‘Go Vegan!’: Is the movement’s dominant slogan slowing our progress towards a vegan world?
The challenge of the 'Go Vegan' slogan is that the general public may perceive 'going vegan' as more of a personal choice than a political position or boycott. When people think of our issue in terms of food and taste, this automatically reinforces extrinsic values (concern for individual wellbeing), and diminishes people’s ability to connect with intrinsic values (concern for the wellbeing of others). If 'vegan' is seen primarily as a lifestyle choice rather than part of a broader social justice movement, it lacks the urgency and collective imperative necessary to drive meaningful change. It also excludes our animal cousins from the frame, narrowing how people understand and connect with the issue.
ANIMAL THINK TANK: “Go vegan” has been a rallying cry for animal freedom advocates for decades. It’s a phrase that calls for action, urging people to embrace a way of living that honours and protects fellow animals. Popularised in the 1990s and early 2000s, it became a succinct slogan for a growing movement. But is it the most effective approach? Despite its simplicity, the phrase carries challenges that may limit its broader appeal… The statement “Go vegan” is an imperative one — an instruction or command for the audience to do something. Vegans and non-vegans alike value their sense of autonomy — the feeling that we have control over our own choices and actions.
There is a large body of psychological literature that suggests that imperative language can often be ineffective and counterproductive — resulting in increased anger, perceived threats to freedom, as well as alienation, message rejection, and derogation of the messenger. Psychologists refer to this phenomenon as reactance. When people feel their freedom is being restricted, they often resist the change, sometimes doubling down on their current behaviour instead. When confronted with a direct command, people may deploy a range of cognitive defences to protect their choices.
Rather than issuing directives, Animal Think Tank has found that posing questions can often be more effective. For example, in conversations or during outreach, instead of telling people why they should “Go vegan”, we might ask: “What if we treated all animals with the same love and respect as animal companions?”… In short, posing questions or leaving room for people to think through an issue is often more effective than delivering a command or a conclusion…
The identity associated with the word “vegan” often carries complex and deeply ingrained connotations. For many people, adopting the label “vegan” does not only signify a dietary change but marks a profound shift in identity. This can feel alien or even unappealing, as the word “vegan” has been burdened with cultural baggage. It is frequently associated with stereotypes or negative perceptions, such as vegans being judgmental, extreme, or overly militant.
The fear of becoming part of a vilified out-group is a real barrier to change. People are social beings; how we are perceived and whether we feel a sense of belonging is often a powerful overriding force. (And it’s linked with our primal instincts of not wanting to be thrown out of the ‘tribe’.) When an identity feels like it could isolate us or label us as a member of a controversial or stigmatised group, even the most well-meaning individuals may resist embracing it fully. Asking a non-vegan to “Go vegan” is like asking a lifelong Liverpool supporter to cheer for Manchester United — it’s not just a decision, it’s a challenge to their sense of self and belonging. A complete non-starter…
Another challenge “Go vegan” faces is that the general public may perceive ‘going vegan’ as more of a personal or lifestyle choice than a political position or boycott. Animal Think Tank conducted research analysing online conversations from 2019 to 2021 to explore how the terms “vegan” and “veganism” were discussed in public discourse. The findings revealed a clear distinction: “vegan” was predominantly associated with diet, lifestyle and food preparation, often framed as a personal choice or social trend, similar to being ‘gluten-free’ or ‘Paleo’. It frequently appeared in contexts related to cooking and food items like burgers or cupcakes.
In contrast, “veganism” was more strongly connected to ethical principles and social justice, appearing alongside terms like “environmentalism”, “activism” and “feminism.” This suggests that “Go vegan” may not be the most effective message for inspiring action. If “vegan” is seen primarily as a personal lifestyle choice rather than part of a broader social justice movement, it lacks the urgency and collective imperative necessary to drive meaningful change.
When people think of our issue in terms of food and taste, this automatically reinforces extrinsic values (concern for individual wellbeing), and diminishes people’s ability to connect with intrinsic values (concern for the wellbeing of others). It also excludes our animal cousins from the frame, narrowing how people understand and connect with the issue…
Instead of urging people to “Go vegan” in a way that can feel like a personal attack or an impossible identity leap, we can create a sense of inclusivity and show them that society as a whole is changing. (Reinforcing a social progress narrative.) We need to convey that people don’t need to leave their community or values behind — they are part of a collective journey. Our messaging should empower individuals to feel part of something bigger, not isolated or blamed. It should offer them the sense that their choices are connected to a larger shift in our culture. SOURCE…
RELATED VIDEO: