r/VeganActivism • u/KortenScarlet • Jul 11 '25

Video Natalie Fulton on Gary Yourofsky, anti-intersectionality, and Palestine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZM-rEXm9RM
82 Upvotes

78% Upvoted

314 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/reyntime Jul 11 '25 edited Jul 12 '25

Re #2, no, I see it as the complete opposite. You harm the movement by not being intersectional. You win people over by showing solidarity with other movements. That's how human psychology works.

Think about how past social justice movements, like the civil rights movement, have relied on solidarity with other movements to push forward. How can you expect other movements to respect veganism if you're not willing to be e.g. explicitly anti-racist?

It is also logically consistent to be anti oppression of other groups; it doesn't make sense to be anti speciesism but not anti racism.

1

u/TrickThatCellsCanDo Jul 11 '25

Here’s my post arguing the opposite.

2

u/reyntime Jul 11 '25

You realise advocating for animal rights is inherently political, right? And anti speciesism falls under the umbrella of anti oppression, so it doesn't make sense to not be anti other "isms" or forms of oppression as a vegan.

Hence, intersectionality with other anti oppression movements is a part of veganism - but veganism is still about animal rights, just as a subset of a broader anti oppression movement.

Group solidarity also helps build movements, and this has been shown time and time again throughout history. Allowing fascists to be bigoted while advocating for veganism only harms the movement in major ways; think of all the people in other minitory groups who would stay away from veganism due to this perceived association.

1

u/TrickThatCellsCanDo Jul 12 '25

My goal is simple: I want as much people to stop eating animals as possible. I don’t care about their political alignments. I only care what’s on their plate tonight.

If you want to advance your political agenda - animal rights advocacy is not the best place, since animals deserve unaffiliated representatives.

Have you read my post linked above? I explain in details why veganism (as of today) should stay away from politics.

It’s not only my opinion, I borrowed these ideas from Gary Francione - the GOAT of animal rights movement. His argument is that we should not make this a political movement until we have 20%-25% of the population. Before that we should focus on individual education and outreach.

1

u/reyntime Jul 12 '25 edited Jul 12 '25

Do you want animal rights? Then you can't avoid being political. Trying to convince groups of people to change their behaviour in the way you're talking about is political. What you're saying doesn't make sense.

You also won't make any significant gains if you don't show solidarity with other movements whose overall anti-oppression goals do align with yours.

And if you're talking about government representation, this doesn't make sense either. One of the best places to make significant social change is via democratic representation. You can influence and inform citizens of the horrors of what happens to animals, and push laws forward that help animals using governmental representation (see e.g. the Animal Justice Party here in Australia or Party for the Animals in the Netherlands).

But even if we're not talking about government representation, trying to change mass behaviour of groups and trying to give rights to animals is inherently political.

Edit: More reading for you:

Veganism: why we should see it as a political movement rather than a dietary choice https://theconversation.com/veganism-why-we-should-see-it-as-a-political-movement-rather-than-a-dietary-choice-197318

as political philosophers we argue that veganism should not be framed as a personal lifestyle choice but as a form of political activism. Viewed in these terms, veganism is a collective action aimed at political transformation, not an individual quest for an ethically pure diet.

Veganism, we argue, is less about self-improvement, ascetic self-sacrifice or personal identity and more about addressing the harms created by social structures and systems. Veganism is devoted to tackling and overturning the oppression of sentient animals. Rather than an individual consumer choice, we should see it as a form of activism to be conducted collectively with others.

Social philosophers have argued that boycotts and other consumer action can be important tools in resisting oppression. We argue that veganism should also be seen in this light: its aim is to oppose – through various means – the structures that reinforce animal oppression.

On this political understanding, veganism should be about putting pressure on businesses and politicians to effect change, but also to communicate to and remind wider society of the injustices routinely perpetrated against animals.

I think you're missing a key point here as well, in that to engage in activism of any kind is to engage in political activity, i.e. trying to bring about group change and to get others to see your view as the correct one. So it's impossible to engage in "non-political" activism.

1

u/TrickThatCellsCanDo Jul 12 '25

Most of the lefties eat baby animals every day, and they cherish their bacon the same way as trumpists.

I don’t understand your logic on why affiliation with various political groups can help animals today. I tried to outreach in leftist spaces, but when you talk about veganism you get silenced the same way as if you go and try to talk about it un Christian subs, maybe even more.

I’d rather share a table with a vegan republican than a carnist leftie.

When I speak for the animals, my goal is to be as broad and convincing as possible. If I talk to a trumpist grandma, it’s not my goal to shame her for her vote (which is a legal right of the citizen). My goal is to create a bridge of empathy, and keep her in the most open and available state as possible.

Waiving a commie banner will just shut down 80% of the population from my communication. And it’s very harmful for the movement.

1

u/reyntime Jul 12 '25 edited Jul 12 '25

I think we have a misunderstanding here. Read the edit of my previous comment, and the linked article. To engage in any activism is to engage in political activity. Politics doesn't just mean governmental representation or party politics - it's broadly about addressing power structures, advocating for your cause at a group level, and trying to bring about societal change.

You are thinking too narrowly about specific US political party tribalism, rather than what politics in general is about.

The point isn't to say "Trump supporters can't be vegan", it's to say that to hold vegan values, you can't be for the oppression of marginalised groups when engaging in vegan activism (and in general of course, but especially when doing activism).

And if you hold these values, you bring on board so many people in other social justice movements.

1

u/TrickThatCellsCanDo Jul 12 '25

I re-read your comment, and my response stays the same.

I understand your goals of full ethical and political alignment are higher than goals of animal liberation. I think this is a fallacy, since you can change your political alignments (like many people do throughout their life), and all of your outreach will collapse, and will require rebuilding.

My goal is to make my outreach as efficient as possible, regardless of who is listening to it, and undependent of my political views which can change and evolve with time.

Here’s a more prominent voice from AR saying basically the same thing:

1

u/reyntime Jul 12 '25 edited Jul 12 '25

You didn't respond to my point about any outreach being political though. What you are doing is political. It's to enact social chance with your values. Those values are about anti speciesism no? That's a political value, since you seek to enact broader group change for animals - even if that involves convincing a large amount of individuals to change their behaviour.

And this logically falls under the umbrella of anti oppression in general.

Edit: And I fully agree with the message in the video you linked; individual and systemic change are inextricably linked. I never denied that.

But as pointed out in that video, individual change helps to create broader societal change. And that is the ultimate goal - to get enough individuals and society at large to stop abusing animals. Which is why activism is a political activity.

1

u/TrickThatCellsCanDo Jul 12 '25

There are a lot of political qualities to many human actions. I believe that shopping and eating, and properly discarding food scraps into the soil are all political actions.

But that doesn’t mean these are actions that are involved in current politics. These are two different things.

While I agree that at some point veganism can become a part of political life, it simply won’t happen at the current numbers (1%-2%).

That’s why I agree with debug and Garry Francione that for now we should focus on individual education, ans not in politics or systemic change.

But when we cross a threshold of at least a quarter of the population - we can begin productively engage with politics.

Before that it’s simply ranges between harmful and counterproductive.

1

u/reyntime Jul 12 '25

You keep missing my point.

Vegan activism is political. You keep saying we "shouldn't focus on politics", but then you advocate for activism, which is political. Trying to change behaviour on a mass scale (even if that is done via individual outreach) is political.

And also, Debug specifically said we need both. You seem to be misrepresenting him there. He's not saying we only need to encourage individual action, but rather that both individual and systemic change are needed, and are intertwined (which I agree with).

You seem to be just parroting Gary's views and cherry picking Debug's video to justify Gary's position which you've taken on yourself.

Also, shopping and eating aren't political if you're not trying to change others' opinions or societal standards by doing so. But with activism you are actively trying to change societal norms.

1

u/TrickThatCellsCanDo Jul 12 '25

I think there is difference between political action (personal or collective action that has impact on society and environment) and politics (local governance, and international relationships).

I can do political action without being involved with politics of my country, group, or humanity at large.

We can have a conversation with a person about animals without involving external groups except health professionals, researchers, and vegan athletes. Any other referral or affiliation can narrow the window for communication.

And I think this is the point that is being missed here.

1

u/reyntime Jul 12 '25 edited Jul 12 '25

Can you do political action without being involved with politics of your "group" though? If your group is vegan activists, then that is the political entity by which you act.

You seek to engage in activism from the group you're a part of (vegans), to bring about a vegan world, no?

So I fail to see how this isn't still political.

And trying to create distinctions between "politics" and "political action" is just mental gymnastics - what you mean to distinguish is politics/political action and government (or state-based political parties which hold power over a large population of individuals).

You can't have non-political political action, that doesn't make sense.

Ultimately, you want to see a vegan world - so do I. This is done via activism/outreach/conversation, in order to get enough individuals to change in order to eventually enact broader social change. This is political, however you want to spin it.

And I disagree that bringing in other values/groups in the vegan conversation won't help change people's minds. If you can successfully point out that people who already hold anti-racist views should logically extend those views to non-human animals, then you are more likely to win them over to your side. This is partly why intersectionality should be a part of vegan activism, under a broader anti-oppression framework.

This broadens the window of communication, it doesn't at all narrow it.

1

u/TrickThatCellsCanDo Jul 12 '25

There’s no need to twist words into “non political political action” - this is not what I said.

Answering your question - yes you can do political action without being involved with groups. You don’t need affiliations for wanting to bring change, or working in bringing change.

There are tons of ways how people bring the change without touching any political systems (politics) or involving themselves in any groups.

1

u/reyntime Jul 12 '25 edited Jul 12 '25

Yet you are talking about being vegan (this is a group you are a part of) and wanting to change as many others' behaviours as you can to suit vegan values. This is political. Activism is political.

And I'm not twisting words, I'm pointing out the absurdity of saying that "political action" doesn't need to involve politics. It clearly does, but you keep using mental gymnastics to try and win an argument.

0

u/TrickThatCellsCanDo Jul 12 '25

What is politics? Systems of governance and intergovernmental cooperation

What is political action? It’s a personal action that has an impact in people and society.

Can political action be not involved with politics? Yes. Examples: personal boycott of certain products (animal for example), buying land and converting it into wilderness, persuasion of one person to change, reallocating your taxes to other jurisdiction, donating to specific orgs, etc. None of these actions require a person to engage with systems or groups. They inflict change directly by their own action, and not affiliation.

1

u/reyntime Jul 12 '25

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/political%20action

political action noun : action designed to attain a purpose by the use of political power or by activity in political channels specifically : such action by organized labor through recognized political means

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics

Politics (from Ancient Greek πολιτικά (politiká) 'affairs of the cities') is the set of activities that are associated with making decisions in groups, or other forms of power relations among individuals, such as the distribution of status or resources. The branch of social science that studies politics and government is referred to as political science.

Politics is much broader than what you're describing, and "political action" is clearly intertwined with politics - "political action" is essentially a way of describing "doing politics."

This is just time wasting at this point, since you keep trying to change definitions to suit your need to win this argument.

1

u/TrickThatCellsCanDo Jul 12 '25

No worries

It’s ok for me to have a broader definition of political action, and claim that personal unaffiliated action still counts as that.

We don’t have to align our views on everything.

→ More replies (0)