I see often from animal activists say that we need to boycott certain countries because of cruelty or they kill certain nonhuman animals. One question needs to be asked to those people who ask for boycotting these countries where do you live, on some planet which doesn’t use other animals, or do you live on this planet. If you want to be consistent with boycotting because of cruelty or killing of nonhuman animals, you cannot live on this planet due to the fact that use of nonhuman animals is ubiquitous and all use involves abuse. And is there a country where animal products aren’t used, no. These boycotts imply that some nonhuman animals value more than others, but all animals are equal.
It’s called for boycott of China due to killings of dogs and cats etc.; Japan for killing of whales and dolphins. So using/killing of dogs, cats, whales and dolphins isn’t ok, but it’s ok to use/kill other nonhuman animals. You aren’t being consistent if you think that all animal are equal but you call for boycott of those countries for those reasons. How can non-vegans be against use of cats, dogs etc. but have nothing against use of other nonhuman animals? That’s breathtaking inconsistency.
Some say I think all use of other animals is wrong but I support those boycotts. Those campaigns don’t say that all use is wrong; they imply that particular use is wrong. Why don’t promote what you think. And it doesn’t matter what you personally think about use of other animals. What does matter is what general public sees when you advocate for those campaigns. And people are doing those campaigns instead of veganism education. Why? Maybe because people cannot handle the truth of inherent immorality of all use of nonhuman animals, right. No, they can handle the truth. Doing unequivocal vegan advocacy helps all animals.