Claiming for the abolition of animal exploitation as a political/social matter without trying to convert people to veganism isn’t a nonsense, it is the way with which all social movements create a debate in the society to get a practice banned. Don’t you see that saying one cannot be for the end of animal exploitation without being vegan is also a complete political suicide for our movement?
ABOLITIONIST STRATEGY: Gary Francione is a Professor of Law opposed to speciesism, he debated online with an animal rights activist regarding the question of the strategy we should use to implement animal rights in the society. After the exchange of some arguments, Professor Francione stopped debating and blocked the other activist and erased his comments. But here you will find the exchange that was made public by the activist:..
Francione:
« I think that promoting anything other than the abolition of animal exploitation as a political/social matter and veganism as the individual expression of abolition is nonsense and is just an excuse to allow for animal charities to fundraise. And if you think that people who are continuing to eat animals are going to help bring about the revolution, you are dreaming.
And you are confused: the boycott of the products of human slavery is not analogous to veganism. Animal products are not the products made BY animals; they are the products made OF animals. Consuming animal products is analogous to buying slaves and not to buying products made by slaves. The one thing that was clear during the anti-slavery movement was that abolitionists maintained that no one should buy slaves.
I find it amusing on one level–and very depressing on another–the extent to which some “animal people” will go in doing cartwheels to avoid promoting veganism as a moral imperative.»
Activist:
« Claiming for the abolition of animal exploitation as a political/social matter without trying to convert people to veganism isn’t a nonsense, it is the way with which all social movements create a debate in the society to get a practice banned. For example, in Switzerland we will have a vote soon on the possible ban of synthetical pesticides, and people who promote this ban don’t say that it is also necessary for all people to boycott food that was grown with this kind of pesticides. And for them to say that can vote for the ban only people who never buy food grown with this kind of pesticides would be a complete suicide. Don’t you see that saying one cannot be for the end of animal exploitation without being vegan is also a complete political suicide for our movement ?
It is much easier for people to change their political opinion about a practice if they don’t also have to change completely all their consumption habits. And having more people having the political opinion that animal exploitation has to end can bring us to a situation where more than 50% of people share this claim and we can then vote a law forbidding animal exploitation. Don’t you think that the ban of animal exploitation would be a good thing ? I agree that buying meat is buying a part of an animal. But in our society it isn’t perceived as a part of an animal, it is just perceived as a product. So the comparison between veganism and hooganism (the boycott of animal products and the boycott of products made by human slaves) holds up well. Also, eggs and dairy are clearly products made by the animals.
Also buying animal products is very different from buying human slaves, because people don’t buy live animals, they just buy non-living products. In the contrary, buying live animals to kill them is analogous to buying human slaves, but the big majority of humans in our countries don’t buy live animals to kill them, they just buy things to eat. So if we can clearly say that buying live animals to kill them and wanting the end of animal agriculture is analogous to buying human slaves and wanting the abolition of slavery, we can also clearly say that buying yoghurts, eggs and non-vegan sandwiches and wanting the end of animal agriculture is analogous to buying sugar and cotton made by human slaves and wanting the abolition of human slavery. And we have to realize that the big majority of people who were for the abolition of human slavery, consumed sugar and cotton produced by slaves. But they still succeeded. And we can do the same if we focus on the political opinion of people.» SOURCE…
RELATED VIDEOS: