Why wouldn’t they?

There are high caloric tasty vegan foods available, and when they are not it’s usually because they aren’t in high demand. How is the onus not on the consumer for picking animal products over those?

I’m all for vilifying the Animal Agriculture industry, they do some terrible stuff that goes way beyond the harm intrinsic to factory farms. But how exactly would they meet demand without factory farming, a brutally efficient way of producing animal products?

Governments should cease subsidizing animal products (maybe help their producers transition to other production), subsidize other foods more, and enact many other policy changes besides. But in most places it can be cheap and delicious to be vegan now. I don’t see how you get around personal choice being the main driver.

There are many problems in the world. Some people like to focus on the ones with the largest impacts, where you can personally do something about it (like veganism). Others like to focus on those where few cause grossly disproportionate harm, as they seem more addressable (like private jets).

Debating the merits of focusing on one problem over another is interesting, but in my mind the time for it is not when media is being shared that bolsters a cause without coming at the expense of any others. It hurts all movements when people always undermine issues, pointing to another more important from their perspective.

I highly doubt that most people think you aren’t doing enough for the environment. And I don’t understand why you’d assume that as the implication of this article.

In situations where the harm is caused by the industry’s approach, I’d agree. But animal products’ harm is pretty inextricable, and its production is caused by consumer demand.

Just because it’s always said doesn’t mean it isn’t sometimes true. Can’t you think of examples of views that were fringe but became the moral baseline?