Name dropping, being too cool for school and relationality

Over the last few years, a ‘trend’ has emerged amongst animal activists. It seems that to be considered a ‘real’ activist, the words one uses — even the names one drops — are more important than anything else. Visible are the emergences of aspects of a boys club, a clique, even a cliché in circles of people/activists. Irrespective of whether one acts (and it seems many talking the talk do not), it is how one can express themselves in these terms that is seemingly more important. Activist cred is based on the words used, not the actions and involvement in seeking outcomes for animals.

Copenhagen, climate change, anthropocentrism & cynicism

The cynicism that has to a degree quashed most of the optimism I try to have has many roots. I have been looking for hope, a reason and a means to move beyond hope. This seems a perpetual task. Sometimes it is fruitful, often it is not (perhaps caught up in my recurrent cynicism. I do so good things, though these ‘good’ things often embody some of the same old shit that the ‘bad’ is predicated on.

Repeated burstings of the proverbial bubble

I have a utopian ideal. I am pretty certain I am not alone in this. Mine is couched, sometimes overridden, sometimes decimated, by my cynicism. I have been referred to as both cynical and jaded. I sometimes describe myself as an optimist with a health dose of cynicism. I wish there was reason to be otherwise — perhaps this is the basis for my utopianism. More times that I would like to recount in recent weeks, any utopian outlooks I have have been quashed.

The current politicking about refugees is beyond description. I literally fled from Australian in the wake of the Tampa situation in 2001. The wikipedia entry on the events surrounding the Tampa describe it as

Rationality's fear of the emotive

Ruby Roth's That's why we don't eat animals [cover]

I have followed reactions to Ruby Roth’s That’s Why We Don’t Eat Animals, seeking to both gage and reflect on underlying assumptions and rationales. Some of the more recent responses, the rationales on which they are based, piqued my interest. I think I have come up with an interesting basis on which to reflect.

action and guilt

The welfare v abolition debate, an often heated debate that continues to encompass discussion of both strategy and tactics, is one that will likely continue for as long as speciesism dominates. Whereas some welfarists are speciesists, some are opposed to speciesism. Conversely, there is a debate, also controversial, within abolitionist circles regarding the place of welfarist reforms. Gary Francione and many others provide valid criticisms of welfarist approaches, highlighting how they can act to reinforce speciesism as opposed to challenging the anthropocentric exploitation of animals.

The animal liberation movement's sad state of affairs

Following on from my rush of recent posts with a similar theme, I have some thoughts on the response of the ‘audience’ to a scheduled seminar Lee Hall recently participated in at the London Vegan Festival. If the approach of the self-declared ‘animal rights activists’ in the room is the future of the animal movement (if I can use that term with any validity), the movement is in a very sorry position and the future is very bleak. The shambles that the seminar became are posted on youtube, and linked to at the bottom of this post.

RSS Feed