Adventures in the the Partnership Between Corporate Welfarists and Institutional Exploiters This is going around and has all the corporate welfarists excited: How Animal Welfare Advances Veganism and Animal Rights huffingtonpost/karen-dawn/how-animal-welfare-advanc_b_4967499.html The essay is in the Food for Thought series co-sponsored by happy exploitation restaurant chain, Chipotle. No surprise there. The essay is nothing but an endorsement of the happy exploitation movement. To call this essay absurd is the nicest thing I can say about it. First, welfare reforms do not do anything to help animals now. Most of them are phased in over a period of years because they are inefficient industry practices that are being phased out anyway. They generally--almost never--help animals now if they ever help animals at all. And when they do, the help is slight, if that, analogous to putting padding on a water board used to torture humans. Second, the author claims that advocating veganism does not preclude support for a more humane meat system . . . . Really? Sorry, but thats just nonsense. When animal advocates *praise* supposedly more humane exploitation, there can be *no* doubt that this sends out a very powerful normative message to the public: we animal advocates say that this is okay. Can anyone really doubt that when all of the large animal groups in the U.S., together with Peter Singer, express appreciation and support for the pioneering happy exploitation program of Whole Foods (see below), it conveys a stamp of approval to the public? Of course not. Can anyone really doubt that PETAs giving an award to Whole Foods for being the best animal-friendly retailer (see below) does not amount to a stamp of approval? Of course not. Can anyone really doubt that PETA and HSUS praising Bell and Evans, the chicken processor, with PETA saying that animal welfare and good business can go hand in hand (see below) tells the public that consuming Bell and Evans chicken is morally acceptable? Of course not. Third, the author analogizes promoting welfare reform to what Amnesty International does--argues against the death penalty while advocating more humane forms of execution. But she misses a crucial point: Amnesty International is not promoting reforms as pioneering or giving awards to executioners and expressing appreciation and support concerning their methods of execution. Thats a rather *huge* difference. Fourth, it is pathetic--and tragic--that anyone thinks that corporate trainer/sales guru Dale Carnegies book, How to Win Friends and Influence People, should guide our thinking about animal ethics. If we cannot justify animal exploitation, then we have an obligation to be clear about that. Period. All of this nonsense about Dale Carnegie is just that--nonsense. Should the morality of rape, pedophilia, and genocide be a matter for analysis in accordance with How to Win Friends and Influence People? I think not. We have an obligation to make clear that we cannot justify exploiting nonhuman animals. Period. Our advocacy should always be creative and nonviolent. But our moral bottom line should be clear. If someone cares but wants to do less than go vegan, that should be her/his choice and never the advice of animal advocates. And the idea that the public cannot be educated about veganism except through promoting everything except veganism, or by promoting veganism in secret or clandestine ways, is not only absurd but its wrong. The grassroots abolitionist vegan movement is proving that every single day. Here are three essays to read and that explain the foregoing ideas in greater detail. abolitionistapproach/animal-welfare-regulation-happy-exploitation-and-speciesism/#.Uynw2aL_naF abolitionistapproach/the-four-problems-of-animal-welfare-in-a-nutshell/#.UynwxaL_naF abolitionistapproach/abolitionist-animal-rights-abolitionist-veganism-in-a-nutshell/#.UynwsaL_naF It is no surprise that this essay was part of a venture involving the happy exploitation restaurant chain, Chipotle. The essay is nothing more than an endorsement of the partnership between the corporate animal movement and institutionalized animal users.
Posted on: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 20:47:35 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015