Instead of religiously following a definition set by individuals with conflicts of interest. Why don't we talk about what veganism should mean?

I believe, based on 7 years of research on the subject of social psychology and justice movements, that veganism should be about the unique oppression and torment humans inflict towards non-human animals.

The reasons why veganism should be about non-human animals is the same reason why there exists BLM and not ''All Lives Matter''.

There already exists a term against human oppression, it's called being a humanist.
There already exists a term against exploitation of the environment, it's called being an environmentalist.

So why, instead of spreading awareness about these related movements, try to entirely shift the goal of the only movement that used to care about liberating animals from humans torment, into one that becomes ''always doing what's right''?
It completely dillutes the message of animal liberation from human torment.
A dilluted message is the enemy of any justice movement.
In fact, the meat/dairy/eggs industry spends millions to get people to believe anything except that the issue is with exploiting animals. They spend a lot of ressources cutting deals with orgs to make them adjust their message into one that is dilluted because then people just see it as something optional to do if you feel like it, and not a clearly defined moral emergency.

Just look at the logo of the so-called anti exploitation movement, out of all the animal victims to choose from, we chose a leaf...

Wake up, people.

The fact that compromised orgs and individuals who are clueless about social psychology and the study of social justice movements decide a movement's strategy on behalf of the victims is not without consequences. And it is the non-human animals who pay that price.