Why does a person who wants to highlight the injustice forced upon millions of animals a day, an hour, a second; a “now”, mean that the movement that backs this mindset – based on the notion that all life is equal – should also be considered devoid of judgement of all life?
I am a vegan secondary to the fact that I am a human. As I human I judge. Even in stating that I don’t judge, I am making a conscious choice not to judge, based off the fact that I judge judging to be in some way, well, judgemental.Actually, it’s more about the intent behind my judgement of others words, or actions, that matters.
If my intent to judge another comes from a misaligned viewpoint that I am myself without similar flaws, fuelled by similar insecurities; I run the very real risk of undermining other isn their being right here, right now. In their existence. If, on the other hand I judge words or actions as immoral because they do not align with my personal milieu of morals and ethics, then, quite frankly, so be it.
In the vegan movement there appears to be a growing ideology that to be a vegan means that all life, regardless of its own personal agenda, must be ardently revered to as sacrosanct and holy. Whilst this is wholly admirable from the safety of a keyboard, out there in nature I’m afraid that different rules apply. For example, if I were to find myself in the now some what vestigially-induced state of traditional ‘fight or flight’ (versus the more common modern-day response of ‘rest and digest’ of my smoothie breakfast); you can be damn sure that any advancing life-force that wanted to do me harm would come up against the full force of my terrified, screaming, shaking, knicker-crapping form. Of course unless said advancing maleficent creature was deemed as less strong and evolutionarily superior than myself that is. Then sorry Jack, but it’s time for you to die! (peacefully enough I hope).
In the same sense, as the modern day fruit bat conveniently engages in ‘battle’ most frequently online, this can make the alignment of outward perception to inward subjective perspective, well, more than a little ‘off kilter’ at times. Simply put; the idea that there mustn’t be infighting and name-calling, “hater-like” behaviour and none-inclusiveness in an online world, is such an advanced way of being; that I wonder if it is wasted on us humans? Well, humans as we currently stand in 2017 that is. But hey, wait! Like anything in life, you have to start someplace for someplace to be in the future.
As eminent physicist Michio Kaku comments: we are currently transitioning between a type zero and a type one civilisation. In other words my friends: this is THE DANGER ZONE. Why? Well because we still have an addiction to our emotional states, that’s why. Alongside this there is a savagery at large in respects to how the world (re)acts to each other, as well as how it obtains it’s food (albeit at an unknowingly unconscious level for many).
Furthermore, we still have institutions like religion and marriage, the latter being responsible for a myriad of truly stupendous moments, yet equally, sadly, repressed emotions. Oh, and we have weapons. Lots and lots of weapons. So, if we don’t end up obliterating ourselves to the same skies and stars that we came from, then maybe we might be thought of one day as a truly ‘advanced’ civilization.
In that sense it could be stated that because we have technology that is slightly more advanced than our limbic system currently is, that the online world can’t help but resemble a piss-stained, graffiti adorned, scummy public urinal at times. Nice, I know.
Luckily, this popular foil in our armory – the internet – is also considered by Kaku to be the first planetary telephone system and I have to say that for the most part, I agree. PS. Kaku also considers the internet to be an advancement towards a type one civilisation, which we are simultaneously instrumental in developing, as well as privileged to be witnessing in its inception. Feel free to add that to today’s status update if you wish to sound like your personal en-suite smells of pot-pourri and not poo-piss.
Indeed, if the above rings as true with you, the reader, as it does with me, the scrawler, then perhaps it is because there is a truth in this concept; that we are seemingly advanced nowadays. For example, mainstream brands of porridge oats helpfully give details on how to include such one-time seemingly obscure ingredients such as ‘chia seeds’ into your overnight-oats recipe. Yet, perhaps, at the same time we are unknowingly unready (or unwillingly stubborn) to accept that we are still very much at our origins, when attempting our next leap in consciousness.
In that sense I do align with the understanding of why veganism has become synonymous with “acceptance of everything and everyone”. Because we are from the future. It’s nice here, you should come and visit someday. All jokey-ness aside, or not, the logical and rational amongst the tribe speak openly of the need to be inclusive, none-judgmental, tolerant and open-mined of others. For the most part I can say that I already meet vegans who fit this description. I also meet none vegans on a daily basis who are just as equal in their respectful treatment of others – albeit the animals they eat – but again, for many none-vegans the not knowing can play as large a role in their cognitive dissonance as the not wanting to know. Perhaps we are all just little Mario’s running aimlessly around, trying to get a +1life in terms of understanding the bigger picture…
And here we reach a brief “pausa” in my hula-hoop loop that is how to neatly tie up an ending with a beginning…well, here it is: we are human before we are anything else. We attempt to become “more human than the human” when we add on everything else that we consciously, or otherwise, label ourselves to be. This is how many of us humans – vegans or otherwise – like to see the world: as what we are versus what they are not. It’s called “dualism” and I am far too lazy to bring up this topic in the here and now (it’s nearly lunch time you know).
The day that we live in a world where we form a global community based on the notion of not judging a single other living, breathing, creature, I am sure of one thing: that we will look a lot different from how we do now. Hell, I probably wouldn’t have to sit here typing out my thought processes for you to read, think about and ultimately agree, disagree, or be indifferent to. In the year 2117 all I would have to do is to look at you and you would just *know*, you know. I would be able to communicate with you at a level where words, vibrations on air, would be deemed passé.
One day we may very well have evolved into technology and our conscious minds will be encapsulated in bodies that are heading towards immortality. At which point I know that a group of highly compassionate and peace-promoting individuals will continually see eye-to-eye. If for no other reason than they won’t have to look each other in the eye to see the message that “peace on Earth begins at the dinner table”.
Until that time comes I will continue to do two things:
1) Continue not to eat anything that can also see.
2) Continue to try my very best not to judge you too harshly when your words or actions plainly ask for it.
Whoever or whatever you are, remember that being ‘a dick’ is a lifestyle choice; not a reaction to it.