‘The War on Terra’, for kids!
January 15th, 2007 4:59 pm by Kelly GarbatoBehold – the NRA’s idea of those crazy Animal Rights Terrorists:
Complete with hairy-legged, Birkenstock-wearing feminists, dynamite-toting spotted owls, angry cocks (no doubt wielding The Bird Flu), and attack lobsters, the NRA’s graphic novel “Freedom in Peril” is an exercise in stereotyping. Good for a laugh, though. It’s so absurd, it’s funny. Seriously, how could I get offended in the face of such ridiculousness?
What does irritate me is the conflation of animal rights advocates with other leftists: feminists, socialists, environmentalists, secularists, and – yes – gun-haters. (And, um gang members. Brown ones, of course. Do they come in any other color?)
While I don’t mind the NRA churning out such idiotic caricatures of us, please, don’t imply that we have the support of other radical anti-ism activists. We don’t. Speaking for myself, I do advocate on behalf of other disenfranchised groups: women, minorities, the impoverished, GLBT persons, those with mental disorders. Speaking from experience, many other animal rights activists I’ve encountered support these causes as well. However, it’s a one-way street: there’s very little crossover to our side.
Case in point: the civil liberties of animal rights terrorists activists aren’t even worth the ACLU’s time. Yup, we’re lower down on the food chain than Fred Phelps and NAMBLA. Indeed, I keep up with a number of liberal blogs, and “those animal rights extremists” are one of the few topics on which the bloggers and their trolls can routinely agree (to rag) on.
On the other hand, vegankid calls for animal rightists to integrate other progressive issues with their own activism:
So the point i am getting at is that we need to be careful not to view ourselves, vegans, as standing upon an ethical pedestal. Just because we don’t consume animal products does not give us moral high ground. If we wish veganism as a movement to grow, then veganism must become informed by all movements for justice, compassion, and non-violence. Rather than limiting ourselves to non-humyn animal suffering, we must also critically approach ability, gender, class, race, age, size, sexuality, and other categorizations that have been used to create violent hierarchies. To do this, we must put a great deal of effort on our own persynal growth and awareness.
So perhaps the internets are just giving me a skewed perception of the animal rights movement and its insularity in regards to other causes? Thoughts?
———————
Tagged: animals animal+rights animal+welfare nra national+rifle+association stereotypes second+amendment activism progressive liberal terrorism war+on+terra
January 15th, 2007 at 5:22 pm
holy shit! i think i found my back piece:) thanks, nra!
veganism is not innately connected to any ideology. nor do i think it should be. my claim is simply that veganism is based on more than what we eat. its about compassion. otherwise, vegans would be wearing leather shoes with no ethical dilemma. but i don’t think i need to explain that to you.
because it is based in compassion, i’m simply suggesting that if veganism is to become an effective tool of compassion then such compassion should not be limited by qualifiers and social constructs. its should be embraced and practiced universally. but to mention race, class, gender, ability or any oppressed identity and speak in the same sentence of compassion and/or liberation, then i’m automatically a leftist ideologue. tack onto that my pseudonym, and i obviously have an owl trained to bomb government buildings:)
funny how fear and stereotypes get caught in a perpetual downward spiral, ain’t it?
btw, where did you find that booklet? i need a good laugh.
January 15th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
oops. i just realized that you linked to it above the graphic. me sleepy.
January 15th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
Hey vegankid –
I agree, I don’t think veganism has to be a left- or right-wing thing. My impression, though, is that animal rightists tend to lean to the left, for example, in supporting gov’t restrictions on how we’re allowed to treat animals, and – more importantly – in regards to social issues. And I think they should: as the most exploited group on the planet, you’ve got to have a wide circle of compassion if it’s to include animals. So if you’ve already extended it further than most people are willing to, what’s your justification for excluding all those other groups (ie, women, different “races” and ethnicities, those with varying sexual preferences, etc.)?
(I guess there’s the occasional fundamentalist who advocates for the humane treatment of animals because of the Bible, and the inhumane treatment of women because of the same, but those seem to be rare. Plus as an atheist, “Because the Bible said so” doesn’t strike me as an especially compelling reason. But I digress.)
Of course, in an ideal world, conservatives and liberals alike would strive for compassion, but – blecht! – who am I kidding?
On the other end of the spectrum, I’ve also seen animal rights activists who are so focused on their primary goal that they overlook all others, even trampling over other disenfranchised groups to further their goals. Like, yeah, PETA. Their campaigns attract gobs of attention, but at what price?
Anyway, there’s definitely room for improvement on both sides of the aisle. I think I’m just feeling miffed over the (non-)controversy surrounding AETA, and the ACLU’s complicity in criminalizing ARAs.
Oh, and I linked to Boing Boing, but Wonkette’s takedown is worth a look too.
January 15th, 2007 at 9:04 pm
kelly – i’m tempted to pretend we don’t agree just to create some sort of conflict. cuz who wants to watch a movie with no conflict? ;)
but, alas, we do agree. i am just not fond of the dichotomous nature of left/right. then again, people like me have been killed and persecuted by both left and right. and i’m not fond of the centrist policies of liberal/conservative either. but that’s a different conversation. you are right, though. such issues of social justice are more often associated with leftist politics. i’m certainly not buying in to the whole compassionate conservative bit.
we definitely seem to be coming from the same place. i think we just use slightly different language.
yeah, i followed your link to several other links and finally found a working version of the PDF (the boing boing link is broken). priceless.
January 15th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
kelly – i’m tempted to pretend we don’t agree just to create some sort of conflict. cuz who wants to watch a movie with no conflict? ;)
Noooo! Just give the feminist blogs a week or two, they’re about due for another blowup ;)
January 16th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
hahaha! so true.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:27 pm
[...] As has already been pointed out, this image comes complete with a dynamite-totin’ spotted owl. i don’t know any animal liberationists that don’t have their own spotted owl. i have seven. i’ve trained them to do different tasks. one is an expert hacker and is working to take down the pentagon’s intranet. [...]
January 18th, 2007 at 3:50 am
[...] For more info on this booklet’s controversy, check out boing boing (and part 2) and easyVegan.info For archiving purposes, i’m now hosting the PDF of this booklet. Feel free to download it in all its glory. [...]