Gee Krupke’s Take On The A.L.F.

The ALF 01

The following item was posted on Facebook by Gee Krupke:

Why I don’t support Animal Liberation Front:

1. They increase the amount of suffering due to taking one suffering individual to have them replaced by another individual who will suffer.

2. It’s a poor use of time and resources towards something that will never change until people reject the use of animals, i.e. accepting veganism. They should use their limited time and resources to educate [everyone], because that is only when the widespread use of animals will end.

3. They engage in and encourage criminal acts which paints the movement as being about violent extremism. That pushes people away and makes the job of education that much harder.

With that said, I, of course, support rescuing but not when it increases demand for individuals to be birthed into bondage: adopt at a shelter or any place outside the forces of objectification. They need our help too, and it doesn’t conflict with justness, like the activities of ALF.

A question posed to this argument:

“What if you were the suffering, sentient being that was being held & tortured, wouldn’t you want someone to do something illegal to get you out?”

Not at the expense of others. And with that argument, it would happen in perpetuity, if all were given the option (due to the issue of supply and demand). A more concrete example: I would not want to be rescued from a concentration camp if it was on the condition of another person being born or captured to take my place. So it seems to me an argument that is based on tokenism, not equality, that results in condemning one individual to suffering while aiding another (who will very often succumb to a really miserable end anyways, due to their unhealthy breeding and conditions they were kept in). On top of that, we have the option of rescuing others who are in need and without increasing suffering that necessarily occurs while animal use is demanded. It’s not an issue of illegality here but of wrongness in further compounding the problem.

In response to the position that “every movement needs radicals”:

What’s truly radical, meaning going to the root, is challenging the notion of animals as property by advocating for their right not to be used. That is what undermines the system in a fundamental way; people no longer taking part in the use of animals. I want nothing more than non-humans to be safe and free, like all vegans, but we must do it in a reasonable way that, at the very least, doesn’t increase the body count.

And as a finale, a recapitulation of the argument in the form of a question:

If you could rescue a dog/cat/parrot (or any other animal that when rescued would not result in someone being bred or captured to take their place) or a chicken/cow/mink (or any other animal that when rescued would result in another individual being bred or captured to take their place) which would you choose? And this is the reality. To me it’s a simple equation of quantitative value.”

Indeed. Militant Direct Action makes no sense from any standpoint. Forget M.D.A. and start educating people on Veganism as the moral baseline instead. If you want to rescue animals, make sure that you’re not just adding to the problem instead of the solution, and feed them Vegan wherever and whenever possible.

If you’re not already Vegan, and you think animals matter morally, then please go Vegan. It’s easy and great for you, incredible for the animals, and wonderful for the planet. If you’re already Vegan, please educate non-Vegans about why they should go Vegan. Please rescue, volunteer, adopt, foster, spay, and neuter the nonhuman refugees of domestication whenever you can. Please feed your nonhuman family Vegan where you can. These things are the most important, morally responsible things to do and are desperately needed by everyone.

To learn more about Abolitionist Veganism and the issues I’ve outlined in this post, check out The Master List Of Vegan Info:
https://legacyofpythagoras.wordpress.com/2014/04/10/master-list-of-vegan-info

Disclaimer: My only goal with this list is to produce as comprehensive a resource for Vegan information as possible. I am 100% Abolitionist Vegan and 100% against exploitation of nonhuman or human animals, any type of violence against human or nonhuman persons or property, welfare regulation, any form of speciesism, ethnic bigotry, genderism, ableism, heterosexism, etc., any of the large governmental or non-governmental nonhuman animal organizations, “happy meat,” vegetarianism, veg*nism, Meat-Free Mondays, or other forms of reductionism and anything else that makes it seem like any form of violence or exploitation of animals is ok. If any of those positions are endorsed on any site in this list, or any language is used to imply that, it’s not that I included that link because I agree, but simply because I don’t control every bit of information on all of these sites.

Vegan and vegetarian – why they are not similar

Why we need to forget vegetarianism and go Vegan – better than I could have said it myself.

If you’re not already Vegan, and you think animals matter morally, then please go Vegan. It’s easy and great for you, incredible for the animals, and wonderful for the planet. If you’re already Vegan, please educate non-Vegans about why they should go Vegan. Please rescue, volunteer, adopt, foster, spay, and neuter the nonhuman refugees of domestication whenever you can. Please feed your nonhuman family Vegan where you can. These things are the most important, morally responsible things to do and are desperately needed by everyone.

To learn more about Abolitionist Veganism and the issues I’ve outlined in this post, check out The Master List Of Vegan Info:
https://legacyofpythagoras.wordpress.com/2014/04/10/master-list-of-vegan-info

Disclaimer: My only goal with this list is to produce as comprehensive a resource for Vegan information as possible. I am 100% Abolitionist Vegan and 100% against exploitation of nonhuman or human animals, any type of violence against human or nonhuman persons or property, welfare regulation, any form of speciesism, ethnic bigotry, genderism, ableism, heterosexism, etc., any of the large governmental or non-governmental nonhuman animal organizations, “happy meat,” vegetarianism, veg*nism, Meat-Free Mondays, or other forms of reductionism and anything else that makes it seem like any form of violence or exploitation of animals is ok. If any of those positions are endorsed on any site in this list, or any language is used to imply that, it’s not that I included that link because I agree, but simply because I don’t control every bit of information on all of these sites.

There's an Elephant in the Room blog

1013974_407459766056297_898097802_nI’ve written on this subject before but it definitely bears repeating. I used to eat a vegetarian diet and although I eventually became vegan, eating that vegetarian diet was not ‘part of my journey’, or ‘a step in the right direction’, or ‘raising my awareness’ because my awareness was utterly dead in the water, wallowing quietly in the misplaced confidence that the donations I sent in return for the horrific images in the mail were helping to ‘stop cruelty’.

No, being vegetarian did not lead me to veganism and I’d still have been vegetarian to this day were it not for Facebook. I became vegan because I stumbled across information that taught me that because I sincerely cared about animals, I logically had no choice but to be vegan. It’s as straightforward as that. Vegan education was what it took.

The light bulb moment

The decision to become vegan is a light bulb moment…

View original post 2,308 more words

Creative, Non-Oppressive Vegan Advocacy: So Easy You Can Even Do It On The Phone!

For almost 2 years now I’ve been engaging in CNOVA (Creative, Non-Oppressive Vegan Advocacy). Here is a post that explains why we need to do it and how it’s done:

https://legacyofpythagoras.wordpress.com/2014/07/01/create-new-vegans

About a year ago I received a call from a telephone solicitor looking to sign me up for something (I think it was home delivery of the local paper). I had just gotten through educating someone in person on Veganism earlier that day (outside a local supermarket). After explaining to the salesperson on the phone that our family would not be able to afford to subscribe to the service, I suddenly got the idea that I might be able to educate him on Veganism right then. So, I asked something along the lines of “Can I ask you an unrelated question?” When he said yes, I asked “Do you think that it’s wrong to inflict unnecessary suffering and death on animals?”

I don’t know why, but I expected the response to be much worse than asking someone in person would be. I had visions of him insulting me, cursing me out, or even simply hanging up without comment.

Imagine my pleasant surprise when this person was actually interested in what I had to say! He wasn’t shocked or even surprised by the question. We went through the usual discussion that any polite non-Vegan will have when challenged and he actually had some very pertinent, even insightful questions and comments about what we discussed. I made sure to give him the link to my blog with a recommendation to check out The Master List (giving people links to AbVegan educational info is essential in this situation). Since the first time I educated someone over the phone I’ve refined my approach a bit.

Now I never try to educate on the phone without using this questionnaire, created by a Facebook friend of mine named Chris Petty:

veganism-survey-01

I start by waiting ’til the part where they’re explaining why they called is over. If it’s some business you are interested in, wait ’til you’ve completed that, obviously. If you’re not interested, you can say something similar to what I said above. If they say that they’re willing to discuss an unrelated or tangentially related issue, I then tell them that I have some incredibly important information that I’m trying to give to pretty much everyone I talk to on the phone or in person. I then tell them that a friend of mine created a set of questions in order to help get the dialogue going so they can understand this issue.

At this point, you may get some resistance. The trick is to stay calm and respect the person on the other end of the line. This is true for any point in the conversation. If they’re too resistant to any point, remember that you can always hang up and call someone else. Caller ID may even get you a different salesperson who is more receptive! Within this respectful framework feel free to try to convince them to discuss the issue though. I usually tell them my blog address first, and tell them that if for any reason they need to hang up, they can always go there later at their leisure.

Once they agree to answer the questions, I start with the first one. They usually just answer “no.” If they start making defensive arguments that early, you may have a difficult climb ahead. With question 2, I usually add the phrase “such as flesh, dairy, eggs or honey” to ensure they don’t forget any, like the bees, who almost every person automatically overlooks. If no defensiveness is exhibited, I usually follow question 3 by making the statement that “it’s unnecessary because the top 20 health orgs in the world have made statements that we don’t need any animal substances in our diet. And using them for those substances causes them to suffer.” Usually, the arguments don’t start ’til after question 3, if at all.

If no defensiveness yet, question 4 is usually easy. The reaction I most often get is very thoughtful. You can then give them a very basic explanation of Veganism, just to be sure they understand it. The one I use most often is “Because Veganism simply means that if we don’t have a real necessity to use or harm animals, then it’s wrong to do it, so we should stop. It’s not only the right thing to do for animals, but it’s also easy and good for you.”  This is a good point to link consuming nonhuman flesh and secretions as food with all other forms of animal use as well.

Then it’s on to question 5. Here also we sometimes get some defensive arguments. However, as long as we reassure the person we don’t hate them and we’re not attacking their character, we should be able to counter their arguments without causing them too much distress. The arguments I’ve presented in the link at the top of this post as well as other places on my blog are invaluable for this purpose.

Question 6 is a no-brainer IF they’ve followed your argument up to this point. For question 7 on the phone, I substitute “open to checking out a website” instead of accepting a leaflet. With the website being this blog, obviously.

Most of the time this goes very well. Maybe you could try it? As long as we’re calm, nonviolent and don’t promote speciesism, what could it hurt, right? And we’ve got everything to gain. And more importantly, the nonhumans literally have everything to gain, like their lives and their freedoms.

If you think you’d like to try Vegan Education over the phone, please make sure to read my post on CNOVA thoroughly first.

If you’re not already Vegan, and you think animals matter morally, then please go Vegan. It’s easy and great for you, incredible for the animals, and wonderful for the planet. If you’re already Vegan, please educate non-Vegans about why they should go Vegan. Please rescue, volunteer, adopt, foster, spay, and neuter the nonhuman refugees of domestication whenever you can. Please feed your nonhuman family Vegan where you can. These things are the most important, morally responsible things to do and are desperately needed by everyone.

To learn more about Abolitionist Veganism and the issues I’ve outlined in this post, check out The Master List Of Vegan Info:
https://legacyofpythagoras.wordpress.com/2014/04/10/master-list-of-vegan-info

Disclaimer: My only goal with this list is to produce as comprehensive a resource for Vegan information as possible. I am 100% Abolitionist Vegan and 100% against exploitation of nonhuman or human animals, any type of violence against human or nonhuman persons or property, welfare regulation, any form of speciesism, ethnic bigotry, genderism, ableism, heterosexism, etc., any of the large governmental or non-governmental nonhuman animal organizations, “happy meat,” vegetarianism, veg*nism, Meat-Free Mondays, or other forms of reductionism and anything else that makes it seem like any form of violence or exploitation of animals is ok. If any of those positions are endorsed on any site in this list, or any language is used to imply that, it’s not that I included that link because I agree, but simply because I don’t control every bit of information on all of these sites.

Egg Exploiters, Hampton Creek, Reverse “False-Flags,” And Why We Need To Increase Our Educational Efforts

1466025_824329134265237_4948328308118496969_n

Recently, there’s been quite some talk about the fact that the egg industry is up in arms over Hampton Creek and their awesome Vegan Mayonnaise:

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/sep/06/usda-american-egg-board-paid-bloggers-hampton-creek

This kind of thing makes me think maybe it could be a diversionary operation by industry instead (I’m stating right now that I’m not claiming that it’s more or less likely than any other scenario, this is only my perspective and a guess).

If you think about it, it’s brilliant. Let’s say that for the sake of argument, educating people about Veganism is the biggest threat to industry, and a much smaller, but equally morally justifiable threat is Vegan food startups. What is your best play, if you’re industry?

Well, you might consider finding a company that isn’t a huge threat to industry and making a big scene about how you think they’re a huge threat to you, in order to divert attention from the real threat. This would get advocates who aren’t sure what the best form of activism is, but who are trying to figure it out so they can devote more of their resources to that, to focus on Vegan startups, and takes away interest in AbVegan Educational efforts.

In a normal False Flag Operation, Entity A (AbVegan Education) moves against Entity B (Industry) in a way that makes it seem like Entity C (Vegan Food Startup Company) carried out the operation unassisted, to keep everyone ignorant of the fact that Entity A was responsible. In this version, Entity B is making it seem like Entity C attacked them in order to divert people’s attention away from joining the bigger threat to them, which is the one that holds the only chance of winning (AbVegan Education, aka Entity A). I’m going to dub this idea “The Reverse False Flag” maneuver.

Notice that nowhere in there did I say that we shouldn’t create Vegan startups or that we can’t educate while doing so, or anything like that? We can most definitely do both at one time. But the more important action we should take is to increase our efforts to educate. Everything else we do should enable and accommodate that.

Here’s how we need to educate others on Veganism:
https://legacyofpythagoras.wordpress.com/2014/07/01/create-new-vegans

If you’re not already Vegan, and you think animals matter morally, then please go Vegan. It’s easy and great for you, incredible for the animals, and wonderful for the planet. If you’re already Vegan, please educate non-Vegans about why they should go Vegan. Please rescue, volunteer, adopt, foster, spay, and neuter the nonhuman refugees of domestication whenever you can. Please feed your nonhuman family Vegan where you can. These things are the most important, morally responsible things to do and are desperately needed by everyone.

To learn more about Abolitionist Veganism and the issues I’ve outlined in this post, check out The Master List Of Vegan Info:
https://legacyofpythagoras.wordpress.com/2014/04/10/master-list-of-vegan-info

Disclaimer: My only goal with this list is to produce as comprehensive a resource for Vegan information as possible. I am 100% Abolitionist Vegan and 100% against exploitation of nonhuman or human animals, any type of violence against human or nonhuman persons or property, welfare regulation, any form of speciesism, ethnic bigotry, genderism, ableism, heterosexism, etc., any of the large governmental or non-governmental nonhuman animal organizations, “happy meat,” vegetarianism, veg*nism, Meat-Free Mondays, or other forms of reductionism and anything else that makes it seem like any form of violence or exploitation of animals is ok. If any of those positions are endorsed on any site in this list, or any language is used to imply that, it’s not that I included that link because I agree, but simply because I don’t control every bit of information on all of these sites.

Why Everyone, Including Vegans, Should Consume Palm Oil

Oilpalm_malaysia

From Louise Mead on Facebook, a great perspective on the continuing Palm Oil controversy:

There is a lot of discussion about whether palm oil is vegan. The TL:DR is – palm oil is a plant, it is definitely vegan and if we genuinely want animal liberation, campaigning against it is actually counter-productive to our aims.

A lot of people argue that because of the environmental destruction palm oil causes, often with particular mentions of orangutans, that it is not vegan to use or consume palm oil. But aside from being incorrect – because palm oil is vegan – this is a huge oversimplification of an incredibly complex issue. To start with, the sheer size of the human population is such that no matter what we eat, it’s pretty much impossible to avoid some sort of environmental impact. So we have to look at the most effective ways to reduce that impact – and singling out specific plants is not the answer. There are a number of reasons for this:

1. The biggest cause of environmental destruction and species extinction in terms of food production is without a doubt, animal agriculture – by a long shot. So our priority should be on ending animal agriculture. If we focus on palm oil or any other specific useful crops rather than ending animal use then we create an extra pressure for new and potential vegans that might make them think twice about ditching their use of animals. We also give nonvegans yet another excuse (not like they need any more of those!) as to why they should avoid making a change to veganism. Not only that but if animal agriculture was to come to an end, there’d be a vast amount of land freed up for planting palm and other crops because as we know, it takes many times more land to produce a pound of animal protein than it does to produce a pound of plant protein.

2. Out of all the plant oils, palm oil has by far the highest yield out of any of them (more than double most other oils). This means it takes up less land to produce the same amount. Unless humans stop using oils – which is unlikely – then palm oil is actually one of the lesser evils. It also requires less chemicals and pesticides in its production – which is also a positive in terms of environmental impact compared to other oils. This article goes into more detail about this particular topic:

http://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/programs/conservation-and-development/can-palm-oil-deforestation-be-stopped

3. A lot of palm oil is planted on land that has already been cleared for another purpose – such as illegal logging, or narcotics. So when the palm oil industry is singled out as the cause, it’s not entirely accurate and is actually a distraction from a number of very serious environmental problems.

4. Palm oil is a single issue campaign. Whilst our initial instinct is that single issue campaigns may raise awareness of the plight of some animals, what they invariably end up doing is promoting speciesism and as we know, speciesism leads to people making distinctions between animals they want to protect and animals who they see no problem in harming. Take for example the narrative of palm oil being associated with orangutans. There are few people who wouldn’t be moved by heart-breaking images of homeless and orphaned orangutans. However, by promoting the cause of orangutans in relation to palm oil, we reinforce the idea – particularly in the eyes of nonvegans – that some animals are more important than others. For starters, not all palm oil is produced in locations where orangutans are a native species but because people are speciesist, orangutans have been adopted as the poster ‘child’ of the campaign to emotionally manipulate people – there are far more species who are affected by habitat destruction caused by animal agriculture than by a single plant product. Further, the nonvegan alternatives to palm oil come from a number of farmed animals – butter, lard, dripping etc. Who are we to say that orangutans are more important than cows, geese, pigs, or ducks? How can we honestly say that an orangutans value their lives any more than other animals? We can’t.

(Editor’s note: I would seriously recommend that you listen to this podcast for an excellent and comprehensive explanation as to why single issue campaigns are actually counter-productive for animal rights:
https://www.abolitionistapproach.com/media/podcast/20100326-araa-commentary-16.mp3)

5. If you’re going to object to palm oil then to be consistent you should probably be objecting to bananas, coconuts, mangoes, sugar, and all other crops that come from tropical plantations. When we put it like that, doesn’t it seem a bit crackers to say things like bananas and coconuts aren’t vegan? More on this here:

http://eatingconsciously.tumblr.com/post/30330216488/palm-oil-is-vegan

So to sum up – palm oil comes from a plant, so it’s definitely vegan. Palm oil has its merits, environmentally speaking, compared to other oils. Palm oil is a single issue campaign that promotes speciesism and can actually distract from or give some people the excuse they were looking for not to become vegan. Veganism is the best chance we have of solving the issues of environmental destruction and species extinction, and therefore we must recognise that no matter how much our heartstrings are pulled, we must be rational and focus on promoting veganism – nothing less will do.

I’ve written extensively on Facebook and this blog about why we should never engage in single-issue campaigns for animal causes and why CNOVA is the only morally justifiable form of activism that is effective. If you think animals matter morally, please study the links embedded in this sentence.

If you’re not already Vegan, and you think animals matter morally, then please go Vegan. It’s easy and great for you, incredible for the animals, and wonderful for the planet. If you’re already Vegan, please educate non-Vegans about why they should go Vegan. Please rescue, volunteer, adopt, foster, spay, and neuter the nonhuman refugees of domestication whenever you can. Please feed your nonhuman family Vegan where you can. These things are the most important, morally responsible things to do and are desperately needed by everyone.

To learn more about Abolitionist Veganism and the issues I’ve outlined in this post, check out The Master List Of Vegan Info:
https://legacyofpythagoras.wordpress.com/2014/04/10/master-list-of-vegan-info

Disclaimer: My only goal with this list is to produce as comprehensive a resource for Vegan information as possible. I am 100% Abolitionist Vegan and 100% against exploitation of nonhuman or human animals, any type of violence against human or nonhuman persons or property, welfare regulation, any form of speciesism, ethnic bigotry, genderism, ableism, heterosexism, etc., any of the large governmental or non-governmental nonhuman animal organizations, “happy meat,” vegetarianism, veg*nism, Meat-Free Mondays, or other forms of reductionism and anything else that makes it seem like any form of violence or exploitation of animals is ok. If any of those positions are endorsed on any site in this list, or any language is used to imply that, it’s not that I included that link because I agree, but simply because I don’t control every bit of information on all of these sites.

On Morality: The Argument For Abolitionist Veganism

Veganism 01

Here is the basic argument for Abolitionist Veganism. I’ve incorporated a couple different major Animal Rights theories into one:

1. Nonhuman animals feel pain, pleasure, fear and other sensations. If they feel these sensations, then they have an interest in not being used merely as a resource for human pleasure, amusement, or convenience.

2. There is no necessity for human animals to intentionally exploit nonhuman animals and cause them to suffer or die except our own enjoyment of the taste of their flesh/secretions and the convenience that animal exploitation affords us. Humans have no dietary need for flesh, dairy, eggs or honey:

https://legacyofpythagoras.wordpress.com/2014/06/15/do-doctors-think

We have no need to use animals for clothing; we have no need to use them for entertainment; not only is it morally unjustifiable to use animals in bio-medical research, but more humans suffer and/or die when we do so than if we didn’t use animals at all:

http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/vivisection-part-one-the-necessity-of-vivisection

http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/vivisection-part-two-the-moral-justification-of-vivisection

3. When something is unnecessary except for our trivial pleasure or convenience and that thing causes some being (for example, a nonhuman or human animal) to experience pain, fear or other kinds of suffering, then the harm being done to that being’s interest in their continued survival, freedoms, or not suffering is more important than our interest in our own mere pleasure, amusement or convenience.

4. We claim to believe in “fairness/ethical/moral consistency” as a “moral good”, which means we believe in treating similar cases similarly when it comes to ethics/morality. In other words, if we believe it’s wrong to beat a human child for no good reason because they will suffer from a beating, then we should also believe that it’s wrong to beat a dog, cow, or chicken for no good reason because the nonhuman will also suffer.

So, if we value moral consistency at all, which means we treat similar cases similarly, the minimum and only criteria needed to include nonhuman animals in our moral sphere (meaning we believe we should not harm them at all for no good reason) is that they feel pain, fear, and other sensations, since that is the minimum criteria we use to include humans in our moral sphere.

5. Any characteristic that humans claim to have that we claim makes us morally superior to nonhuman animals cannot be factually proven to be a humans-only trait. Unless we can prove that we are morally superior to nonhuman animals, any argument that we claim justifies intentionally harming and exploiting nonhumans can also be used to justify humans intentionally exploiting other humans:

https://legacyofpythagoras.wordpress.com/2015/02/07/are-humans-superior

This means that if we personally are in favor of violating nonhumans’ right to be safe from being enslaved, raped, tortured or killed by humans then we have no claim that we ourselves should be safe from having those same things done to us by other humans. Any argument we try to use to justify harm to nonhumans can also be used successfully by other humans to justify harming us in those same ways.

6. If we accept premises 1 through 4, our ethical/moral obligation is to either a) cease any actions that intentionally cause unnecessary suffering and death to other beings such as nonhuman and human animals, in which case we can claim that our interests in avoiding the same harms should not be dismissed without due consideration, and we can point to the fact that this is because we are morally consistent, or b) admit that we are not morally consistent and that any human who wishes to dismiss our interests in avoiding the same harms without due consideration is also morally justified in doing so.

Conclusion: If we don’t stop intentionally exploiting nonhumans to the best of our ability, all the systemic violations we consider atrocities and major problems in the world will never end. We also will not be able to consider ourselves truly morally consistent people. To stop intentionally exploiting nonhumans completely means Abolitionist Veganism.

Abolitionist Veganism also means we do our best to eliminate speciesism (which is the intentional, harmful discrimination by humans against individuals and groups of other species based solely on the morally irrelevant criteria of species membership) within each of us. Speciesism is the tree from which springs all intentional, harmful discrimination against any individual (nonhuman or human) on the basis of any morally irrelevant criteria. Speciesism is rooted in the myth that human animals are morally superior to nonhuman animals.

Ergo, if everyone becomes an Abolitionist Vegan and exclusively advocates a 100% clear moral baseline of Abolitionist Veganism, all of the atrocities we abhor such as world hunger, poverty, ecological destruction by humans, systemic human rights violations, and discrimination against any individual beings based on any morally irrelevant criteria, will either be severely decreased or eliminated. Every living being on the planet, from nonhuman animals to human animals, will be much happier and healthier.

The crucial point here is that if you have moral concern at all for nonhuman animals or human animals and so you want these problems to be decreased or eliminated, it makes no sense for you to participate in actions that will increase or foster those problems. It is your moral responsibility to stop engaging in actions that increase those harms, which means going Vegan (and, if you want to help everyone further, educating others about Veganism).

Final thoughts: If you’re not already Vegan, and you think animals matter morally, then please go Vegan. It’s incredible for the animals, great for you, and wonderful for the planet. If you’re already Vegan, please educate non-Vegans about why they should go Vegan. Please rescue/volunteer/adopt/foster/spay/neuter the nonhuman refugees of domestication whenever you can. Please feed your nonhuman family Vegan where and when you can. These things are the most important, morally responsible things to do and are desperately needed by everyone.

Disclaimer: My only goal with this list is to produce as comprehensive a resource for Vegan information as possible. I am 100% Abolitionist Vegan and 100% against exploitation of nonhuman or human animals, any type of violence against human or nonhuman persons or property, welfare regulation, any form of speciesism, ethnic bigotry, genderism, ableism, heterosexism, etc., any of the large governmental or non-governmental nonhuman animal organizations, “happy meat,” vegetarianism, veg*nism, Meat-Free Mondays, or other forms of reductionism and anything else that makes it seem like any form of violence or exploitation of animals is ok. If any of those positions are endorsed on any site in this list, or any language is used to imply that, it’s not that I included that link because I agree, but simply because I don’t control every bit of information on all of these sites.

A Short Note On “OstroVeganism”

MusselsGooseneckShishiDLC2005

I follow The Precautionary Principle and so I do not advocate the exploitation of any animal, regardless of the complexity of their biology. I advocate Veganism. We have no need to use any animals, and if someday we find out that whomever animal is insentient, since we lived Vegan, then no harm done. If we someday find out they are sentient, then also, since we lived Vegan, no harm done.

Veganism destroys the least numbers of plants compared to a regular non-Vegan diet and ethic as well, and so, if someday we discover that plants were sentient all along, then we will have harmed the least number of plants (especially if we are able to eat a fruitarian diet where we live) and if we discover that we were right all along and plants are insentient, then also, no harm done.

Also, using nonhuman animals of any species for human interests fosters speciesism and does not shift animals away from the “property paradigm.” It manifests to the public as a lack of a coherent and consistent moral stance.

There is no such thing as “ostroVeganism.” Veganism means a specific thing and using animals for human interests is contradictory to that meaning.

Even if we thought that it was justifiable from a moral standpoint to use individuals of some species we think are insentient for our interests, that argument would still never morally justify using every other species of animal, who can all be easily proven capable of feeling pain, for our interests. In other words, even if we’re confused about where to draw the line regarding who we use and don’t use, the line is still not rationally at “whoever we deem morally inferior, regardless of their ability to suffer.” So regardless of any other argument, Veganism is still the moral obligation of every single human reading this.

Instead of calling ourselves Vegans and then trying to figure out how much we can get away with exploiting anyone through a “loophole” of scientific proof, we should be starting off by drawing our moral line in order to eliminate even the possibility of the maximum amount of harm, and then examining whether we can make exceptions on the side of caution afterwards.

If you think animals matter morally, don’t try to find a nice way to do the wrong thing. Go Vegan and educate others about Veganism.

Chrysaora_Colorata

If you’re not already Vegan, and you think animals matter morally, then please go Vegan. It’s easy and great for you, incredible for the animals, and wonderful for the planet. If you’re already Vegan, please educate non-Vegans about why they should go Vegan. Please rescue, volunteer, adopt, foster, spay, and neuter the nonhuman refugees of domestication whenever you can. Please feed your nonhuman family Vegan where you can. These things are the most important, morally responsible things to do and are desperately needed by everyone.

To learn more about Abolitionist Veganism and the issues I’ve outlined in this post, check out The Master List Of Vegan Info:
https://legacyofpythagoras.wordpress.com/2014/04/10/master-list-of-vegan-info

Disclaimer: My only goal with this list is to produce as comprehensive a resource for Vegan information as possible. I am 100% Abolitionist Vegan and 100% against exploitation of nonhuman or human animals, any type of violence against human or nonhuman persons or property, welfare regulation, any form of speciesism, ethnic bigotry, genderism, ableism, heterosexism, etc., any of the large governmental or non-governmental nonhuman animal organizations, “happy meat,” vegetarianism, veg*nism, Meat-Free Mondays, or other forms of reductionism and anything else that makes it seem like any form of violence or exploitation of animals is ok. If any of those positions are endorsed on any site in this list, or any language is used to imply that, it’s not that I included that link because I agree, but simply because I don’t control every bit of information on all of these sites.