https://youtu.be/Kh6QUWsEZJg
Nothing will ever stop animal rights activists from speaking up for the victims of the animal holocaust! Non-vegans have blood on their hands.Be on the right...
Reminder that tone police don't understand disruptive protest. Reminder that you're in a vegan community.
This style of activism is harmful to the cause. No one in that restaurant is going to think "Huh, those people had a point. I will consider their message more." They'll simply resolve that vegans are crazy and annoying, and be pushed further than ever from converting. Honestly shouting like this is just performative for the people doing it. The best ways to be an activist imo are engaging people personally (like Earthling Ed's good-faith debates) or even just presenting people with information and going for numbers, relying on people engaging in self-reflection on their own.
I'm supportive of a diversity of tactics not just for particular 'brands' activists are given, but for differing response to particular people. Tash has many forms of activism, many of which are far less disruptive and agressive. There are a few things I think you are failing to consider.
This particular individual is a proud animal abuser with a massive financial incentive to continue his actions. This particular person outright banned all Vegans from their restaurant because of a review he didn't like that simply pointed out the owner's mistake in forgetting a pre-arranged meal and overcharging for a barebones last minute offering. Banning a group of people with a shared ethical position in any other case would be obviously discriminatory. Sorry, someone who is outspokenly anti-Vegan is not going to have a compassionate and understanding response no matter how kindly you approach them.
The business owner themself set the bad faith precedent. There was no discussion to be had at this event. Of note however, post this event, Tash has since had tv debates with the business owner. He is still incredibly bad faith. Some discourse needs ridicule. There are some nazi's you'd probably be fine with seeing punched, and I don't see how this is all that different.
The goal is to generate outrage, clicks, and attention. For that audience, it is the only way they will be reminded that people oppose their actions, and is in that respect the only way they will have any opportunity to try and figure out why they would conduct themself in that matter. Because of this event, Tash got several interviews on television to talk about animal rights to the general public, all of which went incredibly well. That's huge. Far more than the average activist ever gets the chance to do. Most of the viewers will go "she's crazy" sure, but if its that or nothing, I'd choose the former. She reached someone I'm sure. Likely more than a street activist one on one discussion generally does. Because of this event, a large population of people got to listen to a message they never otherwise would.
If you still don't think this a massive W for Veganism outreach, idk what to tell you. We don't just need a bunch of Earthling Ed's running around. Some people don't have empathy. Some people don't care about being logically consistent. Some people will never approach this topic in good faith. Sometimes you just have to tell those people to cut it the hell out and shut the hell up, and unlike almost any activist, she is willing to put her safety at risk in order to make a bafoon of the shameful restauranteur and make carnism appear as it is - inherently violent. Sometime shame is appropriate. Btw, the owner literally assaulted Tash after a second protest at his business. Seems shame-worthy to me.
Thank you for the context about the situation and its aftermath. I'm sorry if I was too quick to judge this, I was just going off of my personal experiences. Vegans have a reputation for being insufferable that impedes our efforts to convince others, and stuff like this reinforces that. I've found that people are plenty aware of the moral arguments for veganism, so simply getting attention is not so helpful. The main obstacle is that people just don't want to go through the self-reflection of why they should follow through with making a change.
I'd agree that trying to convince someone who is decisely opposed to a concept is a waste of time, and the owner seems like a huge asshole. But his more reasonable customers observing the actions of someone with the moral high ground can still be swayed. Anyway, it sounds like this has enabled a very positive net good regardless of what I thought of the original method, so I am happy to have been wrong.