animal rights

What are “Strong” and “Weak” Veganism?

~ Graeme M ~ 1 Comment

A few people have taken us to task for promoting the idea that people do not have to be strict vegans. Or as we have put it, that people can adopt “weak” veganism. I would like to explain what we mean by “strong” and “weak” veganism.

The core concept that guides us here at JustUs Too is that veganism is not some strange new moral philosophy, but rather the idea that we extend moral consideration to other species. More exactly, we think of veganism as including other animals within the scope of our moral concern for fairness and justice. In effect, that means regarding other animals as having the same basic three rights as people – the rights to be free, to in control of one’s own life and not to be treated cruelly.

Why “rights”? Well, it’s because we believe that in a similar fashion to the concept of human rights, rights for other animals is simply a way of describing how we should wish to treat them. Rights represent essential moral principles that we think can be applied not only to people but also other animals.

Human rights recognise the inherent value of each person, regardless of background, where we live, what we look like, what we think or what we believe. They are based on principles of dignity, equality and mutual respect, which are shared across cultures, religions and philosophies. They are about being treated fairly, treating others fairly and having the ability to make genuine choices in our daily lives. Likewise, regarding other animals as having these same basic rights is a way to recognise the inherent value and dignity of other species and aim to treat them fairly by our choices whenever we can (or choose to).

With this in mind, let’s look at the generally accepted definition for veganism. The UK Vegan Society defines veganism as:

“A philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.”

Most vegan advocates believe in following this definition in a very strict fashion. They simply refuse to buy or use anything derived from another animal as much as they possibly can. Many will not, for example, eat a potato chip cooked in the same oil as a piece of chicken or they will refuse to eat oysters because oysters are an animal. This is a very simple and easy way to interpret and adopt veganism as a direction for living. We call this “strong” veganism and it is available to anyone.

However, the definition for veganism can be seen to rest upon the same basic rights-based foundation that we promote here at JustUs Too. The UK Vegan Society’s definition explicitly states that the aim is to prevent all forms of exploitation and cruelty to animals, which is precisely what the three basic human rights set out to achieve for humans and which – when applied to other animals – achieves what the Vegan Society aims to achieve by veganism.

Now, in many countries, human rights are enforced at law and so we can expect a fairly standard range of behaviours from members of these societies. However, such rights for animals are not generally enforced at law and people are free to make their own choices about whether they respect these rights. In that way, “animal rights” do not necessarily mean that everyone will adopt the same behaviours or make the same choices. For some people, it may be just too hard in their particular circumstances or they may simply not be willing to go that far.

However just because someone cannot or doesn’t want to be a strict vegan doesn’t mean that they have to give up entirely on being fair to other animals whenever they can. Rather they can use the concept of animal rights as a guide to what to do when it comes to their actions, such as buying decisions. For example, while animals on high welfare, free-range farms may not be truly free or able to exercise bodily autonomy, they may be relatively free to live natural lives and treated well. Buying products from these farms may be considered a fairer act than economically supporting CAFO systems.

We call this “weak” veganism. Anyone at all can adopt the guiding principles of veganism – basic rights for other animals – and so long as they genuinely mean to do what they can to treat other animals fairly then we believe they are acting consistently with the principles of veganism.

To offer an admittedly extreme example, someone may have decided that for their health they will adopt a carnivore diet. Now, on the face of it this is directly inconsistent with veganism, but just the same that doesn’t mean that they cannot want to make fair decisions about what they do. They might still choose to buy products not tested on animals, they may buy only second hand leather and woollen products, they could even buy meat from high welfare grazed animal systems. We would regard such a person as endorsing weak veganism.

To sum up then, strong veganism is when someone follows the UK Vegan Society’s definition to the letter, while weak veganism is when someone uses the underlying moral principles to guide the choices they make. In the end, people are free to make whatever choices they wish but aiming to be fair to other animals is within everyone’s reach.

JustUs Too encourages everyone to want to be fair to other animals.

Simply Vegan

~ Graeme M ~ 2 Comments

Someone asked me for a simpler overview of how veganism could relate to them as an everyday person. Cut to the chase they said, make it simple for me. So, here’s my best shot at a simple guide to veganism, my way.

“Veganism recognises the inherent value and dignity of other species and aims to treat them fairly by our choices whenever we can”

Humans have always used and eaten other animals and in a natural setting there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. That is, I suppose, life. However, something drastic happened to the world over the past 10,000 years – human beings have come to own the whole place. In the process, I believe that we humans have become separated from a natural relationship with other species, now regarding many as mere things – resources – to be used however we want. And that seems unfair when we observe that other animals exist for their own ends the same as we do. We really should be fairer to them.

As I see it, veganism is a very simple idea about our modern relationship with other species which seeks to restore some justice to that relationship. Boiled down, we should – whenever possible – treat other species more fairly and behave as though they have three basic rights – the rights to their own lives, to be free and not treated as property, and to not be treated cruelly. In a sense, we could regard them as fellow citizens of a sort and not just “animals”. And that is pretty much all there is to it.

With this in mind, all that one needs do is make choices that best reflect that ethic. For example, farmed animals are not free, often have no control over any part of their own lives, are treated as property and can be (and often are) treated cruelly. So someone who believes we should treat other animals fairly – as though they have those three basic rights – will choose not to buy products made from farmed animals because their dollar then goes to stimulate the animal-using industries to continue. That’s really the main reason why “vegans” don’t eat meat. Eating animals usually involves buying animal parts derived from farming operations. Similarly they would aim to buy products not tested on animals – again because the animals used in testing are not free, are treated as property, and are treated cruelly.

People often point to grazing cattle and say what pleasant lives they have, safe and cared for by the farmer. That might be true, but maybe 90-95% of all the farmed animals in the world are not out in the fields. They are indoors in CAFOs – Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. The very first step someone could take would be to stop buying food produced in those systems. Imagine if we could stop all of these unpleasant ways to farm animals!

There seems to be a million websites out there offering advice and guidance on how to be vegan-friendly. The aim is to act in ways that help to prevent the violation of the rights of other species whenever you can. A simple rule of thumb might be to think whether something would be wrong if done to a human. If so, it is probably wrong when done to another animal. Of course, sometimes we simply cannot help but do wrong by other animals but we can try to do the best we can. In the end, the choices you make are up to you in your circumstances.

By the way, earlier I put the word vegans in quotes. That is because I am not much hung up on labels or special tribes. Anyone can embrace vegan ethics and really, it’s up to you how you do that. I tend to think that if you are genuine about wanting to help restore justice for other species then you will do your best in your circumstances. And you can always learn and do more as time passes. So, you don’t have to “go vegan”, “be” a vegan or whatever, unless that is how you wish to identify. In fact, I tend to reserve the word vegan for those who both support the ethical practice AND advocate for justice for other species. In the same way that suffragettes and abolitionists advocated for justice for people, so too can vegans advocate for justice for all species.

I have written about these ideas in more detail here if you would like to know more:

The Philosophy of Ethical Veganism Explained

So Why Veganism

The Problem for Veganism of Crop Deaths

Is Veganism Really Least Harm

The Philosophy of Ethical Veganism Explained

~ Graeme M ~ 6 Comments

My explanation of just what ethical veganism really is.

Summary:

Veganism is an ethical position, the idea that we extend moral concern to other (sentient) species. We are already vegan to other people, all that is in question is how much we can be vegan to other species.

Over thousands of years humans have developed moral principles about how to live well together. Some of these principles have been described as human rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights sets out a generally agreed set of such rights that can and should apply to all people in any society.

The basic, or foundational subset of these are the three rights described at Articles 3-5 of this Declaration. These are the rights to one’s own life, the right to be free and not treated as property or exclusively as a means to an end, and the right not to be treated cruelly.

There are reasons to believe that these basic rights can be extended to many other species. Simply put, we should want other species to be free and in charge of their own lives without being treated badly by us, as much as is possible.

While human rights are often protected at law, animal rights are not. Vegans therefore are people who behave as though these rights for other species are protected. This makes it very easy to work out what to do whenever we can, even if it turns out that the best that we can do can never eliminate the use of other animals for human ends.

The Full Story

Humans have long been engaged in an ethical project (cf Philip Kitcher). Today it is accepted that people deserve certain moral considerations such as to be free to conduct their own lives, to not be tortured or subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, to not be held in slavery, and to have their interests protected at law. People also deserve to be treated justly. Justice is understood to mean fair treatment and for the victims of unfair treatment to be protected (and perhaps for the perpetrators of unfair treatment to receive punishment).

These ethical principles have been embedded in what are known as human rights. In particular the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights sets out in 30 articles the fundamental human rights to be universally protected. Generally speaking rights and just treatment are confined to our species.

Ethical Veganism is the idea that the principles expressed by three of these fundamental rights – Articles 3-5 of the Declaration – should be extended to other species whenever possible. Vegans believe that we owe a moral obligation to other species to respect their rights to their own lives, not be enslaved and not be subjected to cruel treatment or torture, whenever we can.

This makes it very easy to evaluate what choices and behaviours we should enact in regard to other species. It also offers a clear distinction about those who endorse veganism and those who advocate for animal rights.

Human rights are protected in law – legislation in many different countries seeks to constrain people to observing these rights. Animal rights however are not well protected in law. Because this is the case, people who endorse veganism behave as though those rights are protected, while animal rights advocates also agitate to have those rights protected in law.

While people who endorse veganism choose to act as though animals’ rights are protected, their behaviours will depend to some extent on circumstances. This means that in some cases, animals may still be used and harmed for human needs.

For example, someone living where access to food is limited might own animals from whom food and fibre is collected or obtained. People living in traditional communities with limited access to modern goods and services might continue to hunt other animals for food and fibre. Animals might be used in the pursuit of medical treatments where the outcome can be shown to benefit many.

Generally speaking however, when one lives where circumstances permit then one should make choices that aim to respect and protect the rights of other species. In other words, it is up to the individual how best to act so as to protect other species. For example, they may choose to eat a plant-based diet.

People sometimes argue that farming animals as well as growing crops for food might be preferable to growing only crops. For example, they describe regenerative farming as the most ethical option. It seems to me that this argument is open to debate on empirical grounds, given there is some dispute about the overall efficacy of regenerative agriculture. I cannot adjudicate on that. However, as a broad stance based on my explanation above and within the context of the idea that other species deserve basic rights, it should be clear that animal farming is not ethical.

Our ethical concern in regard to animal farming emerges from its failure to observe the three principles above. We might be able to make farming relatively cruelty free, but we cannot make the animals free or unexploited nor prevent their ultimate harm. Therefore, while minimising pain and suffering in animal farming is consistent with our duty to prevent cruelty, animal welfare in the context of human use of other species falls short of our overall ethical obligation.

Because animal farming fails to fully respect the rights of other species as explained above, people who endorse veganism as an ethical stance will more than likely choose not to buy products derived from animal farming and will prefer to buy and use goods that have been produced without the use and exploitation of other animals, whenever they can. Of course, in the broader sense it might turn out that it simply is not possible to prevent the use of animals completely, if at all, because that is just the way things are. We may simply have to face the fact that whatever ethical failure accrues from this, it is the best we can do in the circumstances.