A Vegan Critique of the Anti-Vegan Movement

Following the world coalition to attack those who don't follow the mandate of using animals, yet another anti-vegan has been published. In this case, it comes from supposed "Marxists". Their "critique" attacks not only vegans, but also ecologists, feminists, and other movements. I'll just answer those of their sections intended to boycott the struggle to abolish speciesism.


Following the most McCarthyist traditions (hey, wait a minute... wasn't MCarthy against Marxists? Whatever...) they start by name-calling. They claim not using animals i.e. living vegan has something to do with "style" (a euphemism for 'fashion', perhaps?). They call our movement "lifestyle politics, or lifestylism, as it is sometimes called.". I guess they should add "sometimes called by us".


They claim not using animals is something famous people promote as for promoting their careers. "lately it’s more the kind of message usually delivered by some well-known spokesman (or spokeswoman) — a famous athlete or movie star." But veganism isn't about famous people. Indeed, only a few of the so-called 'famous vegans' are actually vegan i.e. they oppose speciesism. Veganism is a serious movement against nonhuman slavery (actually, any sentient being slavery). Perhaps the author(s) are missing one very important issue when they claim "or adopted a vegan diet": veganism isn't a "diet". Do they feel unconfortable if people call Marxism "it's wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt fashion"?


The author(s) continue on their "critique" of veganism saying "sneer or take offense at something that falls outside their narrow, single-issue worldview.". Is opposing slavery "single-issue"? Is claiming justice for all sentient beings "narrow"? According to the author(s) view, anything that opposes materialism/consumerism must be something "evil", I guess. Hey, wait a minute... wasn't Marxism against consumerism? I must confess I'm starting to feel confused about who is who in this post-1991 "The End of History" world.


When it comes to explaining why they consider some sentient beings as "persons" (I guess, just because they belong to the human race) and others as "things" (I guess, just because they don't belong to the human race), their explanation is... guess... more name-calling! "the arguments that follow revel in anthropomorphism, allowing for absurd casuistry and moral equivalencies". So, a movement for justice and for the end of discrimination between species is just "absurd" because "they say so"? Is this their best argument? Sad.

My conclusion is that this piece of "Marxist" propaganda writer has either informed themselves after some fashionable celebrity claimed "being vegan" or it's just part of the world "kick the vegans" 2011 wave (remember the "vegan parents' case" and similar stories). Needless to say, veganism isn't about "diet" as they claim "A vegetarian diet, a vegan diet, a raw food diet, gluten-free diet, a freegan diet — it’s too tough keeping up with the latest trend.". Veganism is a movement, and it's about not considering any sentient being merely as a means to our ends. But, of course, attacking veganism on that basis would be too revealing, too informative for their "critique"'s narrow objectives!


Going vegan goes beyond "following a diet". It's about justice, it's about being serious when opposing exploitation. If you're not vegan yet, go vegan! It's easy, it's the right thing to do, and you'll benefit from that as well!