One of the things that has amazed me about the animal rights movement over these past eight years is just how inaccurate parts of that movement are and, even more bizarre, that they just don’t care.
For example, the first time I saw it, I assumed In Defense of Animals sold this t-shirt because they didn’t know the quote on it is bogus. Today, I’m pretty much convinced they just don’t give a damn. Taking their cue from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, many animal rights groups and activists put their ideology front and center, with a commitment to honesty and accuracy a distant second or third. Selling a t-shirt for years with a bogus quote is simply what these people do — its part and parcel of the way they think and operate.
That being said, this is also a problem with some of those opposed to extremist animal rights and environmental groups. For the moment, I’m going to pick on Whitney Blake who is the Daily Associate Editor at the Cavalier Daily, the student newspaper at the University of Virginia. Blake wrote an op-ed about animal rights and environmental terrorism which said, in part,
Is burning down anything they oppose a constructive way to advocate their convictions? It seems counter-productive, since more resources will have to be extracted from Mother Earth to rebuild. Such extremism undermines various environmental causes which can be trumpeted and advocated in a peaceful manner. Mainstream groups like the Sierra Club, however, haven’t been quick to condemn the acts mentioned above. A search of press releases on their Web site reveals no mention of the Earth Liberation Front or eco-terrorism.
In fact, the Sierra Club has been very forward in condemning ecoterrorism. In August 2003, for example, the Sierra Club issued a press release — which is on its website here denouncing environmental terrorism saying,
The Sierra Club strongly condemns all acts of violence in the name of the environment, and we specifically denounce the Earth Liberation Front’s recent acts of arson and vandalism at a construction site in San Diego and at car dealerships in Southern California.
While nonviolent civil disobedience has a distinguished place in American history, the Sierra Club uses only lawful means to protect the environment. We can respect the decision of those who, by undertaking acts of nonviolent civil disobedience, put themselves at risk, but peaceful disobedience and violence are vastly different acts. No matter what the motivation, the Sierra Club does not condone any acts of violence.
Moreoever, the Sierra Club actively fought Paul Watson’s recent attempt to take control of the Sierra Club board. A quick Google search of “Sierra Club ecoterrorism” produces plenty of pages showing the Sierra Club’s consistent denunciation of ecoterrorism. Blake didn’t do her homework, and ended up libeling the Sierra Club.
But Blake is a paragon of research and equanimity compared to some of the banter and claims that show up from time to time on anti-animal rights mailing lists. As we oppose the animal rights movement on issues that are often very personal and emotional to many people, it is important that we take a deep breath and perhaps a step backward and make sure we don’t become a mere reflection of the movement we oppose.
Source:
Burning down the house. Whitney Blake, The Cavalier Daily (University of Virginia), February 17, 2005.
Statement on recent acts of violence in the name of the environment. Press Release, The Sierra Club, August 25, 2003.