Will ‘animal rights’ become the next great social justice movement?

[nankerphelge]

Here's a couple of articles from New Zealand and Australia on animal rights as a social justice movement:

http://news.theage.com.au/animal-rights-next-great-social-debate/20080304-1wr1.html

http://www.lawfuel.co.nz/releases/release.asp?NewsID=266

[peacebuzzard]

1. I sure hope so.

Internationally, the subject is gaining important ground.

[stuntcat]

2. hope

I wish we could forget the consumption/wars long enough to think of the animals. . or the actual fricking planet x(
Thank you for these, I'm sharing them around!

[superduperfarleft]

3. Not unless a few things happen.

In my obviously not-so-humble opinion.

Theory needs to be given just as much weight as action. Action without any forethought can harm just as much as it hurts. A consistent theory of what animal rights/liberation actually means needs to be agreed upon by animal activists before the movement can even begin to be considered unified. The first step, I would argue, would be more emphasis on veganism as an absolutely essential first-step of animal liberation, and even just the word "vegan" as many large orgs seem reluctant to use.

This may also mean changing the dominant paradigm of large corporate charities (i.e. PETA, HSUS, etc.) setting the agenda while individuals just send money, to one where the focus is on smaller, more grass-roots organizations.

Second, negotiations need to cease between those who seek to end animal exploitation and those who seek to profit from it. Rewarding the animal exploitation industry with our endorsement when they give us and the animals what amounts to crumbs in the long run only sets the AL movement back.

Third, veganism and AL needs to be linked to other progressive struggles. Veganism needs to be viewed as just as important as anti-racism/anti-sexism/anti-classism/pro-peace, etc. Before this happens, though, groups like PETA will need to be make strides to be more sensitive to the concerns of women and people of color. Idiotic stunts like tofu wrestling and the lettuce ladies, and the idea that the means always justifies the ends, need to GO.

Fourth, (and kind of related to what I said above about theory) the emphasis on cruelty needs to take a backseat to the more holistic idea that animals simply deserve to have their basic rights respected. It needs to be emphasized that no matter how "humanely" you treat (or slaughter) an animal, you are still violating their basic rights as a sentient being. As the first article seems to concern itself with cage-free eggs, the eating of eggs from captive animals, regardless of how they are raised, is not consistent with a theory of animal rights.

This is really not meant to be as confrontational as it may sound, I am just dying to see discussions on something other than Hillary vs. Obama. Indulge me. :)

[LeftyMom]

4. ay-fucking-men.

I reread to make sure, and I don't see anything in that statement I don't agree with.

I'd like to add that if we want the general public to take our arguments and our struggle seriously, we need to show ourselves taking them seriously.

We should not be undermining ourselves in the very next breath. Care about animals? Go vegan. None of this go vegan... or vegetarian... or mostly... or happy meat... or less meat nonsense. If we've got a good case to make for veganism than we need to make it and trust that it's convincing.

We should not be treating the struggle for animal rights like a carnival sideshow. I understand peta's argument that their attention whoring is the only way to make the news, but didn't another organization just get slaughterhouse footage on national television? I seem to recall the only teats in that video were on dairy cows. You make news and you'll get on the news. Peta does great investigations and undercover work, but their reputation and that of the whole AR movement gets undermined by the stunts-as-activism crap they do the rest of the time. Worse still, that's stuff isn't even effective because everybody does stunt marketing now- dressing up like a chicken in front of KFC doesn't even turn heads if there's a costumed pickle in front of the sandwich shop and spiderman bouncing on a trampoline in front of the gym on the same road. This is deadly fucking serious and it's about time we conveyed that message as a movement.

But really, I think the most important point you made, and one I want to repeat, is that writing checks is not the end all and be all of ground-level activism. If there's one thing that's really failed in the current paradigm of large national organizations driving the movement, it's that they haven't done much to encourage activism on the local level.

Even a weekly email "homework assignment" to get people ideas and get them started on more than writing emails and sending donations would be good. For example, "this week, please request that your nearest conventional grocery stock more popular vegan food items, and promise to buy them there if they do" or "take a vegan dish to a group event, and offer to share the recipe" or "lend your favorite book or movie about animal issues to a friend." How about "donate some healthy plant foods to your local soup kitchen. Call first and see what they need most and if they take perishables." That's really little stuff, but anybody can do it and it's promoting activism as a personal effort and not a career specialization only a few people ever pursue.

[nankerphelge]

5. For the sake of argument...

This will probably sound confrontational too, but some of it is playing devil's advocate. I'm tired of Hilary v. Obama too and find this far more interesting.

First point: If we wait for a unified animal rights movement, we will be waiting forever. I will urge everyone to adopt a vegan diet, but won't turn my back on people who might not be willing to go that far, if they are willing to help out in other ways. I agree with the need for far more grassroots work, but think there is a place for the big corporate charities too. It's hard to deny that HSUS's work was instrumental in the recent meat recall/California case.

Second point: There are certainly examples that deserve this critique. There's not much to celebrate about a hypothetical fast food chain test-marketing a veggie burger in 1% of stores 10 years down the road. However, if a company agrees to phase out animal tests, or moves to cage-free eggs. I think it should be recognized as a positive step. It can be a case-by-case judgment. In many instances, incremental change will be better than no change.

Third point: I used to frown on some tactics too, but have had a change of heart. What a DU member finds convincing is totally different than what works for other people. I've read too many testimonials about people who went veg after some stunt. I read PETA's Dan Mathews book "Committed" recently. He does a much better job explaining the value of campaigns like the lettuce ladies or "I'd rather go naked than wear fur" than I can.

Fourth point: I think you can focus on ending cruelty and recognizing animal rights simultaneously, i.e., it isn't an either/or choice. People who can be convinced to stop eating battery cage eggs because they think it is cruel have started thinking about the lives of animals. They're one step down the path toward eating no eggs. Finally, one of the things plaguing the animal movement is the infighting with each other over tactics, ranking issues of importance, etc. I think all that energy should focused outward.

[superduperfarleft]

6. Here we go...

First point: if someone agrees to reduce their consumption of meat, I would definitely commend that. I've even done that on DU, even though the idea of congratulating someone who continues to eat eggs & dairy is completely inconsistent with animal rights. The problem is when large orgs like PETA promote "vegetarian" starter kits, or when their list of "accidentally vegan" contains products that are not actually vegan. When encouraging someone to reduce their consumption of meat, the emphasis needs to be on the eventual goal veganism, not in advocating for vegetarianism. As I said, the consumption of any animal products is not and cannot be in any way consistent with a theory of animal rights anymore than civil unions can be consistent with a theory of GLBT rights and legal segregation consistent with a theory of AA rights. You don't have to be an asshole about it, but you can make it clear that you cannot meaningfully advocate for animal rights while continuing to consume and use byproducts of the meat industry like eggs and dairy.

Second point: it's not just about marketing a veggie burger, it's about PETA congratulating Burger King for resorting to controlled-atmosphere killing, or Temple Grandin for designing slaughterhouses. I'd even argue that giving an award to Pat Buchanan, a racist holocaust denier, or HSUS endorsing Rick Santorum because of his stand on puppy mills, is inconsistent with the larger goal of tying animal rights to progressive causes. While CAK may be a nicer way to slaughter an animal and deny them their basic rights, it's not consistent with a theory of animal rights. Burger King, Pat Buchanan, and Temple Grandin are the enemy, plain and simple.

Then there's this letter: http://www.satyamag.com/sept06/edit.html. This is disgusting. Animal "rights" groups should never be promoting the consumption of meat, much less giving their implied endorsement with the label of "compassionate." Meat, eggs, dairy, leather, fur, etc. are never compassionate. They are all predicated on denying the basic rights of animals to live free of human intervention.

Third point: PETA's use of nudity and shocking images of people of color has distracted the public from their views on animal liberation and turned it into a discussion about "comparing people of color to animals." Instead of reacting sensitively to these completely legitimate concerns (the context of comparing african-americans and women to "animals" has a nasty history in this country that one would have to be completely historically illiterate not to notice), they pretty much ignore them. It's completely tone-deaf, and strikes me as part of the problem with white male privileged liberals as a whole. This struggle doesn't belong to you: it belongs to the oppressed peoples or animals that you are supposed to be fighting for. And if your message is insensitive or offensive to these peoples, you've failed. Telling african americans or women that their concerns are not of value is as paternalistic as the institutions that you are supposed to be fighting against.

I'd also add that some members of DU are not nearly as progressive as they think they are, so their reactions to sexist or racially-charged imagery is hardly the standard I'd use.

Fourth point: within a consistent abolitionist theory of animal rights, I would argue that cruelty is irrelevant. Slavery wasn't wrong because slaves were sometimes treated badly, it was wrong because the entire institution was a violation of the basic rights of human beings. Domestic abuse isn't wrong because women are treated badly in abusive situations, it's wrong because it violates the basic rights of women to live free of fear and coercion. Factory farming isn't wrong because it's cruel and torturous to animals, it's wrong because it violates an animal's right to have his or her interests considered.

[flvegan]

9. I was vegetarian for a year before I went vegan.

I proudly joined our Auntie's group in between. I disagree with almost your entire post, and I'd like to hear your vegan transitional story. Was it a snap of the fingers or over time? Either way, I applaud it, but the veg folk I know are somewhere around a 1/10 ratio.

Shit, look at the No Compromise to HSUS crossovers for validity. Abolition in that form is bullshit.

You have to look at potential. If, as a vegetarian, someone had suggested to me that it "wasn't good enough" maybe I would have walked away. As for that letter, well diminishing the impact of the appreciation is really a big fucking slap in the face of the work that a lot of orgs have done. When the vegan militia have a dozen lobbyists, a hundred million in dollars and a Senate seat, let me know. Until then, guess I gotta sell myself out to promote a better life for them.

What you're stating is the mentality of folks that might protest greyhound tracks but won't because some folks might be wearing leather.

[superduperfarleft]

10. ....

I think you're missing the larger point of what I'm arguing. Do you or do you not agree that a vegetarian diet (which includes the consumption of eggs and dairy, not to mention the larger issues of making veganism an ethical framework as opposed to yet another habit of consumption) is inconsistent with animal rights?

[flvegan]

13. I strongly disagree.

I think that vegetarians can be very much in tune with and supportive of animal rights. Vegetarianism is a big step, and a natural first step towards veganism. In addition, I believe that vegetarians can be very supportive of animal rights without being vegan.

If one goes vegetarian because of their thoughts, feelings or opinions of the welfare of animals, we are doing a disservice to the animals to dismiss them as not doing enough.

[superduperfarleft]

15. How?

How can one participate in animal exploitation (vegetarians by definition consume eggs and dairy) and support animal rights?

As I said, the problem with slavery was not the mistreatment of african-americans, but the entire institution of slavery which gave AA's second-class status. A vegetarian may eschew "cruelty," but still consumes the products of an industry which treats animals like commodities. How can one say that they are committed to animal liberation if they are continuing to support the animal exploitation industries in a way that is incredibly simple to avoid? This is what I mean by the fact that the focus (for now) should be on veganism and the complete boycott of the animal exploitation industries, not reform of said industries.

Just to note: I'm going to bed really soon. I'll pick this up in the morning, I promise. I'd never shy away from a good argument. :)

[flvegan]

17. How can one support impeachment and ending the war, yet vote for

Obama or Clinton?

See?

We can pick this up in the morning. Good discussion, and I'm really digging it on many levels.

[superduperfarleft]

18. They can't.

Maybe that will get me banned, but they can't.

That one won't work with me. I won't come out and say why, but that is why I stay out of the Hillary vs. Obama discussions (although you should see the emails between me and my Obama-supporting friends).

[flvegan]

20. Dammit!

You called my bluff.

The gist was that you go for the best option. Or something. I dunno. I'm laughing, as I can't stand either one, it's late and my post and your response has me giddy.

[superduperfarleft]

22. We all know Kucinich was the best candidate.

But even though he's a vegan, I know I'd have something to argue with him about. I'm just like that. ;)

[flvegan]

24. Yes we do. Kucinich is the best candidate.

However, even as a vegan, an outspoken vegan, I don't recall his animal liberation past. And he'd probably scold me for my support of Sea Shepherd and he'd distance himself from me for my pics with Rod Coronado. What can I say, I get around.

You maybe kinda see what I've been saying about vegans and liberation? DK ain't stealing any critters, and that's cool. I don't want him to. I'd still like to see him get the Prez job. We, as activists, have to give credit to other activists, regardless of the level of activism they take. I'll give an activist credit for getting sigs to ban veal crates while they eat McNuggets (yes, I've actually done this).

Why? It's not about McNuggets, it's about veal crates. Time and place.

I love Dennis, absolutely, regardless of what he's done, and what he could potentially do.

[flvegan]

7. I had a long response, but I deleted it.

I have to ask what your definition of animal liberation is. Are you talking grand-scale "liberation" of animals from the general use of the public, or honest-to-goodness direct action animal liberation that folks like me hate seeing thrown around?

[superduperfarleft]

8. I understand your question, but I'm not sure where you're going with it.

If you think I'm calling for all-out violent revolution to liberate animals, I'm not. The basic point of what I'm saying is that veganism needs to be the main focus of animal-liberation activism. I actually have serious problems with ALF-type actions, especially since there's no guarantee that ALF-"activists" are even vegan.

But yes, the "grand-scale liberation of animals from the general use of the public" would be my goal.

And I make a point of not personalizing these debates. Feel free to post what you originally wanted to.

[flvegan]

11. I don't believe in violence.

My question is in regards to your statement:

"veganism as an absolutely essential first-step of animal liberation"

Definitions differ.

As for ALFers being vegan, who gives a shit? This is exactly what I'm talking about. Veganism and animal liberation are two different things. I'll take 10 vegetarian soccer moms boosting abused neighborhood dogs over 100 vegan militia wanna be activists that piss themselves at the thought of doing more than sending an e-mail.

[superduperfarleft]

12. An ALFer is useless if they are not vegan.

To me, veganism is an ethical framework, not a habit of consumption. If you are willing to engage in violent actions (and the definition of "violence" is arguable, I agree), you should be at least committed enough to not consume ANY animal products if you are going to risk your own freedom as well as harm to other sentient beings in order to promote the cause of animal liberation.

I'd argue that veganism and animal liberation are not separate things, but are completely related. One cannot be committed to animal liberation and not be vegan.

[flvegan]

14. I stole my first dog as a vegetarian. Not a vegan.

I AM an ALFer. I'm looking at my 2,000th liberation. At the time of my first, I wasn't vegan. I'm the most vocal, outspoken ALF spokesperson on DU.

How fucking dare you call my initial actions useless. It's a step taken on a path. At the time you'd have called me/my action useless.

Tell that dog that. Tell the future vegan ALFer that. The dog booster that didn't "get it" at the time.

How fucking dare you.

[superduperfarleft]

16. Don't personalize this.

If we're going to devolve into personal attacks, this conversation will be over.

I stand by my statement. If you can't respond to what I've posted in a rational way, we have nothing to discuss.

And I'll let you know that you personally had the most impact to me going vegan than anyone, so I'd hope you could chill the fuck out for the sake of indulging me in a good debate.

[flvegan]

19. How so?

How did I have that impact? I'm not only curious for the sake of our discussion but also for any future discussion I might have with someone.

It became personal when you said this:
"An ALFer is useless if they are not vegan."

That made it personal. I became an ALFer before I went vegan. A better statement might have been that "an ALFer is questionable if in time they don't go vegan or continue activity without considering going vegan."

Are you now indulged? I'm not looking for a fight, so chilling "the fuck out" isn't really on the menu. I like you, and I like debate, so let's have at it.

[superduperfarleft]

21. "Useless" may have been too strong a word.

"Ineffective" might be more appropriate. Sure the specific animal freed may have felt the benefit, but how did you challenge the status quo of treating animals like commodities by continuing to consume their milk or eggs?

This is what I was saying about a consistent message among activists. There needs to be a commitment to eschew animal products. And it's not about a boycott, like Wal-Mart or Hummers or some other product, it's about a commitment to treat animals like sentient beings deserving of basic consideration. I understand that my car tires have animal products in them, I understand that the medication I take was tested on animals. But the easy things, the refusal to participate in the industry that considers animals and their byproducts food, are a necessity. Otherwise, would a slavery abolitionist movement accept slaveowners who claim to treat their slaves well be acceptable?

As far as your influence on me, that might be better as a PM. ;) You should just know that you helped me in the initial stages, whether you know it or not. Which is why I don't want this debate to devolve into us calling each other names. The argument here is ideas, not personality.

[flvegan]

23. Let me start with this

I've seen/watched you go toe to toe with folks in other forums *ahem GD* here. If I had ANY part in your influence, then I can die happy. *that means that yes, I'd love a pm from a good, well-spoken, slugfest activist*

As for the point, "the specific animal freed" is what matters at that immediate point. What needs to occur is a thought process that takes nothing more into consideration than the animal in question at the time. What's in question, I guess, is the dog I stole as a vegetarian, and not a vegan...or, how I joined the ALF. I ate eggs and milk. Didn't really get the issues with it. Thought vegetarianism was great. Boosted this abused dog, New Year's Eve. Balaclava and everything (I'll spare the details). It *was* a big stepping stone to who I am now. That's my point. We cannot say "it's not enough" ever. Embrace every step, every thought, every question towards animal rights.

Imagine, seriously, if someone had given me that ultimatum, which really is what that is?

Embrace every action, praise every word. Give credit to every leather-shoe wearing greyhound protester, because they may well be the next vegetarian, next vegan, next ALFer...

You are absolutely right, in that a proud ALFer should be vegan. However, I'll let a newbie ALFer sit out veganism, because it's not about veganism, it's about that/those particular animal(s).

Lastly, ineffective isn't a good word if an animal was freed. Remember, it's not about *you* but the end result for the animal.

[superduperfarleft]

25. Just letting you know....

I haven't forgotten about this. I've been feeling a bit under the weather the past few days (maybe I need protein ell oh ell rofl rofl) and not up for much debating. I'll definitely get back to you though.

[flvegan]

26. Get well.

We'll be here to talk whenever it's the best time to do so. This isn't adversarial, so I'm looking forward to the discussion.