How authoritarian politicians or parties will affect the fate of animals is one question. How the animal protection movement should respond to their rise is another. Should we cast our nets widely and reach people across the political spectrum, including the large share that is voting for authoritarian politicians? It’s possible, but skepticism is warranted. As a liberation movement, the animal protection movement aligns naturally with progressive ideologies. But the 'left' hasn’t massively picked-up the call for animal liberation. Indeed, progressive campaigners may often avoid getting involved with the meat or animal topics too much, knowing those can alienate voters. For now, animal rights remains an orphan child of the left.
TOBIAS LEENAERT: In the US and Europe, authoritarian and populist (far) right and nationalist parties have gained in influence or entered government coalitions. That isn’t good news for animals: conservatives generally seem to be less in favor of animal-friendly policies, alternative protein products or plant-based lifestyles. And increasing polarization is making things worse. While meat alternatives have long been stereotyped (they’re for bunny lovers, green freaks or health nuts), now apparently they’re also something for “woke” progressives and part of the “culture wars” (not to mention they’re “ultra-processed”). Many people on the right now classify ideas like veganism and diet change together with other progressive ideas that they oppose – from environmentalism and cultural diversity to trans-rights and anti-colonialism.
Various theories try to explain what exactly is going on here. Political psychologist Karen Stenner, for instance, suggests that people with “authoritarian dispositions” (one third of the population) are averse to all kinds of differences, long for uniformity, and want strong and decisive leadership. Stenner, by the way, also clearly distinguishes such authoritarians from conservatives (who are allergic to change across time). I’m aware of the coarseness and limitations of commonly used labels like left/right or progressive/conservative and their different meanings in different countries. I nevertheless use some of them here (they remain useful shorthand) though I may also refer to “non-progressives”.
How Trump and other authoritarian politicians or parties in Europe will affect the fate of animals is one question. How the animal protection movement should respond to their rise is another. As a liberation movement, the animal protection movement aligns naturally with progressive ideologies. In recent years, it has increasingly associated itself with other progressive causes—and for good reason, as violence against animals often intersects with violence against humans. But certainly in the current cultural and political climate, this association can make it more challenging to reach people across the political spectrum.
Still we can ask the question: should we cast our nets widely and reach people across the political spectrum, including the large share that is voting for authoritarian politicians? You might think this is a no-brainer, and that we can’t achieve our goals without the support of those demographics. Consider, however, how progressive legislation has often been passed with little support and sometimes much opposition from conservatives (the 1964 Civil Rights Act in the US, marriage equality in several countries, drug decriminalization, and LGBTQ-rights come to mind). Could we achieve similar gains for animals by talking to (and convincing) only progressives? Polarization, after all, isn’t necessarily all bad —it can have galvanizing effects, compelling people on one side to take a stand.
It’s possible, but skepticism is warranted, for several reasons. First of all, the larger the right-of-center electorate gets and the more it is in power, the harder it will be to push through with only progressive support. Secondly, political (and other) achievements are always in danger of being changed or even reversed (see what’s been happening with abortion rights in the US). Thirdly, among the conservative electorate are the farmers, who are very important stakeholders for our movement. Finally, while as I said the animal movement has been quite supportive of progressive topics, the rest of the left (the non-vegan part, so to speak) hasn’t returned the favor so far.
The number of animal-friendly people in human rights, feminist, LGBTQ circles etc. is undoubtedly significantly higher than among the general population, but the left hasn’t massively picked up the call for animal liberation. Indeed, progressive campaigners may often avoid getting involved with the meat or animal topics too much, knowing those can alienate voters. For now, animal rights remains an orphan child of the left. SOURCE…
RELATED VIDEOS: