Comments - Transcript of Mark Jordan's Live ARZone Guest Chat - Animal Rights Zone2024-03-29T09:05:42Zhttp://arzone.ning.com/profiles/comment/feed?attachedTo=4715978%3ABlogPost%3A76154&xn_auth=noTim, I understand you disagre…tag:arzone.ning.com,2012-07-02:4715978:Comment:1021772012-07-02T16:07:34.845ZMark Jordanhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/MarkJordan
<p>Tim, I understand you disagree with my reasoning and beliefs on some of the issues. I agree with my reasoning and beliefs on these issues. I find them neither silly, nor ridiculous, nor obviously flawed. At any rate, there is no denying that AE has significantly changed their approach and message recently. I find the changes extremely disheartening. Have a nice day. </p>
<p>Tim, I understand you disagree with my reasoning and beliefs on some of the issues. I agree with my reasoning and beliefs on these issues. I find them neither silly, nor ridiculous, nor obviously flawed. At any rate, there is no denying that AE has significantly changed their approach and message recently. I find the changes extremely disheartening. Have a nice day. </p> Mark, are you suggesting that…tag:arzone.ning.com,2012-07-02:4715978:Comment:1021752012-07-02T14:40:27.069ZTim Gierhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/TimGier
<p><span>Mark, are you suggesting that, during the Jim Crow era in the United States no civil rights advocates worked to ensure the enforcement of then existing laws, however flawed the laws may have been? I'll not bother to do a study of the matter because, if that is what you are suggesting, your suggestion is ridiculous. Of course people who advocate for the rights of the oppressed advocate for the enforcement of existing and flawed laws. </span><br></br><br></br><span>Are there any perfect laws?…</span></p>
<p><span>Mark, are you suggesting that, during the Jim Crow era in the United States no civil rights advocates worked to ensure the enforcement of then existing laws, however flawed the laws may have been? I'll not bother to do a study of the matter because, if that is what you are suggesting, your suggestion is ridiculous. Of course people who advocate for the rights of the oppressed advocate for the enforcement of existing and flawed laws. </span><br/><br/><span>Are there any perfect laws? Is it the case that every protection now available to the oppressed goes far enough? The answer to both questions is obviously No. Whatever laws and regulations there are about anything, in any free and pluralistic society anywhere, are almost always and necessarily going to be laws that reflect comprise between vested stakeholders - laws will always fall short of the ideal. Vegans who expect Utopia will not only always be frustrated and dissatisfied, they will always be working at cross-purposes to those who are willing to do the messy business of creating positive change in the actual world. Animal Equality is obviously an example of the latter sort and their work is to be commended, even if moral absolutists such as yourself will always be able to find fault with it.</span><br/><br/><span>Regarding "vegan restaurants" -- If it satisfies you to believe that there is a real and moral difference between eating at a restaurant that serves an allegedly "strictly vegan menu" and eating at a restaurant that serves some vegan options along with non-vegan ones, that's entirely up to you. However, it shouldn't require a tremendous effort on the part of others to see the flaw in your reasoning. Since it is the case that any money you spend eating at a "100% vegan restaurant" necessarily goes on to support individuals and businesses that are not vegan, then your support of a "100% vegan restaurant" isn't different in kind to someone else's support of a non-vegan restaurant, it is only different by degree. You may want to claim that recognizing that reality requires a focus on minutiae, but since you are the one claiming some sort of moral high ground, then you at least ought to have an argument that passes muster. You don't. You have no principled ground to stand on to object to someone eating a vegan option at a non-vegan restaurant when your own actions contribute to financial gains of non-vegans as well. </span></p> Thanks for sharing your ideas…tag:arzone.ning.com,2012-07-02:4715978:Comment:1024292012-07-02T04:54:44.426Zred doghttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/reddog
<p>Thanks for sharing your ideas, Mark. I'll have to follow those links and consider this matter more carefully, soon. I agree with parts of what you say but not everything.</p>
<p>Thanks for sharing your ideas, Mark. I'll have to follow those links and consider this matter more carefully, soon. I agree with parts of what you say but not everything.</p> I have been watching Animal E…tag:arzone.ning.com,2012-07-02:4715978:Comment:1022552012-07-02T04:11:48.318ZMark Jordanhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/MarkJordan
<p>I have been watching Animal Equality closely for about four years now, and until this relatively recent and major change in approach/message, I was a big supporter (as is evidenced by my comments in this chat). All my claims are indeed facts and easily found on their facebook and website. As on all issues of animal rights, I don’t make such statements lightly. I will try to briefly touch on your concerns/disagreement with my observations and feelings on these important…</p>
<p>I have been watching Animal Equality closely for about four years now, and until this relatively recent and major change in approach/message, I was a big supporter (as is evidenced by my comments in this chat). All my claims are indeed facts and easily found on their facebook and website. As on all issues of animal rights, I don’t make such statements lightly. I will try to briefly touch on your concerns/disagreement with my observations and feelings on these important matters:</p>
<p></p>
<p>1) You can send a “Do it right” message or you can send an “It is not right!” message – you cannot do both. Brief analogies: Did Civil Rights advocates call for prosecution of businesses because their “Black Only” drinking fountains weren’t up to cleanliness standards?; Do people calling for the abolition of the death penalty call for prosecution of a prisons violations of last meal rights?; Would advocates for women’s rights call for prosecution of businesses that pay women $.77 to the man’s $1.00 *because* the women get their paycheck in cash instead of a check?; Do people who are against abortion focus on prosecution of doctors for botched abortions? The answer to all of these questions is: No, Of course not – these arguments distract from, and are detrimental to, the foundational moral issue, the moral wrong the group of people feel is the heart of the issue. We (I hope) are not trying to make speciesism better regulated and “nicer” for the animals, we are trying to end speciesism. [To make your analogy accurate – human rights advocates would be, for example, campaigning that people kidnapping girls/boys and selling them in the sex trade be prosecuted because the workers were too rough with their captors (even kicking them as they kidnapped them; by letting them be used by too many customers in a night; for not giving them enough water on their kidnapping transport).]</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In the U.S., for example, the HMSA (Humane Methods of Slaughter Act) sanctions and regulates mass murder and The AWA (Animal Welfare Act) regulates and sanctions mass torture and mass murder. Laws like these perpetuate speciesism because their foundational principles are that imprisoning and killing others is o.k., but it must be done correctly. Calling for enforcement of speciesist law legitimizes their speciesist roots, legitimizes speciesism.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>2) #1 (above) is wrong when AE does it, when HSUS does it, when MFA does it, when PeTA does it. AE used to say this was wrong, too. Now, unfortunately, they do it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>3) The linking to HSUS I was referring to was:<br/> <a href="http://www.animalequality.net/news/396/shocking-animal-cruelty-tyson-foods-supplier" target="_blank">http://www.animalequality.net/news/396/shocking-animal-cruelty-tyson-foods-supplier</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The article on AE’s page is an extremely good example of issue #1 (above) in that it focuses on the conditions of animal slavery and murder (but does, at the very end, speak of veganism). The HSUS video on the AE site states that this is “factory” farming and, as is usual for HSUS, is all about conditions, conditions, conditions – not the underlying moral wrong (because, as they candidly admit, they don’t see it as a moral wrong), and links to an HSUS webpage all about #1 (above) with no vegan solution (because, as they candidly admit, they do not see veganism as a viable solution). A couple years ago, AE supporting, promoting, or linking to anything as speciesist as an HSUS campaign was unthinkable.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>4) AE linked to this article, <a href="http://www.sourcewire.com/news/71740/vegan-fish-on-the-menu-at-leading-sushi-restaurant" target="_blank">http://www.sourcewire.com/news/71740/vegan-fish-on-the-menu-at-leading-sushi-restaurant</a> . This article praises a restaurant, and so does AE by promotion/posting it. This restaurant sells the flesh and other “products” of many individuals (pigs, ducks, tunas (who, incidentally, AE have a campaign for), salmons, octopuses, squids, prawns, chickens, cows, etc.) every day. Not a business that would be promoted or praised by an anti-speciesist group.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>5) Animal Rights is a serious issue that doesn’t need nakedness to get press or people’s attention. Unfortunately, AE has done PeTA-esque campaigns recently other than food trays. Here is one example, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150499069899077&set=a.10150499069349077.379563.220873174076&type=3&theater" target="_blank">https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150499069899077&set=a.10150499069349077.379563.220873174076&type=3&theater</a> . AE used to post articles asking PeTA to stay out of Spain and to stop demeaning important issues with nakedness. Imagine the analogies in #1 (above), using nakedness to get press/attention.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>6) I think there is such a thing as a vegan restaurant, just like there is such a thing as a vegan person, a vegan meal, and a vegan wardrobe. I suppose one could argue down to a level of minutia that none of these things is “truly vegan” (an argument often heard from people defending their cheeseburgers or leather shoes), but to me that is irrelevant and doesn’t recognize the core baseline of veganism, to borrow from the Vegan Society: “Veganism is a way of living that seeks to exclude, *as far as possible and practicable*, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing and any other purpose.” To me, it seems obvious that someone for the rights of animals doesn’t support/promote businesses that are in the business of enslaving and killing animals, despite their “vegan options.” While I feel this is, by itself, true, a level of even more absurdity is added when the non-vegan restaurant promoted is in a city with five vegan restaurants.</p>
<p></p>
<p>To reiterate, for about four years now I have been watching AE with interest and, until relatively recently, strong support. I am deeply saddened to see what was once an anti-speciesist group add speciesist campaigns and messages to their persona. I hope they find their way back to their roots: a clear anti-speciesist message.</p> Those are very serious accusa…tag:arzone.ning.com,2012-07-02:4715978:Comment:1023152012-07-02T02:18:41.581Zred doghttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/reddog
<p>Those are very serious accusations against Animal Equality. As Tim pointed out, in one instance Mark appears to have taken AE's words completely out of context. If you're going to make those kinds of accusations I think you should provide links to support what you're saying.</p>
<p>Those are very serious accusations against Animal Equality. As Tim pointed out, in one instance Mark appears to have taken AE's words completely out of context. If you're going to make those kinds of accusations I think you should provide links to support what you're saying.</p> Hi Mark,
I have a few observ…tag:arzone.ning.com,2012-07-01:4715978:Comment:1023132012-07-01T23:36:53.257ZTim Gierhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/TimGier
<p>Hi Mark, </p>
<p>I have a few observations regarding your claims about Animal Equality. It would have been helpful for others to assess your claims had you provided links to the original sources that allegedly support those claims; it would have added some credibility to your comments as well. Be that as it may, I am familiar enough with AE's work to offer the following thoughts.</p>
<p>1) You appear to be suggesting that groups who work for veganism and the abolition of exploitation…</p>
<p>Hi Mark, </p>
<p>I have a few observations regarding your claims about Animal Equality. It would have been helpful for others to assess your claims had you provided links to the original sources that allegedly support those claims; it would have added some credibility to your comments as well. Be that as it may, I am familiar enough with AE's work to offer the following thoughts.</p>
<p>1) You appear to be suggesting that groups who work for veganism and the abolition of exploitation should turn a blind eye when existing laws and regulations are violated. If that is what you are suggesting, then I believe your suggestion is seriously misguided, if not downright silly. Please let me explain by way of an analogous example in the arena of human rights. We can suppose that a human rights organization would insist that some oppressive regime adhere to existing yet inadequate laws even while they advocate fiercely for more and better protections of human rights. That is, no oppressor who thwarts existing laws ought to go unpunished just because existing laws may fail to fully protect the rights of humans. Anyone concerned with human rights ought to call attention to any other who violates human rights under existing law. To act differently just in case the ones who are oppressed happen to be other animals would be speciesist.<br/><br/>2) If it's not wrong to press for the vigorous enforcement of current laws (and it isn't) then it can't be wrong for AE to notice when other groups such as Mercy for Animals do it.<br/><br/>3) The article on AE's website that links to the HSUS reports is called "<a href="http://www.animalequality.net/articles/reforming-slavery-as-a-means-of-perpetuating-it" target="_blank">Reforming Slavery as a Means of Perpetuating it: The Case of Calf Flesh Consumption</a>" and in it AE says "Just like humans, other animals are neither property nor objects to be utilised and, as such, it is a mistake to support modifications on how they are going to be used. We don’t want another form of oppression for them. Just as with human slavery, justice requires the eradication of this institution and not the reform of it. We need to finish with this injustice here and now, starting with ourselves." It's true that AE links to reports that HSUS has produced, but AE only links to those reports to support AE's claim that groups such as HSUS and PeTA have shown that certain welfare reforms could be good for the bottom line of the animal exploiters; AE is not promoting HSUS or "their tactics" - they are expressly objecting to them. I find it incredible that any fair-minded person reading the article would mistake AE's intentions.<br/><br/>4) I'd have to see the article you're referring that supposedly praises some restaurant. The only article I recall on that AE linked to seemed to even-handed on the subject of the restaurant itself and, if I recall correctly, was more concerned with praising the entirely separate company that produces the vegan foods. But again, I don't know which article you are referring to.<br/><br/>5) AE volunteers appear naked on giant plastic-wrapped "food trays", simulating the sorts of packaging that the body parts of other animals are sold in. From what I have seen (and what I have been told by Jose Valle and Sharon Nunez, two of the founders of AE), any of AE's demonstrations involving naked bodies are decidedly not sexualized or sensationalized in any way. You make it sound like AE is engaging in PeTA-esque "I'd rather be naked than wear fur" campaigns, which they aren't and haven't ever, to my knowledge. <br/><br/>6) There is no such thing as a vegan restaurant -- every business that buys and sells products on the open market is supporting, and supported by, at least some non-vegan interests in some way to some degree. To refuse to recognize any restaurant as it begins to offer vegan options is to remove any incentive there is for companies to bring vegan options to the public. <br/><br/>Given that your own view (if I am correct in #1 above) is speciesist, and given that you appear to have painted Animal Equality in the worst possible light in each of the remaining items you cite, I hope that you'll forgive me as I ignore your addendum. Animal Equality and Igualdad Animal are doing tremendous work throughout Europe and, it appears to me, making a tremendous impact in the lives of other animals. Your criticisms of them are misplaced.</p> An addendum:
Since my chat, A…tag:arzone.ning.com,2012-06-30:4715978:Comment:1021402012-06-30T18:48:19.176ZMark Jordanhttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/MarkJordan
<p>An addendum:</p>
<p>Since my chat, Animal Equality has changed their approach to one of regulation and enforcement and no longer only promotes and runs anti-speciesist campaigns. They have unfortunately been quite strikingly adding many speciesist campaigns and promotion of speciesism to their work. Recent examples:</p>
<p>(1) Repeated calls for prosecution of businesses and workers out of compliance with laws and standards for enslaving/killing animals;</p>
<p>(2) Praising and promoting…</p>
<p>An addendum:</p>
<p>Since my chat, Animal Equality has changed their approach to one of regulation and enforcement and no longer only promotes and runs anti-speciesist campaigns. They have unfortunately been quite strikingly adding many speciesist campaigns and promotion of speciesism to their work. Recent examples:</p>
<p>(1) Repeated calls for prosecution of businesses and workers out of compliance with laws and standards for enslaving/killing animals;</p>
<p>(2) Praising and promoting groups like Mercy for Animals and other groups for doing #1 (above);</p>
<p>(3) Linking to and promoting HSUS tactics and reports from their website;</p>
<p>(4) Posting an article about how great ("ethical") a restaurant is that has "sustainable" fish (and other flesh and animal products);</p>
<p>(5) Demeaning serious issues with naked, or almost-naked, protests; and</p>
<p>(6) Promotion of non-vegan restaurants.</p>
<p>Having them change their approach from anti-speciesist to speciesist is a serious tragedy to the Animal Rights movement. I hope they come back to their original anti-speciesist stance and campaigns. But at this time, I have to seriously retract from my praise of them in this chat.</p>
<p>Sincerely and Sadly,</p>
<p>Mark</p> Thanks for another great chat…tag:arzone.ning.com,2012-01-11:4715978:Comment:765712012-01-11T12:33:08.316Zred doghttp://arzone.ning.com/profile/reddog
<p>Thanks for another great chat. Mark is very persuasive.</p>
<p>Thanks for another great chat. Mark is very persuasive.</p>