Why people who are vegans are so against unequivocal vegan
advocacy. You would think that being a vegan would make a person advocate for
veganism. But no, that would be consistent, moral and right. And advocacy of
those people share no morality or consistency with animal rights philosophy.
The reason why some vegans, sadly their numbers are not
small, oppose advocating veganism, critical thinking. They want to preserve
power over you and they are elitists, they think that they are better than you.
In order to preserve power they have to limit your exposure to new information.
Information is the power. Giving only information that is in favor of their
goals they assure their status remains the same. They aren’t doing anything
new, all power figures tend to control what information you receive so they can
remain in power.
But they have a problem with controlling flow of
information, the internet. Anybody on the internet can say whatever they want.
There is lot of stupid things on the web. That is not of concern of elitists.
Internet has an other side, the good one, where people exchange new ideas, discuss
them, accept or reject ideas. We come to their real problem of maintaining
power, how can they limit flow of new ideas on internet where free speech is
the rule (with exception of countries afraid of their citizens). They have a
few tools as their disposal. First one
is there are better things to do than (think critically) than engage in discussions,
learn new stuff, defend your position. You have a problem with defending your
position, if your position, welfarist, has no facts, evidence to support it's claim of helping other
animals. So what those elitists do when you have no facts to support you
claims, tell you that discussions are bad things. Critical thinking that awful
thing that should be avoided at all cost it’s the only thing that has a power of
stripping them of their power. Why would you use your brain when they will use
it for you and decide what’s good for you and what information you can receive?
It’s not like that you and them both capable of deciding for yourselves, the
value of new information.
Their mantra is there is no evidence that welfarism is
counterproductive to ending use of other animals. Of course we don’t have
evidences, besides the fact that use of other sentient being is increasing and
we have welfarism for centuries and their campaigns for decades that haven’t brought
us any closer to abolition of animal use. They think by repeating the same
bullshit over and over again that will somehow become the fact.
The next thing they say is there is no debate over two
opposing views; they are two sides of the same issue, therefore ignoring reality
and once again facts. Two opposing views are abolitionist approach and
welfarist. Many advocates and I wrote about differences between those views before.
One, the abolitionist one seeks to abolish use of other sentient beings and
welfarist wants reform that use with no intention of ending use. How can they
be different tactics of the same approach? To some people you are a bully if
you express an opinion that different from elitists without intention of harm. Do
they know that calling that bullying they are distorting the meaning of a word
which is highly dangerous. Bullying kills so many people and calling a
different opinion without sinister intention a bullying is disgusting. They put
on the same plain critical thinking and psychological and physical abuse.
Another mantra is that we should all get along; it doesn’t
matter if we are doing opposing things. That begs the question how we are going
to all get along when some advocate for murder and rape of sentient beings but
others advocate for veganism. Yes, vegans who promote animal use say that they
want to see use of other animals be gone, but they are doing the opposite thing,
they promote thing they clam to want abolished. You can claim that you want to
see use of other sentient beings abolished but because other people can’t read
minds they only see your promotion of use of other animals. And that’s the
problem. Unless you can develop and teach other people method of mind reading,
you should stop promoting use and promote veganism unequivocally.
Big thing that some elitist have against other vegans is,
you will never guess, promotion of veganism. We shouldn’t do that because some
people may listen and decide to become vegan and apparently that’s bad. Instead
they propose promotion of vegetarianism, ʺhappyʺ
animal products that may or not leads to veganism. If people cannot go vegan at
once, they can devise a plan, steps to achieve veganism. The idea that people
need to be feed teaspoons
of morality resides on notion that people are too stupid to understand facts
about nature of use of other animals.
I know that’s insane idea for some that people are quite
capable for thinking critically, for deciding what’s moral, what’s not. We, who
welcome free exchange of ideas, just need to present new information,
information of immorality of use of other sentient beings and let people make a
decision.