Part 1, A House Divided, explains the debate a bit. Here is a quote from that piece:

Anyone who follows animal welfare and rights issues will spot an all-too-familiar trend. Today we have “new welfarists,” advocates who generally work within the confines of current systems of animal production to improve the lives of farm animals. New welfarists will spend considerable resources working to force industrial farms to eliminate gestation crates, enlarge cage size, install cameras, or allow more free range time. The driving principle behind these efforts is largely utilitarian, and there’s no denying that, pragmatically speaking, these efforts have improved the lives of billions of farm animals.

Standing in stark opposition to the new welfarists are the abolitionists. Abolitionists, many of whom follow the ideas of the philosopher Gary Francione, advocate the immediate end to all animal exploitation. Their approach is a moral-rights based one, their arguments are remarkably persuasive, and they have no tolerance for the incremental, issue-based tactics practiced by the new welfarists. In fact, they see such tactics as counterproductive. Many animal advocates have gone vegan and built activists platforms on the basis of an abolitionist ideology.

In Part 2 he says explains how the two parts go together to create meaninful social change:

Principle is pure. It articulates an ideal (one that we’ll inevitably fail to fully achieve). As an abstract model, as an idea, principle shines. It’s an uncorrupted paragon. Process, by contrast, is messy. It stumbles on the obstacles of tradition, grates against the conventions of humanity, tangles and spars with the powers that be. Its flaws are conspicuous, marked by what critics often dismiss as moral compromise and capitulation.

Different as they are, principle and process are equally necessary in the quest to achieve meaningful change.

Part 3 is an example of part 2. Here McWilliams explores “The Slavery Analogy”:

It would be easy to look at the abolitionist movement alone—followed by the Civil War, Emancipation Proclamation, and Thirteenth Amendment—and portray the abolition of slavery as an example of principle trumping process, immediate change eschewing gradualism, and ideals triumphing over pragmatism.The truth is something more complex. And it has something to do with the fact that the dialect of change—a dynamic blend of principle and process—fueled a process that, after decades and decades of tolerating what many abhorred, eventually reached the purity of principle. Had the Garrisons of the world not had their Madisons, and vice-versa, both process and principle would have floundered, allowing slavery to spread into the American West .

Part 4 seems to wrap it up by saying:

with so many omnivores deeply skeptical about any sort of animal rights message–especially, in this country, when one leaves the coasts–the call for personal abolition of all animal exploitation is more vulnerable to the boos and hisses of public opinion than that of welfare reforms.

[...] the call for immediate abolition of animal exploitation heightens our vulnerability to being ridiculed in a public sphere that knows no nuance. A welfare improvement on a factory farm, by contrast, not only avoids bogus charges of hypocrisy, but it reminds omnivores what they too often forget–an animal suffers. Who’s to say the next step won’t be veganism?

And finally, a reflection:

“I see no reason why we cannot pursue abolition while, at the same time, helping the currently exploited animals who will in no way–at least in the here and now–benefit from an exclusive abolitionist approach.”

To read the entire series, follow these links:

• http://eatingplantsdotorg.wordpress.com/2011/12/20/a-house-divided-abolitionists-vs-new-welfarists/
• http://eatingplantsdotorg.wordpress.com/2012/01/03/a-house-divided-part-ii-abolitionists-vs-new-welfarists/
• http://eatingplantsdotorg.wordpress.com/2012/01/05/a-house-divided-part-iii-the-slavery-analogy/
• http://eatingplantsdotorg.wordpress.com/2012/01/06/the-slavery-analogy-part-ii-gary-franciones-jan-4-blog-entry/
• http://eatingplantsdotorg.wordpress.com/2012/01/06/a-house-divided-part-iv-the-politics-of-public-perception/
• http://eatingplantsdotorg.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/a-house-divided-distilled/

For a roughly similar perspective that I wrote a while back, check out:

• Part 1: http://www.vegansoapbox.com/property-status-and-liberation/
• Part 2: http://www.vegansoapbox.com/criticism-is-not-enough/
• Part 3: http://www.vegansoapbox.com/why-we-must-do-more/

I have been thinking about this a lot lately and it occurred to me that one could get hens a better way: from rescues. Many hens are rescued every year by Farm Sanctuary, Animal Place, and many other organizations. There are even some places that specialize in rescuing and then finding new homes. I am now ready to recommend this route to those who feel they must have their eggs. Generally, these organizations have gone to a lot of trouble to save these animals and will also go to some trouble to assure that they are going to the right homes.

The Battery Hen: this one’s in the UK

Chicken Run Rescue: Minnesota! Their motto: don’t breed or buy; adopt!

Rescue Chickens: a lot of info here but probably worth plowing through

Battery Hens: from ckc birds, another UK operation, mostly sells homes for rescued birds

Of course this is hardly a complete list. A good way to begin is to check local rescue operations.

For a related and not altogether the same view from Vegan Soapbox check this out.

As a vegan I can’t make a case for eating eggs, even from rescued hens. But I can see having a hen as a pet, eggs or no, given the right environment. And I can recommend to those who are not vegan that they take this one extra step to reduce cruelty in the world.

The vampires on HBO’s True Blood (based on Sookie Stackhouse novels by Charlaine Harris) do not have to drink human blood. Instead, they can choose to drink a synthetic bottled drink that contains the same nutrients as human blood. It quenches their biological thirst for blood and sustains their lives. It comes in flavors that mimic blood types, for example AB+ or O-. This new invention of synthetic blood has allowed the vampires to choose to live in peace and harmony with humans instead of viewing humans as food sources.

A new show on NBC called Grimm has a character who is a “reformed” Big Bad Wolf. In the pilot episode, he is first assumed to be the villain who has kidnapped and killed women and girls who wear red hoodies. But later in the episode we find out that he is not bad anymore. Rather, like an alcoholic or someone with a drug addiction, he acknowledges the desire to do bad things but resists. Instead of eating people, he is a vegetarian.

The Showtime hit Dexter features a serial killer who struggles with his violent inner demons. Even though he can’t completely resist killing he does temper his obsession and only kills people who he can prove “deserved it.” He limits his destruction. Dexter is a bit like a flexitarian who isn’t ready to fully give up the consumption of animal products, but he knows he needn’t cause as much death as he may crave. Instead of ignoring the problem, the flexitarian chooses vegan options more often than not.

In the pilot of The Walking Dead on AMC there’s a powerful scene where the hero finds the bodies of two zombies. These particular zombies chose suicide rather than zombie-dom because they knew they would not be able to control their violent urges as zombies. Scratched on the wall in blood they wrote “Please forgive us.” On the other wall hangs a deer’s severed head, a hunting trophy from their former life.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that writers have created these fictional ”monsters” who have free will and can choose compassion. These are not just scary fantasies of things that can kill humans in simplistic “us versus them” stories; instead these are tales of creatures who are so similar to humans that they too can choose violence or peace. They are powerful reminders that we are responsible for our actions, that our choices have consequences. In True Blood, Dexter and The Walking Dead, the analogy to veganism is implied. In Grimm there is no veil, the analogy is offered up to the viewer on a platter plain for all to see.

These are fictions not only designed to entertain, they also offer a powerful message to viewers: we can prevent cruelty, we can prevent unnecessary violence and death. In particular, when viewed through a compassionate lens, these shows tell viewers that we can prevent animal suffering, we can prevent environmental destruction and the deterioration or human health. We can choose to abstain from causing unnecessary suffering and death. We can choose modern alternatives. We can choose vegan.

Most of the animals who are killed by humans are those who are killed in order to become food for humans to eat. Moreover, the number of animals who LITERALLY suffer to death as a result of animal agriculture dwarfs the number of animals killed for fur, killed in shelters AND killed in laboratories combined. Your food choices matter MOST.

Over at the nerdy blog Counting Animals, the author has taken a close look at the number of animals who suffer to death as a result of animal agriculture. These are the animals who don’t die as a result of slaughter, they literally suffer to death as a result of factory farming methods.

The analysis begins:

“There is no dispute over the fact that well over 95% of the animals that die at the hands of humans are those that are killed for food. But, unfortunately, it is also true that they receive a smaller share of human compassion than that warranted by either their numbers or the intensity of their suffering.”

I added the emphasis above (bold) while the Counting Animals blogger did the other addition. The numbers came out to be these below.

Animals killed for fur, in shelters and in laboratories: approximately 19,523,000

• Fur: approximately 3,873,000 animals killed for fur each year. Some are wild animals like foxes caught in traps but most are minks raised on fur farms.
• Shelters: an estimated 4,000,000 animals are killed in shelters each year. These animals are mostly cats, dogs, and rabbits.
• Labs: about 11,650,000 animals are killed in research facilities every year. Most of these animals are rats and mice.

Animals who suffer to death: over 137,831,000

• Chickens: each year about 7,533,000 hens suffer to death as a result of battery cages in the egg industry, about 98,014,000 chickens suffer to death as a result of leg deformities in the meat industry, and approximately 32,284,000 chickens suffer to death during transport from farm to slaughter adding up to approximately 137,831,000 chickens who suffer to death before slaughter.
• Other farmed animals (turkeys, pigs, cows): not counted in this examination.

Check out the whole article for details on how the numbers above were crunched. The link is http://www.countinganimals.com/is-vegan-outreach-right-about-how-many-animals-suffer-to-death/

Looking purely at the issue of animal death and disregarding suffering, Animal Visuals has created a useful tool that compares various food sources and the related numbers of animal deaths each food causes. Take a look:

There, the creator Mark Middleton concludes:

“A diet of plants causes the fewest animals to be killed. Leaving chickens and eggs out of our diets will have the greatest effect on reducing the suffering and death caused by what we eat.”

For the complete analysis by Middleton, read his detailed examination at http://www.animalvisuals.org/projects/data/1mc

Clearly, the numbers indicate that the largest abuse of animal welfare and animal rights take place in animal agriculture. You can “save” more animals simply by refusing to eat them and by encouraging others to do the same than by virtually any other form of animal advocacy.

Despite all the above, Ward M. Clark has published a rant against veganism based on the unlikely possiblity that a very carefully planned omnivorous diet consisting of meat sourced from either farmed animals who graze purely on land unfit for any other more environmentally-sound purpose or animals who have been hunted in an environmentally-friendly* manner might cause fewer animal deaths than some vegan diets:

“A pound of wild venison (net cost in animal death: about 1/120th of one animal) almost certainly causes less ‘death and suffering’ than a pound of rice (net cost in animal death: including rodents, insect, reptiles and amphibians, number of deaths may range into the hundreds).”

Clark compares apples to oranges, ignoring the primary reason that the majority of Americans do not hunt or work in slaughterhouses: there is a difference between intentionally and needlessly killing an animal versus accidentally causing the death of an animal. For example, if we are unable to stop our car just as a squirrel runs into the road that accidental death doesn’t give us license to breed, confine, mutilate, and slaughter rabbits to make fur hats.

Consistent with his bias, Clark doesn’t address the fact that most people who eat meat do not eat meat that could be described as humanely sourced; most people eat animal products that come from factories:

“For each food animal species, animal agriculture is now dominated by the factory farm - 99.9 percent of chickens raised for meat, 96 percent of laying hens, 99 percent of turkeys, 95 percent of pigs, and 78 percent of cattle”
source: Eating Animals

But the most compelling argument against Clark’s claim is that even if the diet he imagines is possible for some people, it’s still the case that most people will not have that possibility. There simply isn’t enough land to feed everyone in a way that is both “humane” and omnivorous. The math on that is easy: if everyone ate wild venison (aka Bambi’s mother) then there would quickly be no more deer.

The truth is undeniable: anyone who thinks that animal suffering and animal deaths matter will embrace a plant-based diet. Whether they should go 100% vegan or not may be debateable depending on their particular circumstances, but there is simply no ethical justification whatsoever for consuming factory farmed animal products.

—

*Environmentally-friendly hunting is usually an oxymoron. See why in this article >>

Hat tip to Marcus for drawing my attention to these articles.

For the past five-plus years that I’ve been “vegan (and the decades previously as a lacto-ovo vegetarian) I’ve been told, repeatedly, like the Happy Herbivore was told, that I’m not vegan enough. But I’ve also been told, repeatedly, that I’m too strict (yes, even as a lacto-ovo vegetarian I was told that). And I’ve also been told, repeatedly, that I’m awesome.

It’s true. It’s all true. *Blushes* It’s true, I swear. I say this because it helps put things into perspective. I’m sure the Happy Herbivore has heard these comments too. Anyone who puts themselves out there with their heart on their sleeve – be it on a blog, messageboard, or in real life – will receive comments. Some are nasty but many are nice. The Happy Herbivore chose to focus on some of the nasty comments, which made her unhappy and according to her bizarre logic, unvegan.

Do what you feel in your heart to be right. You’ll be criticized anyway.

~ Eleanor Roosevelt

On the count of “not vegan enough” I’m guilty as charged. For example, I once made a forum post admitting that I buy original plain Oreos sometimes yet I still call myself vegan. Big mistake. There were many people who disagreed with me and some even said I shouldn’t call myself vegan if I buy Oreos since the sugar in Oreos may or may not be vegan. I explained my rationale and many other messageboard posters agreed with me and didn’t think unsourced sugar was a big deal.

The Happy Herbivore asks, “Is veganism some cool club that I’m not worthy to get into?” Yes. It’s a cool club. But no, I AM worthy. We’re ALL worthy. Anyone can join our cool vegan club. Come on in and join!

So I’m not going to trash my “vegan club membership” and refuse to have a conversation about a vegan issue. I’m keeping my vegan-card. I’m wearing my vegan badge with pride, it’s the heart on my sleeve.

I’m sure the ‘vegan police’ who say Oreos aren’t vegan will jump up hooting and hollering annoyed that I’ve decided to keep my vegan title, but the rest of us will see how ridiculous they are. Some of us might even theorize that many of the ‘vegan police’ aren’t even vegan. They’re probably anti-vegan moles!

Because most vegan advocates know that if you continue down the road of worrying about trivial issues like the sugar in original Oreos then there’s a good chance you are hurting the cause, not helping it. At the very least, harping on wannabe vegans for eating nonvegan sugar is unproductive. It won’t actually help any animals.

“As plant-based eaters, we are a minority. We need to stick together and support each other. We need to spend our time helping others eat more plants and fewer animals.”

That is where I agree with the Happy Herbivore. And that’s why I’m sticking with the vegans who support me. That’s why I’m not giving up or making excuses. That’s why I won’t blame others for my own choices.

To the vegan police: I will not blame you for my choices. If I slip up and eat something that is nonvegan, I will NOT say you made me do it. You didn’t. I will say I made a mistake. Or I will explain why I think it’s ethically acceptable to eat it. I will not reject veganism; I will not badmouth vegans.

We may disagree on issues like unsourced sugar and whether or not PETA is a force for good. But I am smart, I am capable, and I make up my own mind. I will NOT suggest that anyone’s opinions on issues I consider to be trivial (like sugar) could dissuade me from eating compassionately in all other areas. We can disagree but I will NOT say “you have made me eat more animal products.” Because I’m not spiteful like that. I won’t hurt animals to spite mean vegans. I hope you won’t either.

The power to save animals by going vegan is mine, yours… all of ours. This is our power and it is not something the so-called ‘vegan police’ – or any other haters – can take away from us. No one can “make someone eat more animal products” unless they physically force them the way farmers force feed foie gras ducks.

So use that power and help others use that power. Don’t pretend anyone can take that power away from you. And don’t wave it around like a prize that you may or may not award depending on how well-behaved the so-called ‘vegan police’ are today on Facebook. There are more important things to do than whine about haters. You have lives to save! As Jasmin Singer wrote once in a controversial vegan blog post:

“We just don’t have time — the animals don’t have time — for us to prioritize inadequately. In the time it took you to read this blog entry, 17,160 chickens were killed in the United States. It’s up to each of us, truly.”

“I could never go vegan. I’m Filipino.”

I gave him a booklet and said that my nephew is part Filipino and he went vegetarian. Later, I talked to my nephew (who is a pre-teen) and asked him how he would respond if someone said that to him. He looked at me confused and said,

“I’m Filipino. I’m vegetarian.”

We talked some more and decided that veggie meats were a good thing to suggest to people who thought they could never stop eating meat. And we thought veggie meats were a good substitute for cultural foods that included meat – that way people could honor their culture and heritage without hurting animals and the environment.

A few days ago I was leafleting at a local community college. I handed out pamphlets about vegan eating to college students as they walked by me on the public sidewalk. Incidentally, this college is the most ethnically diverse college in my state. It has no
ethnic majority. As a group of African-American men walked by one told me:

“I can’t stop eating chicken. I’m black.”

But before the group had completely passed me, a guy at the back stopped to tell me:

“What they do to meat animals is horrible. Thank you for educating people.”

Was he vegan or vegetarian? Was he a meat-reducer who only eats animals one or two days a week. Was he thinking about eating fewer animal products but hadn’t yet made a change? I don’t know. We didn’t have time to discuss it much, he wanted to keep up with his friends. But he obviously understood that there was more to his identity than fried chicken.

The vegan movement in the US may be largely white and privileged. And there are a lot of us vegans who don’t always “get it” when it comes to issues of race or class (or gender or sexuality or… I could go on). But there are also Vegans of Color. There are also the people at Animal Rights & AntiOppression. There is also the Food Empowerment Project. And more…

In every culture there are rebels. There are people of all skin tones, all classes, all ethnicities, all religions, all abilities, all sizes, all sexualities who rebel against animal cruelty, environmental destruction, and human health risks by choosing vegan.

We don’t have to choose one identity or the other. We can weave them together. We can take our favorite family recipes and update them to make them compassionately vegan. We can participate in our ethnic traditions with simple alterations to preserve the spirit of culture without the cruelty. We can blend our passions.

Vegan Soapbox: First, how do you pronounce your last name?

Brian: Grew-pay

VS: How/ why did you go vegan?

Brian: “In February of 2007 I found an Even if you like meat… brochure (produced by Vegan Outreach) at Sacramento State in the lounge of the music department. I still distinctly remember the moment when I saw it out of the corner of my eye. I sat down and read it and decided to give up meat on the spot. I did not know a single vegetarian or vegan at the time. A few months later, on my sister’s birthday (Aug 6th), I went fully vegan.”

“It was Jack Norris, president and co-founder of Vegan Outreach who was out leafleting that day so credit should be given to him for changing my life.”

“As for the why: I had never thought about what I ate or that animals were even involved. To me food was simply food. In a container, on a plate, from the store, in a restaurant. For whatever reason I was just ready for the message at that moment in time. I liked cats but was by no means gaga over animals.  However, I saw what modern animal ag does to animals and realized I could do something about it by changing my diet.  I felt empowered, just, and right.  2007 will forever remain one of the most important years of my life.”

 VS: What’s your favorite vegan food for lunch or dinner? What’s your favorite restaurant?

Brian: “I love breakfast for dinner.  Pancakes, tofu scramble with veggies and Daiya vegan cheese.  I love burritos.  I seem to grow more fond of chocolate every year.”
 
“Gracias Madre is my go to place in San Francisco for amazing vegan Mexican.  Wayward Café in Seattle is amazing comfort food (kind of like Denny’s).  Fellini in Berkeley has vegan eggs benedict to die for.  And Cinnaholic in Berkeley has amazing rolls.  Can’t forget Souley Vegan in Oakland for some serious comfort food.”

VS: How did you get involved with Vegan Outreach?

Brian: “In the summer of 2007 I decided to email Vegan Outreach to tell them how they had so greatly impacted my life.  Jack Norris, who was living in Sacramento at the time as well, invited me to leaflet the Warped Tour in Marysville.  It was an awesome experience and I started volunteering locally during the Fall semester.  In October, Vegan Outreach hired me to leaflet locally until I could move to Boston in April of 2008 to be the New England Outreach Coordinator.  I held this position for 7 months and until I was offered the position of Northern California Outreach Coordinator which I have had since late 2008.” 

VS: What do you like best about working with/for VO?

Brian: “I love connecting with young people.  I feel as though I’ve put in the time and effort and know how to respond to any question/situation at any given time.  I also love working with our dedicated volunteers and showing new people the ropes of leafleting.  I have ‘trained’ many a successful leafleter and it’s always a lot of fun to watch others succeed.” 

VS: What do you do to relax and prevent burn out?

Brian: “I play bass and synthesizer in a local rock band called Tremor Low (www.tremorlow.com).  I like to ride my bike and cook for friends as well.  I love feeding activists so much that a friend of mine nicknamed me ‘Papa Brian’.” 
 
“I make sure to give myself the time that I need to relax; every second of every day cannot be devoted to helping animals.  As activists, we need to accept this and be present in every moment, whether we’re working for animals or doing something fun for ourselves.  It is truly the way to living a fulfilled life.”

VS: Any final words of wisdom?

Brian: “Actions speak louder than words!  Get out there and make a difference for farmed animals as best you can. Please please please read the essays here: http://www.veganoutreach.org/advocacy/index.html  

“Matt Ball and Jack Norris have been at this for well over 20 years and have immense insight and wisdom.”

Thanks go out to Brian for his excellent interview!

Here’s one Q&A from the piece:

Carnivore Justification: Because humans have incisors and stomachs that can digest meat, we must eat meat — and to raise a child in a vegetarian household is akin to child abuse.

Vegetarian Response: The human body can eat and digest lots of things. It can, for example, chew up and digest other humans. It can also eat animals while those animals are still alive. In most cases, we refrain from doing these things. Why? Because “civilization” means recognizing that just because we can do something doesn’t mean we must do something.

Sirota filled the piece with some great ammo for any vegan or vegetarian. So now go read the rest of the article >>

And if you like that you’ll probably like these articles too:

These are Michael A. Weber’s notes for the Sunday morning Plenary session titled “Arguing Animal Rights.” Weber works for Farm Animal Rights Movement, the organization that put on the conference. Here’s how he answered some common questions about veganism. The questions and his answers are below, indented. My comments are interspersed.

What do you eat as a vegan?
Michael: Lots of stuff! I eat smoked vegan roasts for the holidays, ice cream and milk from soy and nuts, Thai, Indian, and Mexican dishes, breakfast scrambles with potatoes, fruit smoothies, fresh salads and soups – if you can think of it, there’s probably a vegan version of it!

Me: Many people worry about what they will eat when they go vegan. But remember the saying “When one door closes a window opens.” Plenty of vegans find that they eat more of a variety of foods after they went vegan than before. See for yourself what kinds of foods vegans eat: click here.

Where do you get your protein and vitamins?
Michael: From a wide variety of plant foods. The American Dietetic Association calls a well planned vegan diet appropriate for all life stages, and says it offers health benefits. A vegan who obtains the required calories from a varied diet and supplements a few vitamins will get more than enough protein, much more fiber than the average American, and the proper amount of vitamins.

Me: Here’s a link to the ADA statement that Michael referenced: http://www.eatright.org/about/content.aspx?id=8357 
And here are some resources to learn about vegan nutrition:

• http://www.vegansociety.com/html/food/nutrition/
• http://www.veganhealth.org/
• http://www.vrg.org/nutrition/
• http://www.pcrm.org/health/diets/

Factory farming only produces some of our meat. Isn’t it possible to raise animals humanely?
Michael: Unfortunately, factory farming is responsible for over 95% of the animal products we eat, and even those raised in better conditions suffer from abuse and eventual slaughter. I don’t support any practice for pigs and chickens that I wouldn’t support for dogs and cats, and there’s no way “humanely” raise dogs and cats for food, is there?

Me: For details on this idea you may want to browse The Humane Myth website.

I’ve seen those investigations – it’s all the “worst of the worst”, and it’s old footage. Why don’t you portray farming more accurately and diversely?
Michael: Unfortunately, this is farming portrayed accurately. This footage comes from several dozen investigations in several dozen states. Most targets were chosen at random. Only a small fraction of meat comes from supposedly humanely-raised animals, and even on the smallest family farm, animals are often subject to mutilations and always sent to an early death.

Me: Until factory farms and slaughterhouses actually have glass walls (or video cameras) we can’t be certain what’s happening inside them. The only way for you to be sure that a piece of meat came from an animal who was raised according to your own animal welfare standards is to investigate the issue yourself. Please do.

What would we do with all the animals if we stopped eating them? Would they overrun the earth?
Michael: The 10 billion animals we raise and kill each year didn’t raise themselves – their breeding is dictated by demand. Just as the ecomonic crash caused a decline in meat sales, and therefore less animals were born in 2009, we will reduce the numbers of animals born and killed by not subsidizing the meat industry at the supermarket.

Me: Many of these farmed animals are not capable of reproducing without human interference. They’ve been bred so intensively that they’re simply incapable of intercourse and only reproduce during artificial insemination. If humans stop eat these animals, they can’t possible “overrun the earth” because they’ll just die out.

I like to think that if the world suddenly went vegan then all the animal currently in factory farms would be moved to farmed animal sanctuaries where they would be able to live out the rest of their lives in peace. I like to think that if we humans wanted to do that, we could. We’re creative enough, we’re resourceful enough, we’re passionate enough, and we’re smart enough to make it happen.

The world will never go vegan. Why work for something so unfeasible?
Michael: I do believe the world could go vegan, but even if we can only get 90%, 50%, or even 25% of the world to go vegan, that will literally spare hundreds of billions of animals a life of suffering and death over the next few generations. If we didn’t think big, we wouldn’t have ended countless atrocities inflicted in the past on humans, the environment, and animals.

Me: If you’re not vegan then right now the only question on the table is if YOU are going to support animal exploitation or not.

If you are vegan then you have the choice to work towards creating a better world or staying neutral by just living vegan. If you choose the former, as I have, then perhaps you will encourage other people to go vegan, too, because even if we aren’t able to encourage massive numbers of people to go vegan now (which we may or may not be able to do – only time will tell) then at least we will have tried.  

I understand that meat always involves killing an animal, but isn’t it different for dairy and eggs?
Michael: Sadly, cows for dairy and chickens are slaughtered as soon as production drops, and this is often very early. Their conditions while still alive are in many ways worse than animals raised for meat. For example, most hens live in barren cages call battery cages, and most dairy cows have their babies taken from them shortly after birth so their milk can be sold to humans.

Me: Current methods of producing animal products tends to require suffering and death for all animal products, not just flesh. The system of using animals for food, clothing, experimentation, entertainment is fundamentally exploitative. Animal exploitation means that the cruelty involved varies by degree, not kind.

You don’t eat honey or wear wool? Isn’t that taking it too far?
Michael: In order to make the fastest impact for animals, refraining from eating meat, eggs, and dairy is the most important decision we can make. As we learn more about the issues, those of us who fully adopt the vegan lifestyle find additional ways to remove exploitation from our lives, and this does include our clothing choices and more. You can make changes as quickly as works for you.

Me: Here’s an article on why vegans avoid honey >>

If you were marooned on a desert island, would you eat animals to avoid starvation?
Michael: I would eat the smallest amount of meat I would need to stay alive and healthy. In my everyday life, I need zero animal products, so I’m vegan. Whether we believe in animal welfare or animal rights, we believe that we need to use the fewest amount of animals and contribute to the least amount of suffering.

Me: Some people would eat human flesh if it was the only way to survive. We shouldn’t overgeneralize from exceptional or rare situations. Our ethical principles for normal, daily life should come from what is practical and possible in normal, daily life. It’s both practical and possible to avoid consuming animal products at mealtime, so that’s what vegans do.

Don’t we kill bugs every time we walk, and displace other animals to build houses? Where do you draw the line?
Michael: When it comes down to it, being vegan in a non-vegan world is about making the decisions that are least exploitive to animals. Avoiding meat, dairy, eggs, leather, circuses, etc. are decisions that are relatively easy and help a huge amount of animals. I seek to avoid harming any animal that might feel pain and suffering, but I prioritize situations where humans intentionally put animals in atrocious situations.

Me: We each draw our own lines as vegans, but at the very least we avoid the basics listed above by Michael: meat, dairy, eggs, leather, circuses, zoos. And by “meat” we mean all animal flesh including the flesh from birds and sea creatures.

I tried being a vegetarian and I got sick (conversely I knew a vegetarian who got sick)? Why push a diet that’s not for everyone?
Michael: I’m sorry you didn’t feel well, and I wish I was there to address your exact problems as they came up. I promote a vegan diet with the understanding that we should eat the fewest amount of animal products while being healthy. For almost all of us, that amount is zero. If you every decided to try vegetarian or veganism again, I recommend reading a vegan nutrition book.

Me: See the nutrition websites above for some good resources. Learn all you can about vegan nutrition so you feel prepared to tackle it again. And remember that it often takes knowlege and practice to do the right thing. For example, many people have to attempt quitting smoking multiple times before they succeed in quitting the habit.

Other animals eat each other. And humans have eaten animals since the beginning. Why deny what’s natural?
Michael: Just because other do something doesn’t mean I should. Animals in nature sometimes kill their young, and humans fight wars and held slaves. We are all trying to build a better world, and we have the power to create our futures, not just be subject to tradition or history.

Me: The things that humans are doing to nonhuman animals these days cannot possibly be considered “natural” as the word is used here.

—
Our notes from the 2011 AR conference will be all at http://www.vegansoapbox.com/topics/ar2011/. Notes from 2009′s conference are at http://www.vegansoapbox.com/topics/ar-2009/.

Colleen Patrick-Goudreau wrote:

“I genuinely believe that people are good and want to do the right thing, and it’s that perception I approach every person I meet with. I don’t believe people wake up each morning trying to figure out how they can be as cruel as possible. But I do believe people wake up every morning FORGETTING to focus on how they can be as compassionate as possible. If that’s what we speak to – their compassion – then I believe that’s what will be triggered: compassion.”

Tom Regan said:

“Back in the early 70s there was not a single course at America’s four thousand or so colleges and universities that discussed animal rights. Not one. Today I don’t think you can find a single college or university where animal rights is not discussed. And as for philosophy: philosophers have written more on the topic in the past thirty years than our predecessors had written in the previous three thousand. That hasn’t made America a nation of ARAs. But it has made a contribution to the seriousness with which this once “crazy idea,” animal rights, is taken. The way I would put it is: Back then, in the early 70s, we were loitering outside the moat; today we are inside the castle.”

Will Potter typed:

“I believe animal rights and environmental activists are directly challenging what, for most people, is never questioned: that human beings have the right to use other species and the natural world in whatever ways they see fit. It is a challenge to the idea that the interests of humans are inherently more important, more valuable, than the interests of non-human animals. If those beliefs take root, it raises philosophical questions of what it means to be a human being (in that we must reevaluate our moral framework) and pragmatic questions (in that this reevaluation necessitates lifestyle and cultural changes).”

Robert Garner wrote:

“[...] the assumption that the best way of achieving a vegan future is to make things so bad for animals that people react against it, and refuse to eat meat.”
“I have a number of responses to this. Can factory farming get much worse? Has it stopped people from eating meat? Is it morally valid to let animal suffering increase and do nothing to support measures to reduce it? My answer to all three questions is no.”

Peter Young wrote:

“Pick a target, create a specific plan, and follow through. Its very easy to get caught in the trap of thinking if you can’t do everything, you shouldn’t do anything.” [...] “I hope everyone turns off their computer right now and goes out and does something – anything.”

Hey but before you do, maybe you’ll want to bookmark the AR Zone for future reference.