Are Single Issue Campaigns Really That Bad?

Of all the campaigns undertaken within the animal advocacy movement, the single issue campaign is the most common.

Supporters of this type of campaigning justify their continued use by saying things like at least we are doing something, every little bit helps, baby steps, and the old faithful one, the world won’t go vegan overnight.

Whilst there really isn’t anything to argue about when single focus groups launch these campaigns, they do leave a rather unpleasant taste in the mouth when they are promoted by so-called vegan or animal rights groups.

When these groups focus on a single cause as something that is more important than what other animals are enduring, they are literally elevating the status of those animals above all others.

Take for example some of the recent campaigns by local vegan and/or animal rights groups, and how their activities are likely to cause confusion among those who care about animals.

One moment they are protesting Lennon Bros Circus’ use of lions and exotic animals, yet so far I haven’t heard a mention of a protest, let alone media campaign about Hudsons Circus’ use of Macaws, Buffalo, Llamas, Zebras or horses in their shows. Though this could be because their focus is on greyhounds.

This implies that how the lions are kept and used is more important than Macaws, Buffalo, Llamas, Zebras or horses, with a few greyhounds being more important than all of them.

As I mentioned in this piece, a Queensland group has a very confusing stance when it comes to horses.

It appears to be acceptable to use horses for racing, so long as 1% of revenue is set aside for the re-homing when their racing career is over. Though there doesn’t seem to have been too much of a fuss made about the proposed Quarter Horses racing industry, and this group seems perfectly happy for horses to be used in Cavalia and The Outback Spectacular.

There will be supporters of these groups going on the defensive now saying that I am cherry picking one or two campaigns to further my position. Except it doesn’t stop there.

For the past few months, their focus seems to be on stopping a building being built in Underwood in Queensland that will become another greyhound racing track. According to Animal Liberation Queensland, it is alright to keep these animals as pets, which potentially leads to the deaths of other animals as most commercial dog food isn’t plant based, just so long as they aren’t to be kept for racing.

The reality is that they are just changing one cage for another.

Yes it isn’t acceptable that a few thousand greyhounds may be killed every year in Queensland due to racing, though that doesn’t make their lives any more or less important than the thousands of other animals that are killed every day in Queensland.

Or how about calves and cattle?

Supposedly it isn’t acceptable to use them in calf roping events at rodeos, yet no mention is made of the thousands killed every week for food.

Another group in Queensland wants us to boycott Air France because they may or may not transport primates for use in research. Yet this group is eerily quiet when it comes to boycotting Queensland Rail because they transport substantially more cattle to be killed for food.

[GARD]Can you see how confusing things get when these single issues are promoted?

I am wondering if these groups really understand what speciesism is, or if they think it is just a new buzz word to throw around, whilst pretending they care…

Granted it may take some time to get a person to adopt a vegan lifestyle. Whist it is understood by most, it shouldn’t be used as a deterrent to promoting veganism.

What we all have to remember and focus on is that for every person that does go vegan that is one less that will go to greyhound races, rodeos, circuses, eat eggs, dairy, etc.

Yet if they are able to stop one person from going to a rodeo, circus or horse race, there is no guarantee that they will stop consuming other animals.

This is why promoting veganism should be the only option.

What are your thoughts?