What about indigenous and subsistence cultures?

The philosophical literature distinguishes between subsistence use of animals (where no viable alternative exists) and commercial exploitation in industrialized food systems. Scholars including Will Kymlicka and Sue Donaldson (Zoopolis, 2011) have argued for a political theory of animal rights that explicitly accommodates indigenous relationships with animals. Food sovereignty frameworks — such as those articulated by La Via Campesina and the Indigenous Food Systems Network — emphasize community self-determination in food choices, which may or may not include animal products depending on local ecology and culture. The key ethical distinction is between necessity and choice: veganism asks people to avoid animal exploitation where it is genuinely possible and practicable to do so, not where it would compromise survival or cultural integrity under already-oppressive conditions.

Indigenous Scholars on Veganism

This debate is too important to discuss without centering indigenous voices. Several indigenous scholars have engaged directly with the intersection of veganism and indigenous food traditions:

Dr. Margaret Robinson (Mi'kmaw, Lennox Island First Nation)

Dr. Robinson, a professor at Dalhousie University, argues that her veganism is rooted in Mi'kmaw values, not imposed upon them. In her 2013 paper "Veganism and Mi'kmaq Legends," she proposes a postcolonial ecofeminist reading of Mi'kmaw stories as a basis for plant-based eating. She notes that traditional Mi'kmaw stories show regret at animal death and emphasize gratitude, respect, and responsibility. The Mi'kmaw concept of "M'sit No'maq" (all my relations) summarizes a worldview in which humans are part of a network of related beings, not separate from or superior to other animals.

Robinson argues that commercial fisheries are more at odds with Mi'kmaw values than modern veganism, because commercial-scale fishing separates consumers from the processes of catching and killing — whereas traditional fishing placed that responsibility directly on the individual hunter (Robinson, 2013).

Kim TallBear (Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate)

Dr. TallBear, a professor at the University of Alberta, engages critically with food politics from an indigenous perspective. She has noted the complexity of veganism in indigenous contexts, observing that Western veganism can share with scientists and Christianity a notion of a hierarchy of life that does not resonate in many indigenous worldviews. Her work emphasizes that indigenous food sovereignty is about self-determination, not about adopting any single dietary framework imposed from outside.

A. Breeze Harper

In Sistah Vegan (2010), Harper argues that Black and indigenous veganism can itself be a tool of decolonization — reclaiming pre-colonial plant-based food traditions that were disrupted by colonialism and the forced adoption of Western industrial food systems.

Food Insecurity Data

The food sovereignty argument cannot be separated from the material reality of indigenous food insecurity:

• Approximately 1 in 4 Native Americans experience food insecurity, compared to 1 in 7 Americans overall (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2023)

• Remote First Nations communities in Canada report food insecurity prevalence of 43-58% (Neufeld et al., 2021)

• In some regions, the statistics are even more stark: a 2019 study found that 92% of Native American households in parts of northern California and southern Oregon experience food insecurity

• Approximately 70% of Indigenous people in the US live in urban areas, and nearly 1 in 2 experience food insecurity — roughly 4 times the national average

These numbers demonstrate that for many indigenous communities, the question of diet is inseparable from the question of access. Advocating veganism to communities facing food insecurity is tone-deaf at best and harmful at worst.

La Via Campesina and Food Sovereignty

La Via Campesina, the world's largest movement of peasant farmers and indigenous food producers (representing over 200 million members across 81 countries), coined the term "food sovereignty" in 1996. Their framework defines food sovereignty as:

"The right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems."

This framework explicitly prioritizes community self-determination in food choices. It may or may not include animal products depending on local ecology, culture, and available resources. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants (2018) further codified this as a human right (La Via Campesina, 2021).

The Nuanced Position

The honest position requires holding multiple truths simultaneously:

1. Factory farming is overwhelmingly a product of Western industrial food systems, not indigenous communities. Indigenous peoples are often among the least responsible for the harms veganism critiques.

2. Some indigenous scholars see veganism as compatible with indigenous values (Robinson, Harper), while others see it as another form of Western imposition (TallBear's critique). Both perspectives deserve respect.

3. Food sovereignty means indigenous communities decide for themselves. Outside groups — including vegan organizations — advocating specific diets to indigenous communities echoes colonial patterns of controlling indigenous food systems.

4. Using indigenous food practices to justify non-indigenous supermarket meat purchases is appropriation. The "but indigenous people eat meat" argument is overwhelmingly deployed by non-indigenous people in wealthy nations with abundant plant-based alternatives.

---

Sources: Robinson (2013); Harper (2010); La Via Campesina (2021); CBPP (2023); Neufeld et al. (2021); Kymlicka & Donaldson, Zoopolis (2011).