Well, this http://theveganpensieve.wordpress.com/2012/12/23/veganism-or-nothing/ is the most white, middle class, secular and presumptuous thing I have read in a long time. The article, while very well written and eloquent, can be summed up with the statement 'HERP DERP ANIMAL PRODUCTS ARE BAD'. It's panoramic failure to grasp the breadth of humanity in its earnest and unrealistic manifesto would be laughable were its author and their supporters not so decisively staunch in their mission to be as white, middle class, presumptuous and secular as possible. A firm grasp of the situation at hand, from the point of view of a meat lover and animal eater, is a deadly thing for an abolitionist. There are knee-jerk reactionists who will just say 'I eat meat because I like it hurr durr', and really, there will be no real way of ever telling them they are wrong, because two stubborn mules will always be two stubborn mules. However, if you are armed with a slightly deeper grasp on the situation it allows you to better articulate your point. My point, in this case, is that abolition of all animal products from ones diet and lifestyle is a frankly ridiculous pipe dream, and is myopic to a fault when applied over a much larger population sample. To disregard tens of thousands of years of tradition, hundreds of thousands of years of evolution, tens of millions of livelihoods dependent on animal trade/consumption and hundreds of millions, if not billions, of individual human conditions, for your utopia of 'eating animals is bad', is tantamount to a deep misunderstanding, perhaps deliberately, of what the world is actually made of. It's easy for a middle class Caucasian (or similar) to sit in their first world nation and, perched atop their pedestal, perched atop a high horse, who is eating grass from the tallest peak of that countries moral high ground; tell other people that eating animals is at once morally bad, bad for you, unnecessary and evil. It's not easy, however, for these Johnny-come-vegans, to take stock in the far further reaching implementations of their battle-cry. The psychological, economical, scientific, moral and even religious asterisks that sit, perched beyond the last letter of their arguments like vultures waiting for a carcass, aren't going away, and literally (not probably) will never go away. What might come easily for one of these folk - abolition of animal products rolls right off their tongue - doesn't necessarily mean it will be as simple for, say, their neighbour or their relative or all of their relatives or even all of the people in their town or city. Applying ones personal standard of anything to a large sample group and expecting to not meet any resistance in the form of ignorance, differing financial situations, or religious beliefs, or even in this case, differing scientific beliefs; displays a thoughtlessness and ignorance that is usually reserved for the most pious of the spiritual faiths of the world. If you 'can't see' how 'other people' (everyone) simply can't see your point of view about abolition of animal products, it might be because you have your blinkers on, and not the other way around. The abolition argument, while entirely noble if you meet the criteria I mentioned at the top of this article, is simply not for everyone. There is a far deeper psychological undercurrent that you have completely neglected to observe or give any credo to in your attempt to appear steadfast in your mission. There are incalculable financial hurdles facing a 'veganism or nothing' approach to animal welfare that you have ignored, pushed under the rug, and failed to offer literally ANY solutions for in any arguments I have ever seen. There are deep-seated religious practices which, while I disagree with all of them strongly, you've chosen to not address in your bold statements. If you want your cause to have both momentum and purpose, it's going to have to not only be far more convincing than it is at present, but it's going to have to offer up solutions which I would, without hesitation, suggest are both impossible to implement and grossly ignorant to even suggest. The abolition of animal products might be right for you, and it may even be right for your friends and your family, but I'd be willing to bet that you can't offer me any reason why it's 'right for everyone', without neglecting, in whole or in part, some or all of the far larger issues (psychology, economy, evolution, religion, tradition) that seem so easy to disregard in an online blog, but present a sheer wall of resistance when applied to the real world. While its nobility cannot and should not be questioned, the abolition of animal products from ones lifestyle entirely is entirely an ignoble argument the second it's feet-first approach to neglecting other factors is applied to anyone but the person making the argument itself. In this respect, it is both unconvincing and frankly naive, and the force of its message is lost in the void between personal utopia and the seemingly deliberate negation of acknowledgment of an unscalable mountain of those niggling roadblocks to progress; the minds of other people. If I can't offer any solutions to help you, and I shouldn't have to, you are going to need to think of some on your own before your point you are trying to make can indeed no longer be rebutted with a single line troll answer on a blog. As it stands, veganism will never, ever gain enough ground to stop even a significant minority from using animal products in the future who use them now, especially those in nations where their options are far more severely limited than your great american dream offers you.