You say your a realist. But when people say "the worlds not going to turn vegan- we need to do what we can" because many people have said, if we can eliminate as much meat consumption as possible, that's realistic- or try get people to buy from farms, free range and what not. You say there's no point, but that is realistic. Your realistic when you want to be, but when it comes to ACTUALLY being realistic- because the world wont turn vegan, the world wont turn cruelty free.. Any success is good, and tiny little victory should be applauded. Because you seem to think your realistic, but your goals are not.
If you lived when the black slave trade was prevalent, you would be saying the exact same thing. You'd be protesting not to END the trade, but to make things 'better' and more 'humane' for the blacks ie. fewer beatings for the male slaves and less raping of the women slaves. Needless to say, that does not serve to end the enslavement, merely to prolong it because the paradigm that slavery is NOT ok isn't even being challenged.
Same thing goes for people who say 'we must be realistic'. Advocating meatless Mondays, fur-free Tuesdays, cage-free eggs, 'humane' meat/farms, vegetarianism, etc does NOT serve to challenge the paradigm that animals are not our slaves and that using them for our selfish reaons is wholly unethical. This mentally has seen the birth of the new welfarism where people honestly believe the only way to abolition is through incremental 'welfare' reforms that really only serve to assuage the guilt from the public about using and treating animals as mere property or as mere commodities.
I've asked people who love single-issue campaigns to name me one example in human history of a major injustice or discriminatory movement where welfare reforms actually led to the complete abolition of the practice and thus a complete shift of the paradigm through such reforms. No answer is forthcoming.
