How Sea Shepherd lost battle against Japan’s whale hunters in Antarctic 22:39 Dec 24 0 comments Horses Die at Cheltenham - Again 22:47 Mar 14 19 comments Musicians, Actors and animal friends sign letter of support for the Greyhounds 21:12 May 12 0 comments Closing communique : World week for thr abolition of meat 22:31 Feb 19 0 comments ACTION ALERT! Contact 'Lara Boutique' and TV3 21:04 Mar 18 1 comments more >>Blog Feeds
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Alternative Copy of thesaker.is site is available Thu May 25, 2023 14:38 | Ice-Saker-V6bKu3nz
The Saker blog is now frozen Tue Feb 28, 2023 23:55 | The Saker
What do you make of the Russia and China Partnership? Tue Feb 28, 2023 16:26 | The Saker
Moveable Feast Cafe 2023/02/27 ? Open Thread Mon Feb 27, 2023 19:00 | cafe-uploader
The stage is set for Hybrid World War III Mon Feb 27, 2023 15:50 | The Saker
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005RTEs Sarah McInerney ? Fianna Fail?supporter? Anthony Joe Duffy is dishonest and untrustworthy Anthony Robert Watt complaint: Time for decision by SIPO Anthony RTE in breach of its own editorial principles Anthony Waiting for SIPO Anthony
Human Rights in IrelandPromoting Human Rights in Ireland
Lockdown Skeptics
The Truth About RFK Jr. and the Samoan Measles Outbreak Tue Dec 17, 2024 17:30 | David Marks
The Covid ?Lessons Learned? Report From the U.S. House of Representatives is Right to Condemn Lockdo... Tue Dec 17, 2024 15:42 | Dr David Bell
Starmer More Unpopular After Five Months Than Any Other PM Since Polling Began 40 Years Ago Tue Dec 17, 2024 13:00 | Will Jones
Convicted Terrorist Sues Landlord of ?Saracen?s Head Pub Because Sign Offends Him Tue Dec 17, 2024 11:00 | Toby Young
Dale Vince?s Ministry of Eco Education Preaches Climate Crisis to Seven Year-Olds Tue Dec 17, 2024 09:00 | Chris Morrison |
Another repression of the animal liberation movement?
international |
animal rights |
opinion/analysis
Sunday October 24, 2010 00:33 by Mi cke y - !Liberate!
At the end of August Time.com published an article containing a controversial opinion of co-founder of the most popular organization fighting (supposedly) for animal rights – Ingrid Newkirk. Mrs President, said, inter alia, that “Absolute purists should be living in a cave.” In the ranks of the activists PETA has been regarded as the organization which in no way improve the lot of animals. After another raid someone may even be tempted to declare that the organization becomes harmful, because denying ethical considerations justifies the same industry which is responsible for the holocaust of the animals. This in turn leads to the construction of the belief that everything is really okay, we should eat animals, we just need to kill them a bit more gently. This way, Burger King customers will soon become defenders of the animals. Anyway Gary L. Francione issued an excellent response to Mrs. Newkirk views. I urge you to read it to understand fully what I mean. On the one hand, we have an apparent desire to make changes represented by the creators of popular NGOs and on the second hand we observe reinforcing the repression against those who try to make real changes. This is particularly evident in the United States, where not so long ago, Walter Bond was arrested, accused of carrying out direct action under the Animal Liberation Front. By the way as it turned out that FBI informant, who delivered information about Walter Bond, was his brother. Shortly after the FBI raid took place at the house of well-known activist Peter Young, who runs a website dedicated to animal rights Voice of the Voiceless. And from other reports, we can learn about the secret meeting of the companies involved in violence against animals, which is to be devoted to “extremists fighting for animal rights.” To make matters worse a few days ago it emerged that Monsanto hired a Blackwater, which is responsible among others for the crimes committed in Iraq, to spying on the eco and animal rights movements. The measures taken by businesses are becoming more repressive, which may indicate a growing fear of the consequences of activists actions. Especially, thanks to publicity they gain, animal rights issues get to the commercial media, hitting the mass audience. And this is a problem for companies that are part of the industry exploiting animals. They are happy to condone the existence of such organizations as conformist PETA , but do everything they can to harm those who strive for true liberation of animals. These companies are very afraid that their customers can see the truth about the production of food, clothing or other products of animal origin. Less consumption means lower profits. And thanks to the support of the state officials they criminalize those who fight for a right cause, accusing them of absurd allegations (eg, terrorism), at same time pursuing the policy of absolute cruelty to other beings. |
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (2 of 2)
Jump To Comment: 1 2You know perfectly well that people don't go from a condition of little or no awareness directly to radical / revolutionary
PETA, by playing the corporations own media and celebrity games, are achieving awareness of animal issues on a large scale. Because of this, they are considered a much bigger threat than ALF to the status quo. That is why they are targetted
That is why vested interests would like nothing more than for PETA to be rejected by other animal rights groups. Divide and conquer is the game of the corporations. Don't fall for it. Many of those people who PETA gets through to will go on to a deeper awareness.
There is no reason why all groups can't proceed on all levels in parallel. There is no reason why different approaches can't be tried. Not everyone is amenable to a radical or revolutionary approach. In fact very few are. Largely because of the very tools used successfully by corporate interests. Tools that PETA is now using against them, and quite successfully.
No, Not everyone is amenable to to radical or revolutionary change. (The small number that are can be easily smeared and neutralised.) It's naive to think they are.
Or perhaps it's not so naive? Perhaps it's something else at work here?
I think most of your comments is correct. Only one thing. It depends on what you define as a revolutionary change. Contemporary revolutionary thought puts a large extent on education, not a sudden change, which could lead to disaster. Only conscious society can accept radical changes.
The thing with PETA is, that yes, they managed to attract the attention of people using photos with naked chicks or Pamela Anderson involvment in their campaigns but at the end of day it didn't give expected effects. The welfare reforms have failed. Also you can't be against torture, while accepting a lighter form of torture. As Francione's said:
"The reforms that are promoted by PETA and the other new welfarist groups for the most part do not provide significant welfare benefits for animals. They just represent a different form of torture. Waterboarding someone on a bare board and waterboarding them on a padded board is still waterboarding. "
However, of course, I agree with you, there should be different methods of struggle against the exploitation of animals, not just direct action.