means, or they hear supermarket chains advertising ‘cage-free eggs’ and ‘sow-stall-free pork’. Change is in the air, perhaps not fast enough, but it’s happening. And in terms of Animal Rights, these take the form of voluntary dietary changes (the most private habit-change imaginable) and such changes don’t need any swearing-of-allegiance to it. We only need to want it and do whatever we can towards it. On the downside there are a few initial inconveniences, but on the upside it is the dawning of a probable-future (a future most would approve of).

Animal Rights implies such a different way of looking at life. Within that tiny mind-shift there’s a revolution about to take place. No blood or war or force or authority or danger, just a great leap forward in the form of an attitudinal shift. And what do we need to do to bring that about? Nothing but merely consider vegan principle as a possibility.

In a vegan world there’d be no one watching or finger-wagging or hurrying us on, only a little self-generated action.

The bigger picture is like a book which you can put aside when you’ve read enough for the day. No one’s pressuring anybody to read it. And the book itself is passive, just as the future is. It accepts us if we accept it.

If we’re ready (and if we want to, and if we’re attracted to it) then we only need to follow the yellow brick road, following along it as we build it.

Australia and ‘it’

609:

Here in Australia people seem blasé about animals – they’re not yet conscious of them as sentient beings. They eat them, race them, wear them, vivisect them, just as in every other country in the world. But here there’s a germ of something hopeful and I think it can be traced back to our respect for equality (albeit only amongst humans). In regard to the great egalitarian dream, humans living amongst humans as equals, Australia has a lot to teach the rest of the world. Now, if that could broaden to include animals, well then, we’d be in a prime position to be true leaders in the coming age.

            A central value here, which is very twenty-first century, is the egalitarian ‘fair-go’ principle. Australian people have that strongly in the culture. And it puts us in an ideal position to understand the wrongness in speciesism. Once we realise that, then from there we can assimilate, by becoming more ‘consciousness of animals’.

Australians are explorers. We’re curious to try new things – then why should we not then explore a more peaceful lifestyle. It seems right up our street. I see Australians as being the deep-down, most friendliest bunch of people you could wish for. Be that’s as maybe, all I want to say is - it appears things are changing. We can see the changes in some ways … we can see how fast some things are moving.

But there’s one glitch. Our change is slowed down by pessimistic predictions of doom. Amongst Animal Rights people you’ll hear them tell you about certain friends who’ve become vegan this year, (great!) and then, “but millions haven’t”. We almost insist on seeing things gloomily. And that doesn’t encourage others to shift, let alone to feel optimistic 

To avoid gloom, we probably need to insist on the inevitability of a good outcome. Now that isn’t so hard is it? Of course we need to initiate things, like when we’re cooking a meal, dreaming-up things, manipulating ingredients from scratch, all that sort of creativity. The more creative we are the more optimistic we’ll be.

Is it like when you’re vegan, and you’re building, creating and trying to make things satisfying. By narrowing our choices we are forced to be more creative with what is available to us, and therefore to build something new.

The big problems

608:

Our priorities are probably best determined by our own interest. If we’re overweight we’ll want to thin down, if we’re claustrophobic we might want to liberate the incarcerated. My own claustrophobia drives me to want to liberate animals. If you love trees you rescue forests, if your heart breaks at the thought of kids going without food, then you say, “I must do something about this”.

Whatever problems we choose to concentrate on, it’s always going to be a challenge. But there are two levels to any challenge - there’s the apparent unsolve-ability and the slim chance of finding a solution. We cut our teeth on intractable ‘problems’ and not only find solutions but in doing so we throw light on deeper issues. If, for example, I hate seeing chickens in cages, I have to face not eating eggs as well as trying to abolish cages. If I’m opposed to war I don’t join the army. But I don’t leave it at that, I go further and try to promote peace or advocate non-violence.

Isn’t it true that we have to go through the pain of a problem to see our shortcomings, our one dimensional thinking, and that finally leads us towards fuller solutions? Isn’t the genius of the human the ability to gather evidence and solve problems? But another aspect of our genius is to be selfless, and to be able to see far up ahead beyond our own lifetime, to see ‘the bigger picture’. The narrow approach solves the immediate problems, but we often won’t see the ‘bigger’ picture until we’ve shifted from personal interest to the interests of  the ‘greater good’.

Because humans have always been so determined to focus on personal problems, of ourselves, our family, our country, we’ve never really progressed past that point. The ‘bigger problems’ are left for another day. But could it be that the most daunting dramas force us to continually re-examine our problems, to get us over the hump, to inspire us to act sooner rather than later.

It might be scary, but isn’t the trick of it all not to be afraid to look at each problem that comes up? Here we have a whole world-population facing the results of violence, to each other, to animals, to the planet itself. This complex situation shows us, whoever we are, that we are in deep trouble, but it’s not for us to be put off by the thorny-ness of it, and not to be overwhelmed by it, but simply to look at it as if the problem is talking to us. We might be reluctant to learn the biggest of all lessons but if we apply ourselves to a thorough attitude of non-violence, well, the rest inevitably becomes obvious. Doesn’t it?

We have a strong argument

607a

Vegans have grown up. We’re past wanting nursery teas and crap food (mostly animal-based foods that make people fat and sluggish and ill). Our boycott protects the animals but it also keeps us well away from non-foods. That’s one great advantage for vegans. Call that ‘self discipline’ if you like, but it’s really just a blessed release from a daily dosing of poison.

            For those who’re already vegan, the great challenge isn’t how to stick with plant-food but how to convince others of the advantage of it. First it’s a matter of getting a hearing. Second it’s a matter of keeping up our own morale in the face of constant rejection. Our relationship with non-vegans often seems to be on shaky ground. At first we’re chatting away, and then this subject comes up (‘animals’ and ‘food’) and suddenly we notice how they bluntly change the subject, and it’s weird that they often think we haven’t noticed.

They don’t like our passion and we don’t like being dismissed. Both sides have grievances, so what can be done? We vegans can’t fight back since we’re so few and there are just too many of them. All we can do is reflect on the inner assurances of our own moral and ethical position. But we’re left with a lump in our throat. We can’t let it go.

The upshot of all this is not usually a pretty story. We go away and begin to harbour grudges, saving our angriest judgements for the ‘big boys’, who vivisect animals or sell cattle or run factory farms or abattoirs. Then, when we get no satisfaction there we turn our wrath back onto the consumer … and that means just about everybody. We wage judgemental war on the world. That’s all we can do.

But maybe there’s a more effective, non-judgemental way to initiate change. It starts within the mind of the Animal Rights advocate, firstly by acknowledging that we’re in a far stronger position than we seem to be; although hopelessly outnumbered, we have a rationale which must eventually be discussed, and it will be our opportunity to have our say.

Our strongest argument is that we hold to non-violence and applying without any exceptions; and it’s this central value which others can hardly be opposed to. If it worked for us, jolting us out of our own dark corners, it can work for anybody.

Honesty, kindness and all the things we’re hopefully brought up to believe in, are values anyone can respect. But what if that isn’t enough to be convincing? Can we hurry things on by disapproval? I doubt it. It’s only when the private and personal agreement is reached that a person will come out.

Surely, a better way to approach the disparity of views is to emphasise that we’re all in ‘this’ together. The vegan advocate’s job is surely to find ways of dealing with common problems by interacting with others and not by separating away from them. Humans are wonderful planners and communicators and visionaries. It’s simply a matter of getting away from the second-rate self-gratifications in order to see things in a bigger way.

We’re vegans not ‘vague-ans’

607:

What happens when talking turns to fighting, with friends, over ‘issue-differences’? It can be terrible but mostly we just get mildly irritated by each other, which is usually enough to stay clear of serious controversy.

But serious talkers we are. Nothing I like better than having the chance to talk serious-talk, with friends. The next time it happens, our central moral and ethical positions are ready to be defended. But if the person we are talking to feels they are on weak ground, they foresee a possible skirmish, which might end up worse. So to keep my best friends happy I’m inclined to not talk animal matters with them. But isn’t that a cop out?

Here then are the two main problem of advocating for animals - we can be identified too strongly with it and with nothing else. That’s annoying. But secondly, it’s difficult to NOT talk about it when so many other ideas are linked to it. I’ve never really been able to resolve these two particular difficulties. It turns out that I either do NOT talk animals to friends and keep them sweet, or I lose my friends by always going on about animals, ending up with no one to hear what I’ve got to say. In consequence I get very rusty at talking on this subject because I can’t find anyone to discuss it with.

The opposite side of the coin is their effect on me: the opposite difficulty would be me taking umbrage by the things people say to me. And I’d be trying not to be too easily triggered, but it’s very difficult. I get irritated by their obviousness, in dealing with me. Like, when they insist on mispronouncing “vay-gen” (when everyone knows it’s “vee-gn”) but they choose to imply the subject is too unimportant for them to have learnt the proper pronunciation. Or using the sound of that particular vowel to make us seem as if ‘vaygans’ are somehow vague (about what we believe). Or like when there’s a deliberate misunderstanding, likening Animal Rights with a cult or a religion. And my last least-favourite irritation is when the implication is that we are part of a strict group that dictates what we may or may not do, when people ask, “Are you allowed to eat this?” implying a contempt for my willingness to give up normal freedoms concerning food choices. I usually say rather testily “Yes, we can eat anything, it’s just my personal choice NOT to”. And of course that makes me sound rather precious.

You see, we can’t win. But perhaps that’s the whole point anyway; it isn’t about winning. Nor is it necessarily about converting anyone. Perhaps the age has passed where we shame people into believing the way we do, because veganism isn’t a belief in that sense. It’s more like a logic, that even a three year old can follow. As if you’d have to be slightly stoopid not to see the point we are making.

But we’ll always be tested, to see if we’ll hit out when goaded. It’s the same reasoning that makes people pretend not to know how to pronounce the word ‘vegan’ (‘veggn’ or ‘vayghan’ as if the pronunciation is not worth learning because it describes something of such little importance) so as to force us to correct them. But these are minor irritations. They’re meant to shock or mock, and I believe it’s coming from their having no ethical constraint on what they’re willing to eat; everything is indulged in and nothing is missed out on.

It’s quite the opposite way for us, where with vegans everything is examined. Vegans look closely at all commodities to determine their provenance. And that’s hardly ‘vague’!

A conversation that can’t go wrong

606b

The big danger for the Righteous Person is that we are always trying to win approval. If it doesn’t come voluntarily then we try to get it by boasting. (In this case, it might be me big noting myself about being vegan). Boasting is not a good look, which is why a little inscrutability is useful, purely to prevent that happening.

Such a lovely thing is conversation. We who can engage with one another are lucky. I have a dear friend in her mid eighties who is now just about stone deaf and she can’t engage in conversation at all. A sad loss for all concerned. Conversation is a craft, even an art, so to misuse it, even for good reason, is a sacrilege. For me it’s intercourse - with it I can explore differences and common causes. It helps flex mental muscles. I like talking, but if it isn’t underpinned with ‘compassion’ for the person I’m talking to, then all my talking becomes objectionable, and anyone listening is going to avoid future contact with me altogether.

If I make any clumsy manoeuvres, the conversation stops short and alarm bells ring. Everything changes. What I thought I had before I no longer have.

It’s here where unselfconsciousness gives way to scheming. And the worst of it is, when a conversation goes pear shaped, it progresses into unmistakable hostility or aggression. Which is so not-necessary.

Keep ‘em guessing, holding back

606a

The thinking behind veganism hasn’t been faulted up to now. If there’d been flaws they’d have emerged during the 70 years since the inception of the idea. If, therefore, the vegan diet is entirely robust, then the compassion behind it must also be unarguable. Because of this, I associate vegans with being fearless, and if that is so then vegans can tough it out when there’s any hostility, when issues concerning ‘using animals’ are raised.

If fear causes war and vegans no longer have that sort of fear, then our very fearlessness should put a stop to battleground-interactions. We might feel very alone sometimes but, when tempted to hit out at our detractors, we should bear in mind that we’re in a strong moral position. We can open up this taboo subject without using moral pressure, simply by talking about ‘all this’ as unselfconsciously as it’s possible to seem.

However, before we get there we’ll have to deal with others’ criticisms, whilst never letting the flak never become too hard to handle. Our ‘robust principles’ might be dismissed, but I hope we can still handle rude remarks without shooting ourselves in the foot.

You know how it feels. We’re having a chat with a friend, and then, ‘BANG’, out of the blue, the atmosphere changes (and if it feels bad with strangers it’s worse with friends or family). If you ‘go vegan’, you can expect to touch a raw nerve whenever you tell someone, “I’m vegan”.

I’ve noticed (probably because I’m one of those ‘rabid’ vegans) that even good friends are reluctant to get ‘too close to the flame’. They think, given the slightest excuse, I’ll try to burn them.

We see our omnivore friends thinking in a sort of panic, and foreseeing the worst, and sensitive to what we might say that will embarrass them. Soon enough, I’ll steer the conversation side-ways, to get onto unrelated topics - and then steer the talk around from a different angle and edge back-in again later. After a restful chat about something else, I’ll slide back in to what I want to talk about. But is that perhaps too clever by half?

Here we are, having a nice unselfconscious chat, but subtle and devious, each attempting to out-manoeuvre the other.

If we, as vegans, think we’re pretty crafty when we’re doing the opposite to what’s expected of us, perhaps we should think again. The omnivore is often smart enough to spot us, having had practice with other proselytizers.

Assuming, if you do enjoy talking Animal Rights with people, and assuming you aren’t an animal-bore, and assuming you still have a few friends left, may I say something corny? These friends often love us. They love us as we are. They like us, despite ‘our obsession’. In this society, in our well educated Western communities, people pretty much know ‘the vegan-type’. They know something (not necessarily accurate) about us, some of our basic principles; we’re expected to be a sort of moral shock wave. Often they’re curious to see if they can out-argue us.

 For us, we might be keen to get this compassion-revolution up and running. Amongst fellow activists, whenever we’re discussing serious matters, it’s almost impossible not to touch on the significance of ‘compassion’. We talk about it together. We talk about it inside our own heads. In fact we activists are probably walking, talking exuders of concern and empathy. But there something of a caution felt amongst non-vegans. In an innocent conversation, once we let on that we’re vegan, once they’ve guessed we’re steering the conversation towards that tabooed subject, then alarm bells ring. So, before this happens, I am suggesting that instead of going in hard we do the very opposite. We underplay it. Why?

Now, I admit this looks very similar to what we might do when we’re ashamed of something, but of course that’s not the case here - being vegan is hardly that. But my first instinct is to tell myself to beware, when telling people “I’m vegan”. As soon as it’s known, we might have to bite our lip. Sometimes it’s wiser to bide our time and say far less than we’d like to.

Busting fear

606:

Imagine if vegan food did really let you think faster, by relieving the mind of guilt and giving you a sense of hope. I suppose that being vegan means you don’t have to be afraid of who you are, or fear doom for eating animals. Instead we can look forward, perhaps for the first time in our lives, to far less self-imposed ill health, guilty conscience, spiritual failure and, at least in our own heads, to the idea of the animals cursing us. Nor do we have to fear being addicted to crap foods or the shame of being slaves to convention. The freedom from all that is the bonus of eating-vegan, as if we can now challenge the presence of violence and all the paraphernalia of violence.

            We are probably coming to the end of an age where crude solutions (like resorting to violence) are thought to be appropriate. We are close to ending the relevance of violence, and finding a far less destructive way of intercoursing between groups with different-opinions.

            Vegans need to set the example here - our own dissociation with violence should start by our not hating carnivores. We need to talk to the meat-eaters, and since there are so many of them we have our work cut out!

Although the work involved in establishing rights for animals might seem to drain our energy, we can see today that although the forces against us are huge they are lessening. Our society is facing a choice - to recognise the scientific evidence of the value of plant-based diets, or to continue clinging to a superseded means of making energy by way of violating animals. Remaining as an omnivore these days is rather like laying an unnecessarily heavy carbon footprint on ourselves.

The vegan brain

605a:

On a self-interested level, being vegan makes us far less worried about illness. Good body health is one thing to look forward to but perhaps even more importantly is the prospect of good mental health. When you move towards living as a vegan a certain creativity ignites so that we can be inventive, bold, positive, etc. The whole food regimen, our animal activism and our general optimism is inspired by the challenge – the bigger picture forming against such impossible odds – and all that creativity is good for the brain. I think a vegan’s brain works better if only because it must, by definition, be relieved of the heavy stomach and the heavy conscience. It’s difficult to prove, but it seems that vegan foods, being lighter, allow a greater speed of thought. The brain isn’t weighed down with ‘heavy’ foods or whatever it is that omnivores are weighed down by.

If the vegan brain reacts more quickly on lighter food, imagine the great benefit it could be to us. Have you ever watched the fast reaction of birds? Wild animals in general are sharp, observant and react impressively. Their lives are lived on the edge, and I’d venture to suggest that their attention to their own safety (in the face of predation and their ability for self-feeding) keeps them on top of their game.

Perhaps one main characteristic of plant-eaters is that we’re quicker off the mark, like birds. It’s often the most obvious thing you notice, when you meet a plant eater, that they’re just a bit more awake, as if we’re less mentally sluggish. We are usually fitter too. But that’s not how we are portrayed in the media. I’ve noticed that people only see what they want to see, and what conforms to the normal pattern. The confirmed omnivore will probably see a rebellious vegan as frail and sickly, maybe because we don’t look quite like them in certain ways. I’ve noticed omnivores looking at me pityingly, sad that I “have to miss out on so many things”. They’re sad for me that I can’t maintain a proper social life because I can’t join in on so many levels. From my point of view, in compensation, I hope they envy me. Not that I want to be envied for my own sake, but only to highlight the attraction of the simple vegan way of life. Even with a tiny brain capacity myself, I hope omnivores will compare my mental acuity with their own relatively heavy way of thinking, and will want to ditch their dull thinking in order to have a robust conversation about important issues  with a rebellious vegan.

Talk with a vegan is one thing. But omnivores are compelled to hold a fixed view of the animal issue; it mustn’t matter to them; there must be NO reason to think about these things. In fact, on the subject of Animal Rights there must never be a reason to be ‘at-thought’ at all. And that’s where we stand today, some moving rapidly forward while others are left behind, stuck in a state of compulsory non-thought, about an obviously important matter.

Food affecting relationships

605:

A change in consciousness seems to alter a number of things, to do with attitude, optimism, habits, etc, but specifically it alters our awareness of the nature of animal-beings. In that respect it predicts what could become a greater species of human.

Without animals having rights (and, they still being so routinely abused) humans remain animal-dependent, held like a baby to its umbilical cord. We won’t be able to separate until we move away from our primitive food habits of the old animal-dependency model. Without this happening a better type of human can never emerge.

Freed animals means freed humans, as well as a rescued planet. This is the ‘bigger picture’, and it represents the sort of world you and I might want to see growing.

Growth, whether it’s plant growth or the evolutionary growth of a whole species, is always fascinating. We are surely united by our common interest in growth. We need to see something building as much as we need air to breathe.

One big thing I see building is animal consciousness, I mean consciousness of them. It starts by empathising with them, to the point of avoiding hurting them, avoiding using them for food and moving on logically from there to eating solely from the plant kingdom. If we can make peace with our conscience over this we prevent our complicity with a great wrongdoing. Enough said!

Vegan diets are good for humans in many ways, for slimming, for aerobic activity, for long-living, for energy, for mental sharpness, but most importantly, of course, it’s good for us because it’s good for the animals. Fewer of them get hurt. If all this is so, (especially with plant-food energy and nutrition being second to none), why aren’t we all into it? The food itself (plant-based wholefoods) can be the most attractive aspect of being a vegan. We can eat as much as we like and it metabolises perfectly. But to hear the omnivores speak you’d think we were masochistic self-denialists.

Once you’re vegan and know what food you like, then food can be largely forgotten about, because the fundamental attraction in being vegan is the way it affects relationships. Food and lifestyle, once established, has a positive effect on relationships, whether with humans or animals. On the strength of that is the great incoming of motivational energy. All these separate developments make up the ‘bigger picture’. Eventually, even if it’s a long way off, the ‘bigger picture’ motivates relationships. This is the age where most of us are being tested by our relationships. If what we’re aiming at is something we can be proud of, then one positive relationship will translate to another; one of the most positive relationship changes would be how we regard enslaved animals and then our being plant-eating humans. And from this change we can see our world actually having a future, where not only are the animals freed but where human relationships are easier and more fulfilling due to our more advanced empathy for each other.

What is the Biggest Issue?

604

Whether vegan or omnivore, most of us have a stock of well-rehearsed responses to the big issues of the day. Up our sleeves we have our shock-sentences plus our best lines of persuasion. But essentially, advocating for animals is about being confident and not saying more than is necessary. This is dense information we’re capable of passing across. We might choose to say little but we should be sure of what we do say, our facts and figures, quoting them without resorting to bluff. Background knowledge is essential. It’s the basis of our arguments. We can show empathy, commitment and positive attitude all we like, but it’s our hard background evidence that is most convincing.

But coming back to the omnivore who might be having to listen uncomfortably to what we’re saying, they’re probably having terrible time, visualising how it would be, to go vegan, and have to deal with so many personal challenges. Would vegan-living be a great opportunity or a big headache? Is going vegan too much to take on?

Crowding in on all these considerations is another question. Is Animal Rights the biggest, most important challenge or should other Big Issues be dealt with first? (The omnivore is slippery here. Sooner be an environmentalist than to give up food. Anything but that!!)

Well, here you might fundamentally disagree with me. But for me it’s the need to re-humanise humans that is most urgent, and all else will follow naturally after that. It’s not as if change has to be a long slow process, it can be quick, and once made we can move on to other Big Issues, all of which need attention. Nothing, however, can substantially change if we’re attempting to reform one thing but refusing to act humanely over our food choices; for every improvement we make to our lives we negate it all by eating, three times a day, the corpses of murdered animals.

Vicious fighting or friendly stoushing

603f

For some of us the penny has dropped - we are not just plant-eaters or animal lovers, we are simply more empathetic to the plight of enslaved animals and more aware of the dangers of animal-based foods. That doesn’t necessarily mean we are nice people, but it does mean we’ve seen a pattern emerging; by dropping animal protein and generally cleaning-up our own act, we’ve been able to see the bigger picture.

            The satisfaction I get from that understanding makes me very feel grateful, and I suspect that my tendency to empathise springs from gratitude, for having the veil lifted. And even if I’m not a nice person this realisation makes me less cold hearted at least.

Moving on, past empathy, past compassion, I end up with ‘interest; this whole subject becomes more fascinating the more Í get into it. It helps me understand this human-dominated world and it lets me study more closely the reasoning of people, people who seem to me (without them necessarily knowing it) quite lost.

But coming right back to the start of all this, to where your average omnivore starts to consider ‘compassion and empathy philosophy’, it’s the start of an awareness of other global issues. And that sensitises a person to the rationales behind vegan principle.

It’s not just about the food we eat but about applying ‘vegan principles’ to daily life. It affects us on so many different levels. It might start with shopping for different food items and clothing, and then painfully struggling with cravings and addictions, but as momentum builds it has the effect of strengthening the mind; it inspires the emergence of responsibility for repairing damage. It even inspires a new identity for ourselves. So, if you move from animal-eating to eating solely plant-based foods, you begin to think more broadly, and then something else begins to form - a new self-identity.

With less aggro, less determination to win and by avoiding quarrelling, useful character traits emerge for defending animals. Their eventual liberation will come about when we no longer try to apply pressure.

Whenever we touch on what people should and should not eat, it has the potential for sparking a fight. I’m a coward in a quarrel and try to find another way. I’m not saying to NOT bravely uphold one’s position but to NOT let it deteriorate to the point where we’re fighting. Apart from the rights of animals, veganism is also about the overall ethic of non-violence. So, whenever we clash we lose some valuable ground. There’s a lot to lose if disagreement turns sour. If it gets personal.

It’s true that in Animal Rights you can lose friends by the truckload, and it will always be so unless we build a reputation for being something else. By being less aggressive, by being calm and informative and adopting a gentler way of going about things we can make our point all the more effectively. I hope that approach will spread to fellow vegans. It’s true that we do have urgent things to say. We know that the omnivore has a defence shield and we need to break through on some level. The question is, do we risk a fight over it? And if a fight breaks out how can we dampen the flames?

This brings me to ‘stoushing’, an important Australian activity. It’s not quite fighting when you ‘have a stoush’ with somebody.

In a more violent society you wouldn’t dare let your eyes meet unless you wanted to be offensive. Even in this benign country a difference of opinion about the use-of-animals sometimes feels like sitting on a volcano; here you are, you’re talking and talking, and then suddenly the temperature changes. A stoush is brewing. Suddenly you notice, in the changed tone of voice, that it’s becoming a head-on omnivore versus vegan battle. Perhaps a nerve has been hit. We seem to be heading for a full-on confrontation. Or there’s a hesitancy and the making of over-careful comments. On one level, what sparks a stoush is a sense of being offended. My offending you by something I’ve said, or you offending me, for defining me in a narrow way, as being just vegan and nothing else.

Talking to friends, strangers, kids, whoever, about this matter of animal use, inevitably I’m going to be saying something more radical than they’ve ever heard before; my knife cutting a little deeper than any other knife. So, by pre-empting this I try to keep it within the bounds of a friendly stoush; I’m cautious; I go madly back-pedalling.

My first priority would always be to maintain an atmosphere of trust, and if it’s not there I’ll try to build it. So, at first, in order to get my point across or indeed to make any sort of forward progress, I’ll bend over backwards to keep things on a friendly footing. My main concern is always to allay suspicion that I want to go beyond a stoush. To that end I’ll appear almost uninterested in making any further point you feel free to say what you want to say. I’m willing to downplay anything so as not to be defined too narrowly and avoid being labelled as only ‘vegan’.

In our society there’s a knee-jerk reaction to vegans, because vegans are, at least potentially, capable of ruining almost anyone’s day, by what they have to say.

Once you enter the public domain with vegan philosophy or, less preciously, by having a casual chat (with someone you meet on the street, about the using of animals), potentially you enter the lion’s den. Everyone’s super-sensitive around this subject. If we want to approach animal issues we have to be relaxed. They need to see that we intend to play-it-by-ear and to be entirely spontaneous, otherwise we’ll be seen as cheap evangelists.

Selling your soul for a steak

603e

I worry for about the deaths of certain beautiful sentient beings, and worry even more about the traumas we inflict on them whilst they’re alive. The injustice of it all! They have absolutely no say in their own destiny, in fact they have no actual life at all.

            What we do to them, what each consumer encourages being done to them, is a worry. All I ever see are these rows and rows of sentient beings, on farms, waiting to die; for them it’s a living death.

            For these imprisoned animals, life is one perpetual suffering ending in a grisly execution. There could be no worse fate devised for any being than the one daily imposed upon billions of animals. Notably, their treatment and execution has been coldly devised by humans, and most humans can’t yet see this as being so. If you were in their position, if you were a farm animal, you’d be suffering all sorts of physical pain but mentally you’d be experiencing utter hopelessness. You’d have been made impotent, unable to take any meaningful part in the present world or in the building of a better future. As a slave, whether you are human or animal, you live in limbo-land, with none of the characteristics we associate with ‘life’, apart from the physical functioning of your own body. It’s as if the soul has its hands tied.

Now, it’s strongly suggested to children, and repeated endlessly to adults, that all this thing about animals is okay, since animals don’t have souls. But if humans do have souls then we have sold them out.

The problem has always been the same for humans - we are led into dodgy behaviour early in our life and then find it difficult to escape these behavioural habits. As young adults, we follow what others do and forgo our own instincts. While young, by swallowing the food others prepare for us, we continue to eat in the same way when we reach adulthood, and thus perpetuate the mindless violence of our species.

Until we become aware of all this, how can there ever be any change to the collective consciousness? We think we are superior beings, however to animals we must appear to be dunderheads who can’t even forage for our own food, as every other animal can do. We only have a certain type of strength and we use it to dominate and steal; we cannibalize others to provide energy for our own lives. Many humans are intelligent and sensitive but haven’t yet been able to see the nastiness of this particular habit or see through this confidence trick their society is playing on them.

            You might have thought the con was obvious, that no one, when reaching adulthood, would continue to ‘swallow first and think after’. You’d think, in this well-informed age, that we’d all mistrust the authorities enough to be re-examining those ‘core truths’ we’ve been taught, to see if they stood up to scrutiny. But it doesn’t happen. Perhaps it’s never occurred to most people to question such big things, let alone ‘go vegan’; they haven’t even begun to realise what would happen if they dissociated from social norms and changed their whole way of life accordingly. To them, a voluntary, radical change in lifestyle, ‘going vegan’, would probably equate to serving a life sentence in prison.

Have a bright, empathetic New Year

603d

Watching cruelty being done to farm animals, as painful as the video footage is, we need to keep looking at it. The mind wants to run away, to see it as a story rather than a documentary. The video keeps things real and down to earth. For the advocate, these scenes stop us running away from the fight or abandoning the future; until this practice of abusing animals stops there’s little hope that humans will ever be able to move on.

Apart from food, beyond vegan living, it’s a rebellion against arrogance, against the single thought of us being dominant over every other being on Earth. Few of us would want to let go of our dominant status, but it’s this disproportionate advantage that eventually weakens us (both as ‘dominants’ amongst other sentient animals and within that human sub-group, as members of the rich Western world). The danger of being addicted to our advantages should push us over the edge, towards personal attitude change. Animal Rights certainly did that for me. I was impressed by the way the Movement implied the need to feel for the most abused, the farm animals, and to regard them as we would siblings. It’s an egalitarian road we’re on, feeling for other people as our equals and not regarding animals as our inferiors.

            The only way I’ve found, to release my own worry about all this, is to be grateful for the things I have. My gratitude is the basis of my regard for the disadvantaged. I want to regard living beings, especially if they’re enslaved or exploited, as something worth fighting for, for the sake of social justice.

By focusing on what can be done, it makes me less pessimistic, about the destiny of this planet and about the fate of exploited animals. It’s the scale of the problem with animals that gets to me though, for three reasons: there are so many billions of them in gulags all over the world, their plight is deliberately hidden by the authorities, and there are seven billion humans committing slow suicide by eating them. Even if it were only about human health it would be a tragedy, since we are literally dying of unnecessary illnesses, but on top of this we are probably dying of the shame of stealing what rightly belongs to the animals. Omnivores are involved with a lot of ugly stuff in the course of their day, so why wouldn’t their vegan friends want to brighten up their lives? A resolution to go vegan would certainly brighten up the new year for them.