Vegan Trove Podcast Ep 7: Intersectionality and Abolitionist Veganism

I invite you to listen to my latest podcast Episode 7 (Listen here). This episode is targeted at a specific audience but I’m sure others will find it interesting.  With the kind permission of the author of Vegan Ethos, I am sharing her recent blog post which you can view here:  Intersectionality and Abolitionist Veganism Part 1

Intersectionality and Abolitionist Veganism; Part II | Vegan Ethos

“Lefty”

Recently a person who was a republican commented about my posting of the following quote by Bill O’Reilly on my vegan page. I thought it was worth posting the quote because it’s so breath-takingly classist and racist.

Fox New’s Bill O’ Reilly was asked by his Fox news co-host on the 2012 US election night, how the election got so tight. And this was his reply:

O’REILLY:

“Because it’s a changing country, the demographics are changing. It’s not a traditional America anymore. And there are 50 percent of the voting public who want stuff. They want things and who is going to give them things? President Obama. He knows it and he ran on it.

And whereby 20 years ago President Obama would have been roundly defeated by an establishment candidate like Mitt Romney. The white establishment is now the minority. And the voters, many of them, feel that this economic system is stacked against them and they want stuff.You’re going to see a tremendous Hispanic vote for President Obama. Overwhelming for President Obama and women will probably break President Obama’s way. People feel that they are entitled to things and which candidate, between the two, is going to give them things?”

The person who responded to this quote called me a “lefty” and said I was siding with a political party. This was my response to him:

If you notice I commented earlier that this page has no affiliation with any political party. This quote by Bill O’ Reilly was not posted to praise or run down any political party, it is to HIGHLIGHT a deeply entrenched classism and racism within the US, and which also exists in other countries. This attitude permeates many societies but many will deny it exists.

I want to live in a sane society. I want to live in a vegan world. I want to live in a nonviolent and just world — a world which does not “otherise” humans and nonhumans; a world where speciesism, racism, sexism, classism, heterosexism, ableism and other forms of discrimination do not exist or at the very least are addressed when they arise . All forms of discrimination are related and cause violence. None of them occur in a vacuum. Where we have one form, we will have all forms. I would hope that every human would want to live in nonviolent and just world. but sadly that’s not the case. I think that makes me human to want to live in a peaceful world free of exploitation. I’m not sure why it has been given the label of “lefty”? If wanting that makes me a “lefty”, what does that say about those who do not have “left” leaning attitudes? It saddens me that everyone does not have this wish. I don’t even know if most people even know what they want today. Those who speak about a vision of how the world could be are often ridiculed. If Gandhi were alive today, he would probably be mocked and smeared and we would not see him on mainstream media, one reason being that nonviolence goes against corporate interests and corporations fund mainstream media.

I address these various forms of discrimination in as many ways as I can. In this case, I seized the opportunity to use this offensive racist classist O’ Reilly quote — which I’m sure Mr. O’Reilly didn’t think was offensive — to highlight an existing –and often times denied– attitude which continues to oppress minorities world-wide.

I live in Australia and I live in the world. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Everything that occurs on this planet indirectly or directly effects us all (whether we realise it or not) since we are all interconnected. Many humans act as if we are not connected. They act as if what happens within these human-made constructed borders (countries), does not effect anyone — human or nonhuman — outside of their borders, but it does. It only takes one person acting badly in a room to ruin the time of most of the rest of the people within that room. The planet is the same. It only takes violence occurring in the form of animal use (which occurs globally), or racism (global) or homophobia (global) or sexism (global) etc, to effect everyone in some way on the planet. The sooner we wake up to the fact that we are not separate from each other the better. This is not a new idea. It’s been around for thousands of years.

So I ask you to please consider what I’m saying and understand that I sometimes use certain current events to highlight a certain form discrimination which causes violence. This page’s primary focus is veganism which is ALL about non-human animals, not us (even though we greatly benefit), but as well as veganism, I also address all other forms of discrimination (human issues) on this page as well to emphasize how “otherisation” is connected and must end. This page is about nonviolence

Did you have to “come out” to your parents when you realised you liked members of the opposite sex?

Did you have to “come out” to your parents when you realised you liked members of the opposite sex? Were you in fear they would reject you for “coming out” as heterosexual? Were you denied the basic human right to legally marry a person of the opposite sex and have to listen to constant debates in society as to whether you should be allowed to marry? Did you have to be concerned at school that others would victimize you, vilify you, bully you, sexually assault you and be physically violent towards you because you were heterosexual? Did you ever fear being discriminated against in the workplace because you were heterosexual? Did you ever have to fear holding hands with your partner of the opposite sex when walking down the street? Were you exposed to constant attacks in the media and by religious groups calling you “evil” or a paedophile or “perverted” because you loved members of the opposite sex? This is just a little glimpse into the lives of LGBTIQ individuals.

Remember this next time you say something heterosexist or homophobic, or you hear someone say something homophobic and you pass it off as “harmless” or “just a bit of fun”.

Heterosexism is rampant. Homophobia is rampant. It causes violence. Please reject it.

Tim Putnam Speaks on Speciesism and Abolition at Colorado State University

Tim Putnam Speaks on Speciesism and Abolition 04/03/2012 Colorado State University – YouTube.

Speciesist Language and promoting discrimination in the minds of others

On LiveVegan today I commented about speciesist language and on being mindful of not accidentally promoting speciesism in other’s minds.

Here is a the link to the discussion that followed if you wish to view it

It’s good to try and be mindful of our language. When we refer to other animals, it’s important not to refer to them as “it” or “creature”. It’s also good to use the word “who” in a sentence. e.g the pig who did this etc. Speciesist language —- just like racist, sexist, homophobic, cissexist language — promotes “otherization” of groups. It ultimately promotes violence.

I personally try to avoid talking about other animals with non-vegans (or avoid talking about them in general) in terms of how other animals make me feel. I may speak about the cats who share my life privately with abolitionist vegans, and I may talk with abolitionist vegans about certain animals who visit our yard and how delighted I am that they visit, but I try to avoid talking about feelings regarding animals to the non-vegan public because it often just reinforces their speciesism. I might address in a calm and hopefully skilful way a speciesist comment they make and try and help them to think about their comments differently if at all possible. And I will try and bring veganism into the conversation if possible.

But my point is, that whatever I may or may not feel about certain species of NH animals is my own issue and has little to do with that individual species. For example I think snakes are very interesting individuals. We live in a rural area where a particular snake who is very deadly to humans lives. A bite from this particular snake and in 30 minutes to an hour after a bite and it’s all over. I have come across a couple of Tiger snakes on the quiet road where I walk each day, and I have mixed reactions. I have a feeling of fear for my life and I also have feelings of love, fascination and care for them. Of course they are more fearful of me than I am of them. I once privately talked with an abolitionist vegan about my experience where I almost accidentally stepped on a Tiger snake at night who was resting on side of the road where I was walking. I could have been bitten had I not noticed the snake. I would not mention this incident in front of a non-vegan because it is likely to arouse feelings of speciesism. They may react with anger or fear and they may respond by speaking hatefully about that particular animal. They may also want to kill that particular animal if they encounter them in the future. So I do my best to never speak in such a way which could promote feelings of either fetishization, or dislike or favouritism of particular species. The public are speciesist enough and we don’t need to reinforce it. 🙂

Of course the most important way to address our own speciesism is to stop eating, wearing and using other animals and educate others to go vegan as well.

 

San Francisco Police Department ‘It Gets Better’ Video: LGBT Officers Release Inspiring Message (VIDEO)

San Francisco Police Department ‘It Gets Better’ Video: LGBT Officers Release Inspiring Message (VIDEO).

Creative, Non-Violent Vegan Advocacy (A Beginner’s Guide)

Creative, Non-Violent Vegan Advocacy (A Beginner’s Guide)

“And a growing number of abolitionist vegans are explaining and demonstrating the simple fact that unless we shift the paradigm to fully include these sentient beings in our moral community by embracing veganism and rejecting the property status of animals, there will be no end to the socially-acceptable barbarism which allows us to treat beings as innocent as our children as economic commodity units.”

My interview

Interview with Trish Roberts of LiveVegan – Roanoke vegan | Examiner.com
In celebration of World Vegan Month, I will be hosting a collection of interviews with vegan abolitionists from across the globe. I’m excited to have this opportunity to showcase vegan activists and give a face to our beautiful movement. Be sure to check back for regular installments throughout the month of November.
Today’s featured vegan abolitionist is Trish Roberts of LiveVegan. I highly recommend following LiveVegan on Facebook, Youtube, and Twitter. Trish does a wonderful job of keeping us up to date on activities from other abolitionists and relevant current events and news stories.

Trish, tell us a little about yourself…

My name is Trish Roberts. I’m an abolitionist vegan and I live in Australia. I became vegan overnight after reading some information about the reality of the dairy industry and the associated veal industry, and also upon hearing about the slaughter process of chickens. That was six years ago. Shortly after becoming vegan I started an AR/vegan advocacy group.

It wasn’t until I came across Prof. Gary L. Francione’s work in mid 2009 that I truly clarified my own position. My own education is an ongoing process and through his work, I believe I have become a more effective advocate. I spend much of my time doing vegan education mostly through social networking sites like our page LiveVegan on Facebook, Twitter, LiveVegan vids and podcasts on Youtube, fora, discussions and in everyday life.

I’m vegan because I believe we have no right to eat, wear and use other animals. 56 billion nonhuman animals are tortured and murdered each year for our pleasure. Approximately 1,140,000 sea animals are tortured and murdered every 30 seconds for our pleasure. This is morally unjustifiable and it is unimaginable violence. I’m vegan because I believe in nonviolence and justice; so I cannot in good conscience promote anything less than veganism. I believe veganism is the most important social justice movement today and is the most important form of activism one can engage in.

If I may share a quote by a friend, author of “UVE Archives“) which I agree with wholeheartedly:

[I] am a vegan because after much learning and thought about the issue, I have come to see enslaving, exploiting, or intentionally killing an animal as morally equivalent to enslaving, exploiting, or intentionally killing a child. The only difference is one is socially acceptable and the other is socially unacceptable.

What do you think should be the focus of the non-human animal rights movement?

There are two movements today — the “humane” use movement (all large animal organisations) and the abolitionist movement.

The abolitionist movement is a grassroots political movement and it’s growing every day. Its focus is the abolition of animal use through creative, nonviolent vegan education. Veganism rejects the property status of animals and is a recognition of the moral personhood of nonhuman animals. The abolitionist movement is unique because it has veganism as its moral baseline. Our focus should be not HOW animals are used, but THAT they are used, and the only way to address this terrible injustice is to be vegan and educate the public to be vegan.

What are some of the biggest obstacles to reaching our goals?

One of the biggest obstacles to achieving our goals is the false belief that “humane” use / welfare “reform” will lead to abolition, that welfare is just a different tactic to meet the same objective – abolition. However, welfare and abolition are opposing and incompatible views. Welfare “reform” makes animal exploitation more efficient by reducing production costs; it further enmeshes animals in the property paradigm; it makes people more comfortable about animal use and does little to nothing to reduce the torture of other animals. Animal welfare protects animal interests only to the extent that it provides economic benefits for humans.The reality is there’s no such thing as “humane” use or “humane” murder, and even if there were, it would still be unjust. ALL animal use is abuse. ALL animal use is violence.

Today we have big multi-million dollar animal organisations that are just charities. They are not political. Abolitionists are building a political grassroots movement with veganism as our foundation.
I’d like to take this opportunity to say if you are not vegan, if you believe in justice and nonviolence, please go vegan. It’s easy and it will be one of the most profound and important decisions you will make in your life.

What is violence? What is nonviolence?

I wanted to share this. I’ve written a rather long winded comment on some of my thoughts on nonviolence. I’m sorry if it rambles, but there’s a point to it 😉

I’ve often wondered what I would do if I was on the receiving end of physical violence. I had the opportunity at one time in my life to discover what I would do. Apart from the shock of the incident, my impulse was to do my best to remove myself. The incident was not extreme enough that I felt my life was in danger, but it was quite shocking and an education. I sometimes wonder how I would respond in a life-threatening situation. I know that I would do my best to temporarily seriously disable the other person, before removing myself, but I really do not know if I could ever deliberately kill another being to save myself. I hope that I would not do that. I guess we never know what we are going to do until we are in that situation. ***I do know that the moment I end the life of another, no matter what has unfolded prior, I have demonstrated that my life is more important to me than the life of that other person’s (human or non) and that this attitude is at the core of most of our problems.****

Forms of social discrimination and social inequity are violence and it is often a precursor to greater violence e.g WWII.

It’s often the case that people refer to the WWII as an example where violence was justifiable to end the war, because the Nazis were doing awful things. It is true the genocidal policies were horrific, but National Socialism rose as a reaction to other injustices. None of it justifies the policy of genocide, but the injustices weren’t justified either.

Please indulge me for a few paragraphs while I discuss some history.

Hitler rose in large part because of the dire situations of the Germans were in during the Weimar Republic. The causes of that situation lie in the Empires of France, Germany, Austro-Hungary, Britain, Russia, and the Ottomans. The empires were extremely classist (and sexist and racist) societies based in hereditary economic divisions in which the aristocracy held almost all the wealth and power, and ordinary people had few rights. The royals and aristocrats of these empires were mostly close relatives, eg. Kaiser Wilhelm was the grandson of Queen Victoria and cousin of Czar Nikolas’ wife. Ordinary people were used as fodder for competitions between family members. A few years before and after conflicts, combatants would be be intermarrying and having celebrations with each other.

Not only did these aristocracies oppress their “subjects”, they garnered much of their great wealth from their Empires, the subjugation of most of the rest of the world. The lead-up to WW I was more about competition in carving up Africa and China and SE Asia than about Serbia. These empires were rooted in oppression, theft and slavery of the majority of the world’s population. The German and Austro-Hungarian Empires were what remained of the old Holy Roman Empire, dissolved by Francis II (Austro-Hungarian Emperor Franz-Joseph’s grandfather) in 1806. With the Austro-Germans already fracturing, the Russian, British, and French empires saw the Serbian crisis as a way to attack a weak competitor.

What ended the senseless and prolonged slaughter of the war was not some wonderful tactical cleverness by generals. It was the fact that ordinary people were reaching the limit of their acceptance of their exploitation. Three years after the start of the war, the Russian Empire was overthrown by the people. The Kaiser’s navy had rebelled and also raised the socialist flag in Wilhelmshaven, calling for “peace and bread”, and by Nov 7 1918, Bavaria had rebelled and become a socialist region. In the US, Gene Debs leader of the American Socialist Party had been imprisoned for opposing the war.

His party was fighting for economic equity successfully enough that the US imposed the Espionage Act (1917) to limit free speech, the Sedition Act (1918) made statements considered “disloyal” a federal crime, and with the Palmer Raids (1920), the idea of “un-American activities” became a reason to prosecute and oppress socialist dissent. In the UK, Socialists and thinkers like Bertrand Russell were also fighting against the war. Effectively, WW I was ended by agreement, so the various aristocracies could fight the wave of peoples revolutions.

The ending of the war didn’t prevent the operation of greed by the winning aristocrats. The Austro-Hungarian and German empires were shattered into numerous smaller nations, and the victors split up the colonies. Their “terms of surrender” included massive reparations even though most of what was left of the economy was based on cheap colonial imports. Not content with that, the victors maintained blockades preventing imports to Germany even after the war was over.

The result was a major cause of the depression which lead to many Germans becoming desperate. For example, in 1914, 50 million DM (Deutschmarks) was worth about US$12 million. Nine years later, it was worth a dollar. A wheelbarrow of Deutschmarks would buy a loaf of bread. Within a few months it was worthless. People used 1 million DM bills as notepaper, since it was cheaper than blank paper. And yet, assistance was given to suppress the socialist revolutions.

The point of this historical diversion is to say that if people acted from a sense of justice and respect for others, the situation in Germany is not likely ever to have arisen. When a situation like fascism is created through poverty, awfulness, greed, exploitation of others, it is easy to justify violence against those who are committing genocide. We say “This is so bad we have to do something” (violent). Ahimsa would say that the need to act is earlier, before fascism arises, when vengeance and greed impose depression, economic collapse and hopelessness within a nation like Germany, and a breeding ground is created for the mindless anger that becomes fascism.

In the US right there is now a similar situation occurring where there is great inequality and economic poverty. This hasn’t happened overnight, it’s been brewing for decades. The situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan with the hopelessness, poverty and oppression likewise creates situations which are fertile ground for people who preach anger and hatred. The disenfranchised look for a leader/s who personifies and articulates that anger, and they almost always look for a target — e.g sometimes a marginalised group– glbti, women, Muslims, etc; sometimes a group of oppressors.

Mahatma Gandhi said: “Poverty is the worst kind of violence,”

The US defense forces spend 1.75 billion dollars per day in spreading the US empire. With every country the US gov invades and occupies, that nation continues to create great poverty and desperation. That in turn becomes a breeding ground for violence and so on it goes. Imagine if that 1.75 billion dollars/day were spent on wages for workers, US and foreign, diplomatic efforts, to fix the destruction in Iraq and Afghanistan, build hospitals etc. It would improve so many facets of life there, and not only do what is just, but to create fertile ground for future peace, not only there in war-torn countries, but to address the resentment against the US and probably significantly reduce threats to the US.

Here’s an essay by Noam Chomsky people might like to view: Remembering Fascism: Learning From the Past

Finally, here’s a few quotes I like:
“Non-violence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man.” — Mahatma Gandhi

“Power is of two kinds. One is obtained by the fear of punishment and the other by acts of love. Power based on love is a thousand times more effective and permanent then the one derived from fear of punishment.” Gandhi

“Nonviolence means avoiding not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. You not only refuse to shoot a man, but you refuse to hate him.” Martin Luther King, Jr.

Of course, animal use is violence, and I believe it is at the core of all the violence we see unfolding. Where we have one kind of discrimination, we will have all kinds — speciesism = sexism= heterosexism = racism = classism and so forth. Veganism is the cornerstone of nonviolence.

When we persecute the vulnerable, we have become completely dysfunctional. I see our species as animals who are pathological, dysfunctional and completely caught up in our “sacredness” and delusions of supremacy and nothing good can ever come of that. With this destructive attitude, selfishness and our complete love of, and addition to, violence, we will probably be extinct in a century or so. I’m not being pessimistic here, I’m being realistic.

Here’s a couple of excellent quotes about anger:“Anger is the enemy of non-violence and pride is a monster that swallows it up.” Gandhi “You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger.” Buddha

[a blog by Trish Roberts Oct 31, 2010 ]