Billions of farmed animals are hurt and killed in terrible ways every year on factory farms around the world. Professional ethicists like myself are all too familiar with the details and we are reminded of them frequently through the books and articles we read, our conversations with other philosophers, and the ethics courses we teach. But there is a different story to be told when it comes to the general public. Every semester when I cover meat ethics in my classes, I begin by asking who has heard of factory farming before. There are always a few students who never raise their hands, and most who raise their hands have heard about factory farming in a non-academic setting, such as from scrolling on social media. This suggests two things: (1) there is a dire need to educate the public about factory farming, and (2) most people who eat meat shouldn’t be blamed for doing so, as they’ve been sheltered from the horrifying realities. And these two considerations should inform the activism of animal protectionists.
However, common forms of vegan activism take the tone of blame. For instance, what I refer to as “loud protest activism,” often involves activists holding signs out front of slaughterhouses that read “Meat is Murder” or activists marching into grocery stores and restaurants while chanting “Meat is Murder” (a tactic commonly employed by the animal liberation group Direct Action Everywhere). The first problem is that these signs and chants imply that those who eat meat are “murderers.” While shouts of criticism might make the respective activists feel better about themselves, they’re unlikely to inspire change, as people tend to become defensive and/or shut-down when criticized in such ways.
Moreover, this form of activism fails to educate the public about the meat industry, insofar as it jumps straight to the conclusion that “eating meat is wrong.” Yet, someone who hasn’t been exposed to the meat ethics debate has little reason to be moved by these chants and signs, as the evidence they likely have (e.g., what their parents, doctors, friends, etc. have told them) supports the opposite conclusion.
This is why, when it comes to vegan activism (and arguably any form of activism), educational efforts are key. And by educational efforts, I don’t mean simply stopping someone on the street to tell them about what happens on animal farms. I also don’t mean just holding up a TV screen that depicts animals being hurt on animal farms (a tactic commonly employed by the animal liberation group Anonymous for the Voiceless). Telling someone what happens on animal farms isn’t the same as educating someone about animal agriculture.
Educating the public about animal agriculture involves conversing with members of the public about the reasons for veganism—and conversing with them in a productive way. And this is where moral philosophers (in particular, ethics professors) can play an important role, as we tend to be well informed about the relevant moral arguments and empirical facts concerning animal agriculture and we have practice conversing with others about contemporary moral issues in a productive way—a way that doesn’t involve condemnation, that is patient, and that allows our interlocutors a chance to express their own ideas and desires. The point here is that knowing what happens on factory farms isn’t always enough to be an effective vegan activist. Rather, activists should foster a basic understanding about human psychology and human relations—and this is an understanding that many ethics professors have developed simply by teaching ethics courses throughout the years.
For instance, good ethics professors give their students a chance to speak and express their opinions, genuinely try to see things from their students’ point of view, and they are respectful of and sympathetic with their students’ ideas. If activists were to conduct themselves in this way, this not only will make the other person feel heard and respected, but it will also enable activists to talk in terms of the other person’s interests. What’s key to vegan activism is not just communicating the many moral reasons for veganism—rather, the key is focusing the discussion on the reason the other person herself has for abstaining from meat-eating. And one can figure this out by asking simple questions (instead of making statements, like “if you loved animals, you wouldn’t eat them”), such as whether the person loves animals, cares about the environment, or is concerned about her health, and using the answers to focus and direct the conversation at hand.
For the past seven years, I have focused my own activist efforts on what I call “table activism,” which is conducive to the form of activism I believe is so essential to animal liberation. This involves setting up an educational table in a public area, where it is legal to do so (such as in a “free speech zone” on campus or in an outdoor mall area with an issued permit). Displayed on this table are leaflets and pamphlets that address different aspects of meat ethics; some focus specifically on the environmental impacts of animal agriculture, others focus on animal welfare, others focus on the health benefits of veganism (and some focus specifically on the benefits of being a vegan athlete), others focus on the intersection of human and animal oppression (such as the connection between feminism and animal liberation). And my (usually) productive conversations with those who stop to talk determine which literature I give to them to take home.
Prior to this, I regularly engaged in loud protest activism. Back then, the highlights of my activist efforts included a man throwing a bag of McDonald’s cheeseburgers at me while myself and other activists held up “meat is murder” signs out front of a slaughterhouse and a man chucking a cigarette at me while I held up an “animals aren’t entertainment” sign at a circus protest. Now my “activist highlights” look more like this: student athletes enthusiastically telling me that they are going home to watch a documentary about vegan athletes I recommended (Game Changers) and young adults informing me that they are taking home vegan recipe books to show their parents how simple it is to cook vegan food. It is striking how the ego in activists can bring out the ego in the very people activists attempt to reach, while sympathetic kindness in activists can bring out the sympathetic kindness in others.
Educational activism—which can and should be employed by activists concerned with both human and animal liberation—is hard work. It requires us to set aside our ego—our aggressiveness, anger, defensiveness, hostility, and our subsequent desire to “inform” those whom we disagree with that they are wrong and we are right. And it requires us to embrace a sympathetic position that acknowledges that those who hold moral beliefs that differ from our own aren’t necessarily moral monsters. While many have inherited deeply entrenched problematic belief systems, some of us were lucky enough to encounter the right kind of evidence to challenge these problematic belief systems and ideologies. Will we share this knowledge with others in a productive and compassionate way? Or will we hold up signs that criticize others and inform them of how wrong they are? This is to ask: will we let our egos guide our activism? Or will we set our egos aside to advocate effectively on behalf of those whose voices are so often ignored or altogether silenced? Seven years ago I asked myself these questions. And today I remain grateful I didn’t let my ego answer for me. And it is my hope that I, along with other concerned philosophers who are skilled in education, will pave a way forward for a new, non-egoic, form of activism.
Cheryl Abbate
Cheryl Abbate is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. She is the founder of the Animal Ethics from the Margins Project and an associate editor of Between the Species. Dr. Abbate has published over 30 academic pieces on animal ethics, including in the journals Acta Analytica, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, European Journal of Philosophy, Journal of Social Philosophy, Philosophical Studies, Social Epistemology, Social Theory and Practice, and Utilitas.
