The non violent approach is speciesist because it is non violent towards humans but at the same time and as a consequence it is violent towards non human animals.
It gives humans an automatic and evident power to decide whether or not they are willing to stop torturing. It is not supposed to be the abusers' decision and the animal rights activists let the abusers make this decision, a decision that regards other creatures' suffer.
The non violent approach is violent because refusing to use violence to stop much more violence is actually supporting violence. From the moment you are aware of the possibility to stop someone’s suffer using violence and you refuse to use it, you choose suffer.
The speciesist and violent approach is in the concept that the one and only duty of activists is to convince the abusers to stop abusing and not to stop the abuse.
As far as most activists think, their variety of options is expressed in persuasion methods only. The basic approach is hardly ever questioned. Convincing people to divert their diet is the only option, the differences are in the ways to do it.
If something didn't work they will try another but all the options have the same in common, they all are different tactics with the same strategy, to convince the abusers to stop abusing, but not to stop the abusers.
When you maintain a non violent approach, if you fail to convince a non-vegan speciesist, he is free to go and continue the abuse.
It shouldn’t be their choice. You don’t ask the tortures if they would like to stop torturing. You just stop them.
We know it is not easy as "just" stopping them, but it is what we’ve got to do. It begins with you realizing the absurdity. With you stop asking the oppressors to stop oppressing and start to find a way to stop it all.
* Text taken from the Only One Solution website.