History in the Making.

I'm inspired to write this blog entry after listening to Jordan Wyatt's always great Coexisting With Nonhuman Animals Podcast. In his last podcast for 2010 (number 42), Jordan was joined by Emmy James (Vegan For Life), and Elizabeth Collins and William Paul (NZ Vegan Podcast). Also present, in spirit at least, was the mighty Sam Tucker of Food for Thought Radio.

Anyone who reads my work will probably know that I claim that veganism as an idea, as a philosophy, and certainly as the moral baseline for a rights-based social movement, is still in its "pioneer stage." Law professor and animal rights theorist, Gary L. Francione, once suggested that we are all Michael Vick - but there is a real sense that ethical vegans are all Donald Watson, the co-founder of the English Vegan Society. Someone recently noted on Face Book that Watson's Vegan Society was founded in 1944 and that seems to be a terribly long time ago. However, it terms of social ideas, the time span from 1944 to 2011 is just the blink of an eye and so, to quote The Carpenters (if only because it was cool in the 1970s to see a female drummer - and one often with a see-through drum kit to boot), we've only just begun.

Although veganism is still in its pioneer stage for everyone, that term really does apply most appropriately to these folks in New Zealand. These are pioneers in the truest sense of the word and they are already making an impact. As 2010 comes to a close, I'd like to thank them, and all vegan pioneers, wherever you are.  

Thanks for what you do.

 

One Can Lead A Person Toward Knowledge But Not Ensure That S/he Knows It.

Far more crucial than what we know or do not know is what we do not want to know. Eric Hoffer, The Passionate State of Mind, 1954.

It is possible to live in a twilight between knowing and not knowing, W.A. Visser’t Hooft, theologian on knowledge of the Holocaust, 1973.

As the debates about WikiLeaks continue, some are describing what’s going on – cyber attacks on WikiLeaks and its “enemies” by friends and foes alike – as an “infowar.” The current situation reminded me of the research I did toward the end of 1999 – because, as it turns out, just placing information in front of someone, or leading them toward it, is not the end of the story. I think the following, adapted from the beginning of a Ph.D chapter, also says something about present thoughts about supply and demand…

In March 2001, the Welsh edition of the Liverpool Daily Post featured a single large picture on its front page. Under the dramatic headline “HEARTBREAK,” a man is pictured standing in front of a cow. The man’s hand is raised, the cow’s head is raised too, as if she is trying to smell what the man holds in his hand. The smell is likely to be metallic because the man holds a primed captive bolt pistol. 

The gun is pointed at the head of the cow who is locked into a large red restraining device. The subtitle under the headline reads: “The chilling moment which graphically illustrates the horrific reality of the farm outbreak.”  The caption under the photograph reads: “GRIM TRUTH: A slaughterman shoots a cow in Lamonby, Cumbria, yesterday.  We apologise to readers who find this photograph distressing.  After much thought, we decided to publish it to show the full effect of the foot-and-mouth crisis.” 

Apart from the newspaper’s masthead, two adverts for the content of other pages and an advert at the bottom of the page for mobility scooters, the picture and the words above take up the whole of the tabloid-sized front page.

Albert Bandura has argued that “euphemistic labelling” is commonly used to “mask” objectionable activities. Something thoroughly “objectionable” occurred regularly during the aforementioned British foot and mouth disease outbreak of 2001. The public saw, or at least had the opportunity to see - often several times daily - on both national and regional television and in all the nation’s press and every radio news bulletin - the mass media version of the killing and destruction of animals they normally encounter only as “meat,” or “hamburgers,” or “pork” (see Agnew), or perhaps as “cute” lambs or “contented” grazing cows.  As Ted Benton (and see Plous) points out, most people in the Western world usually purchase meat already commodified, packaged and often renamed. 

Of course, many people do not overtly – front-of-their-minds - recognise themselves as purchasers of parts of the carcasses of dead animals. Apart from the case of some fishes, care is generally taken to remove eyes and heads or other parts that would result in “meat” being seen as a piece of an animal. However, despite, or because of these points, a question is raised and it is a relatively blunt one: why should people take active steps to know any of the details of the deaths of the animals they intend and wish to consume? 

In fact, since even a moment’s thought on the subject might be expected to lead many individuals to make a guess that the deaths of “food animals” may not be particularly pleasant to witness, regardless of how “regulated” the process may be, the question is rather: why shouldn’t people go out of their way to avoid knowing all there is to know about the animal-derived foods on their tables? 

Furthermore, what is more sensible than attempting to “mask” known or suspected objectionable activities by euphemistic labelling or by other means? After all, is it not commonsensically assumed that the consumer of, say, pornography will likely avoid focusing on the potential suffering or harm involved in the “product” they consume, and concentrate instead on the personal pleasure that derives from the consumption? Is it not at least appreciated that such consumers are liable to put any “known details” of such harm and suffering to the backs of their minds, or interpret matters in such a way that serves to reduce the harm done? 

Philosophical appeals that informed adult human beings should regard themselves and act as reflexive moral agents are apparently not sufficiently powerful to prevent the purchasing and mass consumption of many products that cause harm. Complex social forces and understandings are in play here. In relation to meat consumption, Peter Singer notes that people, perhaps quite reasonably, do not want to know the details about the lives and deaths of the animals they are prepared to eat: for one thing, they do not want to spoil their dinner. 

After all, why should anyone want to spoil their dinner?  Carol Adams begins The Sexual Politics of Meat with a dedication: “In memory of 31.1 billion each year, 85.2 million each day, 3.5 million each hour, 59,170 each minute.” 

Apart from perhaps placing “9-11” into something of a controversial context, these huge figures might easily spoil someone’s dinner, since the figures refer to the deaths of “food animals” (and current numbers require that at least another 12 billion should be added to the total amount cited by Adams (1990 - although the same figures are used in the 2010 edition of the book), and that figure should be doubled if fishes and shellfishes are to be included). Why, then, would anyone willingly put themselves “in the way” of such statistics? Why would any meat eater know these things? After all, vegan and vegetarian animal advocates know more of these numbers than meat eaters know: and ironically the former are also the ones who have seen all the videos showing commercial animal slaughter.


Food for thought.

Paris Vegan Day.

Paris Vegan Day, 2010, was a rip-roaring success with around 5000 people through the doors during the day-long event.

In addition, there were events in Paris earlier in the week leading up to PVD, such as a vegan Thanksgiving dinner and an Italian salsa evening, both with attendances of 200.

I gave a talk about the philosophical and practical differences among traditional animal welfarism, neo-welfarism, and rights-based animal advocacy. The questions at the end of the talk were interesting: they touched on the issues of insects, micro-organisms in soil, evolution (or the lack of in some people), vegetarianism, harm done by vegans, and violence.

Earlier in the day, Paul Vogel of the Irish Animal Education Trust gave a talk about his initiative, about how the talks were going and how access to Irish schools was proving to be a major obstacle.

The French versions of Gary Francione’s Abolitionist Approach slide shows were also shown, and I believe the Vegan Ireland introduction film was shown somewhere during the day.

I would like to thank Deborah Brown Pivain, Mark, translator Valery Giroux, Alexandre Brown Pivain and “Australian Paul” as we came to call him.

Paris Vegan Day.

I. Top Floor – The Loft
Fashion, Beauty and in Shape
• Fashion shows
• Clothing /shoe exhibitors
• Cosmetics and beauty product exhibitors
• Make-overs
• Athletes show
• Vegan Speed Meeting

II. Ground Floor and Mezzanine – The Forum
Food and Gastronomy; Nutrition and Health
• Various Culinary demos
• Cookbook author forum
• Vegan wine and cheese tasting
• Food stands

III. Ground Floor – Sas
Conferences and Photo Exhibits
• Slideshow/videos on animals
• Conference with international speakers on animals & animal rights; veganism and the environment, famine reduction, nutrition and health.

IV. Basement – The Club
Music concert
• Concert with a variety of well-known and to-be-known vegan groups and musicians.
• Video clips by well-known musicians with personal message for PVD

V. Restaurant – La Halle aux Oliviers
Food and Drink
• Diverse restaurants and chefs present vegan food for purchase
• Children’s Activities

Animal Rights November at UCD.

I have just completed a series of presentations and film shows entitled “Animal Rights November” (ARN) at University College, Dublin. This month-long series was similar to “Animal Rights July” which I organised at UCD in 2009.

The ARN programme involved a main session running from 7.15 to 9.45pm, each Tuesday in November, following an “early bird session” (apart from week 5) running from 6-7pm:-

WEEK 1 - (2^nd November) The Animal Rights Debate: Abolition or Regulation.

Professor Gary L. Francione (Rutgers University, live via Skype from the US) and Professor Robert Garner (University of Leicester, via videocast) presented themes from their newly-published book, The Animal Rights Debate: Abolition or Regulation, on animal advocacy, animal welfare and animal rights, and the value - or otherwise - of different campaigning strategies.

Gary Francione was also available to take questions from the audience. This event took place simultaneously at UCD and the vegan café in Dublin city centre.

The Early Bird Hour 1. The Irish Animal Education Trust presents “PARTITIONS.” A short video about small farmers and their attitudes to the animals they rear and send to slaughter.

WEEK 2 - (9^th November.) “HOME.” One of the most important films of all time, first released in 2009 on World Environment Day.

Documentary about the present day state of the Earth, its climate and how we as the dominant species have long-term repercussions on its future. Includes footage of the beginning of the natural world, starting with single-celled algae developing at the edges of volcanic springs. By showing algae’s essential role in the evolution of photosynthesis, it also explores the innumerable species of plants which all have their origins in this one-celled life form.

The focus switches to the agricultural revolution and its impacts, the harnessing of oil, leading to fire, industry, cities and inequality gaps like never before. The film examines the impact of cattle ranches, deforestation, food and water shortages, the over-quarrying crisis and the shortage of energy, namely electricity. Cities such as New York City, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Shenzhen, Mumbai, Tokyo, and Dubai are used as examples of the mismanagement and wastage of energy, water and food. The film also focuses on global warming and the carbon crisis. Home shows how melting glaciers, rising sea levels and changing weather patterns are ravaging the people who have least to do with climate change, but also how it soon will affect rich populous areas.

“HOME is the story of the earth and the evolution of sentient life, and how human beings have, in a fairly short time, brought our planet to the brink of disaster. The narration is intelligent and those who know little about ecology will come away with considerable expertise. Those who are already knowledgeable will learn even more.

“As far as the animal issue is concerned, HOME is better by miles than Al Gore’s document, An Inconvenient Truth, which was a surprise given that some of HOME’s sponsors produce animal products. There is explicit criticism of intensive agriculture and discussion about the inefficient use of resources (grains, water) used to produce meat. Although the film certainly does not advocate veganism, that is the logical implication of its message. As I have argued for longer than I care to remember, anyone who cares at all about the environment should be vegan even if she/he does not care about the moral issue involved in animal exploitation.  HOME is a desperately needed wake-up call.”

Law professor and animal rights philosopher, Gary L. Francione.

The Early Bird Hour 2. Living With the Enemy. (30 mins.)  

What happens when a vegan activists lives on an animal farm? This fascinating BBC documentary shows vegan John Curtin living for a few days with farmer Henry Yates.

Professor Tom Regan on the Late Late Show. (30 mins.)  

This is Tom Regan’s appearance on The Late Late Show (circa 2000). Regan explains his version of animal rights theory, his opposition to violence, and takes questions from mystified and sometime hostile audience members. The ARN audience was invited to count the number of mistakes Late Late Show presenter Pat Kenny makes in his account of animal rights.

WEEK 3 - (16^th November) EARTHLINGS.

A film by Shaun Monson, narrated by Joaquin Phoenix. A documentary about humankind’s economic dependence on nonhuman animals raised as pets, food, clothing, entertainment and for scientific research.

“Of all the films I have ever made… this is the one that gets people talking the most.” Joaquin Phoenix. 

“For those who watch Earthlings, the world will never be the same.” Professor Tom Regan, author of The Case for Animal Rights.

The Early Bird Hour 3. 2009 Vegan News Interview with Professor Gary Francione, author of Animals, Property and the Law, Rain without Thunder, Introduction to Animal Rights and Animals as Persons.

Professor Francione speaks about his concept of “moral schizophrenia,” the case of footballer/dog fighter Michael Vick, single-issue campaigns, vegetarian first, animal welfarism, Peter Singer, PETA, self-awareness in nonhuman animals, Tom Regan, welfare reform and the property status of animals, KFC and gassing chickens, the economics of agriculture, supply and demand, animal experimentation, vegan advocacy, leaders, capitalist animal users, and violence.    

WEEK 4 - (23^rd November) Undercover: Images You Were Never Meant to See.

A critical investigation of the use of undercover footage used by animal advocates to educate the public about animal use. The premise of this session was the fact that both Earthlings and Victor Schonfeld’s The Animals Film featured in ARN.

Whereas Earthlings uses film shot undercover, The Animals Film does not. The makers of The Animals Film obtained permission to film from farmers and researchers, and some scenes were the result of freedom of information legislation. In fact, it can be argued that the impact that 1980s documentaries like Schonfeld’s has resulted in animal users being unwilling to allow cameras into their animal use facilities, thus serving to justify secret filming as a means to gain material.   

Advances in technology means that undercover footage of animal use, especially in slaughterhouses, farms and circuses, frequently comes to light. The session was designed to ask how effective are these exposés and how have the countermovements responded?

The presentation included what is probably the most famous footage from inside an animal laboratory, shot by the researchers themselves, and never meant to be seen by the public.

The Early Bird Hour 4. Interview with the director of The Animals Film, Victor Schonfeld.

Victor Schonfeld looks back at the production of the film and talks about the impact it had and its continuing relevance. This interview was a great introduction to the following week’s feature, The Animals Film.

WEEK 5 - (30^th November) The Animals Film. A film by Victor Schonfeld and Myriam Alaux.

This ground-breaking film, recently re-released to celebrate its 25^th anniversary, was instrumental in inspiring a huge growth in animal advocacy in the early 1980s.  If you want to see what caused the biggest boost in action for animals in history, then see this film.  Narrated by actress Julie Christie, Victor Schonfeld and Myriam Alaux’s film helps us explore the attitudes and the norms and values that allow us to exploit other animals on a massive scale.

The Animals Film pioneered the style of documentary filming we now take for granted in the work of film makers such as Michael Moore. It includes cinéma vérité sequences, secretly-filmed footage, advertisements, cartoon footage, rock music, and a range of interviews with farmers, animal experimenters and animal advocates. Music by Talking Heads and Robert Wyatt.

“I do not know when I have come out of a press show so moved by the power of the cinema as a medium to transform the entire sensibilities of an audience,” Alan Brien, Sunday Times film critic.

“Fancy a roast this Sunday? First watch The Animals Film,” Ken Russell, film director.

Although ARN was advertised every week by placing posters throughout the UCD campus, and by advertising on both the Sociology and general UCD web pages, attendance was low. I think this is revealing of the fact that vegan animal rights advocacy is starting from a very low base in Ireland. The first session, involving Profs Francione and Garner, was the best in terms of numbers.

Lessons for me? 

Two immediate ones – carry on and redouble efforts and don’t forget that 21^st Century students are not exactly of the class of those of the 1960s, 1970s or even the 1980s.