Cattle Industry Enjoys Seeing Us Divided
Everyone is welcome to care about animals
On the facebook group called “Effective Animal Activism — Discussion”, someone shared this gem, straight from the exploiter’s mouth:
Meat of the Matter: The Great Debate, by Dan Murphy February 27, 2015
Who’s right? ‘Hardcore’ activists who want complete elimination of livestock? Or ‘reformers’ who want to make production humane? Who cares? Let’s just hope they just keep on fighting.
A journalist for the Animal Agriculture industry discovered some of the in-fighting within the animal advocacy movement. In short, that some people, who call themselves “abolitionists”, have declared that anything that does not clearly and openly demand the abolition of all animal exploitation should be labelled “welfarism” and is either good for nothing or downright playing in favour of animal exploitation.
Of course, every sensible advocate understands that things are not black and white and that the world is not going to go animal friendly overnight.
I have always said that the dichotomy “abolitionism” versus “welfarism” is bogus and counter-productive. These self titled “abolitionist” purists, those 5th column vegans who seem to spend far too much time attacking other animalist organisations and who refuse to accept diversity within the movement are only beneficial to the meat industry.
Everyone is welcome to care about animals. Some strategies might seem more effective but a variety of strategies can go a long way as long as we’re united on common goals.
So isn’t it interesting to find an article from the “Drovers Cattle Network” and written by a professional meat advocate where one of the key elements of the “abolitionists”, Prof. Gary Francione, is celebrated as an asset for the animal exploiters.
Another most interesting part is the meat advocate’s opinion of “welfarist” organisations: “Because no one involved in livestock production meatpacking or processing has any illusions about the goals, strategies or tactics of HSUS. They are veggies in drag, charlatans pretending to be mainstream lobbyists interested only in making animal husbandry more humane, when in fact they are dedicated to the full vegetarian agenda that demonizes livestock production, condemns meat-eating and pretends that global utopia is only a vegan lifestyle away.”
Well, this will be interesting to quote to those who assert that “welfarists” are beneficial to the meat industry and welcomed by it.
So again I will say: everyone is welcome to care about animals. Some strategies might seem more effective but a variety of strategies can go a long way as long as we’re united on common goals.
The false dichotomy “abolitionist” vs “welfarist” makes no sense. I am an abolitionist, since I am in favour of the abolition of all slaughterhouses but I also welcome every step in the right direction towards change, towards cultural, social and political change.
More on Francione and self-titled “abolitionists” in this excellent article by Tobias Leenaert: On Gary Francione and the “abolitionists” (1)
Extract: Accusing PETA the way Francione does is much like accusing Amnesty International of being a pro-political imprisonment organization because — although their goal is to have political prisoners freed — they also campaign to improve the treatment of political prisoners.