archive-com.com » COM » A » ABOLITIONISTAPPROACH.COM

Total: 223

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • The Abolitionist-Regulationist Debate From Another Era: Sound Familiar? - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    it You openly and sincerely but nonviolently express your persistent uncompromising moral opposition to slavery which is a system of boundless immorality Similarly if you believe that animal exploitation is wrong the solution is not to support happy exploitation The solution is to go vegan be clear about veganism as an unequivocal moral baseline and to engage in creative nonviolent vegan education to convince others not to participate in a system of boundless immorality It would have been absurd in the 19th century to claim that there was no difference between those who opposed slavery and those who favored its regulation It is absurd now to claim that there is no difference between those who propose veganism as a clear unequivocal moral baseline and those who promote the humane regulation of animal exploitation and compassionate consumption and who claim that being a conscientious omnivore is a defensible ethical position If you are not vegan please go vegan Veganism is about nonviolence First and foremost it s about nonviolence to other sentient beings But it s also about nonviolence to the earth and nonviolence to yourself The World is Vegan Gary L Francione Professor Rutgers University Related posts Commentary 21 The Animal Rights Debate the Abolitionist Approach Discussion Forum and a Response to Nicolette Hahn Niman Abolitionist Animal Rights Abolitionist Veganism in a Nutshell Statement on Abolitionist and Abolitionist Vegan Groups Veganism The Fundamental Principle of the Abolitionist Movement Commentary 6 Aspects of the Vegetarian Vegan Debate Share this entry Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Share on Pinterest Share on Linkedin Share on Tumblr Share on Vk Share on Reddit Share by Mail Français Visitez notre site miroir français Recent Posts Guest Essay This is Why New Welfarists Should Stop Equivocating on Moral Principles Concerning Animals A

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/the-abolitionist-regulationist-debate-from-another-era-sound-familiar/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive


  • My Interview On Philosophy Bites - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    it provokes your thinking on issues of animal ethics If you are not vegan please go vegan Veganism is about nonviolence First and foremost it s about nonviolence to other sentient beings But it s also about nonviolence to the earth and nonviolence to yourself The World is Vegan Gary L Francione Professor Rutgers University 2012 Gary L Francione Related posts Philosophy Bites Audio Interview on Abolition Published CNN Interview on The Andre Robinson King Case Vegan Philosophy in Spain Interview in The Believer Interview on Veganism Abolition in The Vegan Share this entry Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Share on Pinterest Share on Linkedin Share on Tumblr Share on Vk Share on Reddit Share by Mail Français Visitez notre site miroir français Recent Posts Guest Essay This is Why New Welfarists Should Stop Equivocating on Moral Principles Concerning Animals A Response to Mercy For Animals Incremental Reform in the Human Context Is Not Analogous to Welfare Reform and Single Issue Campaigns in the Nonhuman Context The Animals Need YOU A Report from the Intersectional Justice Conference Why Welfare Reform Campaigns and Single Issue Campaigns Necessarily Promote Animal Exploitation When Intersectional Justice Means Promoting Meat Fish

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/my-interview-on-philosophy-bites/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • A Response To PETA's Position On "Happy" Or "Humane" Exploitation - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    its steady stream of sexist campaigns that merely reinforce thinking of others as commodities which characterizes both sexism and speciesism and its position on the no kill movement there can be no doubt that PETA has become deeply involved in the whole happy or humane exploitation movement PETA gives awards to various vendors of happy meat and animal products PETA along with other animal groups has enthusiastically endorsed the Whole Foods Animal Compassionate program label PETA gave an award in 2004 to Temple Grandin the designer of happy slaughter houses and what Grandin calls the stairway to heaven system of slaughter PETA announces and then calls off boycotts of institutional animal users such as Kentucky Fried Chicken and Burger King and praises those companies for their supposed concern for animal welfare PETA praises McDonald s as actually leading the way in reforming the practices of fast food suppliers in the treatment and the killing of its beef and poultry To say that this does not constitute support for happy or humane exploitation is simply not correct Newkirk says We ve stopped PETA protests outside Burger King or McDonald s restaurants when those companies agreed to reforms but that doesn t mean that we would ever suggest eating meat from Burger King or anywhere else because we know that massive suffering still goes into every bite But if PETA calls off a boycott or protest PETA does not have to suggest eating meat from Burger King or McDonalds The moment PETA announces that the active opposition is at an end the message is sent out those concerned about animals can once again patronize these restaurants When PETA praises McDonald s Burger King the Whole Foods Animal Compassionate program or Kentucky Fried Chicken the message that is sent is very clear There is no need to say it s okay to eat a hamburger That message is unquestionably implicit when PETA praises the company or its labeling program Newkirk seems to acknowledge that welfare reforms do very little to improve animal welfare She characterizes reform efforts as providing a marginally less hideous life for animals and as g iving animals a few more inches of living space I would certainly agree with her there But then why does PETA spend so many of its resources on these welfare reform campaigns They are not a small part of PETA s program PETA s welfare reform campaigns and single issue campaigns are the centerpiece of PETA s program Indeed in contrast to its support for vegan advocacy Newkirk mentions PETA s support for the 21 Day Vegan Kickstart and our wildly popular vegan starter kit PETA s support for welfare reform and single issues is overwhelming Several years ago PETA Senior VP Dan Mathews gave an interview which occurred at a McDonald s restaurant The reporter asked if it was alright for him to order a cheeseburger Mathews replied Order what you want Half of our members are vegetarian and half think it s

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/a-response-to-petas-position-on-happy-or-humane-exploitation/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Means And Ends - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    of peace To say that the differences are only matters of strategy assumes that the means do not have to be consistent with the ends and may even be inconsistent So it s fine to advocate happy animal use to get to supposedly no use it s fine to advocate war to get to peace I suggest that putting aside the matter of whether happy use will get to no use or whether war will really lead to peace to dismiss these differences as mere matters of strategy ignores the fundamental differences involved World leaders who wage war always claim to want to achieve lasting peace I am quite certain that many of these leaders if not most really do want peace in the end But to say that we cannot distinguish Stalin from Gandhi is I think wrong If you are not vegan please go vegan Veganism is about nonviolence First and foremost it s about nonviolence to other sentient beings But it s also about nonviolence to the earth and nonviolence to yourself The World is Vegan Gary L Francione Professor Rutgers University 2012 Gary L Francione Related posts Abolition Making Sure the Means and the End Are Consistent BBC World Service Program Animals and Us Ends on a Vegan Note A Thought for Christmas Eve Journeys Into Speciesism Moral Behavior and Moral Significance Share this entry Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Share on Pinterest Share on Linkedin Share on Tumblr Share on Vk Share on Reddit Share by Mail Français Visitez notre site miroir français Recent Posts Guest Essay This is Why New Welfarists Should Stop Equivocating on Moral Principles Concerning Animals A Response to Mercy For Animals Incremental Reform in the Human Context Is Not Analogous to Welfare Reform and Single Issue

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/means-and-ends/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Our Choice - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    status of animals as commodities or things that exist for human use have the counterproductive effect of making people more comfortable about consuming animals and make animal advocates partners with institutional exploiters whom they ask animal advocates to support or B engage in creative nonviolent advocacy that promotes veganism as the moral baseline and that will reduce demand and effect a paradigm shift in our thinking about animals Every second of time and cent spent on doing A is a second less or a cent less spent on doing B A and B are different and mutually exclusive ways of thinking about animal ethics Neither A nor B is immediate neither helps animals now and both involve incremental efforts The question is which you choose to do If you are not vegan please go vegan Veganism is about nonviolence First and foremost it s about nonviolence to other sentient beings But it s also about nonviolence to the earth and nonviolence to yourself The World is Vegan Gary L Francione Professor Rutgers University 2012 Gary L Francione Related posts There Is No Third Choice Monday Your Choice Multiple Choice Test Commentary Vegan Education Advocacy Forcing Others to Go Vegan and Animal Ethics as Involving Obligation and Not Choice What to Do on Proposition 2 Share this entry Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Share on Pinterest Share on Linkedin Share on Tumblr Share on Vk Share on Reddit Share by Mail Français Visitez notre site miroir français Recent Posts Guest Essay This is Why New Welfarists Should Stop Equivocating on Moral Principles Concerning Animals A Response to Mercy For Animals Incremental Reform in the Human Context Is Not Analogous to Welfare Reform and Single Issue Campaigns in the Nonhuman Context The Animals Need YOU A Report from

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/our-choice/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • "Carnism"? There Is Nothing "Invisible" About The Ideology Of Animal Exploitation - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    s one solution but not necessarily the only one If it is the infliction of suffering that we are concerned about rather than killing then I can also imagine a world in which people mostly eat plant foods but occasionally treat themselves to the luxury of free range eggs or possibly even meat from animals who live good lives under conditions natural for their species and are then humanely killed on the farm The Vegan Autumn 2006 Singer claims if someone really were thorough going in eating only animals that had had good lives that could be a defensible ethical position It s not my position but I wouldn t be critical of someone who was that conscientious about it The difference between Singer and the conventional welfarist position is that he thinks that we need to go further to provide humane treatment and we should eliminate most aspects of intensive agriculture But he has no principled opposition to killing and eating animals or animal products and he supports welfare reform campaigns that actually provide little if any improvement of animal welfare Singer s position characterizes most of the large animal protection groups in the United States and Europe That is these groups focus on treatment not on use To the extent that they talk about veganism they discuss it only as a tool to reduce suffering and not as a moral baseline It s about suffering it s not about death It s about treatment it s not about use Animal lives have no moral value per se HSUS and other large animal organizations in the United States and Europe are very clear happy exploitation is morally good HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle makes it very clear that happy meat is a morally good thing I don t think that everyone needs to adopt a vegetarian diet to make a difference I think that little choices that we make getting animal products from a farmer who is raising animals in a proper and humane way or reducing consumption by a little bit all of these things matter You don t need to go the full measure in order to have an impact One thing I don t want is people to feel paralyzed that somehow you ve got to fit some orthodox regimen in order to be a part of this Absolutely not Little decisions that all of us make can have an enormous consequences You can have an impact by eating meat and animal products from a farmer who is raising animals in a proper and humane way So Pacelle is not only suggesting that products made in a proper and humane way are actually available but that consuming them is a morally good thing to do This is how HSUS justifies celebrating a decision by three meat companies to phase out the economically inefficient gestation crate over a period of years and asking animal advocates to publicly praise those companies thus promoting the compassionate consumption of meat and animal products HSUS and other large animal organizations in the United States and Britain sponsor various humane label schemes that are explicitly intended to make consumers feel more comfortable about continuing to consume animal products So what exactly is invisible about any of this Answer nothing Absolutely nothing In fact it s pretty obvious Those people who argue that we can t justify using animals at all are described as extreme and are reprimanded they are told to stop being divisive and to just shut up about any criticism of the happy exploitation movement They pretend that it s all really one movement theirs But the conventional wisdom from the 19th century to right now is based on the assumption that the only way to be self aware for moral purposes is to be self aware in the way that humans are Because animals are it is claimed not self aware in that way then they don t have an interest in continuing to live We don t harm them if we kill them as long as we do so in a relatively painless way That position I have argued is morally indefensible for a number of reasons the most relevant being that it is blatantly speciesist in that it arbitrarily privileges a particular sort of self awareness A being human or nonhuman can have an interest in continuing to live without having the reflective self awareness that we normally associate with normal humans I also reject the conventional position because our treatment of animals we use for food will as a practical matter never be humane in any practical sense As I discussed in my 1995 book Animals Property and the Law because animals are chattel property animal welfare standards will always be low and we will generally protect animal interests only when it is in our economic benefit to do so The result is that the welfare reforms that are implemented are those that increase production efficiency This does not result in moving animals away from being property it enmeshes them further in that paradigm In any event none of this is invisible The animal welfare ideology is our conventional wisdom about animal use and it s supported by the modern animal protection movement It s out there we are all quite aware of it it s discussed publicly A day does not go by when there isn t a new story about happy animal products in a major newspaper or on TV The Irony of the Invisibility Position To say that we ought to treat the ideology of animal exploitation as invisible is in effect to say that we ought to ignore the dominant paradigm of animal welfare we ought to ignore the speciesist ideology that keeps us comfortable about exploiting animals It is no surprise that those who promote this invisibility position are people who also promote welfare reform as effective or who tell us that we don t need to be worried about any distinction

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/carnism-there-is-nothing-invisible-about-the-ideology-of-animal-exploitation/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Animal Rights: Marginalized By The "Animal Movement" - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    treat themselves to the luxury of free range eggs or possibly even meat from animals who live good lives under conditions natural for their species and are then humanely killed on the farm The Vegan Autumn 2006 So Singer tells the public that animal welfare is a morally defensible response to the fundamental questions of animal ethics Why should anyone go further Why would anyone go further Why should they go vegan when CEO of The Humane Society of the United States Wayne Pacelle himself a vegan makes it very clear that happy meat is a morally good thing Pacelle states I don t think that everyone needs to adopt a vegetarian diet to make a difference I think that little choices that we make getting animal products from a farmer who is raising animals in a proper and humane way or reducing consumption by a little bit all of these things matter You don t need to go the full measure in order to have an impact One thing I don t want is people to feel paralyzed that somehow you ve got to fit some orthodox regimen in order to be a part of this Absolutely not Little decisions that all of us make can have an enormous consequences You can have an impact by eating meat and animal products from a farmer who is raising animals in a proper and humane way So HSUS is not only suggesting that products made in a proper and humane way are actually available but that consuming them is consistent with treating animals as members of the moral community and caring morally about them HSUS actively promotes the consumption of meat and other animal products Donaldson and Kymlicka observe that even People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals PETA perceived to have a radical message promotes welfare reform Again if people who are perceived by the public to be speaking for the animals claim that welfare reform is all that is morally required why would the public think otherwise As I stated in the book I co wrote with Professor Robert Garner The Animal Rights Debate Abolition or Regulation The modern animal movement has never promoted a clear and unequivocal abolitionist vegan message On the contrary Almost all of the large groups in the United States UK and elsewhere promote a welfarist approach and to the extent that they even talk about the abolitionist vegan approach they present it as some sort of distant and utopian goal They often pejoratively label veganism as absolutist fundamentalist or purist and following Singer promote being a conscientious omnivore as a morally defensible position Please understand that I am not saying that if all of the animal groups shifted focus and promoted a clear and unequivocal abolitionist vegan campaign we would abolish exploitation overnight or anytime soon But we would at least start the required paradigm shift by focusing discussion on the right issues The welfarist model has failed and will continue to fail because

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/animal-rights-marginalized-by-the-animal-movement/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive

  • One For Your "Humans Are An Odd Bunch" File - Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach
    was a piece of gristle or cartilage from a dead cow And then she realized it was a human nail That disgusted her The fact that she was eating decaying flesh did not disgust her The fact that she thought that there was a piece of cartilage from the dead cow in her sauce did not disgust her But she was disgusted about the human nail which is also made of cartilage Think about that If you are not vegan please go vegan Veganism is about nonviolence First and foremost it s about nonviolence to other sentient beings But it s also about nonviolence to the earth and nonviolence to yourself The World is Vegan Gary L Francione Professor Rutgers University 2012 Gary L Francione Related posts Equality and Similarity to Humans Happy Meat Making Humans Feel Better About Eating Animals Ellen Degeneres and Iggy the It What The Humane Slaughter Act is Not Being Enforced Road Kill Abandoned Eggs and Dumpster Diving Share this entry Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Share on Pinterest Share on Linkedin Share on Tumblr Share on Vk Share on Reddit Share by Mail Français Visitez notre site miroir français Recent Posts Guest Essay This is Why New Welfarists Should Stop Equivocating on Moral Principles Concerning Animals A Response to Mercy For Animals Incremental Reform in the Human Context Is Not Analogous to Welfare Reform and Single Issue Campaigns in the Nonhuman Context The Animals Need YOU A Report from the Intersectional Justice Conference Why Welfare Reform Campaigns and Single Issue Campaigns Necessarily Promote Animal Exploitation When Intersectional Justice Means Promoting Meat Fish Dairy Imagine If There Were a Real Animal Rights Movement Challenging Peter Singer s Paternity Claim Business As Usual VegfestUK and the Animal Welfare Industry The Vegan Society

    Original URL path: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/one-for-your-humans-are-an-odd-bunch-file/ (2016-05-02)
    Open archived version from archive



  •