1868:
I want to let people know how
they’re being manipulated into buying ‘yummy’ foods and wearing shoes and
clothing made from animals. Of course, in order to push my point home, I’d love
to talk more about people’s ‘addiction’ to these foods and clothing items, but
that would touch on a very raw nerve.
So, that’s my difficulty. How
do I explain my reasons for being optimistic without mentioning boycotting? It’s almost impossible to explain
the remedy for pessimism without giving offence. People make great daily use of
all the stuff I’d be suggesting they stop using. I could talk about saving
money by not wasting it in buying rubbish. I could talk about the health
benefits of eating only from the plant world. But I’d always have to come back
to the crimes committed by the Animal Industries and, by implication, the
consumer’s crime in supporting them. The very mention of ‘crime’ would win me
no friends. I realise it would distance me from non-vegans, and I don’t want to
be seen as a shame-merchant, because that’s not going to help change peoples’
attitudes. But how to embark on this subject, with any serious purpose, without
seeming to take the moral high ground?
It would be wonderful if it
were like any other subject, where one’s opinion wasn’t reflected in one’s
daily actions. But this isn’t something about which an opinion can be changed
or modified so easily – it has to be linked to daily habits of eating and
wearing, of what we buy and what we have in our cupboards and wardrobes. You
might not agree with animal cruelty but if you comply with the way things come
into our possession, then how can you do anything but be a supporter of what
you, in theory, disagree with?
No comments:
Post a Comment