I’ve seen a few (not many) people online fawn over how Khaled bin AlWaleed converted to veganism, and even got his dad to do the same. There’s also talk that he plans to open a chain of plant-based restaurants throughout the Arab world.
I’m curious to hear what people think about such figures. This guy is directly descended from the founder of Saudi Arabia – on both his parents’ sides. He’s part of a family that’s brought an entire country – Yemen – on the brink of death, with 2+ million people at risk of dying from hunger. Not to mention he’s part of one of the most brutal, draconian regimes anywhere in the world.
The same goes for places like, say, Tel Aviv, hailed as the “vegan capital of the world”. Is that what we really want to talk about, and not the hideous apartheid regime erected by Israel in the West Bank and Gaza? Gaza, for example, is an open-air prison, where people are left to die, with no access to even drinking water.
And yet we find popular YouTubers celebrating both AlWaleed (who flew in Dr Michael Greger to Saudi Arabia just for a consult) and Tel Aviv as bastions of veganism.
I’ve heard the argument that neither the restaurants in Tel Aviv nor Prince AlWaleed are personally liable for their government’s crimes. I don’t really buy this. I mean I somewhat understand it re-Tel Aviv, but someone like AlWaleed is literally part of the government. He has plenty of power and privilege to relinquish ties with his family and use his newfound platform to bring attention to the hideous regime in Saudi Arabia. But as far as I can tell, he hasn’t said a single thing about Yemen (not to mention Khashoggi, Saudi-Israel ties etc).
In my opinion, in these contexts, veganism effectively serves as a way to whitewash serious crimes that are far worse than the animal lives these individuals/groups are potentially saving. But I’m curious to hear what people think.
I don’t think veganism really works to whitewash the crimes of either the Israeli or Saudi Arabian government. Even for vegans, those crimes are probably some of the first things they think of when we hear of those countries. It is good that Tel Aviv has a decent vegan scene, and it is good that Al Waleed is having some vegan influence. However, I don’t think veganism is considered so good to most people that it really does anything to mask those issues (and it certainly doesn’t make up for them.) For what it’s worth (not much) I do agree that the praise of Al Waleed is worse since Tel Aviv is made up of many more parts than the Saudi Arabian royalty and I don’t think the average Israeli resident has as much power as Al Waleed.
Agreed! I should have phrased my post better – when I said “veganism effectively serves to…” I should have said “these figures’ veganism effectively serves to…”. I.e. I didn’t mean to make a statement about veganism as a whole at all.
And yep, agreed on Tel Aviv too. The shop owners there have little, if any, agency compared to AlWaleed.
I don’t spend my time defending bad people or actions just because the person happens to be “vegan” (I feel hesitant to call someone’s who has shown blatant disregard for human life as vegan rather than simply plant-based, tbh).
Lots of people who share traits with me are assholes but that’s just because lots of people are assholes in general.
Relieved to hear. I was just ticked off by a good number of people online coming to the Prince’s defence.
Veganism is a moral philosophy that looks to reduce the suffering and exploitation of all organisms, not just a diet.
Anything can be used as distraction, veganism is not suddenly evil because some assholes adopted and advertise the label.
It is also a mischaracterisation that vegans put the lives of animals over people. It is the case that animals are routinely treated as objects and made to suffer just to satisfy peoples taste buds, or for entertainment, or to wear their corpses. Humans are animals and vegans do not tolerate their suffering or exploitation either.
It is obvious the distraction has worked on you. Veganism does not whitewash anything. People are not stupid. Not everyone is going to risk getting killed by speaking out against atrocities in their own back yard. If they cared they would have done so already.
I don’t think it’s fair to say OP has ‘obviously’ been distracted by it but I otherwise agree.
No, probably not. I could not figure out a better way to phrase my impression at the time, but I also cannot figure out what kind of response OP expected with that post.
I do not suspect OP is happy with anything we said.
This guy is directly descended from the founder of Saudi Arabia – on both his parents’ sides. He’s part of a family that’s brought an entire country – Yemen – on the brink of death
How could it possibly be reasonable to judge a person based on their lineage?
Not to mention he’s part of one of the most brutal, draconian regimes anywhere in the world.
What does “part of” mean here? He’s setting/enabling those policies personally?
He has plenty of power and privilege to relinquish ties with his family and use his newfound platform to bring attention to the hideous regime in Saudi Arabia.
It’s pretty common for people to get involved in just one cause. I live in America but I’m not spending a lot of time speaking out about treatment of Native Americans even though as an average American I’ve benefited from stuff like their land being taken away. Maybe he, I, we all should do more of that kind of thing but just the fact that we aren’t actively and vocally speaking out about it doesn’t mean we’re responsible for it or endorsing it.
So far, none of your criticism seemed to be about anything the guy did personally. I’m not familiar with him, maybe he’s actually a terrible person. If you’re going to criticize or condemn him, you should pick something he actually did rather than who his parents are or the fact that he was born into some kind of position of privilege.
