in defense of veganism
Dec 25th
A formerly vegan friend recently revealed to me that she has begun incorporating “local” and “sustainable” dairy products into her diet in an effort to eat more responsibly, at least in terms of her impact on the earth. This person is now consciously seeking only foods — with the exception of those stolen or recovered from a dumpster — that have originated within a small geographical area. Influenced heavily by Lierre Keith’s recent book, The Vegetarian Myth, this friend argues that veganism as a mainstream movement and, specifically, a way of eating, has turned into one of over-processed, over-packaged “replacement” foods that may actually harm the planet (in the language of topsoil erosion, water and fossil fuel resource depletion, and non-organic agriculture) more than is done by eating locally-raised animal flesh and excretions.
I definitely do not disagree with her dissatisfaction with the current state of vegan affairs. Veganism, to me, sometimes feels like so many grains of sand slipping through my fingers as classism, racism, sexism, heterosexism, and other forms of privilege run rampant, unchecked, through activist efforts. I, too, worry about the use of genetically-modified soybeans in faux-meats, reliance on foods transported thousands of miles, and the extinction of orangutans because Earth Balance is harvesting non-renewable palm oil from their habitats. The modern-day vegan movement, hardly reflective of the Vegan Society’s original definition as a stand against exploitation, has allowed the Philip-Morris company (the animal testing, tobacco-growing giant behind the BOCA brand) to produce vegetarian foods that vegans rave about and permits groups ostensibly working toward animal welfare to celebrate and partner with people who otherwise commit racist, sexist, and other oppressive acts when not speaking “on behalf” of animals.
In the interest of full disclosure, I should state that I haven’t read Keith’s book, and while I would like to at some point, it hasn’t yet made its way onto my reading list. In the introduction available on her site, she states that her intention is to ask readers to look beyond just the animals on their plates and consider what else might have been sacrificed along the way to get that food to your mouth: animals killed in the agricultural process, river beds gone dry, topsoil “turned to ghosts.” It’s an interesting and important question to ask, and not one to be dismissed out of hand.
But I’m still not convinced that abandoning veganism is the way to go.
This friend of mine has declared that her desire to eat only locally is so strong that she plans to move to California and live and work on a farm, from which she will procure all of her food. While this is a very romantic and admirable notion, the fact remains that dropping everything and moving to places where the sun shines year round and myriad crops can grow is not desirable or possible for everyone. As long as we live on a planet with seven billion people, some of them will be living in areas where food is less accessible than others; unless several billion of those people plan to kill themselves for the greater good, some measure of transportation is going to be required to feed all of us. Declaring that everyone should (there’s that pesky “should” word again!) only eat food grown in their backyards feels just as privileged as the “replacement food veganism” that some locavores are purporting to challenge with their new dietary choices. Issues of privilege aside, this New York Times article from 2007 also questions some of the assumptions that local food is always “greener” than other types of food.
(On an aside, I think some mention must be made of the implicit privilege involved in dumpster diving. Royce at the Vegans of Color blog highlights some serious problems that he faced as a dumpster-diving person of color; plus, issues of accessibility, availability, and reliability also plague anyone who tries to make dumpster diving a main source of sustenance.)
Not to mention that “humane” or “sustainable” animal agriculture doesn’t happen in a vacuum. While the animals shown to visitors to a local farm may be treated “well” (though can you really be doing right by an animal by stealing her milk and forcing her to live as a tool of production?), what about their offspring who were created to keep milk flowing and then taken away from the mothers shortly after birth? What happens to the animals on this farm once their production levels decrease and they no longer become profitable for the farmers? What about the basic tenement of not using another being without her consent on which veganism was founded?
If we’re working toward a vegan world, we of course want there to be a world left over when we get there, which is why issues of sustainability and environmental responsibility are crucial to our work. But, in my opinion, a world built on oppression is not an acceptable outcome. I do think it is possible to make better food choices and STILL be vegan; for example, we can assess the foods we would like to purchase and see if an organic food wouldn’t be better than a conventional food, or if a fairly-traded food would be better than one without fair-trade certification, or if maybe a food doesn’t even belong in our cupboards because of the issues of transportation or labor or sustainability involved. Of course, this extensive line of thinking and questioning isn’t always possible for every person, every time, but neither we nor the world are perfect. I believe that continuing to advocate for veganism while continually improving our food choices (the personal is political!) is a better solution than eating eggs. (And just as we can critique local-only diets as being harmful and privileged, I think it is important to keep harmful, privileged rhetoric out of the vegan dialog as well.)
We recently updated the “Vegan on a Budget” portion of the LOVE website, which offers some really great meal ideas for vegans who may be looking to eat more cheaply, locally, or sustainably. I am proud of the offerings on this page; many of the recipes beautifully illustrate that veganism isn’t always about trying to replicate animal flesh or importing ingredients from around the globe. We welcome your comments, suggestions, and recipes; please use the general inquiries contact form or leave comments below!
about 8 months ago
Thanks for this post, Jenna. So many folks, including vegans, seem to be swayed by the arguments (which are extremely weak in my opinion) in the Vegetarian Myth. I think you did a great job highlighting the original anti-oppression aims of the vegan movement, which are not discussed or dignified in any way in Keith’s book. Rather, she focuses on, and actually bases her book on modern redefinitions of veganism promoted by the current anti-vegan welfarist, animal rights movement, as in not eating or wearing animals without a larger anti-oppression context. In fact, she says she got the inspiration to write her book after reading a ridiculous post on the PPK forums discussing separating carnivorous animals from herbivorous animals so no animals have to die. Indeed that is a ridiculous discussion in my opinion, but Keith runs with it and bases her “vegans are ignorant, childish, etc” argument on that thread in that forum, as if those vegans speak for all vegans in what veganism is about.
“Denying death” has never been central in the vegan movement (in fact, I don’t know any vegan who “denies death”, whatever that means). Rather the principle of non-exploitation (central to anti-oppression) has historically been the focus of the vegan movement, and that extends to humans, other animals, and the environment. Pioneers such as Richard St Barbe Baker, Robert Hart (Forest Gardener), Kathleen Jannaway, and more have conducted their work based on vegan principles and when this is/was applied to agricultural techniques, one can clearly see veganism is larger than mere arbitrary dietary and clothing preferences. It’s about justice for all. All we need to do is continue to uphold those original aims without being co-opted by the status quo and we can see all that veganism, as it was originally defined, can offer the world.
Thank you for truly upholding veganism as it was intended to be!
about 8 months ago
I think its possible to spread oneself too thin. When we try to do too many things at once, sometimes no single thing gets done very well. My election is to focus on living opposed to exploitation of the non-human species. Others can tackle the world problems as well if they so choose, but my election is to focus my limited resources of mind, spirit, and energy, and finances on one aspect in particular…the non-human species who have no voice. I will eat one bananna a day and I really couldn’t care less if they have to import it from the moon.
about 8 months ago
Hi, Harry:
While I do appreciate and recognize that people have limited resources of time, money, and energy, a central tenet of my activism has been to be aware of the broad power structures that keep many groups oppressed. Personally, if I don’t have the capacity to be directly involved in the different anti-oppression struggles around the world, I at least strive to be respectful of them. The importation of food, for example, is fraught with problems, including but not limited to the treatment of workers on plantations, the depletion of fossil fuels and other resources required to transport those foods to our tables, and the deforesting and other destructive methods of farming necessary to harvest these crops in quantity large enough to meet the demand of people around the world.
I find that many of these problems are interwoven because of the hierarchy and oppression inherent in many of the systems by which the world currently functions. If we, as vegans, are taking a stand against the oppression of non-human animals, it feels natural and important to me that we also work toward eliminating the oppression of human animals. I think you’ll find that this message is consistent through the blogs and other information on this site, and it’s this view of veganism that I choose to promote with my activism and my writing.
xj
about 8 months ago
jenna, thank you for this; i appreciate how you bring the focus back to our underlying reasons for eating vegetarian, not just the dietary choice considered in a vacuum. lui, i also appreciate what you wrote about this.
harry, i agree with what jenna wrote back you, but i also want to add: consider that environmentalist efforts often imply a great deal for nonhuman animals. earlier this year, i started to care a bit less about local/organic efforts and similar things because they didn’t seem relevant to an anti-oppression understanding. i thought, “everybody on earth is probably doomed by global warming, and although i don’t really like that, it’s at least fair; it’s equal.” lately, however, i realized it’s not ‘equal’ because oppressed groups like nonhuman and human animals outside of industrial societies receive a disproportionate amount of the consequences, and much sooner than privileged groups. maybe global warming will eventually ‘get’ everybody, but it’s hurting oppressed groups first and most brutally.
for example, pesticides are eventually a major threat for everyone, but they are IMMEDIATELY a threat to nonhuman animals in/near those fields and humans who depend on now-contaminated water sources. deforestation eventually harms everyone on earth, but it IMMEDIATELY harms the nonhuman animals who live in those forests. so i now feel that pollution and industrial development are definitely relevant to veganism.
when we transport our food from far away or buy/grow non-organics (is that the word?), it may be a less direct form of violence, but i still feel like it’s a form of violence against nonhuman and human animals (and against the earth as a living system). if veganism means working to stop our participation in violence, then i feel like these are relevant issues to consider over the long term, at least for those with the financial means.
warmly,
steve
about 7 months ago
great article jenna.
like you, i feel that veganism is larger than just animal rights. but as harry said, it can be very difficult to figure out where to focus your efforts. for me it comes back to something that steve has discussed in past blogs: understanding that often your personal life and efforts cannot be as ‘big’ as your ideals. as activists we have to come to terms with that and learn not to beat ourselves up about it! but as jenna’s article so eloquently states, knowing that you can’t do everything is no excuse to do nothing.
there’s a quote somewhere, by someone, that says that all you need to light up the darkness is one candle. i say if you can light a bonfire all the better!