Editorial: The (perhaps unwittingly) chilling effects of vegan protests

Vegan protesters occupy the chilled meat aisle at St Lukes Countdown. File photo / Delta Wolfepine

Editorial

EDITORIAL

Animal activist vegans are stepping up their protests at supermarkets and other meat product retailers.

This will inevitably lead to shoppers being blocked while about their rightful business, losing patience and more incidents of lashing out at the protesters. From their words and actions so far, it does appear this is what protesters want.

Fact is, many supermarket customers are already highly strung with busy lives, even before they enter the store. It's recognised these are stressful places, with some outlets trialling "quiet times" for the elderly or those with autism spectrum disorder.

Whether we like to admit it or not, the activists are right. Animals are being slaughtered to provide food we often don't need, lack appreciation for and waste. Nutrition can be amply, if not as economically, provided without raising captive animals for the purpose of devouring them.

But vegans are not only right, they are already winning, as our Review feature today shows. The Economist, in it's annual look ahead late last year, declared 2019 the Year of the Vegan, stating: "Where millennials lead, businesses and governments will follow". The number of US consumers identifying as vegan grew from 1 per cent in 2014 to 6 per cent 2017, a 600 per cent increase, according to GlobalData.

Vegan activists standing in the front of the meat section at Countdown while holding signs and chanting "it's not food, it's violence" are being confrontational and obstructive.

Such is the obstinance of human nature, these protests may have the opposite effect with some social media users declaring they would throw a big steak on the barbecue as a response.

Protests are meant to disrupt, they have little impact if they don't, but there is a difference between getting a message across and impeding people's right to stock up on provisions for themselves and their families. Everyone should respect freedom of choice, even for those choosing what we don't agree with.

It is one thing to protest a lack of change, or progress being too slow, it's entirely another thing to rub people's nose in it while already making effective gains.

It would seem unnecessary and to appear as simply showboating a superior ethical ego.