Misanthropy and Veganism
Upon becoming disillusioned to the cruelties humans inflict upon animals every day by the millions, and every year by the billions, and witnessing the general populace's apathy to their plight since it's in the latter's benefit, it is very easy and very common for a person who has just recently gone Vegan to take on misanthropic views, ones that view the human species with nothing with contempt and scorn.
While at first it's completely understandable to take on this sort of mindset to view human beings as nothing but immoral parasites who do nothing but wreak havoc on animals and the planet, but this mindset is not only irrational, immoral, and incorrect, when it is associated with Veganism, it causes huge amounts of harm to the animal rights movement.
This article will criticize misanthropy from several angles, including how it's associated with Veganism, and why it is both empirically and morally false.
Contents
Association with the Vegan movement
One of the Seven Deadly Sins of Bad Vegan Activism is advocating, alongside Veganism, fringe claims, including conspiracy theories, political extremism, antinatalism, and of course, misanthropy.
The reasoning behind this simply comes down to PR. While Veganism as an idea is gaining wide acceptance in society, especially given animal welfare and environmental concerns, only a very small minority of people in the developed world are practicing a Vegan diet. The 99% of society who is not Vegan needs to be reached in some mode or form, but there is still a fairly limited representation of Vegans, meaning that every interaction someone has with a Vegan is vital to his or her impression on individuals in the entire movement. We create positive impressions by being relatable, understanding, compromising, and NOT advocating views that most people would regard as fringe, crazy, or unethical. If you associate these views with veganism, it creates the impression that ALL vegans hold these views, as a sort of part of an overall ideology.
Are they wrong in creating that guilt by association? Sure, but it can't be entirely pinned on them. It would be harm to blame someone for thinking negatively of Vegans if the only ones they've met are misanthropic and show a hatred of humanity. At that point, Vegans aren't viewed as people being kind and compassionate by extending morality to animals, they are viewed as people who can't relate or understand humans, and are more Vegans due to just disliking humans, not because they necessarily care about animals.
Disowning of Non-Vegans
Template:Main Misanthropes tend to disown people in their lives who aren't vegan, often close friends and family members, but it can and often does extend to acquaintances, coworkers, and other peers. This has a very similar effect as associating misanthropy with the Vegan movement, although it's likely even worse since people are now becoming victims of this misanthropy, instead of just being turned off by an angry vegan they see on the internet. Unless the people in question were already very hostile towards Veganism (which presumably is why they were disowned in the first place), they are almost certainly not going to go Vegan now, and may view the movement with resentment for taking a loved one away from them.
Why Misanthropy Is Wrong
You might think that something like misanthropy is a matter of opinion and isn't something that can be dispelled, and while a person's opinion on humanity is up to that individual, the reasons often given for misanthropy are objectively wrong, both in terms of the moral and empirical claims.
Morally
Human beings are sentient beings with preferences, therefore they have moral value. Denying moral worth to the human species is by definition unethical.
Humans are not on the level of parasites, where their existences don't benefit anyone but themselves, human beings positively affect each other, and when we finally smarten up and stop killing billions of animals, our impact on other animals will be roughly neutral to possibly positive, for the animals that we keep as pets and on sanctuaries.
Often, changes in ecosystems benefit one species, and hurt another. Why is it necessarily a net negative that humans are the ones benefiting? It's unfortunate when we have to log down habitats to make room for humans, but the positive of helping highly sentient beings almost certainly outweighs the harm, not to mention we're looking on building civilizations that don't cause as much destruction and help concentrate more people into once place.
Empirically
This section will address the common more real-world reasons people have for being misanthropes, which regard how humans interact with each other and the natural world.
Decline in Violence, and soaring of human flourishing
Misanthropes like to make the claim that humans are nothing but vile and evil and all that, and will claim how humanity has never improved and that we've always been horrible and terrible and we're just a lost cause. Contrary to common lamentation, the world is not becoming a worse place to live in, and in fact, is more peaceful, safe, and comfortable than it ever has been.
Rape, murder, theft, and other crimes have all declined, education and healthcare access has been more widespread than ever (and is still expanding), more people than ever are living in comfortable, stable democracies with unprecedented levels of freedom, advances in science have allowed us to grow more food and provide energy to potentially billions of people, we have cures, medicines, and treatments for just about every ailment that once threatened our lives, technology allows us for easier and comfortable lives with all the information and entertainment we could possibly want, human rights progress has been made in terms of civil rights, abolition of torture and slavery, billions have been lifted out of poverty in the past few decades (with tens of thousands being lifted out of it everyday), and while there are setbacks and obstacles, there is every reason to believe that this trend will continue.
Of course, there's still plenty of room for improvement, no denying that. But seeing how much progress we've made shows that human beings are not lost causes, and there is always good reason to believe that sooner or later, we'll collectively do the right thing. But being a misanthrope and withdrawing from society certainly isn't going to help, and we've only been improving so much because people were able to understand that humans have moral value, and that we prosper more when we cooperate and deal kindly with each other.
Effects on the Environment
One of the more common reasons for claiming that humans are parasites on the Earth is our environmental impact, which is symbolic in many ways, showcasing our blatant disregard for the planet that allowed us to come into existence.
The main problem with this argument comes down to the fact that mankind's effect on the environment is not inherent to us being here. Our lack of consideration for the environment is a vestige from the beginning of the industrial revolution when we didn't know any better, and while there is quite a bit of progress to go and it's slower than it should be, we are certainly able to be more considerate of the environment.
We have developed tons of new technologies and implanted numerous policies in order to reduce our effect on the environment, and the idea of Ecomodernism is becoming more and more prominent, which focuses on maximizing human flourishing while minimizing our effect on the environment. From nuclear power, renewable energy, GM technology, development of mock meats, efficient technology, and overall investment in cleaner infrastructure, we've made some serious progress in terms of tackling our environmental footprint.
Humans have been able to come together and do something about the environment, such as for instance the Montreal Protocol which phased out the use of CFCs, which were destroying the Ozone layer. Mainly, the resistance to doing something about climate change revolves around politics. Climate change has been a partisan political issue since the late 90s, and unlike the CFCs and the ozone where governments were able to cooperate on it and quickly do something about it, since there wasn't enough time for it to become about partisan politics.
Evil is a universal thing in both humans and animals
One of the more common reasons for misanthropy is the idea that humans are inherently evil, as evidenced by many of the atrocities committed by humans throughout history, therefore making the goal of improving lost cause.
While it's easy to provide a counterexample for every example of a person who shows evidence that humans are inherently evil, regardless of which side is providing examples, this isn't a very interesting or compelling argument, since no matter which side is being argued, it's just a matter of cherry picking. The fact of the matter is, saying that humans are either good or bad isn't very useful or even accurate. It's far more accurate to say that humans are short-sighted, ignorant, tribalistic, and emotional. This isn't something inherent to humans; This is something that is a result of our animal mind. If it weren't for humans, some other highly intelligent species would come along eventually, and there's no reason to think that species would necessarily be any better. Out there in the vast cosmos, there are thousands of other advanced civilizations, and no doubt within those civilizations there are individuals who are thinking that their dominant species is the worst thing in the universe too.
The aforementioned traits (short-sightedness and tribalism in particular) were useful to us in our early eras, and there's a reason why it remained with us throughout our evolution, and many animals share them too. In caveman times, long term goals weren't really a thing, especially considering the relatively short lifespan. Goals mainly consisted of hunt, gather, clothe, sleep, find shelter, mate, and defend tribe, which are all short-term goals, and really all we needed at that time. But nowadays, these traits hinder us far more than help, and they are the main causes of why we act terribly.
Are there evil humans? No doubt. But most humans are not, and the harm they cause is not done out of malice, it's done out of the flaws of our brains that did not evolve to be able to comprehend living in a complex society with moral dilemmas, social issues, and advanced understandings of scientific phenomenon.
As for the Vegans who lambaste humans as evil monsters yet tend to put animals (aside from maybe parasites) on pedestals as innocent, this isn't accurate either. While granted, it is something of a myth that nature is nothing but a brutal unforgiving place (nature documentaries have let us astray), that does not mean there is any shortage of violence and death that goes on between animals.
Misanthropes will point to immoral human behavior, such as men abusing raping women, people killing one another, discrimination such as racism, sexism, homophobia, engagement in warfare, etc. and use this as a justification for their hatred. While we've already addressed how these things have in general been on the decline, these actions will often be attached to human nature as a whole, and do remain as problems for the species.
Of course, this is all true. But if you're going to look at the horrible things humans do, it's only fair to look at the horrible things animals do too.
The following is an excerpt from Steven Pinker's book The Better Angels of Our Nature, which discusses the behavior of our closest relatives, Chimpanzees, as observed by British primatologist Jane Goodall in the 1970s, when they deal with members outside of their own tribes.
When a group of male chimpanzees encounters a smaller group or a solitary individual from another community, they don't hoot and bristle, but take advantage of their numbers. If the stranger is a sexually receptive adolescent female, they may groom her and try to mate. If she is carrying an infant, they will often attack her and kill and eat the baby. And if they encounter a solitary male, or isolate one from a small group, they will go after him with murderous savagery. Two attackers will hold down the victim, and the others will beat him, bite off his toes and genitals, tear flesh from his body, twist his limbs, drink his blood, or rip out his trachea. In one community, the chimpanzees picked off every male in a neighboring one, an event that if it occurred among humans we would call genocide. Many of the attacks aren't triggered by chance encounters but are the outcome of border patrols in which a group of males quietly seek out and target any solitary male they spot. Killings can also occur within a community. A gang of males may kill a rival, and a strong female, aided by a male or another female, may kill a weaker one's offspring.
So given the violent behavior chimpanzees, you might be inclined to hate them too just as you would humans, but regardless of their behavior, none of that will change the fact that chimpanzees are still moral agents that deserve consideration, just like humans.
Yes this is just one example, but it isn't limited to just chimpanzees killing and maiming each other. Sexual coercion has been observed in fish, mammals, birds, and even insects, infanticide is fairly common (especially in lions), and tend to be willing to kill others, both members of their species and not, and even engage in war (including with the chimpanzees). The fact that most misanthropes are ignorant of this shows their ignorance of basic zoology. The horrible things we do are merely extensions of our primitive behavior, just on a larger scale due to our evolution.
Some misanthropes are a little more consistent and will include predators in that list of immoral beings, but prey animals aren't necessarily harmless either. They engage in a lot of the immoral behavior mentioned before (killing members of their own species, rape, etc.), and just because they aren't evolved to hunt and kill animals, they are by no means harmless. Also, there likely aren't any 100% herbivorous animals either, as animals such as deer, hippos, and even our beloved cows, have all been observed eating small amount of meat when presented with the opportunity.
If you want to counter that by saying that overall, the happiness felt by animals is probably outweighed by any of the harms and evils that they do to each other. Sure, bad things happen to animals, but a lot of good happens in nature. Animals are always having sex, enjoying their favorite foods, spending time with their friends and families, grooming each other, playing with their children, singing in groups, and relaxing in the comfortable weather they're adjusted to.
This is all true, so granting it's completely fair and valid. And along with granting that, it also has to be granted that despite all the horrible things human beings tend to do to each other, there's plenty of happiness and altruism to go around. From friends and family loving and appreciating each other, a new parent looking into their firstborn child's eyes for the first time, good samaritans helping those in duress, appreciating the Earth's natural beauty, pursuing intellectual and artistic endeavors, fighting for good causes they care about, enjoying fantastic music, and doing their small part in helping move society forward.
After that point, the only reason why you wouldn't be compelled by this argument is because of some subconscious appeal to nature fallacy (remember, natural does not equal good) you automatically apply to animals, where it's fine for animals to do what they do since they're animals and part of the natural world, and bad for humans to do what they do since they're humans, separate from the natural world. For that, there really isn't any response since it's based on such an irrational thought process that would need to be completely eradicated from your brain in order to reach you (though at this point, it's safe to assume you're just a lost cause).
Effects of misanthropy on activism
If even after all that reasoning explaining why misanthropy is a naive and idiotic worldview you still insist on hating humanity with a burning passion (which in your case trumps any sense), all we ask is that you keep these misanthropic views to yourself. We do not care how strongly you believe them, we do not care how right and justified you think you are in holding these views, and we do not care if you think more Vegans should take on a similar mindset. The fact of the matter is, misanthropy is viewed as an abhorrent worldview by society at large, and society at large is who we need to reach in order to get the world off of animal agriculture. If you put off society from Veganism because you're associating it with such a view, you are making it significantly harder to reach them in order for them to cut down or even eliminate their consumption of animal products, and this is something that really hurts animals. That's what we DO care about. Arguably, it might be a good idea if you don't participate in outreach at all. Since our thoughts manifest themselves in our physical behaviors, people pick up on mannerisms, tone of voice, and use of language. It doesn't matter how sound or effective your argument is (though if your a misanthrope, it's not likely you would understand a proper ethical argument), if someone views you as a hateful and negative person, they are unlikely to listen what you have to say.
Case in point, retired animal rights activist Gary Yourofsky. Instead of retreading all of the problems with Gary, it is important to explain how misanthropy can cause an effective Vegan activist to lose their way.
Near the end, it was hard to tell if it was still about the animals, or if it started becoming less about them, and more about his narcissistic hatred of humanity. While Gary's activism had some flaws, particularly in his use of bad arguments (e.g. gross-out, humans are herbivores, etc.), opposition to animal welfare laws, his unwillingness to acknowledge any sort of moral gradience (i.e. a being is either in the circle of compassion or is not), his speeches have been massively impactful, and are credited with converting tens of thousands to Veganism, as well as inspiring hundreds to get into Vegan activism. However, along with all that came his extreme and uncompromising misanthropic views, which were expressed with hyperbole (e.g. "...we are the nastiest, filthiest, deadliest parasitic-organisms to ever infect The Universe!"). And instead of showing dismay or disappointment for being compelled to hold these views, he instead views it as a badge on honor, proudly parading his misanthropy as much as he could.
Did Gary really not consider for a second that these views do not portray Vegans in a negative light, and thus would push potential vegans away from considering reducing or eliminating their consumption of animal products, and hurt more animals in the long run? Or did he just not care? If the former, that would make Gary either suspiciously injudicious, or (and the probably more likely answer, if the former is accepted as the explanation for his behavior), just very, very stupid. If the latter, then that means (at least after he became a big name in the animal rights movement and gained a large following) he stopped doing the activism to help animals, and more just because he wanted to boast about how much he hated humans, and used the abuse humans enforce upon animals as a sort of leverage to justify and reinforce it.
When he elected to retire in 2017, he primarily cited his misanthropy as his reason for quitting. See, when the activism in your movement is mainly dealing with people, you have to be able to recognize each individual person as unique, with different perspectives and ways to be convinced. While you don't have to absolutely love and adore every human, realize that everyone deserves a chance, and that most people are not bad people, and are just misguided and often ignorant of thee harm they're doing. Being optimistic and positive about interactions is self-sustaining; If you view people as good (or at least not bad), and are able to see them able to change, that will keep you motivated and productive in your activism.
While Gary certainly did understand this at one point, as time went on, he was more focused on fostering his hate for humanity that he started to despise humanity as a whole, which made him less likely to connect and identify with people, and therefore burned him out on activism and thus retire, forgetting the victims due to his own misguided misanthropy. If you watch the videos he posted during his temporary return from retirement, you'll notice that the vast majority of them are just about how much he thinks humans are terrible and disgusting, and whatever little mention of the animals that exists in them are done within a misanthropic context (i.e. pointing out animal mistreatment just as a way to frame humans as evil).
If you're like Gary, and carry around this bitter and resentful attitude of the human race, you simply will not be a good representative of veganism and a positive influence on others. If you believe otherwise, you're seriously mistaken.
How to prevent yourself from becoming a misanthrope
It can admittedly be difficult to not hate people when you hear people say stupid things, seeing the cruelties humans take part in, and the apparent stifles in progress (not just for animals).
It's not that you hate humans necessarily, you just hate evil and human stupidity. Realize that most people are not anti-Vegan, and can be persuaded to reduce their harm to animals. People like to make jokes and complain about Veganism and animal rights, not necessarily because they hate Vegans or oppose animals, it's mainly done a way to not have to critically think about a serious immoral action they constantly take part in, and not feel bad about it.
When you see something stupid and dumb on the internet about Veganism, whether it's a stupid Tweet by a high-profile person, a braindead take on Reddit with five thousand upvotes, or Youtube comments, don't dwell on it, don't let it upset you, and don't bother trying to write a response, since these actions are fruitless and counterproductive. The best thing to do in that situation is just shake your head and move on. Being angry about it is not going to help matters.
To clarify, feeling angry about these sorts of things is not necessarily a bad response, and in fact can be a very useful and productive response; It's just that you have to channel that anger into activism and a drive for positive change, not use that as a justification for resentment and hatred, and withdrawing yourself from the world and therefore unable to make an actual difference.
The best way to not become a bitter misanthrope is to have a more realistic and maybe even optimistic view of humanity, instead of an incredibly pessimistic one. Understand that most humans are not fundamentally evil, are capable of change, are capable of compassion, and don't like causing harm. Recognize the progress that has been made in human history, in terms of declining violence, advancements in technology and medicine, and the expansion of rights and democracy globally. And also engaging in face-to-face activism and seeing how people are willing to change, are able to change, for the animals and the environment, certainly helps you stay motivated. Staying hopeful for change drives progress, and other is every reason to believe it will happen, despite any setbacks.
