The following item was posted on Facebook by Gee Krupke:
“Why I don’t support Animal Liberation Front:
1. They increase the amount of suffering due to taking one suffering individual to have them replaced by another individual who will suffer.
2. It’s a poor use of time and resources towards something that will never change until people reject the use of animals, i.e. accepting veganism. They should use their limited time and resources to educate [everyone], because that is only when the widespread use of animals will end.
3. They engage in and encourage criminal acts which paints the movement as being about violent extremism. That pushes people away and makes the job of education that much harder.
With that said, I, of course, support rescuing but not when it increases demand for individuals to be birthed into bondage: adopt at a shelter or any place outside the forces of objectification. They need our help too, and it doesn’t conflict with justness, like the activities of ALF.
A question posed to this argument:
“What if you were the suffering, sentient being that was being held & tortured, wouldn’t you want someone to do something illegal to get you out?”
Not at the expense of others. And with that argument, it would happen in perpetuity, if all were given the option (due to the issue of supply and demand). A more concrete example: I would not want to be rescued from a concentration camp if it was on the condition of another person being born or captured to take my place. So it seems to me an argument that is based on tokenism, not equality, that results in condemning one individual to suffering while aiding another (who will very often succumb to a really miserable end anyways, due to their unhealthy breeding and conditions they were kept in). On top of that, we have the option of rescuing others who are in need and without increasing suffering that necessarily occurs while animal use is demanded. It’s not an issue of illegality here but of wrongness in further compounding the problem.
In response to the position that “every movement needs radicals”:
What’s truly radical, meaning going to the root, is challenging the notion of animals as property by advocating for their right not to be used. That is what undermines the system in a fundamental way; people no longer taking part in the use of animals. I want nothing more than non-humans to be safe and free, like all vegans, but we must do it in a reasonable way that, at the very least, doesn’t increase the body count.
And as a finale, a recapitulation of the argument in the form of a question:
If you could rescue a dog/cat/parrot (or any other animal that when rescued would not result in someone being bred or captured to take their place) or a chicken/cow/mink (or any other animal that when rescued would result in another individual being bred or captured to take their place) which would you choose? And this is the reality. To me it’s a simple equation of quantitative value.”
L.O.P. – Indeed. Militant Direct Action makes no sense from any standpoint. Forget M.D.A. and start educating people on Veganism as the moral baseline instead. If you want to rescue animals, make sure that you’re not just adding to the problem instead of the solution, and feed them Vegan wherever and whenever possible.
If you’re not already Vegan, and you think animals matter morally, then please go Vegan. It’s incredible for the animals, easy and great for you, and wonderful for the planet. If you’re already Vegan, please educate non-Vegans about why they should go Vegan. Please rescue, volunteer, adopt, foster, spay, and neuter the nonhuman refugees of domestication whenever you can. Please feed your nonhuman family Vegan where you can. These things are the most important, morally responsible things to do and are desperately needed by everyone.
To learn more about Abolitionist Veganism and the issues I’ve outlined in this post, check out The Master List Of Vegan Info:
Disclaimer: My only goal with this list is to produce as comprehensive a resource for Vegan information as possible. I am 100% Abolitionist Vegan and 100% against exploitation of nonhuman or human animals, any type of violence against human or nonhuman persons or property, welfare regulation, any form of speciesism, ethnic bigotry, genderism, ableism, heterosexism, etc., any of the large governmental or non-governmental nonhuman animal organizations, “happy meat,” vegetarianism, veg*nism, Meat-Free Mondays, or other forms of reductionism and anything else that makes it seem like any form of violence or exploitation of animals is ok. If any of those positions are endorsed on any site in this list, or any language is used to imply that, it’s not that I included that link because I agree, but simply because I don’t control every bit of information on all of these sites.