Home / Weak arguments / The cause as a tool
"More expensive meat is bad for ordinary people."
They use the animal movement for another purpose, or pretend two goals never conflict.
Why it is weak
When the price of animal products rises, the drop in consumption is usually treated only as sad news, and not also as what it is: fewer animals killed.
The obvious demand of an animal advocate would not be to keep prices low, but for every form of animal exploitation to become more expensive to the same degree, so that consumption does not shift to eggs and milk.
Improving the lives of poor populations is a legitimate goal. The mistake is pretending there is never tension with animal suffering, always leaving the burden on those who have no voice to complain.
How to say it better
Recognize when two legitimate goals conflict and discuss how to resolve it, instead of pretending the conflict does not exist.