Comments - Oh My God, These Vegans ... ~ Prof. Gary Francione - Animal Rights Zone2024-03-29T05:58:30Zhttp://arzone.ning.com/profiles/comment/feed?attachedTo=4715978%3ABlogPost%3A15965&xn_auth=noI'm not here to defend Prof.…tag:arzone.ning.com,2011-01-03:4715978:Comment:161642011-01-03T00:03:30.000ZTim Gierhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/TimGier
<div>I'm not here to defend Prof. Francione, but I will try to answer blackpanther's questions.</div>
<div>Francione's point isn't that there are “Good” and “Bad” vegans, but that there are people who are distorting what veganism is. If veganism is properly considered as the practical result of the philosophy of equal consideration of interests and non-exploitation of others, then one cannot occasionally deliberately and intentionally use other animals and still refer to oneself as a…</div>
<div>I'm not here to defend Prof. Francione, but I will try to answer blackpanther's questions.</div>
<div>Francione's point isn't that there are “Good” and “Bad” vegans, but that there are people who are distorting what veganism is. If veganism is properly considered as the practical result of the philosophy of equal consideration of interests and non-exploitation of others, then one cannot occasionally deliberately and intentionally use other animals and still refer to oneself as a vegan.</div>
<div>Consider an anti-racist philosophy. One could not coherently claim to be non-racist and yet occasionally resort to racist attitudes and actions. One who adopts a racist attitude, and acts as a racist, is a racist, no matter how infrequently that attitude and those actions are manifest. So, if one occasionally deliberately and intentionally exploits other animals in some way, one cannot be coherently thought of as vegan.</div>
<div>Now, the problem is, what do we, as vegans, say to those who are beginning to consider veganism, are aspiring to veganism, and making steps towards veganism? We have to find ways to talk to them in ways which encourage their continued exploration, non-judgmentally, in terms they can understand and relate to. At the same time, we can't dilute or soften the essential claims we are making about the rights of other animals or our obligations towards them. This may not be an easy task. The additional and complicating problem is that we may not talk to other animal advocates in the same way we would talk to aspiring vegans – one would expect other advocates to know more, and we would expect more of them. Often, Prof. Francione is talking to other advocates in what he writes, and were he talking one-on-one to an aspiring vegan, we should assume that his tone would not be the same.</div>
<div>The third point blackpanther raises is very important, and it asks whether the debates between advocates are even productive. When we have strong opinions and disagree with other advocates, are we doing more harm than good for the animals and for the movement? Are we helping to bridge the gap between differing viewpoints or are we just further entrenching opposing camps. I believe that we must stand by our convictions, while we reach out to those who disagree with us. The position of animal welfare, as compared to animal rights, is different on a fundamental level, to the point where welfare may be thought of a different movement from animal rights, and not as a different branch of the same movement. </div>
<div>As far as I know, there isn't an abolitionist who would say that you should stop helping distressed cats and dogs (there would be disagreement over how best to help them though). However, a rights-based abolitionsist position would, I think, require that we never kill any other animal unless we'd also kill a human animal in the same circumstances. We don't often euthanize humans, so we generally ought not to be euthanizing nonhumans.</div>
<div>I don't know what is happening in France. But I do know that the internet is crossing international borders and making information available throughout the world, at the same moment, everywhere. It's a good time to be alive, and a great time to be an advocate for a better world!</div> *reposted to fix glaring erro…tag:arzone.ning.com,2011-01-02:4715978:Comment:161442011-01-02T23:22:17.000ZTim Gierhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/TimGier
<p>*reposted to fix glaring error!!</p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #333333; line-height: 19px;">While I agree with the thrust of Francione's argument against "flexitarians" and "welfare" reforms, <span style="text-decoration: underline;">and for veganism,</span> I do not think of being vegan as an end, in and of itself. I'm vegan because it is the logical extension of a way of thinking about the world. That way of thinking acknowledges that all life is worthy of respect, and that rights…</span></p>
<p>*reposted to fix glaring error!!</p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #333333; line-height: 19px;">While I agree with the thrust of Francione's argument against "flexitarians" and "welfare" reforms, <span style="text-decoration: underline;">and for veganism,</span> I do not think of being vegan as an end, in and of itself. I'm vegan because it is the logical extension of a way of thinking about the world. That way of thinking acknowledges that all life is worthy of respect, and that rights of others ought to be accepted based on an equal consideration of interests. As such, this view requires veganism, insofar as it is possible to live that ideal in practical terms. The end I seek is a life of respect towards all others, the means to it encompasses veganism.</span></p> I have to agree with blackpan…tag:arzone.ning.com,2011-01-02:4715978:Comment:161222011-01-02T21:26:32.000ZSam Hillyerhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/Sambee
<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px;"><font color="#333333" face="'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif"><span style="font-size: 11px; line-height: 1.5em;">I have to agree with blackpanther, I can see why the </span><span style="font-size: 11px; line-height: 16px;">abolitionist</span><span style="font-size: 11px; line-height: 1.5em;"> approach should be favoured, especially if you used human rights analogies. If people had been …</span></font></p>
<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px;"><font face="'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif" color="#333333"><span style="font-size: 11px; line-height: 1.5em;">I have to agree with blackpanther, I can see why the </span><span style="font-size: 11px; line-height: 16px;">abolitionist</span><span style="font-size: 11px; line-height: 1.5em;"> approach should be favoured, especially if you used human rights analogies. If people had been </span><span style="font-size: 11px; line-height: 16px;">campaigning</span><span style="font-size: 11px; line-height: 1.5em;"> for slave welfare instead of the abolition of slavery would we still have the slave trade today but with them working in better conditions? </span></font></p>
<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px;"><font face="'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif" color="#333333"><span style="font-size: 11px; line-height: 16px;">But I don't think welfarists should be treated so negatively. I would guess, though I don't know how accurate I would be, that most people who eventually come round to the abolitionist approach started out with concerns for animal welfare, because initially imagining a world where people don't exploit animals does not seem imaginable or within reach.</span></font></p>
<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px;"><font face="'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif" color="#333333"><span style="font-size: 11px; line-height: 16px;">Is it not a stepping stone, doing more good than harm?</span></font></p>
<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px;"> </p>
<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px;"><font face="'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif" color="#333333"><span style="font-size: 11px; line-height: 16px;">It's where I came from, that's all.</span></font></p>
<p style="text-align: left; margin: 0px;"><font face="'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif" color="#333333"><span style="font-size: 11px; line-height: 16px;">I'd also like to see the questions blackpanther posed answered and discussed, because I am here to listen to the views of others, and have my way of thinking challenged and potentially changed.</span></font></p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; color: #333333; margin: 0px;"> </p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; color: #333333; margin: 0px;">As far as possible without surrender</p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; color: #333333; margin: 0px;">be on good terms with all persons.</p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; color: #333333; margin: 0px;">Speak your truth quietly and clearly;</p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; color: #333333; margin: 0px;">and listen to others,even the dull and the ignorant;</p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; color: #333333; margin: 0px;">they too have their story</p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; color: #333333; margin: 0px;"> </p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; color: #333333; margin: 0px;"></p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px;">If you compare yourself with others,</p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px;">you may become vain and bitter;</p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px;">for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.</p>
<p></p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; color: #333333; margin: 0px;"> </p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; color: #333333; margin: 0px;"></p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px;">The world is full of trickery.</p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px;">But let this not blind you to what virtue there is;</p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px;">many persons strive for high ideals;</p>
<p style="font-family: 'lucida grande', tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; text-align: left; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px;">and everywhere life is full of heroism</p>
<p></p> A vegan is a vegan is a vegan…tag:arzone.ning.com,2011-01-02:4715978:Comment:160992011-01-02T13:13:20.000ZDEN FRIENDhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/DENFRIEND
<p>A vegan is a vegan is a vegan, or is it?</p>
<p>I have encountered people who claim to be vegan, but eat eggs from rescued chickens.</p>
<p>According to Singer they are 'essentially vegan' or 'flexible vegans. Apparently this would seem to be acceptable to him. Far from appearing inconsistent in their ideology towards animal exploitation, people who eat the meat that has inadvertently found its way on their plate, rather than throwing it away might actually be helping their cause! Who are…</p>
<p>A vegan is a vegan is a vegan, or is it?</p>
<p>I have encountered people who claim to be vegan, but eat eggs from rescued chickens.</p>
<p>According to Singer they are 'essentially vegan' or 'flexible vegans. Apparently this would seem to be acceptable to him. Far from appearing inconsistent in their ideology towards animal exploitation, people who eat the meat that has inadvertently found its way on their plate, rather than throwing it away might actually be helping their cause! Who are these vegans who can so easily be persuaded to consume flesh, no matter how repugnant. If the flesh is eaten or thrown away the situation remains the same -the animal is dead, it does not care if it is eaten or not. A life was 'wasted' as soon as it was taken!</p>
<p>I don't like Singer, I don't know why he is still held in such esteem. His ideas do not coincide with my own abolitionist viewpoint. He may be a pragmatist, but he is also irritating.</p>
<p>People who eat the odd bit of meat or the occasional egg can call themselves what they like but they are not vegans.</p> so, Garry, if I understand we…tag:arzone.ning.com,2011-01-02:4715978:Comment:160962011-01-02T11:59:05.000Zblackpantherhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/blackpanther
<p>so, Garry, if I understand well, there are "GOOD" vegans, and "BAD" ones.......but maybe I didn't understand you....complicated that kind of differences and quarrels, seen from France. I must say I don't really follow, and don't see exactly where it leads.....but who am I to criticize you, some may think?</p>
<p>I think when you always make others think they are far less smart than you, then, they are no longer interested in what you have to tell them, as they know what they do will always…</p>
<p>so, Garry, if I understand well, there are "GOOD" vegans, and "BAD" ones.......but maybe I didn't understand you....complicated that kind of differences and quarrels, seen from France. I must say I don't really follow, and don't see exactly where it leads.....but who am I to criticize you, some may think?</p>
<p>I think when you always make others think they are far less smart than you, then, they are no longer interested in what you have to tell them, as they know what they do will always be wrong in your opinion.....that doesn't lead to clear communication.....and to convincing people to follow you! isn't it better to help them reach the aim, little by little?</p>
<p>sometimes I read things here that make me wonder if one day, we'll progress on the path to "freedom" for all and no more exploitation, or will loose ourselves in endless quarrels....</p>
<p>For example, must I stop helping distressed cats and dogs because it seems to be "welfarist" to save them? and the "good" abolitionist position would be to do nothing, as to have a pet is wrong?.....then, why criticize PeTA when they euthanize animals that cannot be adopted. Is it better to be dead or to live one's whole life in prison? I would personally choose death.....</p>
<p>We don't have that kind of debate in France (most people don't even know what veganism is)...Does it mean you are far ahead of us? </p>
<p>And all those questions are very real ones for me......asked without any agressiveness</p>
<p>(forgive my mistakes!)</p> Hola:
Voy a dar mi opinión en…tag:arzone.ning.com,2011-01-02:4715978:Comment:160842011-01-02T10:04:57.000ZEduardo Terrerhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/EduardoTerrer
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Hola:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Voy a dar mi opinión en base a lo que he entendido al traducirlo con el señor google. Así que quizás no haya captado matices que me hayan hecho
malinterpretar partes del texto.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">En mi opinión el artículo acierta en las…</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Hola:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Voy a dar mi opinión en base a lo que he entendido al traducirlo con el señor
google. Así que quizás no haya captado matices que me hayan hecho<br />
malinterpretar partes del texto.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">En mi opinión el artículo acierta en las conclusiones pero con un análisis muy
básico y encorsetado. Me parece que no se puede establecer que una línea<br />
estratégica es más efectiva por establecer que la posición es más clara.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Es decir, no creo que el hecho de ser más claro con el mensaje, y más directo con
la oposición al especismo, haga que una línea estratégica sea mejor.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">De hecho, creo que usar “mejor” y “peor” nos lleva a una espiral confusa.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Deberíamos hablar de efectivo. De más efectivo y menos efectivo. Eso, lo de efectivo, no
depende de si nuestra percepción subjetiva de cierto tipo de activismo o de<br />
cierto tipo de mensaje es peor o mejor, si no que la etiqueta de “más efectivo”<br />
debe estar acompañada de datos que lo verifiquen.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Creo que no hay datos tales que verifiquen si una línea estratégica es más efectiva
o menos efectiva. Aunque creo que se puede intuir, no creo que se pueda afirmar<br />
con la rotundidad con la que se afirma en este artículo.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">No sé en otros países, pero en España hay varias líneas que se supone que buscan
la abolición de la explotación animal.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">La línea pragmatista (uso la terminología que suelo usar aquí, no sé si la vuestra
es diferente) se supone que tiene como fin hacer uso de muchos recursos, como<br />
por ejemplo reformas bienestaristas (o lobby político, etc…), para dificultar<br />
la explotación, aumentar los costos y, junto a acciones de otro tipo, crear una<br />
especie de dinámica que vaya complicando a los explotadores mantener sus<br />
negocios de sangre.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Esta línea estratégica, supuestamente, no tiene como fin reducir el sufrimiento.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">La otra línea, la abolicionista, busca concienciar a la sociedad (como ya sabemos
todos, vamos).</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Hablar en términos de eficacia me parece algo tendencioso. Aquí en España, mi
percepción del tema viene, principalmente, determinada por la eficiencia, no<br />
por la eficacia.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Hay un grupo que está trabajando con una eficiencia asombrosa en la línea
abolicionista. Con poco esfuerzo consigue salir en medios masivos y llegar a<br />
millones de humanos. Esas acciones claramente son muy eficientes, y hacen<br />
llegar un mensaje anti-especista a la sociedad humana. No obstante ¿Cómo se<br />
mide la eficacia de dichas acciones?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">No creo que haya, ahora mismo, una forma de medir dichos resultados. O si lo hay,
debe ser bastante complejo. Entre otras cosas porque, al contrario que una<br />
campaña de marketing para aumentar las ventas de un producto, el paso de un<br />
individuo al veganismo es un camino incierto, muchas veces largo y complejo, y<br />
el sembrar la semilla ya puede ser considerado un logro. Pero esa semilla es<br />
posible que ni el mismo individuo humano sepa que ha sido sembrada en su<br />
cerebro, con lo cual medir la eficacia se complica.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Por eso, me parece que se debería evitar este tipo de afirmaciones rotundas que
intentan justificar la eficacia de una estrategia en base a lo coherente a<br />
nivel ético. Hace que el discurso pierda credibilidad.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Y, por supuesto, como no podemos medir la eficacia (o no podemos medirla de manera
sencilla) me parece que una ecuación muy sencilla puede ayudarnos a movernos de<br />
una manera que, a priori (y reconozco que de manera subjetiva, aunque con un<br />
argumento que lo respalda) debería ser más efectiva:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">La línea más corta es el camino recto. Por lo tanto, lo más efectivo debería ser
usar la eficiencia para lograr depurar el avance en dicha línea recta.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Es decir, aunque puede parecer, según la línea pragmatista, que es más fácil
lograr que las jaulas en batería se prohíban que lograr que se prohíba la<br />
explotación de las gallinas, es una falacia afirmar que dicha reducción nos acerca<br />
a la abolición de ese tipo de explotación. Intuitivamente puede parecerlo, pero<br />
al profundizar en el tema no existe una relación tal y como la afirman quienes<br />
defienden dicha línea estratégica.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Por tanto, debe ser más efectivo dedicar los esfuerzos a pedir la abolición, y usar
la eficiencia, también usar el feedback para aumentar la eficacia de esta línea<br />
estratégica.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Es muy sencillo. Si pido algo y lo logro ¿qué logro?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Entonces, si pido el fin de la explotación y lo logro ¿qué logro?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Y si pido jaulas más grandes y lo logro ¿qué logro?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Así pues, mi conclusión es que si se enfoca todo el esfuerzo en aprender a pedir
las cosas, se avanzará más que si no se pide de forma directa asumiendo que no<br />
se puede pedir de forma directa.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Considero más efectivo aprender a ser más efectivo en el camino en línea recta, que
aprender a ser más efectivo en el camino sinuoso.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">En España, al menos, el trabajo de un grupo me hace percibirlo de esta manera. Un
trabajo directo, de forma muy eficiente y prestando especial atención al<br />
feedback que se establece con la sociedad. De este modo no se trata solo de<br />
pedir (lo cual hacen muchos, y en cuyo caso no me parece efectivo), si no de<br />
aprender a pedir. No se trata de comunicarse, si no de comunicarse aprendiendo<br />
a comunicarse.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">En conclusión, que no me parece coherente analizar la eficacia de las diferentes
estrategias de una manera tan simplificada y atendiendo a la coherencia del<br />
discurso. Me parece una simplificación de un proceso que es mucho más complejo,<br />
y que requiere manejar y estudiar diversos parámetros dinámicos.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Esa es mi particular forma de verlo. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">Un saludo </span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-fareast-language: ES;">------------------------------------------------------</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: ES;" lang="EN-US" xml:lang="EN-US">Hello<br/> <br/>
I will give my opinion based on what I understood to translate to Mr.<br />
google. So there may not be captured nuances that I have been<br />
misinterpreting the text.<br/>
In my opinion the article is correct in the conclusions, but with a very basic<br />
analysis and corseted. I do not think you can set a strategic line is more<br />
effective to establish that the position is clearer.<br/>
That is, I do not think the fact that the message clearer and more direct<br />
opposition to speciesism, have a strategic line is better.<br/>
In fact, I have to use "best" and "worst" leads to a spiral<br />
confusing.<br/>
We should talk about cash. More effective and less effective. </span><span style="font-size: 9.0pt;">So what cash is not dependent on our subjective<br />
perception of a certain type of activism or a certain type of message is better<br />
or worse, if not the label of "most effective" must be accompanied by<br />
data verification.</span><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; color: black; background: #E6ECF9; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: ES;" lang="EN-US" xml:lang="EN-US"><br/>
</span><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: ES;" lang="EN-US" xml:lang="EN-US">I think there is such data to<br />
verify whether a strategic line is more effective or less<br />
effective. Although I think you can guess, do not think you can say for<br />
the forthrightness with which it is stated in this article.<br/>
I do not know in other countries, but in Spain there are several lines that are<br />
supposed to seek the abolition of animal exploitation.<br/>
Pragmatist line (using the terminology I use here, I do not know if yours is<br />
different) it is assumed that aims to make use of many resources, such as welfare<br />
reforms (or political lobbying, etc ...) to hinder the exploitation ,<br />
increase costs and, together with other actions, to create a dynamic that will<br />
complicate the business operators to keep their blood.<br/>
<br/>
This strategic, supposedly, is not intended to reduce suffering.<br/>
The other line, the abolitionist, aims to raise awareness of society (as we all<br />
know, come on).<br/>
<br/>
Speaking in terms of efficiency I think is biased. Here in Spain, my<br />
perception of the issue is mainly determined by the efficiency, not effectiveness.<br/>
One group is working with stunning efficiency in the abolitionist<br />
line. With little effort to get out in mass media and reach millions of<br />
humans. These actions clearly are very efficient, and they send a message<br />
to anti-speciesist human society. Nevertheless How do you measure the<br />
effectiveness of these actions?<br/>
Do not think there is, right now, one way to measure those results. Or if<br />
any, should be quite complex. Among other things because, unlike a<br />
marketing campaign to increase sales of a product, an individual step to<br />
veganism is an uncertain path, often long and complex, and sow the seed can be<br />
considered an achievement. But the seed is possible that not even the<br />
human individual known to have been planted in his brain, which measure the<br />
effectiveness is complicated.<br/>
<br/>
So I think that should prevent such categorical statements that attempt to<br />
justify the effectiveness of a strategy based on what ethical standards<br />
consistent. Makes the speech lose credibility.<br/>
<br/>
And, of course, since we can not measure the effectiveness (or can not easily<br />
measure it) I think a very simple equation can help us move in a way that, a<br />
priori (and acknowledge that subjectively, but with an argument behind it)<br />
should be more effective:<br/>
The shortest line is the right path. Therefore, the most effective should<br />
be used to make debugging efficiency progress in this straight line.<br/>
That is, although it may seem, according to the pragmatist line that is easier<br />
to ensure that battery cages are banned to ensure that prohibit the exploitation<br />
of chickens, is a fallacy to say that this reduction brings us to the abolition<br />
of such exploitation.Intuitively it may seem, but to pursue the subject no<br />
relationship as proponents claim that the strategic line.<br/>
<br/>
Therefore, you should be more effective to devote efforts to seek the<br />
abolition, and use efficiency, also use the feedback to improve the<br />
effectiveness of this strategic line.<br/>
It's simple. If I order something and achieving what achievement?<br/>
So if I ask an end to exploitation and achieving what achievement?<br/>
And if I ask for larger cages and achieving what achievement?<br/>
<br/>
So my conclusion is that if you focus all the effort to learn how to ask for<br />
things, you move ahead only if not asked directly assuming that you can not ask<br />
directly.<br/>
It is most effective to learn to be more effective on the road in a straight<br />
line to learn to be more effective in the winding road.<br/>
<br/>
In Spain, at least, the work of a group perceive me this way. Direct work,<br />
very efficient, with particular attention to feedback that is set by<br />
society. This is not just to ask (which many do, and in which case I do<br />
not cash), if not learn to ask. It is not communicated, if not to<br />
communicate learning to communicate.<br/>
<br/>
In conclusion, it does not seem consistent to analyze the effectiveness of<br />
different strategies in a manner so simplified and coherent response to the<br />
speech. I think a simplification of a process that is much more complex,<br />
requiring handling and study various dynamic parameters.<br/>
<br/>
</span><span style="font-size: 9.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-fareast-language: ES;">That is my particular way of seeing.<br/>
Greetings</span></p>
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size: 9.0pt;"> </span></p>