The mind of the omnivore

859: 

Maybe vegans are on the outer because the principle of harmlessness is still foreign and we’ve no top professionals arguing our case. Has anyone ever heard of a vegan barrister,  defending the rights of animals (pro-bono)?

Bright minds in our society are engaged elsewhere, usually making money or if conscience-driven, fighting for humans. Above all, they are defending their careers. If they were to put their weight behind Animal Rights, they could do serious damage to their career prospects.

            Needless to say, our opposition is formidable. The ‘Animal Abuse Club’ have power and money, and they find it relatively simple to win the hearts and minds of the public; they are selling popular products after all, whereas, we’re trying to sell a whole raft of radical ideas. They want to shift the public’s money their way, and we want to shift the public away from using animals.

Attitude change, concerning animal-use, is disappointingly slow. Most people probably think we’re mad to suggest we should never use animals. We have a great case to argue, they stone-wall us. In return we judge them “unethical” to show how much we disagree with them. But although that makes us feel better, it’s destructive. The more we find fault or insult, the more our adversaries dig their heels in; it comes down to saving face in the end.

Our balancing act involves not cornering people into opposition but giving information without the emotional overtone; by not thinking-judgement of people we show no judgement and can then inform, help, serve and encourage. Doctors don’t judge a person as being careless because they are ill, they simply diagnose and recommend treatment; likewise with us, we don’t help anyone by condemning them, but we can help by recommending certain changes. We can even be less direct; with care we can be subliminal with our suggestions.

First up, we must never be insulting or getting uptight or try to score points – people are super-sensitive to any of that. Even if we feel a boiling rage about what is happening to the animals, we can’t afford to show it. I might feel heartbroken at people’s insensitivity, but I would try to judge them. If I did ? How will that help anyone? It’s likely that our ‘boiling over’ is simply a way of I’d be doing it for my own relief and end up shooting myself in the foot, by risking spoiling people’s opinion of me. I see no point at all in being quarrelsome over these issues, and differences of opinion.

So, this is the danger; I present a clear, calm argument and then get upset when people disagree with it. The trap I’ve often walked into goes something like this: I get upset and say why their argument is faulty, and after a few backwards and forwards, if I still seem upset they think they’re winning the argument. They stay calm but won’t back down, which makes me aggressive in my answers.

How strongly people disagree, even if they have poor arguments, indicates how they feel. If I use my memory I can remember my own similar feelings once. Most of us felt the same way they feel. But maybe there’s a memory gap here. I can’t really remember the sequence of events that made me leave traditional foods and to go vegan. But I do know that I progressed from one stage to the next, and to the next, until I arrived at a point where I am now. All I know now is about now; that I know quite a lot about this subject but that most people don’t know about it, and don’t want to.

Fundamentally, I (we) have to realise that it’s impossible for omnivores to know what it’s like to be vegan. They can’t possibly know how strongly we hold our opinions when they are underwritten by daily practice. They can’t know how empowering it is to live by one’s own philosophy, nor how good it feels to stand up for something as important as Animal Rights when very few others are doing so.

I, and others like me, can feel okay about my commitment, there’s no problem with that, but there are difficulties which show up as soon as I try to proselytize. I would be trying to convert a whole social attitude, unaware of the capacity our subject has to inflame unattractive traits in people.

I am inflaming by showing up the animal-abuser  and, by inference, all consumers who support them. I inflame also by seeming to boast about my ethical self-discipline. I’m speaking to someone who ought to feel ashamed but at the same time showing off my righteousness and selflessness. This is why I can come across as being an unlikeable person, so it’s no wonder that people aren’t inclined to take my advice. And no ordinary advice at that?

If we want to pass on ‘good’ advice it needs subtlety. If we engage in any moral arm twisting people will drop us. Even with friends, especially with friends, they might think it better to have no friend rather than one who is a bull-at-a-gate-preacher-friend.