Talking With Non-Vegans About Veganism: 5 Principles
In this Commentary, I address a topic that I have been asked to cover by a number of you: how do we talk with non-vegans about veganism?
I present five general principles:
Principle #1: People are good at heart.
Our default position when we talk with people ought to be that they are good at heart, and interested in, and educable about, moral issues. There is a tendency among at least some advocates to have a very misanthropic view of other humans and to see them as being inherently immoral or uninterested in issues of morality. I disagree with that view.
Principle #2: People are not stupid.
There is a tendency among animal advocates to believe that the general public is not able to understand the arguments in favor of veganism and that we must “go easy” and instead of talking about veganism, we should talk about vegetarianism, “Meat Free Monday,” “happy” meat and animal products, etc. I disagree with this very elitist way of thinking about other people. There is no mystery here; there is nothing complicated. People can understand if we teach effectively.
Principle #3: Do not get defensive; respond, don’t react.
Yes, some people will try to provoke us or will ask questions or make comments that we find insulting or that we take not to be serious. If someone is really not interested in what we are saying, they will, as a general matter, walk away. Treat every comment and question—even the ones you find abrasive, rude, or sarcastic—as an invitation being offered to you by someone who is more provoked (in a positive way) by you and engaged than you might think.
Principle #4: Do not get frustrated. Education is hard work.
You will get the same question many times; you will be asked questions that indicate you must start at the beginning with someone. But if you want to be an effective educator, you have to answer every question as if it is the first time you heard it. If you want others to be enthusiastic about your message, you have to be enthusiastic about it first.
Principle #5: Learn the basics. You have to be a student first before you become a teacher.
Many animal advocates become excited about abolitionist veganism and the next thing that happens is that they set up a website or start a blog that is motivated by the right feelings but not informed by clear ideas. Before you teach others, learn about the basics. Take advantage of abolitionist vegan resources, such as the videos, pamphlets, and other materials available on this site and materials available on other abolitionist sites such asanimalemacipation.com and the Boston Vegan Association.
The sad fact is that the biggest obstacles to vegan education are the large, new welfarist groups that have become partners with institutional animal exploiters to promote the consumption of animal products by giving various forms of “animal rights approval” to animal exploitation (see, for example 1, 2).
These new welfarist groups are part of the problem; they are not part of the solution.
I hope you find the Commentary to be useful. As I indicate, I will be pleased to do future Commentaries in which I address further issues related to vegan advocacy depending on the feedback I receive on this Commentary.
Go vegan. It is easy. It is better for your health and for the planet. But most important, it is the morally right and just thing to do.
Gary L. Francione
© 2010 Gary L. Francione
LISTEN TO THE PODCAST...
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Related posts:
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
Sign-Up Now for the Opposing Views Daily Newsletter
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
Gosh, the five principles by which vegans can speak to non-vegans. How bizarre!
If before I didn't have the impression of vegans sniffing superciliously down their noses at the rest of us, I sure do now. Mr. Francione does not do veganism any favors by posting this quasi-religious, pretentious sort of nonsense.
What about exterminators killing rats, mice, spiders, ants, roaches, snakes?
Where is the line drawn for what is acceptable?
Dose it have to do with taxonomic rank or is there some other criteria set forth?
RE: "It is better for your health and for the planet. But most important, it is the morally right and just thing to do."
So anyone who doesn't buy into Gary's hogwash is immoral and unjust.
That aside, it's not better for your health or the planet. Animal protein contains many essential vitamins, minerals and amino acids not found in a vegan diet. A healthy, balanced diet contains animal proteins that make up approximately 20% of the total daily caloric intake.
Only about 10-15% of plants grown for human consumption is suitable for use as food for humans. The remainder must be either recycled or left to rot as garbage. As rotting garbage, it is an environmental nightmare, producing massive quantities of methane gas, ground water pollutants, toxin producing molds and breeding grounds for disease.
Recycled as livestock feed, an environmentally friendly circle is closed. Instead of rotting mountains of garbage, the garbage is recycled and converted into even more food for a hungry world.
In other words, Gary is a sanctimonious poseur and a fraud. He wants to lead a new religion with adoring sycophants hanging on his every word. Like most poseurs, his motives are quite transparent. All evidence to the contrary, he'd like to believe he is better than an entire race of ominvores who consider him to be an obnoxious, loudmouthed loser and a fool.
I am interested in justice for nonhumans. And I am vegan. There are currently some things which I don't align completely with regarding Mr. Francione's theories - But they are inconsequential for the time being. I want to stay on the important goals that relate to the fairness I believe animals have been denied.
However, since you brought up our " food system". Isn't it really a shame that we are only growing about 7% of the variety of plant foods that are nutritious for humans? It's a terrible shame that we are growing only foods suitable to fatten animals. This certainly needs to be changed.
And this rotting garbage? Decaying plant material breaks down into excellent fertilizer. It is the "animals as food" system that is failing in it's goal to "feed the world" and wasting huge amounts of water and contaminating rivers/killing fish & wildlife in the process.
Considering all of this it is actually "an entire * race * of omnivores" who are quite elitist in their desire to eat "high on the hog". Everything is true about going vegan. It's better for you, better for the planet and most importantly... It's the right thing to do.
To be fair, there's nothing about too many people that is good for the environment . I don't see many environmentalists cutting their throats to save the world, though, so I tend to take a lot of what they say with a grain or two of salt. That aside, increasing the nitrogen and pesticide runoff for agriculture is hardly an improvement.
RE: "Decaying plant material breaks down into excellent fertilizer."
Indeed it does... while producing unholy quantities of greenhouse gases in the process. It's those mountains of rotting garbage I referred to previously.
In the mean time, if you can show me another species of meat eater as kind to animals as humans, you might have a point. I don't think you do. As I've mentioned in previous discussions on the topic, if you've never seen a calf with its guts ripped out by coyotes, I can guarantee it is not pretty and is not humane. The species humans prefer for food would quickly become extinct without human intervention, and all the more so as competitors for crops grown for human consumption. As it is, the body count on getting veggies to your table is quite high. Everything in line to eat it before you is killed. And, of course, there are also all those animals killed through loss of habitat to cultivate more cropland.
The vegan religion is rooted in hypocrisy. Across the board, it is false to fact. If you ate today, animals were killed to make that possible, even if all you had were veggies.
Re: Fertilizers and plants and food ... There are also vertical farming systems which trap and utilize all "greenhouse" gases in self contained units. It's a food system that should have been implemented 50 years ago instead of "factory farms". We'd certainly be much better off today if we had invested in this technology .
Regarding your comment about the calf being torn apart by the coyote. I'm not a coyote - are you? I'm not a wolf, lion or bear either. To say that an animal with no other dietary choice OR moral guidance justifies what humans choose to do is comparing oranges to rocks. Neither has anything to do with MAN opting for the most compassionate route. We can be "humane". Therefore we should be.
Your second comment about plants causing harm isn't denied. I agree there is harm in every food choice. But to the extent that a plant based diet is absolutely "necessary" to my survival it is a harm I cannot escape completely. But causing less harm is better than causing more... Nothing is "perfect" but it's a good idea to proceed in the direction that is more so. It is unfortunate that animals are harmed in harvesting crops. But it is unintentional... It's not like as if we are breeding foxes, squirrels, moles and mice to deliberately put in harms way... Again - Oranges to rocks.
There is not hypocrisy or inconsistency in wanting to cause the least amount of harm... It is only rational and kind.
Finally, if all the "livestock" animals domesticated by man for "useful" purposes were to go extinct tomorrow - It would be a glorious day if they were liberated from our frivolous wants.
You seem an intelligent lady. You keep stating that veganism is the morally superior path. But where does your morality come from?
In the minds of religious zelots, an immoral act is always defined in terms of a sin against god or nature. First you create an anthromorphic god, assigning to it one's own worst character flaws. From there, now knowing the mind of god down to the most intimate detail, one may define sin according to what god would or would not like. It's simple, really. With a bit of sleight of hand, one declairs oneself god, entitling the self proclaimed god to define sin within the bounds of one's own ignorance and prejudice.
No one proclaims themselves to be more "god-like" than someone about to eat someone else.
I have no problem using my human(e) empathy.
Most vegans I meet are atheist. Two questions that atheists always struggle with is "Where does your morality come from?" The generally answer that it "Comes from society?"
But what if society does something immoral?
Where morality comes from is a question I've thought long and hard and deep on since i was twelve. When I was thirteen I realized that society needed a strong back bone of morality that is solid. If we didn't have one then the foundation of our culture is like sand, it'll wash away at the first high water.
But with modern cultures, what morality do you use? Do you use the most predominant religion within each country? Ancient philosophy?
Morality is not some ignorance. It is not a prejudice. It is something that mankind must find, and must hold to strong and firm or we will forever be lost to war, disease and famine, corruption and revolution, tyranny and anarchy.
So don, where does morality come from?