Paul and Linda McCartney said, "If all the slaughterhouses were made of glass we would all be vegetarians."
We all remember this:
From Times Online
In late February, a representative of the Humane Society of the United States produced an undercover video shot at the abattoir run by the Hallmark Meat Packing Company documenting sick, hapless and crippled cows being dragged by the hoof behind a forklift truck, and distressed animals being lifted, rolled and shocked in an attempt to force them to stand. The video also showed workers kicking, forcing water down the throat of one cow in an attempt to get him to stand and otherwise maltreating injured cows so sick or injured that they are unable to walk.
I mention this as an example of direct activism - a form of activism that is often opposed by the authorities, members of the business and "scientific" communities, and other uninformed individuals.
Why the opposition to this activism?
I have been told that many University campuses have designed certain buildings for the specific purpose of shielding the animal testing that occurs in the departments of psychology or the "hard sciences" from the majority of the population. At my undergraduate University, the University of Utah, animal rights activists made many concerted efforts to force those groups who test on animals to provide access to and documentation about the animals being exploited, the methods employed, the ends sought, the use of veterinarians, etc.; efforts that were opposed by University officials, who continuously denied activists access to this information.
Perhaps the McCartneys' words hold true when the exploitation of animals takes other forms?
I received an email today from a member of the animal rights movement on the campus of George Mason University describing attempts by some to oppose the free expression of outrage over yet another form of sanctioned animal abuse. Some exerts follow:
"As many of you know, Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus is at the Patriot Center...Numerous individuals, including GMU students, have been demonstrating against Ringling Brothers'...documented history of abuse.
On April 6...protestors were in front of the Patriot Center, standing on the sidewalk with signs and chanting, when Virginia State Troopers and members of the campus police department surrounded three activists by forming a tight circle around them, and threatened immediate arrest if they did not leave...The activists were standing on public property without impeding individuals attending the circus - a legal protest.
...the protestors were asked to remove their masks (because they were not allowed to conceal their faces), when the activists agreed the police officer changed the subject by claiming that he was the "caretaker" of public property and again threatened immediate arrest - which is illegal.
On Friday, Saturday and Sunday, GMU police took photos of activists, videotaped activists, and finally followed the animal rights activists to their cars after the demonstration..."
I ask again, why the opposition? It's curious that those people who defend the exploitation of animals so ardently are often the most adamant in their opposition to the forms of direct activism described above. The federal government has passed laws that would describe any act that potentially hinders the profitability of a business that benefits from the exploitation of animals as Eco-Terrorism. Protesting outside of a McDonalds would fall into this category. The fear is almost pathetic; but their power is undeniable - a power only reinforced by the ignorance of the masses.
The fear that engenders this often illegal opposition is well-founded: "If slaughterhouses and, animal testing laboratories, circuses, fur farms, puppy mills, zoos, factory farms, hunting events, etc. were made of glass we would all be vegans.
Leave a comment