Hitler may have had a diet restricting meat most of the time, but that doesn't mean he ate purely plant-based foods. He had a flatulence problem (which embarrassed him), which is why he didn't eat much meat. Henry Ford's assembly line (which was modeled off a Chicago slaughterhouse) inspired Hitler when he designed the concentration camps. Jews were sent to concentration camps on "cattle cars", and were sent to their deaths in tunnels resembling those of the slaughterhouse that led cattle to their deaths. There were also farms and slaughterhouses for nonhuman beings on site of concentration camps to provide meat for the Nazis, and Hitler banned German vegetarian organizations. Many Nazi eugenicists were former animal farmers, who took their ideas from selective breeding and applied them to humans, starting racial cleansing. Nazis also used (nonhuman) animal terms like "vermin," "rats," "geese," and "swine" to vilify Jews (since nonhumans were also vilified).

In any case, even if Hitler didn't eat meat, is that somehow supposed to mean that people who don't eat meat support the Holocaust? Hitler also had a mustache, and spoke German. By your implied logic, people who have mustaches or speak German must also support the Holocaust.

Hitler certainly didn't go by vegan ethics by murdering millions of people. Vegans hold that all sentient life, human and nonhuman, has intrinsic value, and has the basic moral right not to be treated like a thing, used as a means to an end. Hitler certainly did not go by this philosophy. If he had, he wouldn't have murdered. Hitler had great disdain for weakness (or what he interpreted as weakness, anyway), and once said: "He who does not possess power loses the right to life." He had no reverence for sentient life, and strongly supported a hierarchal way of thinking. Vegans do not believe in a moral hierarchy among sentient beings. We believe that sentience alone is enough for a being to be regarded as important. Not intelligence, species, race, or gender, but possessing the ability to think and feel. Therefore, we do not regard humans as being "more important" than nonhuman beings, nor do we regard nonhuman beings as being "more important" than humans. Many who follow a hierarchal way of thinking believe that humans are "superior" and are the only beings who should ever be regarded, and seem to think that it must be a "one or the either" decision when having compassion for humans and nonhumans. There doesn't have to be an "either or" stance: humans AND nonhumans can be cared about. I personally, am very aware of human suffering as well as nonhuman suffering, and buy sweatshop-free clothing and fairly traded products. I also am vegan (although veganism also includes compassion towards humans). So many times I hear that there are "more important" things to be concerned about than animal rights, but I don't think human and nonhuman issues must be mutually exclusive. A person doesn't even have to become a vegan activist to become vegan; it could be as simple as replacing animal products with vegan products.

For the record, I don't think that those who consume animal products are Nazis. I do, however, recognize the parallel between nonhuman exploitation and violence and human exploitation and violence. It is the disregard of sentient life that is the root of violence.

Regarding Darwin's quote, even if he was talking about human slaves (which is odd, considering his choice of the non-specific word, "animals," which could include humans as well as nonhumans), it is still a good quote. Whites didn't want to be compared to blacks because they were slaves, considered inferior, and humans don't want to be compared to nonhumans because they are our slaves, and are considered inferior. Darwin also believed that the differences between humans and nonhumans are quantitative, not qualitative. He maintained that there is no human trait that isn't also found in another species, and that the differences are only of degree, not kind.

About plants "feeling pain": I've heard that before from anti-vegans, and know that it is false. Plants lack a brain and central nervous system, so that alone concludes that they are incapable of feeling sensation. As for them "screaming"; they emit ethylene gas when they are cut, and that is measured and converted into sound by a machine. That is not screaming, but a method of measuring a gas. Note that the plant must be cut or otherwise physically damaged in order to release the ethylene gas which is then converted into sound by an electronic machine. Bottom line: plants are not sentient. And if a tomato and a sentient being were falling off a cliff or both doomed by a house fire, I'd rescue the latter, although by your terms, that must make me a hypocrite.

Why Hitler Was Not a Vegetarian

Vegetarianism of Adolf Hitler

Excerpts from "Eternal Treblinka"

Don't Put Hitler Among the Vegetarians

--
~ Chelsea

Nonviolence starts with veganism.

A Life Connected

Don't Buy the Myth!