Nonviolence

The non violent approach which is both speciesist and ironically extremely violent.

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.

Vegan Education - the problem is with the addressees

Gary Francione is wrong. The world is not vegan and as long as humans exist, it never will be.
To think creative vegan education can somehow, sometime, cause the human race to act in non-speciesist manner is to ignore human nature.

How high the human barrier is?

Excellent & comprehensive explanations are given by the Only One Solution team on their FAQ page:
1. Why not work hard to make a vegan world?
2. Social revolutions are possible. Don’t you believe a revolution in the way society seize non human animals is possible?
3. The human race perspective on itself and on the world has changed through time and will keep on changing, all we need is to be patient

One way the team from WhyCulturedMeat.org try to confront vegan educators/converters is by asking "If an individual is a good person, rational, intelligent, loving and caring, even wealthy, how come he/she is not a vegan?". Then, they give plenty of examples to support their position.

Do you still believe a vegan world is possible?

Cognitive Dissonance among Vegans

Consider the following:
A. Most vegan activists will agree that humans - as all species - are selfish and violent by nature and that most of them do not care about nonhuman suffering.
B. Most vegan activists dedicate their activity time to vegan education and believe animal exploitation will end within 100 years.[1]

Don't you agree these two cognitions are inconsistent with each other? It is impossible to convince humans - who hold the freedom of choice - to behave against their own nature.
Vegan education is based on moral justice, while humans' choice is based on self interest. In our case, these are two contradictory things.[2]

It's so frustrating to admit, but the reason this dissonance is so common among activists is selfishness (which we all struggle with):
"Let's be honest. The animal rights movement as we now know it will never become a revolutionary struggle because the representatives of the oppressed enjoy enough privilege from the system they oppose to prevent them from supporting, let alone engaging in actual revolutionary activity that would risk those comforts."
--Rod Coronado, "Hypocrisy Is Our Greatest Luxury" (no longer available online)

The Only One Solution Manifest begins its attention to vegan education with the next paragraph:
"Have you ever wondered why is it so hard to convince someone to go vegan?
We don’t need to tell you how morally initiatory and how nutritiously simple veganism is. So how come it is so hard, even for many people who define themselves as "animal lovers", to become vegans? It is a question we have constantly asked ourselves when we were "vegan converters". Could it be that the obstacle to veganism is the messengers? Not enough health food stores? The price of soy milk? Not enough vegan celebrities? Not enough visual evidence about what is going on in factory farms? You know it is not any of these.
The question we are asking ourselves now in the only one solution movement is how come animal rights activists don’t see that the problem is with the addressees?"

Most activists probably know deep down it is not the messengers but the addressees, but as Rod Coronado put it so well, the price is too high.


[1] According to recent survey (which is no longer available online) that was first presented in the 12th International Vegan Festival, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, July 22-25, 2009.

[2] Some people would argue that acting morally is part of anyone's self interest, but this is not true. For most people - morality is a negligible consideration, it is important for them to feel peaceful with their choice. Meaning, they will seek (and find) a justification to continue with their violent acts ("animals in nature kill and eat other animals all the time", for example) and continue to ignore the most basic moral principle ("Do not do to others what you would not want them to do to you").