I don't know if any of you listen to Erik's Diner, a podcast by Erik Marcus, but I suscribed to it recently, and the first podcast I listened to was Erik's debate with Gary Francione. Gary Francione is a law professor and animal rights activist, www.animal-law.org/ and he and Erik were debating about animal "welfarists" verses abolitionists. You can find the debate on Erik Marcus' website: www.vegan.com/
The argument was over whether trying to improve the condition in which farm animals are kept actually helps or hurts the animal rights movement. Francione argued that trying to get people to improve the bad conditions such as battery cages, etc. just makes people feel better about eating animals, and that people have less guilt because they are purchasing "cage free" eggs/chickens.
Read or listen to the debate. I'd like to hear your opinions.
The argument was over whether trying to improve the condition in which farm animals are kept actually helps or hurts the animal rights movement. Francione argued that trying to get people to improve the bad conditions such as battery cages, etc. just makes people feel better about eating animals, and that people have less guilt because they are purchasing "cage free" eggs/chickens.
Read or listen to the debate. I'd like to hear your opinions.
-
Re: Abolition vs. Welfare
Fri, April 6, 2007 - 4:45 PMYeah! I have mixed feelings about this. It's like... why the fuck do you want to eat free range chicken? You still killed the fucking chicken, what's the difference?? But on the other hand, at least the bird got to stretch her legs a bid.
I think improving the conditions in which the animals live is a good short term improvement to the problem, but doing so may delay the eventual long-term goal of a vegan nation. -
-
Re: Abolition vs. Welfare
Fri, April 6, 2007 - 4:56 PMI have mixed feelings too. I think we all want the same result though: to end the exploitation of animals. The issue is how to best achieve that goal. I'm somewhere in the middle. I think we need everyone who wants to help animals to do what they think will help, as long they do something. There are BILLIONS of animals who need our help, however we can give it. -
-
Unsu...
Re: Abolition vs. Welfare
Fri, April 6, 2007 - 5:08 PMwe had a discussion about the subject of farm animal welfare recently: tribes.tribe.net/veganphil...2daaa08f21 -
-
Unsu...
Re: Abolition vs. Welfare
Sat, April 7, 2007 - 1:08 AMThanks for the heads up Mystic. I was aware of this recent debate betweeen Gary Francione and Erik Marcus, but had not heard it...I've been off podcasts for the last few months...
For me it is also an odd argument, because philosophically I agree much more with Gary, he is probably the person in the AR movement whose philosophy I agree with the most, and I agree that he and others like him will make Animal rights a reality...but yet, I don't agree with his harsh judgement of PETA, HSUS and others, and the blanket claim that they do much more harm then good.
I find it pretty hypocritical actually that all these vegans are sitting around agreeing with Gary's assessment, while most became Vegans because they watched "Meet your meat" or read other PETA litterature.
Although I agreed with many of his points in "Rain without thunder" and I think that constructive criticism and self-observation can only make the movement sronger, I think we must realize how constructive our criticism actually is....and just because we don't agree with supporting Temple Grandin, or Burger King int heir welfarist endeavours, does not eman that the broad statement that those who do are innefective and actually harm the movement more.
we ahve to be careful that we help one another at getting better and not actually fight with one another, cuz the enemy will use this kink in our armor to divide and destroy us.
While Gary is brilliant, not acknowledging that HSUS, PETA and Vegan Outreach among many others have done tremndous things for the AR movement just because they tolerate people, actions and rhetoric that are not 100% Vegan is insane.
PETA has a clear AR message, and all the food on their website is Vegan.
and as for the free-range and organic issue, well, I believe that we are in a revolution and we must behave as we would in a revolution. There are sides, and it IS confrontational. Although we are peaceful, ethical and compassionate, our enemies are not, and although it may be more honest to show them all our cards as Gary wishes, it is not necessarilly the best strategic choice.
If everyone decided to buy ONLY cage-free, organic and "humanely-raised" animal flesh and products tomorrow, the reality is that the demand would far exceed the supply of these "commodities" ...so I say tell meat-eaters to eat organic and free-range and "humanely-raised" as long as they do it EXCLUSIVELY...then, when they see how impossible it is , they will notice how easy veganism is. :-) -
-
Re: Abolition vs. Welfare
Sat, April 7, 2007 - 6:46 AMI haven't read "Rain Without Thunder" yet, but Gary Francione mentioned it in the debate. Every podcast I've listened to by Erik Marcus since the debate has continued to talk about the abolitionists. Last night I was listening to the latest one, and Erik was talking about the latest victories for animals and then asked what has the abolitionst movement done. He said if you look on PETA's HSUS's or his website, you can see what they have accomplished, but the abolitionists have accomplished nothing. I know I honestly could not think of anything either, but like you, I tend to agree more with Gary. However, I don't know if a truly vegan world is possible, knowing how deeply people are attached to animal carcasses and their secretions, so every little bit of help for the animals is good. In the meantime, I will try to lead by example. A lot of times I am the first vegan that people meet, and my presence has at least shown some people that it is possible to live without animal products.
-
-
-
-