I didn't say the goal was to persuade masses. That's what organizing does.

> Hmm, if there was a movement that organized around ending animal ag, and they called for individuals to stop consuming animals, would that not count as working towards systematic change?

Not really. Not if it's just a propaganda/awareness campaign. It would only matter if anti-industrial agriculturalists were organizing, defined as building resilient social-political structures which could change policy at increasingly large scales.

> Arguably, no systemic change has ever happened without individuals choosing to act.

I don't even think that's arguable except in the case of natural disasters bringing down systems entirely. The individual choices that matter, for the disenfranchised with revolutionary ideas, are the choices and actions that build organizational power. And building power is extremely grueling work when money is neither the goal nor vehicle, so that's why we see so little of it. That's why I'm not currently doing it, for the time being.

> Yeah because the revolutionairies have proven that enviornmental protection is their priniple aim after a revolution.

What revolutionaries are you referring to? It sounds like you're just making shit up and loosely attaching it to what I said.

> What actually works is political organisation that proposes solutions that actually work.

Like I already said in the last part of my comment, though I'm not sure you read any parts of it very closely.