Altruism and optimism

1667:

Out of optimism comes stability, and if our optimism persists, stability increases, and it brings a sense of permanence. The sort of change which is made by people who ‘go-vegan’, as soon as it begins to stabilise there's feeling of renewal. As new habits form and as the practical difficulties are ironed out, we start to get a feeling 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, finding now that even those things we thought we’d definitely miss have already faded in importance.

To achieve this change, to get to the point where we feel entirely at home being vegan, is rather strange. It makes us feel altogether different, because we still live in the same society where most people have never even given ‘going-vegan’ any serious thought. Their meat and dairy foods, their woollens and their leather shoes, are part of their everyday life -  so much so that they'd think it's impossible to maintain a lifestyle where these foods and commodities don’t play a major part.

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 their own frustration at being tied to the violence of the Animal Industries. For them, there’s bound to be some pessimism about the world and its future in general, because they always have to make room for abattoirs. By supporting any sort of animal-killing one is supporting the use of force. And with this comes the belief that change can only be made possible by the use of force - and quickly and dramatically, otherwise change won't have enough momentum.

Something like veganism doesn’t seem dramatic enough to set off the chain reaction needed for making major social change. But here's where I think people get it all wrong - veganism, by denying the force and violence of quick change, establishes the basis for a long-term reform. It's not just about food choices, for as soon as the idea 'enters your head', it establishes itself so deeply and so profoundly that it's almost impossible for non-vegans to recognise it for what it is. They can only see that it represents some sort of solution which is both unreachable and unrealistic, because it presents such a fundamental change in the way we view life, that it looks  like a masochistic philosophy. And in that way it is easily dismissed.

         

However, popular or not, vegan principle is precisely in tune with the character of the 21st century. It’s thoroughness and optimism inspires a root-and-branch change, despite the fact that such a change might not show any signs of ‘flowering’ during our own lifetime. And if that's off-putting, it could be the main reason why it will be dismissed as already being "too late, so why bother?” Which makes it merely an expression of pessimism and selfishness.

Looking ahead, as vegans must do, living a life for others-to-come, it will impress future generations when they analyse the history of the latter part of the last and the early part of this century. 

Greater good revisited

1666: 

I suppose I’m arguing that to ignore animal issues is dangerous. In body terms, it would be 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 live 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 with the combination of good intentions and satisfying outcomes. 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 being unselfishly-useful. When it works it recharges our energy. We experience the pleasure of using energy for others’ benefit. 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 we're not showing-off but simply acting in an unselfconscious way. 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 and reliable. 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 acquiring better, more pleasure-giving habits, adopting a more useful way of living based on give and take. When we act optimistically, good habits fall into place and selfish ones fall away. 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 of new-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 all have to get used to, soon enough.

Consistent ethics, comprehensive too

1665: 

This is the world of the specialist. Most people think that we can only be effective if we have specialist knowledge. But what expertise is needed for knowing that the animal business is wrong? When something isn’t right we know it in our gut, it comes from intuition and inborn values. Anyone can see it if they want to. 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 I can see what needs to be done. And then I’m more likely to gravitate towards ‘the greater good’, only because it is such an obvious way to go. What counts, I think, is optimism and having faith in one's instincts. 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 either for our own self development or for the future in general.

         

When any of us choose NOT to buy something we may want, stopping ourselves for ethical reasons, we make an important statement. We say, for instance with animal-derived food, that we can’t eat what shouldn’t even exist - namely foods associated with farmed or hunted 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 human advancement, whether it’s our career, lifestyle, relationships or non-material 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, and a deal of internal turmoil.

In the end, if we can’t muster sufficient personal power to change any faulty parts of our own daily existence, we have to make a compromise. It means we've cauterised part of our instinct, and then we end up with such a reduction in personal authority that we handicap ourselves in any fight against corruption or any attempt to change the system we live in. 

An end to pessimism

1664: 

For over sixty years, vegan activists have been promoting the boycotting of anything coming from the Animal Industry, each working to stop the juggernaut before it swallows us whole. And just as importantly, what we do is being done in the spirit of optimism, helping each other to drop our pessimistic belief that whatever we do we won’t even scratch the surface.

It all starts on an individual basis and not only by boycotting animal products. We do what we can do - we change to eco-friendly light globes, we recycle newspapers, support organic farming, but most importantly, we 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 downfall.

If optimism is to gain strength, to become something more than just a nice idea, it must enter into many of our daily activities, and be substantial enough to carry us over the tough spots. It must be based on our making a practical contribution to the greater good. Our own interests must be put second. Then nothing can possibly go wrong.

Investing in vegan principle

1663: 

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 greatest need for a good supply of energy is that it can keep our bodies vital and keep them from early deterioration. It isn't surprising that our energy is prized. It's almost hoarded.

         

Good energy supply is equated with well-being. Expending energy needs to be justified, as being purposeful. Energy isn’t something to be wasted, so for ‘unsupported’ causes like veganism people may not want to invest. If they don’t think it stands a chance of coming to anything, they won't waste energy on it. If we see no ‘me-advantage’ in the vegan ideal, perhaps we’re likely to be miserly about using so much energy on such a lost cause.

If we take up any major cause, we probably want to believe that it will make a difference, otherwise our efforts will be wasted. But 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. But imagine what impact it will have if people do adopt it, how changed the World will be, how magnificently our energy will have been used, to bring this one cause to prominence.

Out of Sight

1662: 

Edited by CJ Tointon

Scenario: A fire starts backstage in a proscenium theatre. There are flames and smoke and panic. The fire curtain is in place to protect the audience in the auditorium. So effective is the curtain, that the audience is unaware of what's happening behind it. They are asked to leave their seats and move towards the foyer. Only when everyone is safe, do they hear that there's been a fire backstage. By then, however, most people are more concerned with getting back home than with what's been going on 'behind the curtain'.

Down on the farm, there's another sort of 'fire curtain'. It's between what the general public is made aware of and what is actually happening 'behind the scenes'. Unlike theatre actors who are paid to entertain the audience and create an enjoyable atmosphere; farm animals are there for human use and consumption (definitely not an 'enjoyable' atmosphere). There's a detachment between those delivering, those receiving and those just being used up. No one really wants to know how things happen. The same might apply to tourists visiting a beautiful city and being waited on by the locals. It's only when we want to experience things more fully that we look deeply and question the validity of an experience which might detrimentally involve others.

Whilst entertainment and tourism are occasional experiences; the experience of eating takes place many times a day, every day. This makes it important that we know what has to happen in order to bring certain 'foods' from the farm into our homes. Those who do want to find out must look behind the 'fire curtain'. Those who are willing to just accept the surface appearance of things, won't want to look behind anything. If it comes out as they expect, no other consideration is important. What then is the difference between a vegan and a non-vegan? You might think one is uninformed and the other informed. Or that one is taking things too frivolously and doesn't care and the other does care. Or maybe you think one is stupid and the other not! It all depends on where your views are fixed. 

Vegan animal activists are super-aware of the horror 'behind the scenes' on an animal farm. Nothing else is as important to us as stopping the cruelty! It's all-consuming. Animal abuse is something we refuse to be a part of. We'll even let ourselves sound fanatical or desperate, so fierce are we in our condemnation of what's happening to these 'hidden' animals. Non-vegans are either unaware, don't care, haven't thought it through, or indeed have deliberately not thought about it for fear of getting to know too much for comfort. Are they stupid or are we stupid? Maybe it isn't stupidity at all that marks the main difference. Maybe it's just a different perspective; perhaps the result of a different upbringing or an acquired attitude to life. One person may be highly attuned to the feelings of defenceless animals. Another may not be interested in beings who are not human. They feel no resemblance to them and cannot identify with them.

There's certainly a difference in empathetic connection here. As soon as a person has made the decision to avoid the products (mainly food) made from animals, they are then ready, willing and able to examine everything in more detail. They look at the conditions on farms and in abattoirs and turn their empathy into action in support of those innocent animals who undergo daily torture. When we see the suffering of animals, we also notice the desperation of the men and women who, by nature of their trade, keep one eye on getting animals to 'produce' for them and the other eye on the market price of their produce. Whether they're in the business of raising animals or killing them, their main focus is on staying economically afloat.

Vegan animal activists do whatever they can to bring an end to animal farming and animal killing. The last thing animal farmers want is for there to be any empathetic connection between 'their customers' and 'their animals'. They keep their business as secret and as out of sight as possible. If only animal farms and abattoirs had glass walls!

Reconciliation

1661:

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. It's good to get things off our chest. 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, in order 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 some sort of retribution. But at what cost?

This is where true compassion shows through. It’s hard to imagine how one can find any sort of reconciliation with the animal-eaters, because their version of 'species-apartheid' is so mean, cold and majority-protected.

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 – they turning on the animals, we turning on the animal-eaters.

We all need to turn into compassionate folk – it’s as simple as that. Firstly, it’s a personal thing, concerning our own food choices. But then it moves onto something broader, to the principle of living non-violently and being non-judgmental. And this brings all of us into feeling at peace with our detractors, not excusing what we each do but being on friendly terms whilst discussions are underway. Our first aim should be to restructure our interactions. Once we see each other making an attempt to accommodate the expectations of the other, we’ll automatically move past the accusing stage. When we can find ourselves discussing our points of difference without any fear, we no longer have to be unfriendly with each other. Then we’re really on the road to repair.

Once we can feel some movement, albeit small progress, we can start to experience a seed of optimism growing, perhaps for the first time. Ultimately, it’s in everyone’s interest to build a feeling of optimism. We can’t do that if we’re pessimistic or resentful of others. Vegans have certainly got to get over their judgement-based, looking-down-our-noses at those who aren’t vegan - yes, we have to realign our attitudes, for sure. But for people in general, there are hard times to come when being 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. There will be no excuses, since the records will show that we knew everything we needed to know to make the necessary changes. Our need for radical attitude change shares the same early-warning as that of climate change.

Not being too obvious

1660:

It’s understandable, with so much guilt about animal cruelty and meat-eating, that most thinking people who are still meat-eaters spend a good deal of time beating-themselves-up about it all. They end up feeling depleted with shame about the mess they're involved with and their inability to clean up their own lives. Personal shame is turned inwards, forcing a feeling of being overwhelmed.

For any of us, if we can't fix up our own personal shame-making habits, we don't think we'll be able to influence any other big issues. If we can’t get a clear run at major global problems because 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, we're likely to look back at our own lives with similar pessimism. We ask ourselves, for instance, why we should go to all the inconvenience of taking on a vegan lifestyle, when it just seems to be so masochistic.

Animal consumers are practising members of an animal-abusing society. The Kill-Club thrives in every corner of the globe. Most people are umbilically linked to it, so they continue to feed the very problems they’d like to be trying to solve.

When we do take a moment to consider things logically, we see that so many of the world’s problems can 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 for fear of getting out of our depth. We decide to only go half way. We make little reforms instead of making thorough changes. Eaters of red meat switch to eating chicken and fish, the vegetarians stop at another ‘half-way’ point. Neither gets close enough to the problem to feel quite free of animal exploitation, and therefore get to a position where they can be an effective advocate for the animals.

Only vegans have shaken off all compliance and therefore feel equal to becoming effective advocates. But since these are such early days, the winds of change are still only barely perceptible breezes; evidence of broad change is not exactly noticeable.

Because we can't see the results of our efforts, we arrive at a point where we become disappointed. We try to bring our views to the attention of others only to find that no one notices what changes we've made in our own lives nor do they notice what we are saying. They even make fun of us with the intention of putting us on the defensive. Or, in an attempt to pre-empt ridicule, we try showing off, by telling everyone what we’ve done and why they should too.

Inevitably we get a bad reaction which disappoints us further. Then we get angry (obviously frustrated because no one’s paying attention). Then we go for broke, we get angry, but still no one changes.

         

With such a vast majority still using animals for food and pleasure, it's likely that nothing will substantially change all the time we animal advocates focus only on the wrongs of ‘attacking animals', because we are also using an attack strategy against those who disagree with us. Perhaps we shouldn’t be phased at all by disagreement, but see it as evidence of our stimulating opinion about something they'd prefer to voice no opinion about.

         

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.

Defending Change

1659: 

When I get bogged down in discussions about the rights and wrongs of using animals for food, I find the fall-back position is “the cruelty of it all” - that's the most persuasive argument. Animal cruelty is always ugly, and surely the systemic use of cruelty-to-animals is the one convention most people would want to be trying to move away from.

         

So, starting from the ‘no-more-cruelty’ position, vegans suggest that we all think about how we put our money into the pockets of those people who do ugly things to animals. If we stop making the rich richer by buying nothing that's animal-based from them, and if enough people do that, these animal-abusers won't get any richer. Or at least, the people in those businesses will be encouraged to move into a more humane business.

         

It’s our finest hour when we convince people to spend their money more wisely by no longer, ever, buying crap products and unethical stuff. But, to convince?

         

In a supermarket survey I did a few years ago, covering about seven and a half thousand individual shelf items, three thousand of them were either wholly from animals or contained animal ingredients.

         

By breaking the ‘animal’ cycle, we can allow another cycle to begin. Going vegan is the start of both a personal turn-around as well as a more widespread world recovery programme. If we don't break with old habits, if we continue buying items with animal derivatives, we ally ourselves with some of the most destructive forces on the planet. If we remain as omnivores, we are refusing to see that veganism can make a difference. It’s rather as if we’re saying to our self that the idea is too way out, that it’s never going to catch on, that it's rigid and socially isolating. And then, searching for more justification for not changing, we say that ‘Going Vegan’ looks too bleak. Inevitably that sort of not-worth-doing-belief makes everyone feel powerless, which is just how the powerful want us to feel.

         

To get this knot of defeatism untied, we need to imagine overcoming the odds. These odds seem, at first glance, so stacked against us that we almost feel ridiculous for being optimistic about Animal Rights. Again, that's just what 'they' want - psychologically, the intention is to make us lose hope that any change can occur.

          

Cool fashion

1658: 

Vegans want people to change their attitude towards using animals. We're not just attempting to  bring about a changed attitude amongst family and friends, we want it amongst LOTS of people. We're aiming for change on a grand scale.

The most likely reason why people will change is if they think it’s in their best interests. For example, they’ll be willing to change in order 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 up with the latest hairstyles or clothing, to keep pace with fashion and therefore 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 our friends and family. We might hope to persuade friends to follow suit, but to go vegan means, at first, to go it alone. Our aim would be to lead a fashion, and this 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. It's relatively easy with a new hairstyle, but a whole different eating regime, based on ethical principles, calls for some considerable strength of character. And then, it requires us to consider our approach to others, to attract them to change in the same way.

         

Although veganism is being practised by ever more young people these days, we know that ‘shaming’ people into dropping their animal-eating habits won’t inspire them to change. But what might move them is their fear of falling behind a growing fashion. Once people feel that there is a trend towards compassionate eating, they might want to get in early, to be ahead of the crowd.

         

If we try to use ‘guilt’ to get people to change, they might oblige us, initially, but it’s likely not to be a permanent change. It’ll weaken back to nothing over time. Whereas, if the ‘coming fashion’ is overlaid with sound ethical reasoning, it's likely to have a much more powerful effect on personal habits and stand a better chance of escaping the gravitational pull of convention.

Manipulation and dilemma

1657: 

Vegans want to let people know how widespread is the manipulation of the consumer, and how easily we can be convinced into buying 'yummy' foods made from animals. Of course, in order to push our point home, we’d love to talk more about people’s 'addiction' to these foods, but that would touch on a very raw nerve.

         

So, that’s our difficulty. We see a bright future ahead for resolving so many of our ethically-based problems, especially our complicity in the crime of animal abuse. The ending of that is to start mending many problems afflicting all forms of life. But the ending of this one human habit is easier said than done for most people, who can't seem to stop eating the animals and their secretions. Even if only sub consciously, most animal-eating people are aware they're doing something morally wrong. So, how do we explain our own reasons for being optimistic without mentioning our reasons for boycotting animal products? It’s almost impossible to do that without causing offence. The fact is that people make great daily use of all the stuff we are strongly suggesting they have nothing to do with.

We could talk about saving money by not wasting it buying rubbish. We could talk about the health benefits of eating only from the plant world. But mostly it's the invisible danger of being part of a conspiracy against these enslaved animals, and the equally invisible effect all this has on the well-being of the consumer. Broaching these matters brings the animal advocate into a veritable minefield of disagreement; when we start to talk about the crimes committed by the Animal Industries and, by implication, the consumer’s crime of supporting them, we can expect to ignite considerable hostility. We are labelled 'shame-merchants' - and that’s not going to help us change peoples’ attitudes. But if we don't mention it in terms of a crime, then we're misrepresenting the whole issue. That's the dilemma.

The Antidote

1656:

Most of us see a wash of seemingly insuperable, human-made problems and can't see a way through them. It makes us sad and it leads to pessimism. Vegans argue that, by boycotting what we find most wrong, we start to turn things around, both for ourselves and for others. By convincing ourselves why we should boycott, we highlight what we consider to be most destructive in our society. People who aren't in the habit of defending their principles fall so easily into the trap of submitting to those who run the show. They work for them, and then spend the money they're paid by them on goods sold by them. They comply with the exploitative production methods, and support the very worst systems whilst keeping quiet about anything they don’t like.

         

As soon as we drop our own participation in what we don't approve of, we start to drop our pessimism. But there might be some personal cost at first, since we have to get used to changing such habits as buying things we've always enjoyed. But reversing consumer compliance is the start to reversing the acceptance of dangerously destructive habits. On a personal level, it leads to a much more optimistic outlook on life. But it takes effort. For instance, by letting go of so many popular food items that are animal-based, we confirm and make clearer our ethical reasons for doing so - we go up against the popular attitude that say's it's okay to make use of 'food' animals.

The pessimism, the drabness of conventional attitude, the de facto cruelty people condone, the mindless compliance - all this is reversed by a simple boycott of products. As difficult as this might seem, it's the antidote to the main nagging worry and guilt over what we do against our own better judgement. Turning that around is the beginning of a cure to a very entrenched illness amongst humans - a feeling that things are never going to get any better. 

Obtaining Optimism

1655: 

Edited by CJ Tointon

Are we generally optimistic about the future? Do we have reason to be? I'd say most people are pessimistic about the future - but it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If enough people see the future in a negative way, the collective consciousness will complete the job of self-destruction. Maybe we won't be around to see what happens; but why should that influence what we do today? With the 'ME NOW' attitude, it's likely we'll not care about repairing what our species has done. We're either concerned for the future or we're not. If not, we're being spectacularly selfish.

Selfishness is an expression of pessimism and as such, is one of the main mistakes we humans make. Pessimists are insecure; the most selfish of whom devote their lives to seeking pleasure, comfort and security wherever they can find it without thinking how it will affect others. We're all selfish to some extent. We say: "Make hay while the sun shines" because we don't want to miss out on anything. The thought of tightening our belts and imposing personal disciplines is not something any of us want to do. Even less do the selfish want to be concerned about global issues or the future of the planet.

Ideally, we'd prefer to coast along and initiate no changes to our own lives or to the improvement of anything which doesn't benefit ourselves directly. But the warnings about 'systems collapse' are everywhere. Our ecosystems, our economies and our ethics are going downhill rapidly. Most of us realise that something has to be done - if only to relieve our own pessimism. But we ask the questions: "If I do it, will you do it too?" and "It would be crazy for me to ignore the warnings; but why waste energy trying to repair the irreparable and depleting my energies?"

If we do make advances in consciousness and begin to act for the greater good, what do we expect? If we see nothing improving, or find that our efforts are not being noticed or appreciated, we may never complete our changes. We'll just be lumped together with everyone else as not addressing our problems because we don't care enough. We'll be seen as ultimate pessimists and feel it is the ultimate put-down. But why should that influence us at all? Do we act just so we'll be recognised? Can we be part of great paradigm shifts if we're only worried that others don't understand?

One such shift concerns the ethics of using animals for human advantage. In our Society, 'Animal Rights' represents an early state of an advanced consciousness; yet most people haven't even heard of the idea, or don't take it seriously if they have. For most people, whenever certain animals are spoken about, it's always in the context of their being made into food. When others are mentioned, it's connected with their being companions for humans. Others they link with being research animals or entertainment animals. With such a weight of context and connection, it isn't surprising that most people find the idea of animals having 'rights' strange. Freedom might be fine for wild animals; but they can't imagine letting those that have been 'domesticated' have freedom or no longer be tools for human use.

Unless this mindset changes, so-called domesticated animals will remain as slaves and humans will be disabled by being their slave-masters. Above all else, this will hold humans back from advancement and will solidify our pessimism. The way we use animals will always be a stain on our collective conscience and it will continue through the generations as has been shown so far. Younger people today might breakthrough this mindset; but it will need great conscious effort on their part. And still the majority will remain stuck. Every older generation will continue to plead for understanding from succeeding generations; whilst every new generation will blame the last for being irresponsible. They, in turn, will leave the same legacy to the next and so it will continue without there being any substantial change in human nature or optimism. 

The most important thing to change in our world today is - human nature! And that's the one thing that still eludes us, for the selfish gene is possibly the strongest drive we have. We've been weakened by taking advantage of our 'big brains' to undermine our ethics. We grab at every advantage possible; the worst being the enslavement of fellow sentients, be they human or non-human. Nothing seems to stop us and there seems to be no repercussions. We've become used to the 'live now, pay later' attitude because it appeals to the most primitive part of our pleasure-seeking brains. It's been going on for a long time; but now is 'later' and we're feeling the pain of the 'paying'. We'd prefer that this  payment be delayed until after we've gone from this world - the ultimate irresponsibility based upon our just not caring what happens to our world fifty years hence.

This is the ugliest face of pessimism and the weight of such a cynical outlook crushes the possibility of how things could be. If we are to survive and thrive as a species, our pessimism can only be turned around if our selfish natures can also be turned around. Obviously we must deal with personal problems first, but we shouldn't become so overwhelmed that we fail to consider global problems too; even if they seem too huge for us to directly influence. The pessimism connected with feeling overwhelmed might make us want to give up, to revert to type, to remain selfish. But if we do remain selfish, we'll only be able to tend the needs of self, thereby ensuring the continuation of the status quo.

If we are pessimistic today, it's because we can't see how the 'big things' can be fixed or how the mega-destructive people can be stopped! If we want to cut a swathe through all of this, we must personally stop supporting everything we don't agree with. There's no other starting point. It might be uncomfortable, inconvenient and unpopular; but the alternative road only leads back to stagnation. If others are slow to change, we should not use this as an excuse, but as a reason to stimulate our own programme of boycotting all we disagree with. There might be some initial discomfort, but from the actions we take now, the buds of optimism will certainly open.

How vegans are perceived

1654: 

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 in their use of animal products and aren't fazed by what we represent?

In our society, there are many totally different attitudes and lifestyles, and yet we all live alongside each other. The fact is that, mostly, our differences aren’t that apparent. There are so many important things to be different about, but unless we expose our attitudes to others, they won't necessarily know of them. Unless what we do stands out, as do the practices of vegans, going about our daily lives. Vegans are noticed to have more self discipline, simply because we do so much more boycotting. And, noticeably, we are busier discovering alternatives to animal foods and products and new ways of meal-making. And, get talking to vegans and it's apparent that we’re more used to thinking about ethical issues, and therefore more questioning and more used to arguing our case. All this gives us a strong point of view. Even as a tiny minority within a predominantly omnivorous population, our strength and sense-of-right could intimidate those who hold opposite views or who're apathetic towards the views we hold. We have a triple job: to encourage people to think for themselves, to allay their fears and to guide them towards a whole new lifestyle.

Vegans facing opposition

1653: 

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 us voicing our opinion on animal matters in general. They certainly don't like it if we attack their views, or worse if our arguments get heated.

When I know I’ve gone too far, I 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. For my part, I don’t need everyone to agree with me. Nor do I need to take on every red neck I meet, or feel obliged to parry every joke made at my expense. By the same token, I refuse to be intimidated by what others say, even if they’re representing the 'popular view' or they're powerful politicians.

         

We have something they haven't got - as vegans, we can be confident simply by virtue of the fact that we are vegan. Our own example is the most powerful weapon we have. If we start to get aggressive, it means we're afraid of defeat. The one thing that's clear is that no one dares to take any of us on in serious debate. This is the one subject that non-vegans never talk about in public, for fear of making themselves look both uninformed and callous. 

          

The animal issue

1652: 

There’s a great gulf between people, over their attitude to animals. We all love the cute and cuddly ones. We love far less the ‘edible’ ones.

Until a few decades ago, no one thought much about it - farm animals were just different types of animal which we needed to eat to stay alive. Then the myth was exploded – it was shown that animal protein was NOT essential for good nutrition, in fact it was harmful to health, whereas plant protein gave optimum health benefits. That in itself was a bombshell. But then the rest of the story came tumbling out, about how animals were being treated on farms and what horrors happened at abattoirs.

In the 1940s and 50s the idea of a vegan diet was being tested and found to be healthy - plant-based nutrition was coming of age. By the early eighties The Animals Film and the book Animal Liberation were released and together they had a profound impact on a lot of people.          

I was shocked, certainly, realising for the first time how much our food relied on animals and what actually happened to the animals reared for food. The information seeped into public consciousness and suddenly everyone seemed to be talking about it. But then, surprisingly, it all came to a standstill. At least it did in Australia.

Once the novelty had worn off, once the shock was over, people returned to what they knew best, and what tasted best. Old habits die hard. Ethics and rich cuisine make poor bed fellows. In the general community there was reluctance to face up to animal issues - probably because people who eat animals feel too uncomfortable to think about it too deeply. In private, if there’s any talk of it at all, it centres on health issues rather than the ethics of imprisoning and killing animals. People like their animal foods too much to discuss the rights and wrongs of the origins of their food with any sort of intellectual rigour. In any supermarket there are probably thousands of choices of animal-based edibles. In any one day the meals and snacks we eat probably all contain some animal ingredient, because it adds richness, flavour and bulk to foods. The food industry has worked hard to make us crave their food products which contain animal ingredients. And since we now know so much more about animal cruelty but still want animal-based foods so badly, we’re reluctant to even discuss the subject seriously.

Those who are against the ‘eating of animals’ are usually the butt of jokes. Those who are likely to want to talk about animal issues are usually avoided or discouraged from even bringing up the subject in conversation. The whole subject has been tabooed. Who knows, but if we don't think about it, it might just go away!!

Starting to pay back

1651:  

Once, when we were younger, when the world was less damaged, there was unexploited abundance everywhere. It seemed to be everlasting. Oceans were clean and teeming with fish. It was incomprehensible that whole river systems could ever die. Land was fertile. Our surroundings were attractive. It was unimaginable that the world could be turned into a slum. But over a relatively short period of time, with each person saving their own skin, it is becoming the worst of all possible worlds. And soon there will be nothing of worth to pass on.

The damage is done and we haven’t been able to stop ourselves from continually taking, and taking faster. Instead of learning from our mistakes the human race has lost its collective identity, and now it’s every man for himself. Everything is done to numb the individual’s feeling of unsafety even if it means increasing danger for others. We’ve refined cruelty, increased slavery, wrecked forests, polluted the air and land, and the main power brokers have shown little regard for those with less power. The human has become addicted to an increasingly unsustainable lifestyle. And now, there’s tangible proof of  the human influence of planetary systems – few people doubt that we are now in all sorts of trouble.

         

Why this has happened this way may be because it was the only way the big brain could reflect on the inherent dangers of big-brained-ness. We’ve been so keen to develop one system in ourselves, shall we say the speeding up process, that we’ve ignored the slowing down system, the sustainability factor. We don’t learn from theory but from consequences of practice. From a state of plenty we’ve built up a debt burden. Our collective debts won’t easily be paid back, but it isn’t impossible, surely, and in the attempt to rebalance our systems we will have learnt the most valuable lesson of all that will serve us well into the future and make our more sustainable evolution possible.

Debt mentality gave us the false impression of being richer than we were and, like any bubble, it had to burst. That realisation dawned on us slowly at first, then we caught up with reality and then it gathered speed as we took more and more for granted. Now, with less clean air, less fresh water, fewer trees and less bird song in the morning, we’re learning the big lesson about debt and damage.

It’s a bit like animal food itself or anything else we’re not entitled to - it kills the best in us.

Inherited debt

1650: 

Unsettled debts affect the generations which follow. Young people wake up to the mess left them by their elders. They have no trouble putting two and two together to see what has happened and why. They’re familiar with self interest, they understand how forests are being destroyed, they see how animals are being factory-farmed. They realise why poor nations are being made to starve. And they know we older ones are to blame for perpetuating all this destruction and cruelty and waste.

I imagine the young get quite angry when they think about what they’ve inherited. But to be completely constructive about the mess we older ones are leaving them with, we need to see what is driving all this irresponsibility. We need to look at human nature itself, to see why it hasn’t made the advances that technology and science has made. And to what extent our nature hasn’t really changed much over the centuries.

Unless we want the next generation to do exactly what we’ve done we must clear our debts. Unless we want today’s kids to spoil their own health, ethics and environment, as we’re doing, we can’t afford to sit around passively, twiddling out thumbs. If we do, nothing will change and our children will continue the trend, violating as we’ve done, stealing as we still do, until there is nothing left to take or spoil. The first and most constructive step we can take is to become vegan and encourage the young to follow suit - it will have a dramatic effect on their health and the legacy of non-violence they leave to their own progeny. 

Advantage-taking

1649: 

The example set, mostly by young people when they ‘go vegan’, is noticed. It’s hard not to notice whenever there’s food around, whether it’s at work or at home. The general effect can be profound, and all without a word being spoken. The omnivore is likely to feel or even show their embarrassment at the self discipline shown. And this ‘example’ can have the most powerful influence on omnivores, who might consider making their own first steps in the same direction, towards diet and food shopping but, more deeply, their lifestyle habits, their life-long attitudes and their capacity for altruism.

The impact on anyone who is still using animal products is to shake the foundations of ‘normal behaviour’. And then to question their own contribution to Society’s animal-exploiting conventions.

         

Veganism is just one of today’s ways of countering the wrongness of stealing from the powerless. Colonial powers steal from poorer nations to enrich themselves, and humans in general steal from animals for much the same reasons. But isn’t it true that our thefts comes back to haunt us? Once-powerless countries grow up and strengthen themselves, and then begin to commercially outstrip their former masters, endangering long-established economies. Similarly, powerless animals used for food now become dangerous to their masters, but not as directly. Instead, they adversely impact on the health of the humans who eat them.

This must be Nature’s way of restoring balance or showing how harsh the consequences of stealing and taking advantage of the weak.

Starting the ball rolling can be self-benefitting too

1648: 

The criticism of both young and older people, for their indulgent lifestyle, seems partially true but partially misplaced. Older people might argue that the trouble with the world today is young people’s profligacy. The young, in turn, argue that the World’s troubles have been caused by older people. Each is passing the buck.

For me, as a cyclist, I blame the car driver. For me as a wage slave I blame the rich. And so on. But really it’s a whole complex of issues that rise to the surface and we feel impotent to change anything because we are part of the collective mind-set. We drive cars and we fly in planes that pollute our world. What can any individual do to stop it apart from not driving or flying? In today’s world how can we NOT take part, without disadvantaging ourselves? I know if I tighten my belt and act responsibly I’ll feel resentment that others aren’t doing likewise.

Perhaps the one way each of us can get started (doing the right thing) is by acting constructively whilst avoiding resentment. We can take a stand without making a rod for our own backs. We can do something for the greater good which also happens to benefit ourselves. 

This brings us back to the need to save the environment, our health, the animals, the economy and our own sense of meaningfulness all at the same time, simply by going vegan.

By not exploiting animals, by eating plant-based foods and by wearing non-animal clothing and shoes, we do something to make us and our world feel better. It helps pay back the debt we’ve collectively run up. By boycotting very many of the products on the market (which are unethical) we can affect the collective lifestyle habit even though we might see not much evidence of our effect. And that might appeal to young people who don’t see how, otherwise, they can be constructive with their own lives. They almost certainly do want to build a future. They almost certainly don’t have to go along with the ruin inherited from their elders.

By going vegan, young people can show, by this one major gesture, how individual action can start the ball rolling. 

You just can’t win!

1647: 

If vanity is the big trap in life, you’d think, after some decades of life, we’d have learnt about it and stopped ‘doing’ it. All I’m saying here is that for older people, who could be setting an example for the young, if they want to avoid neuroses concerning their lost youth and missed opportunities, they might need to stop running up their ‘vanity debts’. We should get used to paying-back as we go along, doing without some things, exercising a little self-restraint and add a touch of responsibility-taking. If we don’t go that way then we risk not being able to restore balance later in life, and then it all ends in tears.

I can remember starting out in adult life eager to experience abundance and enjoy effortless, sensory experiences. But as I got older, and taking all this for granted, I tried to recapture some of the pleasure of past years, only to find that that pleasure required a whole lot more investment. Was I losing my capacity for pursuing pleasure?

As age creeps on and our health goes and then our strength, we have to more careful to measure what we do - we no longer run just for fun. Our body creaks so much that we can’t even run for a bus! If you speak with very old people they’ll say how important it is to ‘keep your health’, because once lost it’s very hard to get it back. For them, so they say, there’s pain every day. Whereas younger people don’t get much body pain and whenever they do it doesn't seem so serious - health isn’t such a big issue because they haven’t experienced it deteriorating yet. But they do know that good health and good looks go together, and energy, sexuality and a slim, athletic body are a main source of pleasure, and this somewhat pulls them into line. But up against this there’s a powerful need to extract everything possible from life.

On an everyday basis we try to excite the taste buds and satisfy food cravings. So here, on these familiar battle grounds, we tear ourselves apart, torn between pleasure and good sense, stuffing our faces with good-tasting but body-destroying foods. And it becomes such an all-consuming occupation that we forget that the rest of the world is going on around us, with many starving.

Here in the West, we are so privileged and have such opportunities to live life NOW, and that’s just great! But in the process we forget about the need to contribute towards ‘the greater good’. It’s a shame about that because something vital is spoiled in us because we forget about this. And then, we deserve to be criticised for living an indulgent lifestyle.

Huh! You just can’t win. But was it ever just about winning?

Animal Co-Products

1646: 

Edited by CJ Tointon

"Vanity, vanity, all is vanity (that's any fun at all for humanity)"….Ogden Nash.

Young or old, we all live for pleasure - and acceptance. Appearance and fashion is important to us. Young women's shoes have to 'look right'. But for young vegan women, there's often not much to choose from; which puts them in a difficult position. When I look around, I don't see many people without leather on their feet, whether it's hardy walking boots or formal footwear. Does it not cross peoples' minds to think about this material as a co-product of the abattoir? Animal hides are often more valuable to the shoe industry than the carcass is to the meat industry; hence leather becomes a co-product rather than an animal by-product. 

We're more likely to go for attractive or hard-wearing shoes than consider the unethical nature of using leather. For health reasons, we may eat non-animal foods; but we don't rule out wearing the skins of animals as clothing, fur or shoes. After all, a shoe or a coat will not adversely affect our health!

When health isn't an issue, we may consider that eating junk food is okay  - until we put on body weight. Even then, we just eat what we want, which is much closer to vanity and much farther from good health practice.

To acquire whatever commodity we consider essential to our lifestyle, we squeeze what we can from what's available. We spend big, risk debt, ignore warnings and mainly consider our own interests. We live for the moment. We just want to have fun - Now!

Young people will usually paint their lives from the brightest colours of the palette. To keep it exciting, they need to question what they buy as little as possible to avoid undermining their self confidence. At a certain age, young people are suddenly free to experience any stimulating experience they desire. "And why not? You only live once. Live life while you can!" This is the governing approach - until the shutters come down and one is forced to change (usually in later years). By this time we've probably lost the joy of living and become Vanity's faded victims. We've watched the years slip away, the fun drain from our lives, the youth slip from our bodies. But have we ever considered the ANIMALS whose lives have been sacrificed to make our own lives as 'colourful' as possible? 

Indulge to your heart’s content

1645: 

Materialism is rampant. Our thirst for the material satisfactions of life is insatiable. Great wealth is achieved by those with the most unquenchable thirst and the shallowest conscience. To get the things we want we need to make big bucks. We take trees out of forests, put people in slums and factories and enslave animals. The rich have made fortunes, for wherever there has been a benefit to be had, they’ve grabbed it.

Perhaps we’re all complicit in one sense, since we humans have made it our goal to dominate all other species. We think we can do as we please. Apart from a few viruses that we don’t yet control, all other life forms are subject to human whim. Anything useable is used. Anything in our way is got rid of. Violence and violation are used by us on each other. If anyone steps out of line we make war on them. If any useful animal, like a kangaroo, can’t be farmed, we hunt it instead. If any life form becomes an uncontrollable pest, like rabbits, we spread disease amongst them with the aim of eradicating them.

Humans will stop at nothing to be masters of the universe or at least to retain control of their world. Violence is employed without a second thought. And this control-through-violence is passed on from generation to generation, and initially the spoils of this 'war' appeals to young people who only have eyes for the advantages to themselves. And who is there to guide them? Older people are intimidated by youth, finding young people’s vitality and spontaneity so exciting they hardly dare to speak up or criticise them for any lack of responsibility or lack of independent thinking. Conversely, young people usually find their elders not worth listening to, uninspiring and unexciting. Instead they to their peers for support, which exposes them to peer pressure, group thinking and a lot of unthought-out behaviour. Thus we are as we are, and will remain so, unguided and drawn towards the quick results which come from violence and self-interest.

The Animal Rights movement is hopefully the one influence in our society which aims to initiate a change towards harmlessness. It is made up of people who are brave enough to ignore the quick-fix fashion and to make a bold stand against one of the greatest irresponsibilities of our time. Our message, concerning the abuse of food animals, may just be enough to reverse today’s indulgent trend, and bring back some sanity to our increasingly uncivilised society.

Involvement

1644:

Most people today are involved in a live-now-pay-later culture, believing that debts incurred will never have to be paid back. As with money so with every other material advantages we pursue. We accumulate useful stuff and don’t care about wasting or disrespecting it. There is so much for the taking. The things we acquire define us to the extent that our possessions reflect our self-worth; we’re quick to admire ourselves for our cleverness in acquiring so much that gives us pleasure. And since it’s all relatively free - the air, the water, the soil, the flora, the fauna - we take it all for granted. We have no qualms if our systems are unsustainable.

Our wastefulness imprints on each succeeding generation, until we come to today, with our ‘smash and grab’ attitude getting quite out of control. We no longer pass on to the young a sense of responsibility and frugality, instead we show them that resources can be exploited, and life can be lived almost entirely for pleasure.

Probably the greatest 'pleasure' comes from exploiting animals. There are rich pickings here. The supply of animal products is endless. The brilliant human brain has devised systems that generate abundance. We are led to believe that there will always be a constant stream of benefits for those with the cleverest exploitation systems. But it’s only when these systems seem to be dancing nicely to the tune of science and economics that the sting in the tail appears. Eventually it becomes apparent there’s a hidden price to pay, in the form of competition.

Word gets around about 'easy gains', and it follows that the richer the pickings, the more competition there is to win market advantage. It seems, today, that animal farmers have had to inflict ever greater cruelty on animals, to keep costs down and to keep prices low.

And in response to fierce competition, each society lays-to-waste on a grand scale, in order to edge ahead, to stay in business. Throughout the animal-eating world, vast numbers of defenceless animals are massacred. We do terrible things to these animals because we can, and because they can’t fight back, and because the customer wants cheap food. It happens because there are always those unethical operators willing to undercut less-unethical operators. It’s a fact that all omnivores are caught up in this. And it’s also a fact that vegans aren’t caught up in this.

The great delusion

1643:

Objects may not be living and breathing beings like us, but perhaps their purpose is to show us what being is really all about; it’s as if they sometimes ‘respond’ to our feelings for them, as if they ‘read’ our feelings. Maybe this is twaddle, but you must admit that somehow objects do react to our attitude to them; probably the planet is changing its climate in response to our profligate use of fossil fuels. More constructively, a flautist possesses a flute and the flute takes on the status of ‘a treasured possession’ and it almost becomes a living being. It takes on a symbiotic relationship with its player. Whatever we call it, there’s something very nice going on here. Isn’t it everyone’s dream to lose themselves in a relationship, to love something or someone, in a symbiotic pact of intimacy? In her attic, the flautist reaches for her flute, it being the inspiration for their making some fine music together.

But all this symbiosis and closeness isn’t necessarily the complete answer to life. For that we need more than one flute. We need many 'flutes'; we need to ‘symbios-ise’ with several elements in our life. We need to address perhaps a vast array of dysfunctional, inherited attitudes (which are far from producing any mutual benefit). The most damaging of these is likely to concern the way we use animals. Here’s a classic example of delusion: a belief in the safety of having a ‘non-relationship’ with the animal we are about to eat.

Our contact with certain animals, our cruelty towards them, is to our mutual disadvantage. It starts out easily but ends up badly. Humans and animals – we’re deluded enough to think we’ve discovered a bargain, where it’s all advantage on our side with minimum disadvantage. Later, too late usually, we find things don’t work out quite as well as we wish. Here we have a lop-sided situation, the too strong against the too weak - the destabilising element being the human intellect, hungry for advantage. In this case, we have the ugly act of enslaving, killing and consuming the animal - the attacker attacked from behind, creeping up slowly and unnoticed, then striking us down boldly, just when we’re not looking. The attack comes in two forms, shame and illness. Which one deals the final blow is unimportant – but vegans advise against trying to conduct an anti-relationship. Why try to get away with it when you don’t have to?

Un-discovering is impossible

1642:

What’s it like being an animal? We’ll never know but I think we can learn a lot by observing them. Those we know best, dogs and cats, have an energy which is attractive, care-free, intimate, often friendly but without ambition. People can show these great qualities too, but only if ambition or opportunity doesn’t lure them away into becoming cold hearted. These days, we survive not by hunting for food but hunting for a social place. Survival in this difficult human world means we have to accomplish things, accumulate possessions and qualifications. We also have to learn how to cut off and become quite unfriendly. Along the way we become greedy for anything which might advantage us, which only later acts to drags us down like a heavy chain.

         

We humans who cause the most damage, find ourselves on a runaway train, investing whatever we've got into getting ahead. Along the way we find out how to exploit, using our brains to dominate both beings and resources.

Animals are a prime resource and the most exploited resource; we eat them, use them, experiment on them, imprison them and, as far as their feelings go, disregarded them. We’ve learnt about ‘using animals’ and it’s all turned ugly, and we’ve become caught up in our own struggle for 'advancement'.

Eventually we see how the exploiting ‘omnivore’, in search for advantage, has settled for enslaving animals. And for those on the front line, they are caught up with all forms of animal exploitation just to stay ahead of their competitors. All of us might wish we’d never learnt to exploit, since things have got so out of hand, but it's too late. Knowledge is irreversible.

         

We’ve been lured towards possibilities, lost control of our thirst for knowledge and then realised that what we’ve discover can’t be un-discovered. We can no more return to an innocent or simple life than we can unmake the atom bomb. Likewise, once we know what happens down on the farm, we might be haunted by it but we're held committed to it by our habits and addictions. The only option open to us is to atone, repair and act.

But who is this ‘we’? I can’t ban the bomb. I can’t change laws. I can’t ban animal slavery. But what I can do is live by my own code of conduct and perhaps lead by example. I have to be content with that, in the slim hope that I, along with others who feel the same way, will set a trend. If I stop using animals, that’s one more friend they have on their side. Once I’ve seen why human ambition is dangerous, I no longer need to run the risk of making the same old mistakes humans have been making for perhaps thousands of years.

Empathy

1641: 

Edited by CJ Tointon

The picture of someone injured, or being damaged, can trigger an autonomic, uncomfortable surge in the observer.  Everyone has a different response: a gasp of shock, a scream, a rush of nerves, a reaction showing up before the brain has time to process the situation. Each response is a mirrored representation of the other's discomfort. It's almost as if we are in the place of the victim, attempting to reproduce what they are feeling; as if our imagination is being made more alert to finding ways to help alleviate the damage being done. This is "empathy" and it's essential for maintaining compassion.

Vegans (and maybe some non-vegans) can imagine the pain to which helpless farm animals are subjected. We sense their fear and panic and want to do whatever we can to stop it. At the least, we don't want to do anything which might help it continue. Vegans have made some important decisions about their daily lives, taking active steps to disassociate from animal cruelty. By boycotting all animal products, we effectively protest the system which is routinely bringing suffering to those animals being used for human benefit. We detach from any needs we might have for those benefits. A well developed sense of empathy helps us keep up this boycott, which can be difficult in a society so heavily dependent on animal products. By practising self-discipline, we can wean ourselves off these 'benefits' and in turn (if empathy is felt) we can become active in promoting the idea that animals have just as much right to live as any other non-enslaved sentient being.

If we do nothing, if we continue to indulge in stealing life from animals, we can't reduce our sense of participatory guilt nor the breakdown of self-esteem. If we don't boycott animal products but are sensitive enough to feel empathy for them, we find ourselves between a rock and a hard place. We are tethered by our own habits and the only realistic way to move on, is to observe vegan principle. 

To feel relaxed about one's lifestyle, one must eliminate any anxiety or emotional discomfort triggered by feelings of empathy. To some extent, things are made much easier without empathy! We won't suffer from the shooting pains of mirrored neurons, or similar painful empathetic reactions. But empathy is like eyesight - necessary to identify dangerous external situations. With only a raw cognitive empathy, there might be an understanding, but no moral springboard from which to react effectively.

We see a bully hitting a child, but can't find enough reason to risk 'getting involved', so we just continue to watch. Perhaps a part of us actually enjoys the salacious thrill of experiencing another's discomfort without suffering ourselves. Yet another part of us might be weighing up the odds of expending our own energy and safety to rescue the bullied child. Whether we are a passive onlooker or benefit from the bullying, our much prized empathic 'eyesight' is eroded each time we decide on no-action. 

If we want to develop our empathy, we do it best by practising it at every opportunity. It might involve bravery, or determination, or self-discipline. It may cause us to become ever more sensitive to others' situations (and all the sadder for that). But these reactions are the bedrock of activism. It starts the process of personal change which then makes an impact on our community - albeit slowly - in the case of Animal Rights.

The morality of causing animals to suffer just to produce food for humans, is the case in question here. Each time we ignore the obvious and well documented cruelty in the treatment and killing of innocent animals, another nail is hammered into our coffins and we move further away from our innate sense of responsibility for keeping the world safe from violence.

Attachment and detachment

1640: 

What does it feel like to feel ‘respect’ for something or someone? Or disrespect, or more usually uninterest?  I think I’m typical here, where I’m constantly choosing between the two - coming forward or moving away from.

I’m deciding who or what to respect or to trash. I know I can show amazing loyalty and affection for the loveable, and conversely for the unloveable. I see how it happens. Things I get bored with, or even friends I’ve lost interest in. But whether it’s possessions, friends, cats or even gardens, they each have the power to benefit us or bring us down, depending on how we treat them. And overall, we hope to be inspired by our relationships and particularly the truthfulness of them. We find it inspiring to be around dogs and cats, because they don’t pretend to be other than they are, and that’s so endearing. They’re always ready to play, dogs nearly always affectionate, cats so intimate. They bring out our own ability to show closeness and affection. Animals, domesticated or wild, can bring out the best in us.

         

It’s probably the reason so many people live with an animal - the influence of a cat or a dog lets us see our sensitive side. But not necessarily our goodness, because with the less-dear or the less-loveable, human or non-human, we don’t always act so honourably. That smelly homeless man on the street corner, asking for money - many of us try to ignore him. Or that not-so-attractive animal that’s about to be eaten for dinner. It’s easy for us to abuse them since they pose no threat to us – we say, “They can’t possibly hurt me even if I hurt or ignore them. They have no power or hold over me”.

It’s easy to show kindness to a cute puppy or a sweet child, but we might not have the same inclination towards a stranger and feel even less inclined to consider the feelings of an anonymous farm animal that’s going to be turned into food.

But all this is changing. We’re becoming more conscious of a shift taking place, where the hard-nosed human is starting to look ridiculous and where the once-reviled ‘bleeding heart’ is no longer ridiculed. The gentler, kinder character is starting to win favour. Today, we can see the balance point changing, moving away from dominance and force to a subtler, more sympatico approach.

We’re still in transition, but a move towards the kinder and more compassionate looks like the intelligent way to go, fitting better with this ‘age of relationships’. We’re learning how to relate to things, to people, to the disabled, to minority groups, to farm animals, to forests, etc. We’re beginning to see the advantages of acting more interactively, symbiotically and more altruistically. And now, we see that sustainability isn’t just a groovy idea but a vital necessity.

Is this the idea of ‘doing the right thing’? Not necessarily. Is this a new morality? Maybe not. What was once a duty or a strictness or a discipline is now becoming an enjoyment. We don’t have to be earning merit points or winning each others’ approval for what we do. It just comes with the territory, of becoming more sensitive whilst being more resilient and less in need of outside encouragement. Instead of obstacles to be overcome we can see possibilities.

If we are about to rescue our species from ignominy, it will spring partly from a sense of ‘right action’ and partly as the most fulfilling thing we could ever think about doing - enjoying doing useful things, in other words. Work as play as work.

Love

1639: 

Love is one of those words that's been high jacked by religion, the greeting card industry and the writers of corny romances. It has so many sickly-sweet overtones that it stops us mentioning the word in public. Love is used as an absolute that’s beyond question. But love isn’t quite everything. Or at least, it isn’t a cure-all.

Life’s problems can’t be solved simply by showering love on them. In the material world, we have to attend to feeding and clothing, washing, paying bills, maintaining machinery, etc. Love is certainly a big emotion and it works well on things that are on a grand scale. But it isn't usually applied to the mundane. It's kept like one's best suit, for important occasions. We tend to shower it on significant others, and on those who do a lot for us. But things that can't respond? Can we or should we consider 'loving' things?

Take the fridge; it does a lot for us. What a useful machine it is. Surely it deserves a little attention from us, if not loved at least kept in good order and kept clean. It preserves our perishables and keeps our beer cold. The fridge and the computer and the car, they each deserve at least respect, or at the very least, some of our time and energy. But in our hurry to show consideration for the animate we often have nothing left over for 'things'. And if this is a failing, if this is why our homes and the interiors of our cars are sometimes a mess, it might reflect an attitude that carries over to other 'things'. And this might be why we treat farm animals so badly, because we think of them as mere 'things'. They are the property of the farmer. What business is it of ours to interfere? That's what most people think, and so we don't interfere. But that suits us just fine, because these animals are not so much living beings as sources of food. Why be concerned when they are about to die anyway?

Humans are good at ‘loving’. But we’re not always consistent with it. It’s often completely absent in our attitude towards animals. We absolve ourselves of the crime of neglect in this case, because we know we are capable of love and show it in most parts of our life. And it follows that because we only are doing what others do, that we are normal, and what we do is therefore okay. But feeling love in one quarter, doesn’t make up for the absence of it in another.