A repair plan

1668: 

We look at the big issues of the day, trying to find simple solutions to complex problems. "It's hopeless". We don't believe that any remedy will have a lasting effect or be a catch-all solution - if we fix one thing there will always be many other problems to fix. And that might mean we're overwhelmed by the scale of things and find insufficient reason to make piecemeal improvements to our life, based upon a single principle. For example, we might see the sense in going vegan but because it seems to be so self-denying, the giving-up of so many familiar things will seem to outweigh any advantages veganism might bring. "It's not worth the effort".

It's only when you realise how a simple change to a plant-based diet affects so many other world problems that you might feel the need to reappraise it. Once adopted, the vegan diet transforms to a principle of harmlessness, which in turn has the capacity to alter attitudes to the environment, ethics and economics. The simplicity of this one single change has the power to feed the world, reduce the carbon emissions associated with animal farming and free the animals from their lives of misery and slavery. But as transformative as vegan principle might be, convincing the omnivorous majority to make such a dietary change becomes the main problem itself.

Human intransigence is founded on freewill and the sensual satisfaction of eating what gives us pleasure - voluntarily giving up one's beefsteak presupposes that one has empathy for the animal from whose body the beef comes. It also presupposes that the consumer is ethically driven and can see the connections between certain types of food and the reasons behind the need to end animal husbandry. In fact there are so many other factors persuading the individual not to change that, however thorough our arguments, there will always be enough reasons to ignore them. When such a vast majority are inclined to meat-eating, then that is more persuasive than any argument against it. This is peer pressure on a global scale.  Added to this is the normalisation of using animals for food and clothing - the Animal Industry is wealthy enough to use every means at its disposal to persuade the consumer to buy its products. As it is, human nature is still too violent, pessimistic and materialistic to be changed by the central tenet of vegan principle - harmlessness. 

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!