Animal Liberation as a tool against Capitalism

270 posts / 0 new
Last post
Tojiah's picture
Tojiah
Offline
Joined: 2-10-06
Jan 17 2007 20:17
Blacknred Ned wrote:
... you are at least as guilty as others of avoiding or summarily dismissing opposing arguments.
Blacknred Ned wrote:
You're having a laugh. I am not going to rehearse this whole thread again.

I thought it was "taking the piss." Anyway, pot calling kettle black much? The real reason you're not going back up in the thread is because if you'd bothered to, like I had, you'd have found that our part of the discussion concluded with:

tojiah wrote:
In practice, most animal rights activists that I know in Israel co-operate with Palestinian olive farmers, say, even thought they eat meat and tend to exploit animals for the purposes of conducting the olive harvest. They are much more practical-minded and have a better order of priorities than what seems to be the case in the UK animal rights "scene".

I wish this would put the straw-men to rest, but I doubt it.

Blacknred Ned wrote:
I hope that I have not been setting up straw men. This thread was originally about "animal liberation" as a tool against capitalism and it seems to me that a number of valid arguments have been raised to suggest that, at best, this kind of activism is a distraction from or irrelevent to that struggle, or at worst a hindrance to it altogether.

I have tried to point out what I consider to be the weaknesses of the positions of those I have known who advocate the struggle for ar and I hold to the position that that movement is not a help in the struggle against capitalism. It is good to hear that in your experience animal rights activists do find it possible to co-operate with those who make different life-style choices, but that in no way strengthens the idea that animal rights activism furthers anti-capitalism; in these cases the two are coincidental not necessarily complementary.

This won't stop you, though:

Blacknred Ned wrote:
...I sense no movement in the positions of ar/vegan diehards. Your response is...

Now, previously:

Blacknred Ned wrote:
You have spent your last few posts playing the victim of misunderstanding.

In fact, I am a target of misattribution, and you have just proved it yet again. Imagine having everything you say analysed as if you were a Maoist, because you're talking to people who've only heard Maoists talking favorably about communism. That's how this discussion has been.

If you want to hear my own opinion about home-grown chickens, etc, I'd say that, if you were raising chickens as pets, and you took the occasional unfertilized egg, and killed the occasional old and senile chicken, then I may be able to accept it. This idyllic picture is so far removed from the harsh reality laying chickens (and chicks) face in the egg and poultry industries, however, that it's laughable to use that as an excuse to consume drumsticks and omelettes, of the kind you can get on the market today.

Anyway, why the insistence on chickens and cows? Clams are much more nutritious and sustainable, and you could argue that such primitive molluscs do not feel pain in a way we can recognize, so we can industrialize their exploitation with the same impunity that we have when we industrialize wheat production.

There are countless other points where you could have entered into a meaningful discussion with me, if you were inclined to. But you have your image of that lymey diehard AR activist, and you're going to undergird it, no matter what I happen to say.

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Jan 17 2007 20:47

Hi

Quote:
But you have your image of that lymey diehard AR activist, and you're going to undergird it, no matter what I happen to say.

The shared propensity for animal libbers, anarchists and Internet forum dwellers to rapidly assume the role of victims, with an endless desire to discuss their feelings, continues to impress us all.

Love

LR

Lone Wolf's picture
Lone Wolf
Offline
Joined: 1-03-06
Jan 17 2007 21:11
Lazy Riser wrote:
Hi
Quote:
But you have your image of that lymey diehard AR activist, and you're going to undergird it, no matter what I happen to say.

The shared propensity for animal libbers, anarchists and Internet forum dwellers to rapidly assume the role of victims, with an endless desire to discuss their feelings, continues to impress us all.

Love

LR

Christ!!!! If you think that quote from TOJ constitutes a "discussion of his feelings" than I wouldn't want to be a woman having one of those "we need to talk" convos with you... wink

I mean ffs!! roll eyes

Love

LW X

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Jan 17 2007 21:49

Hi

Quote:
I wouldn't want to be a woman having one of those "we need to talk" convos with you... I mean ffs!!

Ho ho. Anarchism, the ideology of choice for the high maintenance personality.

Quote:
we can industrialize their exploitation with the same impunity that we have when we industrialize wheat production

We can indeed. Do explain who granted us impunity for the “crime” of industrialized wheat production.

Love

LR

Lone Wolf's picture
Lone Wolf
Offline
Joined: 1-03-06
Jan 17 2007 22:32

ME high maintenance??? roll eyes Pot, kettle, black...

Glad i got a ho ho tho.. its been a while.. cool

Love

LW X

jason's picture
jason
Offline
Joined: 22-07-06
Jan 17 2007 23:30

Animal empathy 101:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/temple/

Video at:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1063749803579204077

enjoy

revol68's picture
revol68
Offline
Joined: 23-02-04
Jan 17 2007 23:40

Discussing your feelings is pretty necessary for a relationship, it's just an excuse for talking utter banal shite in regards to politics 90% of the time though.

Lone Wolf's picture
Lone Wolf
Offline
Joined: 1-03-06
Jan 17 2007 23:47
revol68 wrote:
Discussing your feelings is pretty necessary for a relationship, it's just an excuse for talking utter banal shite in regards to politics 90% of the time though.

But noone HAS been discussing their feelings as such on here... just that LR was under the misapprehension that TOJ was...so no worries Revol - your psych. secrets are still safe for another day... tongue (kinda... wink )

Love

LW X

Tojiah's picture
Tojiah
Offline
Joined: 2-10-06
Jan 17 2007 23:52
revol68 wrote:
Discussing your feelings is pretty necessary for a relationship, it's just an excuse for talking utter banal shite in regards to politics 90% of the time though.

Trust me, if I was to start discussing my feelings, you'd all drop to the ground right-quick like in that Radiohead video.

I don't think I was being over-the-top. But maybe I'm wrong. Just to make sure, could you quote something that I've said that's too emotional for your itty-bitty heart to handle? I certainly wouldn't want to hurt your feelings.

Lone Wolf's picture
Lone Wolf
Offline
Joined: 1-03-06
Jan 18 2007 00:03

Well said TOJ - touche!!! cool

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Jan 18 2007 08:31
tojiah wrote:
Trust me, if I was to start discussing my feelings, you'd all drop to the ground right-quick like in that Radiohead video.

so that's what he said. "animals are people too", and they all just gave up grin

(wink)

i always thought he made a compelling case for primitivism, and they decided to voluntarily reduce the earth's human population by 95% by starving themselves to death where they fell ...

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Jan 18 2007 20:28

Hi

Quote:
But noone HAS been discussing their feelings as such on here

Clearly, feelings of empathy and compassion, feelings of unfairness and cruelty, feelings of persecution and victimisation, have been discussed. Moreover they form the moral root of animal liberationism. Finally, anarchism (and indeed the left in general) is indicted by its attractiveness to the high maintenance victim oriented personalities that are inclined to develop these kinds of value systems.

Love

LR

Lone Wolf's picture
Lone Wolf
Offline
Joined: 1-03-06
Jan 20 2007 02:22
Lazy Riser wrote:
Hi
Quote:
But noone HAS been discussing their feelings as such on here

Clearly, feelings of empathy and compassion, feelings of unfairness and cruelty, feelings of persecution and victimisation, have been discussed.

See below

Moreover they form the moral root of animal liberationism.

No they don't - with the possible exception of compassion
and empathy - there are other aspects to the "moral root" but I am reluctant to explore such higher, finer aspects of debate if you are still struggling to identify what a feeling is...you have to walk before you can run..

Finally, anarchism (and indeed the left in general) is indicted by its attractiveness to the high maintenance

That might explain why you are here then.. tongue - you are EASILY the highest maintenance poster and the hardest to debate with - lil' bit of projection here methinks Lazy..

victim oriented personalities that

Nah altho at least you go on to say "inclined" - I would say if there WAS an inclination - IF - it would be more "rescue oriented" which is better IMHO than victim or persecutor..

are inclined to develop these kinds of value systems.

Love

LR

LR

Word to the wise:

Unfairness, cruelty , persecution and victimisation are NOT feelings - they are attitudes or possibly on occasion attributes...Here is a simple test - an emotion is something you can say you can FEEL - therefore anger, fear, loss, love, guilt i.e. I feel love, I feel anger.. there is no such statement as I feel unfairness etc... roll eyes There may be well be feelings that underpin these views, attitudes etc but these are NOT what is being discussed. How can you not know this??? confused

Love

LW X

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Jan 26 2007 20:42

Hi

Quote:
Unfairness, cruelty , persecution and victimisation are NOT feelings

On the contrary, the extent to which a given situation is unfair, and whether this or that unfairness warrants remedial attention, exists only in our imaginations.

Animal Liberationists are specialists in compassion, and are about as much use to the average punter as, say, Buddhists or anarchists. Having said that, having eaten a Boot’s Cream Cheese and Roast Pepper wrap today, it would appear I have something to thank the “vegetarian movement” for after all.

Love

LR

Black Flag
Offline
Joined: 26-04-06
Jan 27 2007 16:34

I find it hard to believe that there is anything anti-capitalist about islam.Animal liberation yes as it is againt the capitalist industries of exploitation and oppression.

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Jan 27 2007 16:51

Hi

It's hard to believe that there is anything anti-capitalist at all.

Love

LR

Lone Wolf's picture
Lone Wolf
Offline
Joined: 1-03-06
Jan 30 2007 02:24
Lazy Riser wrote:
Hi
Quote:
Unfairness, cruelty , persecution and victimisation are NOT feelings

On the contrary, the extent to which a given situation is unfair, and whether this or that unfairness warrants remedial attention, exists only in our imaginations.

I don't disagree that fairness or otherwise is largely perceptual -but er.. this doesn't in anyway invalidate my statement, making that a non-sequitur.. confused Fairness being largely perceptual doesn't make it a feeling.. it is a perception that will, as a consquence, cause emotions to be present and felt.. ..

Animal Liberationists are specialists in compassion, and are about as much use to the average punter as, say, Buddhists or anarchists.

I like all these groups of peeps!! grin and i am very useful.. but maybe i don't know too many average punters..which is a happy thought.. wink

Having said that, having eaten a Boot’s Cream Cheese and Roast Pepper wrap today, it would appear I have something to thank the “vegetarian movement” for after all.

Well i'm glad our "movement" accomplised something for ya Lazy.. smile Did you ever try the mexican chilli bean wrap they used to do - contained avocado and a bit of sour cream and stuff...as well as kidney beans etc.. it was a sad day when they discontinued that baby.. sad

Love

LW X

Love

LR

Tojiah's picture
Tojiah
Offline
Joined: 2-10-06
Jan 31 2007 10:40

I'm not quite sure that it's relevant to my argument, but this quote was too good to miss:

Frederick Douglass wrote:
He who would be free must strike the first blow. You know that liberty given is never so precious as liberty sought for and fought for. The man who is outraged is the man who must make the first outcry. Depend on it, men will not care much for a people who do not care for themselves. Men will organize to prevent cruelty to animals, for they are dumb creatures, and cannot speak for themselves, but we are men, and men must speak for themselves or we shall not be spoken for at all.
revol68's picture
revol68
Offline
Joined: 23-02-04
Jan 31 2007 10:44
Quote:
Men will organize to prevent cruelty to animals, for they are dumb creatures, and cannot speak for themselves.

And this is why talk of animal liberation is retarded, all we can do is have better animal welfare.

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Jan 31 2007 18:59

Hi

W wrote:
Unfairness, cruelty , persecution and victimisation are NOT feelings
R wrote:
On the contrary, the extent to which a given situation is unfair, and whether this or that unfairness warrants remedial attention, exists only in our imaginations.
W wrote:
Fairness being largely perceptual doesn't make it a feeling.

Granted, the general notion of fairness (and hence justice) doesn’t fit into conventional categories of emotional response. The meaning and content of justice
is an archaic philosophical question that remains as contentious as ever.

Justice, is both an attribute of social institutions and a social institution in itself. It’s either
created by humans or by God. Humans can only relate to animal suffering as an emotional response, so the degree to which animal suffering is justified is set either by feelings or by magical belief.

In the absence of supernatural forces, animal exploitation (and for that matter “capitalism”) is as justified as its antithesis. Animal Liberation is anti-capitalist only in so far as anti-capitalism, as long as it is predicated on capitalism being unfair and cruel, isn’t against capitalism at all. Indeed, as it is a mere critique of social institutions through an appeal to some magical external moral signage, it perpetrates the prevailing order.

Love

LR

pingu
Offline
Joined: 3-04-07
Sep 2 2007 15:19

Allow me to add my tuppence worth to this debate. I havn't read all the entries in this thread, but it seems to me that nobody has mentioned something really basic about all this- namely that animals, however cute cuddly etc they may be are not SUBJECTS capable of liberating themselves whereas humans we hope, ARE.- so any movement claiming to act on animals' behalf can only be the most blatant form of vanguardism. It seems also that animal libbers cannot tell the difference between a dead and a live human- hence the digging -up of corpses.The alf-ers I've met have been right prats one bloke trying to do pennance for his raping a woman by giving up eating animal protein- encouraged by his partner of course! Ugh

ImprovedLenin
Offline
Joined: 24-08-07
Sep 3 2007 01:08

Does this invovle instituting welfare for animals as well?

redboots's picture
redboots
Offline
Joined: 10-09-07
Sep 10 2007 21:24

I admit it is sort of a sticky issue.

Personally I am a Vegan and certainly understand the arguments for animal liberation on an emotional level.

But I have come to believe that there is absolutely no way in which this liberation can be carried out.

I just don't believe there will ever be a Vegan world, and I see veganism as largely connected to lifestylism and the middle class. I do think there is value in the continuation of social movements to argue for vegetarianism/veganism and I would hope that an anarchist society would inherently include less cruelty and certainly more sustainable farming practices, but I just dont believe that it would not include some animal products. And I do not think there can be unity built around this idea.

In addition I have to say that my views on the matter have gotten less extreme over the years, and I do see what others would call a speciest hierarchy in nature. Like others have said, pigs and cows can not organize and rise up. It's just the way it is . And right now we need to focus on human liberation, anything else seems like wishful thinking.

j.rogue
Offline
Joined: 8-04-07
Sep 11 2007 00:20
redboots wrote:
I admit it is sort of a sticky issue.

Personally I am a Vegan and certainly understand the arguments for animal liberation on an emotional level.

But I have come to believe that there is absolutely no way in which this liberation can be carried out.

I just don't believe there will ever be a Vegan world, and I see veganism as largely connected to lifestylism and the middle class. I do think there is value in the continuation of social movements to argue for vegetarianism/veganism and I would hope that an anarchist society would inherently include less cruelty and certainly more sustainable farming practices, but I just dont believe that it would not include some animal products. And I do not think there can be unity built around this idea.

In addition I have to say that my views on the matter have gotten less extreme over the years, and I do see what others would call a speciest hierarchy in nature. Like others have said, pigs and cows can not organize and rise up. It's just the way it is . And right now we need to focus on human liberation, anything else seems like wishful thinking.

My god! A reasonable vegan! If only there were more....

Antieverything
Offline
Joined: 27-02-07
Sep 11 2007 02:09

I'm pretty impressed by redboots' stance, as well...although this is more a reaction to the normal activist purity/lifestyle bullshit than anything.

I was a vegetarian for a while when I was 18. A month or so before I started I had attended an activist meet-up/training and had my first contact with ethical vegetarianism (or at least this was the first time it was rationally explained to me as opposed to the self-righteous sneer you get from veggies when you cut into a steak). I respected the people I had learned from and agreed with many of the ethical positions (meat production is not sustainable, is unnecessarily cruel, etc.).

By the way, before you go and accuse me of being a hippy-sympathizer, I did introduce many of these same folks to socialism and its connection to their existing ideals of peace, democracy and nonviolence (just so you Europeans know, US activists will often spout off about 'anti-capitalism' while even a good chunk of the 'anarchists' are taken aback when I bring up 'pro-socialism')

My actual experience as a vegetarian was less productive...in the event that anyone gave a fuck what I was on about their responses were either dismissive and critical (leading them to be less receptive to everything else I had to say) or, more rarely, something along the lines of 'I'm glad you are one of us' which is just as counterproductive in my opinion. To top it off, I was stuck eating cafeteria food for every meal and I soon got sick of salad, rice and beans for every meal.

So, not only was I stuck eating shitty food that left me undernourished and unhappy, I also--at worst--alienated non-'activists' while--at best--getting 'activist' women to notice me. Pretty big fucking waste of time, all around. No animals were spared and my ethical high-ground didn't make fried chicken any less appealing...eventually I dropped the whole charade.

More recently, I've began to think about eating meat as an ethical/political decision much in the same way vegans consider their bullshit to be an ethical/political statement. Basically it means that, even though I understand the ethical dimensions of the issue, I strongly favor my human relationships and since vegetarianism often alienates me from other humans who I ought to be organizing with (unlike animals who I can't possibly organize with) it would be, in the long run, unethical to throw away all of the fulfilling and productive relationships that could be constructed through sharing food with people--possibly the most important social activity there is. (I once met an 'anarchist' activistoid who went to Chiapas for several months and apparently ate nothing but tortillas and soy-jerkey...think about how much awesome food he turned down...what a dick!

--by the way, I noticed a doodle on his notebook that said VEGANARCHIST--which made me instantly want to kill him...along with his general antisocial behavior, that is! (we were hosting his shitty "anti-power" workshop and he had the nerve to root through my friend's fridge and eat all sorts of expensive foodstuffs...not before meticulously checking the labels to shit as simple as a loaf of bread, of course!

lem
Offline
Joined: 25-07-05
Sep 11 2007 02:22

lazy riser your constant appeal to nihilism is just disguised moralism.

i won't check this thread to see if you've blamed "schizos" for the failure of the left, but i am watching you angry eta or indeed called anyone a "schizo cripple" angry

revol68's picture
revol68
Offline
Joined: 23-02-04
Sep 11 2007 03:53
lem wrote:
lazy riser your constant appeal to nihilism is just disguised moralism.

i won't check this thread to see if you've blamed "schizos" for the failure of the left, but i am watching you angry eta or indeed called anyone a "schizo cripple" angry

lem piss off you schizo cripple. grin

lem
Offline
Joined: 25-07-05
Sep 11 2007 03:59

lol.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Sep 11 2007 08:15
Quote:
(I once met an 'anarchist' activistoid who went to Chiapas for several months and apparently ate nothing but tortillas and soy-jerkey...think about how much awesome food he turned down...what a dick!

I experienced that stuff in Palestine a few times. We'd stay with families that slaughtered a sheep or something just because we were staying there and joining in local protests or whatever and the fucking vegans would always turn it down. Rude as fuck.

redboots's picture
redboots
Offline
Joined: 10-09-07
Sep 11 2007 20:24

Also, a lot of Vegans I have met have been openly hostile to the working class, especially when they come from some sort of green anarchist/anti civ place. I have heard it suggested that there is no point in organizing slaughterhouses and burger kings and also just a level of hostility for people that make their living in any way that involves animals. It's easy to take this stance when you are a member of your schools local youth Peta mob, but of course in any other realm purely ridiculous. But this really is an important thing to remember when you talk to Vegans and try to figure out why they seem so crazed. They in fact do not have to deal with reality. They have no game plan or real attainable goals so they can say things like "we need to make the world vegan" and really not be expected to offer any follow up. And if you call them on it they can label you a thuggish meat eater and go along their soy eating way.

It is frustrating because I can not say that I am not personally affected by my knowledge of what happens to animals. That is just who I am. But I really have come to believe that a lot of this is just cultural. Do I belive that farmers who kill sheep are bad? No. Would I even tell them they should not do so? No. So really like any other belief based on emotion and not a rational dedication to what can be achieved, like human liberation, you have nothing but a position to preach from. Which, again, is enough for most Vegans.

It's something that is likely to remain an uncomfortable thing for me. But right now I can not eat animal products and feel good about who I am, and can not support the Vegan/Anarcho Green movement and feel good about what I do.

So I just stick with the red veganism thing and give the world a big shrug...