Lately I've been thinking about the fact that veganism seems largely unsuccessful achieving any mainstream success. It really looks like quite the opposite (especially here in Australia), though of course there has certainly been progress since 1948 or so. It occurred to me that maybe vegan avocacy is chasing the wrong target. So, I wrote a short post about that for my blog. I thought I'd post it here and see what people think about the idea.
Does Vegan Advocacy Need A Reformation?
I believe that veganism is the single most rational and effective strategy for conducting ethical relations with other species. To recap, I take the position that veganism is the idea that we are under a duty to act with justice and fairness towards other sentient species as far as possible. In other words, veganism recognises the inherent value and dignity of other species and aims to treat them fairly by our choices whenever we can. A simple way to think about this is to regard other animals as attracting the same three basic rights as do people. We make fair decisions for other animals whenever we seek to respect and protect those rights. This boils down to very much the same definition as that of the UK Vegan Society.
Unfortunately, this is not how veganism is generally understood nor how it is usually promoted. Instead, too much vegan advocacy is shrouded in judgement, forceful criticism and rejection of everyday feelings about the world. As well, most people think of veganism as merely a super strict diet.
As a result of this poor and fractured public image, veganism appeals to very few people. Worse, the word seems to evoke an almost irrational reaction that borders on hatred towards "vegans" (people who endorse veganism). This is incredibly sad given what I said above about the value of the idea as a rational and effective ethical framework for all of us.
Advocacy group Pax Fauna observed in recent research:
"Vegetarians and vegans, however, remain deeply unpopular. Omnivores view veg*ns more negatively than several groups which are commonly targets of prejudice, including Black people, immigrants, and atheists… Negative feelings are stronger towards vegans than vegetarians, and towards veg*ns motivated by animal suffering or environmental concerns as opposed to those motivated by health."
How can this overwhelmingly negative attitude be turned around? Perhaps the times call for a radical reformation of the public face of veganism and associated messaging to build on the progress and gains of the recent past. Only by winning over citizens to believe that treating other animals fairly is important, indeed necessary, are we really likely to see greater progress. However, winning people over is rarely achieved by pointing out their shortcomings.
If current strategies are failing to encourage general agreement with veganism and doing little to change public attitudes, a new strategy is needed. The way I see it, far too much weight is being placed on the tactic of complete individual conversion to veganism. Too often, success is measured by the number of people becoming vegan, yet so far at least very few people do this and the vast majority reject the idea out of hand. Worse, many vegans eventully abandon their veganism.
My suggestion then is to focus instead on encouraging a more positive society-wide attitude to veganism. That is, the aim of vegan advocacy should not be converting people to veganism (with often doubtful results) but rather promoting a more positive public attitude to how we regard and treat other animals. How this could be done is open to debate, but I would take the tack of providing an educative and guiding role more than anything else. For example, one could conduct street advocacy where people can learn more, ask questions and even contribute their own perspectives without being judged. The very well known Earthling Ed offers a fine example of this kind of advocacy.
However, I'd even go a step further and NOT measure success by individual conversion to veganism and thus strict and complete adherence to a vegan lifestyle, but rather by engagement, interest, willingness to discuss and by whether or not participants in discussions depart on good terms. In other words, success is measured by the extent to which public attitudes to veganism (justice for other animals) are positive, enquiring and supportive, even if the public remain by and large not strict vegans. The long game is important.
For now, veganism is not required by the law and all that anyone can do is make the changes in their life they are willing to make. It seems important that we celebrate the small steps and encourage even the slightest inquisitiveness about justice for other animals. And more than that, I hope for greater public engagement with the simple idea that we regard other animals as more than objects to be used however we like.
Does Vegan Advocacy Need A Reformation?
I believe that veganism is the single most rational and effective strategy for conducting ethical relations with other species. To recap, I take the position that veganism is the idea that we are under a duty to act with justice and fairness towards other sentient species as far as possible. In other words, veganism recognises the inherent value and dignity of other species and aims to treat them fairly by our choices whenever we can. A simple way to think about this is to regard other animals as attracting the same three basic rights as do people. We make fair decisions for other animals whenever we seek to respect and protect those rights. This boils down to very much the same definition as that of the UK Vegan Society.
Unfortunately, this is not how veganism is generally understood nor how it is usually promoted. Instead, too much vegan advocacy is shrouded in judgement, forceful criticism and rejection of everyday feelings about the world. As well, most people think of veganism as merely a super strict diet.
As a result of this poor and fractured public image, veganism appeals to very few people. Worse, the word seems to evoke an almost irrational reaction that borders on hatred towards "vegans" (people who endorse veganism). This is incredibly sad given what I said above about the value of the idea as a rational and effective ethical framework for all of us.
Advocacy group Pax Fauna observed in recent research:
"Vegetarians and vegans, however, remain deeply unpopular. Omnivores view veg*ns more negatively than several groups which are commonly targets of prejudice, including Black people, immigrants, and atheists… Negative feelings are stronger towards vegans than vegetarians, and towards veg*ns motivated by animal suffering or environmental concerns as opposed to those motivated by health."
How can this overwhelmingly negative attitude be turned around? Perhaps the times call for a radical reformation of the public face of veganism and associated messaging to build on the progress and gains of the recent past. Only by winning over citizens to believe that treating other animals fairly is important, indeed necessary, are we really likely to see greater progress. However, winning people over is rarely achieved by pointing out their shortcomings.
If current strategies are failing to encourage general agreement with veganism and doing little to change public attitudes, a new strategy is needed. The way I see it, far too much weight is being placed on the tactic of complete individual conversion to veganism. Too often, success is measured by the number of people becoming vegan, yet so far at least very few people do this and the vast majority reject the idea out of hand. Worse, many vegans eventully abandon their veganism.
My suggestion then is to focus instead on encouraging a more positive society-wide attitude to veganism. That is, the aim of vegan advocacy should not be converting people to veganism (with often doubtful results) but rather promoting a more positive public attitude to how we regard and treat other animals. How this could be done is open to debate, but I would take the tack of providing an educative and guiding role more than anything else. For example, one could conduct street advocacy where people can learn more, ask questions and even contribute their own perspectives without being judged. The very well known Earthling Ed offers a fine example of this kind of advocacy.
However, I'd even go a step further and NOT measure success by individual conversion to veganism and thus strict and complete adherence to a vegan lifestyle, but rather by engagement, interest, willingness to discuss and by whether or not participants in discussions depart on good terms. In other words, success is measured by the extent to which public attitudes to veganism (justice for other animals) are positive, enquiring and supportive, even if the public remain by and large not strict vegans. The long game is important.
For now, veganism is not required by the law and all that anyone can do is make the changes in their life they are willing to make. It seems important that we celebrate the small steps and encourage even the slightest inquisitiveness about justice for other animals. And more than that, I hope for greater public engagement with the simple idea that we regard other animals as more than objects to be used however we like.
