Motivational energy

865: 

High energy is something we all find attractive. Kids have it in abundance, wild though it might be. If you have it, as an adult, it’s something very satisfying, especially when it’s ‘busting-out’ with good feeling. Perhaps what I’m saying is that vegans have access to that energy, because that’s precisely what you get by eating solely plant-based foods. Vegans have energy to burn.

             But what sort of energy is this? Is it a macho energy, so useful for winning wars? Or is it the less overt energy that drives motivation?

            A vegan diet is physically energising but it also has, within the reasoning behind it, a unique motivational energy; we are, after all, involved in one of the most revolutionary projects - the freeing of animals from human bondage. The energy needed to bring this about has to be exceptional; it has to come from somewhere that humans so far have never dared to look - from the plant food we eat, without the diluting effect of non-plant-based foods .

The food regime vegans adopt isn’t like any other diet, since the reasoning behind it is the boycotting of the foods we DON’T allow ourselves to eat. Ours is an on-going experiment to test what plant-based foods can offer; these foods (for the soundest of ethical reasons) must replace animal-based foods, but they must bring us to that point of security where energy and health needs and where eco-friendly criteria are met too. If all our food requirements are to come from this source, then they must be physically not-heavy, they must be relatively inexpensive, and sufficiently satisfying, and we should feel no hankering for the alternative product. If all these requirements can be met, then we can be fully active with clean energy coming from a clear conscience. How optimistic is that?

Animal Rights gives us an excuse to find meaning, and surely there’s nothing as meaningful as the prospect of a world without animal-exploitation. For this, we give up nothing, except for daily participation in violence; as far as I can see, there’s no better prospect for our species. There’s no better project in life, than to transform our own species in such a simple way. And if this is such a worthy project, I’ll want to give it my best shot, and pursue it efficiently. I’ll want my mind working smoothly, without squandering energy and without making too many mistakes. So, we come back to that unique quality of plant-based foods, which give us so much energy and immunity to the sorts of illnesses which plague people today. Most importantly, it gives us a sense of momentum.

The good intentions of people are held back by lack of meaning, energy and self esteem, rather as if they are driving a fine car with one foot on the accelerator and the other on the brake. When we experience this forward momentum there’s something akin to a perpetual-motion type of energy - the more of it we use it the more we get; it expands rather than expends. The mistakes we’re bound to make, along the way, might not seem so destructive. With a clear conscience, negativities can roll off us like water off a duck’s back. It seems to me that Vegan Animal Rights is a particularly constructive project-for-life.

If we have to put up with criticism, ridicule and denigration, or if we don’t get support or encouragement, or if we’re not taken seriously, does that really matter at this early stage of the game? Any of these set backs, generating from unenlightened sources, are insignificant when there’s enough highly energised momentum in our lives. 

Back to judgement again

864: 

Value judgements - we make them frequently. As vegans we feel justified in making them, but we’re not as brave as our beliefs make us feel: we slander those who eat the animals we love and we argue the issues vigorously, but only in our own heads or with fellow vegans. We do it where it’s safe, whereas we should do it in public. We need to be able to put our money where our mouth is. It’s good for us, because it forces us to back up what we say and take any amount of flak. If we have to judge people then let’s do it courageously.

            We, as vegans, have a lot to say. If we can’t be rigorous and yet gentle at the same time, if we can’t resist showing our nasty side, then it’s best to keep quiet.

            We dish it out but don’t like taking it; we all fear being judged by someone else. Perhaps vegans feel invulnerable, that no one would dare judge us, but we should remember that it’s  a terrible feeling, to be disapproved of or judged. For us, as vegans, making judgements is as dangerous as walking through a minefield. That’s where we find the vegan traps waiting for us.

            The safest judgement-target is a person who can’t fight back. That’s when you may not care if they hate you, because they can’t tell you. Vegans tend to make generalisations; we say, “Humans are wicked, that’s why things are so bad”. It means nothing and touches no one in particular, but if we get more personal, where the accuser confronts the accused, then it’s much more of a risk.

            If we start to make judgements, each one leaves behind so much destruction that, forever after, we’re looking over our shoulder for the consequences. Value judging seems to solve something at the time, but it’s like a plate of hot chips, they’re satisfying and filling but they dry you out. I’ve noticed that when I blame someone or I judge them, that I sound sour, and get a reputation for it. Then, no one is inclined to listen to what I have to say. And the more often I fail to communicate, the more often I look defeated. If I lack faith in myself, and consequently lack faith in the way things will turn out, I’ll probably resort to blaming. It’s not that vegans doubt the position we’ve taken up, but generally we doubt our ability to communicate our position adequately. We often seem to want only some sort of support from others, in the form of their agreement with us.

            You know what it’s like? You come away from an exchange with someone, feeling drained and annoyed. It looks like a battle fought and lost. Apart from all the bad feelings left behind, it saps everyone’s energy.

            The alternative to judgement is unselfconscious talking about the issues, without any evident attempt to find agreement. And if we enter the world of judgement-making, we need to skip off it as soon as we make it, as if walking on an ice sheet that is about to melt. Judgements can be useful within our own heads, if only to help support our own values, but if we express them, they must melt as soon as they form. 

Food-like

863: 

Tasteless vegetables and fruits plus the widespread practice of spraying chemicals on crops has made organic produce popular, especially when prices aren’t too high. I expect the same will happen with cruelty-free items. However, today, right now, these particular ‘reasons-for-buying’ aren’t strong enough to alter buying patterns and therefore farming practices.

We come back to ethics, to becoming more ‘animal conscious’. There’s a double whammy here in that people aren’t fully aware of the plight of animals nor do they realise how important their support is to the Animal Industries, just by being consumers.

            In the Animal Rights movement, if we haven’t been able to sensitise people, it’s because our heads were in the wrong place; our biggest fault is that we smell of defeat.

On the whole, and for good reason, we activists are deeply pessimistic, which is why we keep resorting to moral judgement to promote our arguments.

Perhaps we doubt the wisdom of investing so much energy into something that’s doomed to failure. Animal Rights doesn’t seem to have much hope. We keep being disappointed. But if we had a more realistic time frame for this gigantic lifestyle revolution to take place, we’d not wallow in pessimism and disappointment but simply concentrate on setting things up for future generations. Does this sound to idealistic, too altruistic?

            We all want the bad stuff to stop, and the sooner the better. And, in all honesty, we want some rewards for going vegan, for taking up the cause of animal liberation.

If only!

Perhaps altruism is the easy bit. I know a lot of selfless, hard working activists. It’s the studying of the whole range of animal issues and the subtleties of communicating them which is much harder.

            The rough game-plan might be already worked out in our heads, but it’s how we go about getting the information to sink in, in our own head, so that we have it at the ready to draw upon. We need to be quite eloquent when talking through the issues. And for that we need to do our homework. There are books to be read, videos to be watched and we might need some hands-on experience with farm animals. There’s quite a lot of work to do to familiarise ourselves with the main issues. But that’s not all.

            Emotionally we must be strong enough to take in the horror of what’s happening. Now that it’s been so well documented, it’s available for you and I to find out about it. But it’s hard to read the material and even harder to watch the visuals.

But let’s slip back to the matter of effectiveness. I suspect that some of us (more angry people) watch the footage and that stirs up ever more anger within our own heads.Once you’ve seen or read about what’s being done to farm animals, heard the arguments and gathered enough information, you form a picture, and from that you can formulate answers; when people want to know something, when they ask questions, we need to be ready with something informative or instructive to say.

            After reaching a point where we can talk about it convincingly that’s when we need to have not even a flutter of judgement in our voice. The talking can take place. I don’t mean preaching or lecturing, but letting talk be a thing of itself, where we take a more creative approach. If we can let things arise in conversation, almost unselfconsciously, it appears less threatening, less contrived, and that’s the opposite to evangelising at the first opportunity.

            Bringing people around to the idea of Animal Rights is a soft revolution. What we surely want here is a very voluntary cooperation, not a slogan-driven conversion. We aren’t the imposers of discipline nor is veganism a religious cult. This is a gradual realisation process people go through. I hope we are seen as educators and softies, who don’t use force or moral persuasion, but instead appeal to intelligent arguments and logic. It would be so easy to take the ‘high moral ground’ or use that tone of disapproval in our voice.

Take for example the inexperienced teacher who, when a student can’t understand something, accuses the student of stupidity; they don’t blame their own poor teaching. It’s the same with us. Vegans know very well that we have ‘a better way of living’ but others may not know that. How could they? I think it’s much better to tell people what they might need to know, rather than tell them what to do.

If someone decides they’d like to make this change, they’ll need to know how to make a safe transition, and that’s where useful advice comes in. It’s practical advice that’s needed, nothing more. Imagine the hurdles to a would-be vegan: how to find vegan alternatives, how to cook new dishes, how to cope with friends who aren’t vegan. Importantly, people need time to weigh things up for themselves. What they don’t need is hurry. They don’t need pushing or shoving. No one should try t hurry anyone over this very personal and private decision.

            How do you get people interested? How to get them impassioned? How, to actually like us enough to want to be like us!

The time is right now

862:

Disapproval is the weapon we use when pissed off with someone. Vegans don’t like what they see in people, they hate having to be silent and resent omnivore’s intolerance of veganism. So, we disapprove of them.

Then they hit back ... and so it goes around in circles. Vegans have to break that circle, to take the lead, hard though it is.

            I’m always disappointed by our lack of impact. But, as a union of vegans, we’re divided over how we approach omnivores, how far to go with them and what to emphasise. Some want to advocate total abolition, others settle for a partial non-use of animals. Added to this, we’re divided over what approach to take, when talking on the subject of ‘animals’. There are those who go in hard and there are those who favour a softer approach. The most outraged and bravest vegans initially go in ‘hard’, both to impress colleagues and show themselves how determined and committed they are. But what of the other way?

            How effective is it to be seen as a ‘softy’? Vegans want for people to rise up against misinformation and dangerous food products. But most people aren’t ready because they don’t see the bigger picture. They can’t imagine themselves dropping the traditional foods they like to eat. Nor can they know that at each step away, from a conventional mind-set, discomfort lessens.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, things could hardly be going better for the Animal Industry and purveyors of animal-based products. They know that customers will always demand the yummiest foods.

            All we vegans can do is to continue promoting cruelty-free products and encourage people to boycott animal products. The odds are against us. Small markets mean small choices; there isn’t a big enough market to warrant vegan foods being produced. If you want a Mars Bar you pay $1 at Woolworths. The equivalent cruelty-free bar is four times the price. Cruelty-free products are priced for the smaller-market, and that’s the big problem for many of us on limited incomes. But little by little, as the cruelty-free companies grow and can reduce prices and sell more, the wheel begins to turn in our favour.

In the meantime, we have to learn to do-without, when vegan alternatives simply aren’t available.

            Presently the Animal Industries are raking it in. They know what customers want and, ethically, how much they’ll tolerate to get it. But as health concerns and moral outrage increases, so the idea of alternative foods will be more seriously considered. 

Lightness of being

861: 

As vegans, are we or our view admired? No, not necessarily. People see us as masochists and our philosophy as idealistic.

            Do omnivores want to agree with us? No, they certainly don’t, because they can’t see how life could ever be fun again - if you had to give up so many things, food mainly.

            Maybe vegans have a warped perception of the omnivore mind. Maybe we think they’ll listen to us if we push them hard enough. But it hasn’t worked so far. To date, few of them have gone vegan.

Perhaps, for vegetarians (half way reformers) the seductive qualities of dairy products hold them back. And for meat-eaters, celebrating such events as weddings and Christmas, by feasting on rich animal protein, is irresistible. To interfere with that is unthinkable.

            As a percentage of the population (in Australia), vegans are a tiny minority, much tinier than in Europe and North America; but at the other end of the scale, in most countries, vegans are almost non-existent. Perhaps things will stay this way for a while yet, until specific ethical constraints make boycotting animal based foods fashionable.

            I doubt if we’ll start to see signs of permanent change until we talk to our own conscience. Conscience awakens empathy. Until then, there are important ‘don’ts’. The value-judging of the animal-eater (to shame them into change) won’t increase empathy. Being angry, outraged, disgusted, etc., won’t help the animals either.

If our aim is to spring animals from jail we have to find a way to impress the general population; if we’re serious about getting people to become animal-conscious, we have to transmute our outrage into something like a ‘lightness of being’. Patience is impressive and has a calming effect on this animal-liberating revolution, because it will associate change with non-violence of approach.

            Humans have one big attitudinal problem – we have a big brain and a big fist and we use the first to wield the second. But we’re also very conscious of fashion and that might be our saviour. Fashion is the big changer, and in this case a fashion change in attitude might be stronger than the wisdom of diet change. 

Consolidating our advantages

860: 

I think the art of talking about this subject is in looking a bit vulnerable. I don’t mean deceptively so, just as long as we don’t try to speak from the pulpit. Even though we can’t stand the idea of murdering animals for meat, we have to accept that there are different points of view about this, and we ought to know what those views are before trying to present counter arguments. Otherwise what we say will go in one ear and out the other

            I think the omnivore that it might take a very long time for cruelty to food animals to mean very much, when it’s weighed against food sensation and its instant gratification. The taste-sensation, the stomach-filling, the crunch and bite and ooze, the salt, the blood-taste, the sugar-hit – they’re all connected with a familiar oral pleasure that has been developing all our lives.. It’s perhaps the most powerful external-internal interface we know. It’s not only associated with satisfying hunger and therefore easing the fear of starvation, but it’s also associated with rich living which eases the fear of feeling poor and worthless (as if we are not even worth feeding). Loving what we love to eat is not a casual time-passing activity, it’s what stays pretty much at the forefront of the mind all the time. Just one little twinge of feeling peckish and there’s a need to satisfy that slightly empty feeling, and indulge all the choices of taste sensation. One small setback in our day and we compensate with a snack, a favourite savoury or sweet treat. The omnivore will not discriminate along ethical lines, if it’s animal or non-animal doesn’t matter. The only important factor is that taste buds need appeasing and the body and mind need calming.

So giving up any of this instant pleasure would seem like unnecessary self-punishment. Why would anyone choose to do without what is so available, for the sake of animals? One would have to be crazy or masochistic. Apart from becoming healthier, (and most young people feel themselves to be immune to ill health) why would anyone give a plant-based diet even a moment of serious consideration? 

Bearing all this in mind, I’d suggest that, for the activist vegan, emotion should give way to determination, and urgency to patience, if only because the omnivore is nowhere near ready to be led to our views yet. Our frustration is a difficulty for us, and it’s hard for us to not expect to se much progress. But it’s important that we hang in there and develop an optimistic patience. And withal, we might need to get used to the absence of positive feedback.

It shouldn’t surprise us that the average omnivore probably thinks we are either crazy or masochistic. We need to be like the parent who provides interesting meals for the family but who doesn’t expect the kids to compliment them on their cooking. That they grow up well fed is all that can be expected; and it’s the same with our efforts to enlighten people about animals. It might sink in on a subtle level without the need for direct agreement or approval.

As activists and advocates we might need a better understanding of the scale of the change we want to see. To bring people across to our view, that animals shouldn’t be exploited, we have to realise it’s a more radical attitude change than anything attempted before.

            To recap: animals are slaves and our aim is to bring that to an end. Angry we might be, but determined activists have to be in it for the long haul. We don’t need to fly any flags or keep hitting people with ‘the truth’. Our job isn’t to bore them or lecture them. We mustn’t go on about being vegan if that just gets people’s back up, and inhibit them. We want them to hear what we say and then go home to consider things we’ve said. We mustn’t make them feel so uncomfortable that they’ll go home and open the fridge for some crap-food to make them feel better,  to help them forget us.

When omnivores do agree with us they’ll often do it in the hope of shutting us up. The more praise they shower on us (saying how much they admire us for the ‘stand’ we’re making) the more they hope to calm us down, in order t be rid of us (before we ‘go too far’).

Whether for a good cause or a selfish one, the more we want admiration from others the less we’ll get it. When we seem to impress people by shocking them with the facts, we may not be impressing them at all. Their seemingly positive feed-back may just be politeness, to please us. People won’t become vegan out of politeness.

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.