He's a vegan?

What's up with his endorsement of Pizza Hut and their stuffed crust pizza (stuffed with cheese of course!!)?

http://myqkaplan.com/?p=45

Perhaps not a vegan at that time?

Ok so now I've actually had the opportunity to listen to the interview. As a vegan I must say that I felt disempowered to hear some of the things said on this show.
Veganism is as "absolutist" as any other any anti-oppression approach. Since when did vegans start promoting animal exploitation (the antithesis of veganism)? Thanks Peter Singer (who is not a vegan)!
It's one thing to have to work at a place, out of absolute necessity, that somehow participles in the exploitation of animals, and it's another thing to openly promote animal exploitation industries, calling their products of exploitation "great" or "awesome", as Kaplan does.
It's clear to me that animal voices needs to have more interviews with vegans who understand and uphold the vegan principle of non-exploitation and do not undermine it. Otherwise veganism will continue to lose all of it's meaning and power to transform our speciesist society.
Two thumbs down, Karol.

Hi "C", thanks for your comments.

I sincerely hope you don't think that I bring guests on the show because I agree with everything they say, or that I expect the listeners to agree with everything they say. In that sense, I really appreciate that you disagreed with Myq about some of the things he said because I did too. But I also recognize that outside of my private (and not so private) abolitionist thoughts, there is a whole diverse world of opinion and strategy out there... It's not necessarily one that I agree with, but I don't see anything fruitful in tossing it aside because it doesn't jive with me personally.

I think your critiques of Myq are fair, but please keep in mind that he's not a spokesperson for the show. I brought him on the program to talk about being a vegan comedian (we've never done a show with a vegan comedian before), talk about what got him there (if Peter Singer got him to be vegetarian and later vegan, isn't that a good thing?), and respond to some critiques. I specifically asked him how he reconciles being vegan with promoting products that aren't, and he responded sincerely. My role as host is not to play "vegan police," but rather to raise issues and open up conversation. I asked, we discussed, and that was that. It's not an attack show, and I don't bring guests on to hammer them about their ethics or ambush them with questions.

As someone who constantly struggles financially (this show is entirely volunteer run, remember) to make ends meet, I empathize with anyone who might be put in a position where they have to engage in the vast, ubiquitous system of animal exploitation to survive. In the past couple of years, to pay my rent and buy my vegan groceries, I have had to work at restaurants that sell meat (where I've had to promote the "special of the day"), and work at a bookstore where people buy books on how to cook foie gras. Did I like doing any of it? No. So I empathize with Myq in the sense that, I know what it's like to be a struggling artist, to being trying desperately to make ends meet, and to be offered work that doesn't match my politics. It's a messy, messy world we live in, and I don't consider myself (or anyone) to be free of contradiction.

Again, I'm glad you didn't agree with Myq, because it shows that you're a free-thinking person who isn't going to be spoonfed something that they don't agree with. But I didn't bring him on to be a role model for yourself or other activists; I brought him on the program because I really appreciated that he was doing vegan comedy, which I find to be unique and a great tool of outreach.

Many of our past guests have not been vegan, nor would they advocate veganism. I bet if you went through our archive, you might even have a hard time pointing out who is and isn't vegan or has an ultimate goal of transforming our speciesist society. Does that make what they have to say, or the work they do for animals, any less valid? Personally, I think not. You may disagree, and you're entitled to that opinion.

In the case of Myq Kaplan, he's someone who IS vegan, who was willing to face critique (I told him ahead of time that I would be asking him about his Pizza Hut endorsement), and who responded to questions with blunt honesty and sincerity. What more can you ask of him, or anyone?

I don't ask my guests to be perfect, I don't ask my audience to be perfect, and I don't hold myself to a standard of perfection either. We're all complicit, in different times, places, and ways.

All the best,
Karol from AV.

He just sells it. He doesn't eat the ones with cheese. Veggies only.

Thanks for your response, Karol.
First of all, I certainly do not think you should only bring folks on the show who you agree with you 100%. That is not, and was not my concern and I never said it was.
Second, I said nothing about perfection.
Third, why does openly disagreeing with, or simply challenging, someone (in this case a "vegan" who openly promotes the consumption of other animals) have to be considered an "attack" by the "vegan police"? It is my understanding that veganism was established in the 40's as a movement that opposes all exploitation of other animals out of principle ("as far as is possible and practical"), so therefore anyone promoting animal consumption while calling themselves a vegan is not really a vegan, but a confused person with little or no understanding of veganism. I'm certainly not surprised that Myq was influenced by Singer because Singer openly promotes animal exploitation too, and at the same time considers veganism to be unnecessary and even "fanatical". What's the value of Myq being "vegan" (which you seem to think I should respect) if he promotes animal exploitation (not just pizza hut, but "happy meat" too)? Think of the great PR; "A vegan promoting our non-vegan products." Maybe that is great outreach - For Pizza Hut and providers of "happy meat".
My problem is with letting veganism get confused and depoliticized to the point where it loses all it's meaning and effectiveness to transform society, and all the while vegans keep their mouths shut and allow it so as not to be considered as the "fanatical" "vegan police" (meaning consistent vegans who are opposed to animal exploitation?) to non-vegans.
As I pointed out in my other comment, it's one thing to have to work at a place out of necessity that exploits animals (I'm certainly not "well off" financially myself) when animal exploitation is so pervasive in our world, and it's another thing to, as an identified vegan, openly and gladly promote animal exploitation when it's not necessary to do so. That's what my thumbs down comment was in reference to - you basically apologized for Myq and gave him all the excuses he needed when he was obviously not concerned with the ramifications, or contradictions of his choices. You may not have considered yourself to have been the "vegan police", but you were the apologist and excuse bearer for a "vegan" that thinks exploiting animals is acceptable to the point of openly promoting it. So actually, if you think that animal exploitation is objectionable yourself, Karol, and you didn't raise a concern or challenge Myq, but instead handed him excuses on a platter, then you were internally policing yourself. That's the real definition "vegan police" in my opinion.

(it's worth mentioning that Vegan Outreach uses the term "vegan police" to marginalize consistent ethical vegans when they themselves often openly promote non-veganism)