'Vegan Capitalism' by Tom Harris

Anti-capitalism and veganism are two sides of the same coin. Maximum profit from minimal investment is the reason industrial slaughter exists, and for generations being vegan meant avoiding multinationals. Companies like McDonalds hated us as much as we did them; they didn’t even make vegan fries. But the rise of ‘vegan capitalism’ has ushered in a new era, and it poses a new question. Are we adapting, and do we need to?

In 2017, I finished a five year Anti-Social Behaviour Order. This followed a five year prison sentence I received during a coordinated attack by the British state to end the anti-vivisection movement. As a result, I had been isolated from other animal liberation activists for the best part of a decade. Dozens of my friends were in the same situation, or worse. As I emerged into the cold light of freedom, the movement I grew up in had all but vanished. Something new, and in some ways better, had replaced it. For the first time since the 1960’s a new generation of activists had appeared with little guidance from those who came before.

Before my arrest, my activism consisted of deconstructing businesses. I routinely follow the financial press, and in those pages I noticed another change; one which slipped under the radar of many.

As my ASBO ended, the western-world’s plant-based revolution began. The catalyst wasn’t the animal liberation movement, but an unusual research project. The Wellcome Trust and Oxford University are a sinister pairing, responsible for countless depraved and violent experiments on non-human animals. But this time their study took place amid the aisles of Sainsbury’s supermarkets. They placed veggie food on the same shelves as meat, gave vouchers to shoppers who chose vegetarian options, and provided recipes cards to help shoppers eat less meat. Their aim was to increase plant-based eating in an attempt to slow the looming climate crisis. Through this study, influx of plant-based foods onto supermarket shelves had begun.

... Now however, these corporations are converting to plant-based of their own volition. Now, the fastest way to animal liberation appears to be accelerating that change.

Months later, Bill Gates, Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz, and Asia’s third wealthiest man Li Ka-shing invested over $75 million in Impossible foods. Plant-based egg manufacturer Hampton Creek added senior employees of Dupont and Heinz to their board and secured funding from investors including Yahoo cofounder Jerry Yang. Companies such as Beyond Meat saw similar investment surges, as capitalist grandees rushed to back plant-based foods. As a result of their efforts, between 2016 and 2019, Britain’s vegan population soared from roughly 250,000 to over 600,000. Capitalism isn’t reacting to the plant-based revolution; it is driving it.

Multinationals often present as faceless hives of evil. SHAC was feared by the establishment because we recognised that these companies are actually comprised of individuals. Decisions aren’t made by a collective, unaccountable consciousness, but by people with hobbies, biases, families, and lives. Over time, those people change, both literally and figuratively.

Take the CEO of bakery chain Gregg’s. After watching The Game Changers, he adopted a plant-based diet and began working to create plant-based versions of Gregg’s bestselling products. The CEO of KFC switched to eating plant-based burgers, acknowledging ‘they’re as good as the regular burger.’ Unilever subsidiary Knorr launched a ‘Cheat on Meat’ strategy, inspired by their CEO’s vegan daughter. Unilever themselves sell many of their plant-based foods at a loss, to lower demand for animal products.

'The Game Changers' - the film that inspired Greggs' CEO to go plant-based

Not so long ago, the fastest way to total animal liberation was to tear downs these corporations and replace them with something better. There was nothing in McDonalds for us to eat even if we wanted to. Now however, these corporations are converting to plant based of their own volition. Now, the fastest way to animal liberation appears to be accelerating that change.

Personally, I am idealistically anti-capitalist. I routinely reject multinationals in favour of smaller, more ethical brands whenever I can. However, I have met few people who practice anti-capitalism as rigidly as many preach it. Who do you know who grows all their own food on squatted land? Even dumpster diving and shoplifting rely on the existence of capitalism. Someone’s location, household budget, privilege, and a host of other reasons dictate their ability to live off entirely ethical products. We are all forced to make uncomfortable compromises, and each of us has our own, often wobbly red lines.

Twenty years ago, I regularly enjoyed a cooked vegan breakfast at roadside café Little Chef on my way to or from an action. The company predominantly sold meat products, yet I ate alongside prominent activists from the largest animal liberation campaigns of the last fifty years, including several ALF veterans. None of the people who shared a table with me in Little Chef would have entered McDonalds without a megaphone, or a dried-out sponge to block their toilets. Somewhere between Little Chef and McDonalds is a level of capitalism many of us are willing to tolerate.

McDonalds’ became the face of evil in 1986 when London Greenpeace created their infamous ‘What’s wrong with McDonald’s?’ leaflet. They clearly and concisely made their case from every progressive angle. They detailed the company’s involvement in deforestation, worker exploitation, child labour, plastic pollution, and violent farming practices. The leaflet caused a stir, London Greenpeace were dragged through the courts as McDonalds attempted to defend their collapsing reputation. By the time the ‘McLibel’ trial was addressed in the European Court of Human Rights fifteen years later, the company insisted that ‘times have changed and so has McDonald’s.’ A lot of their changes were flagrant greenwashing, but how much has changed? We know they still murder billions of non-human animals, but do they still exploit children and chop down rainforests?

'McLibel' - the book documenting the infamous McLibel case in the UK: 1986

Their chicken supplier, Cargill does both, and far more besides. More and more multinationals are driving the plant-based revolution to slow the climate crisis, but Cargill are doing the opposite. Alongside Heifer International, their ‘Hatching Hope’ initiative targets deprived areas of developing nations. Here they pressure struggling families in plant-based communities to create poultry farms as they attempt to balance out the decrease of animal agriculture in the west. As the world’s leading chicken feed supplier, the scheme protects Cargill’s profits for generations to come, even as the world burns around them. On top of that, Cargill have deforested so much of the Amazon even McDonalds begged them to stop. Cargill agreed to spare the Cerrado region, but simply moved their operations to other vulnerable sections of the Amazon. They poison rivers, buy from farmers who use forced child labour, and own a phalanx of abattoirs, supplying a quarter of the US’ meat supply.

McDonalds’ relationship with Cargill warrants a continued boycott of the fast food chain, but does that complicate things? If we boycott McDonalds because of Cargill, then we should avoid Cargill’s other customers, including Tesco’s, Morrison’s, and the thousands of companies who purchase their cocoa, salt, coconut oil, animal feed, and meat.

We elevated McDonalds above these other companies because there was a targeted pressure campaign against them. The facts the campaign highlighted were so compelling they resonate decades later. This highlights the power of grassroots activism, and the importance of research and knowledge. It should also highlight the need to ensure our information is up to date and relevant.

'What's Wrong With McDonald's?' - the image that went with the leaflet, which sparked the beginning of the longest libel case in UK history

Another popular boycott shows how important this is. In the 1980’s, Unilever owned animal testing facilities. Animal Liberation Front (ALF) activists rescued dogs from these laboratories, and aboveground campaigners dropped banners from roofs and picketed their offices. The boycott began, and no animal liberationist would dream of buying their products. Unilever eventually sold their laboratories, but the boycott didn’t end. Why would it? They still paid others to test their products. Now however, Unilever subsidiaries ‘only’ test products when required by law to sell in regions such as China. Remarkably, Unilever are the primary force pressuring the Chinese authorities to end cosmetic testing once and for all. They have even funded XCellR8, who replace animal products used in ‘non-animal testing’ (such as bovine foetal serum) with fully plant-based ingredients.

This is no defence of Unilever, they are a terrible company who have done terrible things. But it should make us evaluate our position. Few of us dogmatically demand new vegans boycott every harmful company. Kraft Heinz are Unilever’s major competitor. They have a weaker policy on vivisection, own slaughterhouses, and are responsible for at least as many non-human deaths. Yet I rarely hear calls to boycott Tesco own-brand baked beans or Amoy soy sauce (both made by Heinz).

Unilever - a call to action regarding their affiliation with animal testing in the 1980s

Unilever - a call to action regarding their affiliation with animal testing in the 1980s

Once a pressure campaign convinces us that a company is the epitome of evil, is there any point at which we can accept they’ve changed? If McDonalds became fully plant-based, paid fair wages, and stopped exploiting their workers, would we still demand people boycotted them? If that is a possibility, there is clearly a long way to go. The launch of McDonald’s plant-based burger generated more revulsion from animal liberationists than the release of the Impossible burger, which is animal tested and not suitable for vegans.

And what of the once ethical companies who pursue the capitalist path? This year the company behind Veganaise sold themselves to dairy giant Danone. Old school staple Scheese supply Cargill customer Tesco with their own brand cheese, and Oatly recently got into bed with a consortium of investors including Amazon destroying Black Rock. Older vegans remember the scandal of the Body Shop selling out to L’Oreal, and many continue to boycott them for it now. However, the Body Shop were dropped by L’Oreal and are now owned by a vegan cosmetics company from Brazil. Over the next two years, The Body Shop are set to become fully vegan themselves. This is a stronger stance than Lush, who continue to exploit bees and sheep. And yet, the people who insist we boycott the Body Shop often suggest Lush as an alternative.

So what do we do? Do we prioritise our hatred of capitalism, or our desire for immediate animal liberation? Do we demand never-ending boycotts in hopes our withheld cash drives companies out of business? Do we follow the path of Animal Rebellion and target our boycotts and actions to pressure them to become less unethical? Or do we patronise these businesses to encourage them to change with their favourite thing: money?

Ultimately, that comes down to personal choice. Personally, I think we can disrupt capitalist multinationals without disrupting their plant-based ambitions. Our anger should be directed at their oppression, rather than their attempts to mitigate it. We should be furious that McDonalds sell meat, not that they sell plant-based burgers.

Those calling on perpetual boycotts of companies like McDonalds should do so through empathy and education rather than demands and dogma. People will only join a boycott if you provide them with solid reasons. Why is that company worse than any other? If new vegans, or plant-based eaters, aren’t convinced by your arguments, perhaps to them your information seems out of date and irrelevant. Shouting louder, or more aggressively won’t change that, but rethinking your arguments and doing some extra research might. Equally, if someone passionately pleads with you to avoid a specific company, listen to them, look into the issue, and draw your own conclusions.

More than anything, trans-generational boycotts demonstrate the efficacy of targeted pressure campaigns. The boycotts are a residual symptom, the true power came from the campaign itself. In four decades, nothing has caused McDonalds more damage than the simple truth, printed on a sheet of paper by London Greenpeace. But it was what people did with that piece of paper that really mattered. It is how they spread that information to the world.

Whether we want to push capitalism towards a plantbased future, or push it off a cliff, we need maximum knowledge, and we need maximum action. Attacking new vegans online will never help the animals, but forming or supporting targeted pressure campaigns to attack the systems of oppression which exploit them will.