The Absurdities of Pacifism and Intersectional Activism in Animal Liberation

The Absurdities of Pacifism and Intersectional Activism in Animal Liberation.

by Derk A.Brachmann

“Nobody in the world, nobody in history has ever gotten their freedom by appealing to the moral sense of those that were oppressing them”-Assata Shakur

“What is the conscientious animal defender to do ?

The liberator solution is the use of physical force. They believe force is a necessary method for defending animal beings against their human being oppressors. The fact that we are human need not stop us. But it does demand, they say, that each person reassess his or her loyalties. If you are of the family of all creatures, brother or sister to the other animals, then you must stop cooperation with society and participating in the slaughter, and fight for your family. If you are of the family of man, then don’t call yourself an agent or defender of the animals. You have a conflict of interest, and not admitting it is doing animals more harm than good. It can mislead people who are of
the family of creatures, and who may be willing to fight for their family. People who are of the family of man engage in tactics which are designed more to keep peace with other people than to free the animals. This is why most animal organizations are concerned more about public opinion than their effectiveness in liberating animals.”-Liberators

The problem with the way that current Animal Liberation activists operate is that they don’t view this as a struggle, a fight. They don’t view the animal exploitation industries and other murderers of animals as enemies. They have not picked a side. They have no loyalty to animals, no solidarity with them.

Most confuse Pacifism(non-violent protest, potlucks, and petitions) as “fighting” for Animal Liberation. They are not fighting for animals. They are ‘requesting’ their freedom. And very politely I might add. Until we ramp up our tactics to include ANY and ALL necessary means, the status quo will be maintained. And unfortunately, the pacifist/nonviolent “activists” help to maintain the status quo: a culture of animal exploitation.

Most often when I speak against nonviolence and pacifism(which anyone who knows about past struggles for Liberation knows that using pacifism and nonviolence as the sole means to bring about Liberation, doesn’t work), I
am attacked instantly by pacifists.  Am I suggesting that all nonviolent and pacifist activities cease right now? No. Of course not. Any means to bring awareness is a good thing. I support education, and I’ll even concede that nonviolent protests don’t ‘hurt’ anything, but these methods are not enough to bring about meaningful change. Now, where I say that these methods are fine to use, my pacifist opponents on the other hand, see their way as the only way, and often verbally attack anyone suggesting otherwise. I have been villified online, lied about, and all around slandered, simply for pushing for more action for Animal Liberation. And so have many other extremely dedicated activists. They try to silence me by either suggesting I’m a government agent or an informant(even though I never offer to plan with them, or participate with them in an action, I just suggest that we ALL collectiviely step up our efforts for Animal Liberation). So how am I trying to inform on anyone? Actually, it’s typically pacifist Vegans doing the slandering against me. They report my comments and photos on Facebook and try to get my account shut down. Mind you, these are VEGANS we are talking about. People that fancy themselves “animal liberators”. They try any and all methods to silence ANY call to arms for Animal Liberation. Whose side are they on?  And why is EVERY call to action for animals attacked by the very people that are supposed to be protecting them? The most glaring reason I see is that these cowards aren’t willing to sacrifice anything. Not freedom, not limb, nothing. Remember what I said earlier about so-called Animal Rights and Animal Liberation activists helping to maintain the status quo?

The reason that these pacifists are so intent on not taking action is because many have comfortable, suburban homes. Many of these people are parents. They have a mini-van etc. They’re living the “american dream”. They don’t seek to disrupt that in any meaningful way. And the other half of these people are these little whiny, millenial, “I’m offended by everything” rejects. They live in a fantasy world of cliches and the false assumption that Gandhi and MLK single handedly liberated their people. But those of us who study struggles for liberation know that that isn’t the case. They were one spoke in a wheel that included violence and everything else. I would argue that MLKs dream has yet to be realized. These kids live in a delusional fantasy world. I can’t understand how they assume that anywhere near the 9 billion+ people on this planet will someday have a moral epiphany and that the whole world will go Vegan. It is a pipe dream. But not a benign one. Because it keeps people from realizing that humans almost never do the right thing until they have no other choice. Animal exploiters mock the suffering of animals. They mock us for even caring at all. They enjoy the suffering of animals. These people are sadistic. They will fight and die for what they believe is their right: to enslave, mutilate and murder innocent beings. What kind of people did you think you were dealing with? Some will go Vegan as we all know. But never enough. Not fast enough anyway. But, supposing that that pipe dream is possible, until that day comes we are obligated to beat the enemy into submission using any and all means necessary or die trying.

Non-violence will never work to free animals the same way that Gandhi’s plea to Hitler to free the Jews didn’t work. Words mean nothing, and the killing machine kept on killing. You have to fight.  Where animals are oppressed, there needs to be attack and liberation, not protests and petitions. Violence can certainly be used to stop violence. Both world wars are a good example. But violence as a whole will always be part of this world. And brave people need to step up to defend and protect those that cannot defend themselves. Letting others suffer for pacifist ideals is the
definition of cowardice. To be a pacifist is absurd, and if we were all adherents to it, black people in the U.S. would still be in chains today. Did you think that southern slave holders had a moral epiphany? No. Their slaves were freed ONLY after the North invaded, killed a good number of southern soldiers, and burned many plantations to the ground. If pacifism were the rule and not the exception to it, Jews would not exist in Europe today. Europe would not exist, it would be called Germania as Hitler was planning to name his Empire. Violence has freed many from chains and
defended many from harm. To be nonviolent is to be PRO-oppression. Nonviolence invites violence. We do not live in a nonviolent world. We live in this violent world. And being passive in the face of aggression does not stop aggression. If you see a woman being raped, what do you do? Do you draw a “rape is wrong” sign and stand next to the guy holding it?, or do you do anything you have to in order to stop him? The rapist is unlikely to have a moral epiphany and decide to stop raping because you approached him peacefully. This dogmatic adherence to nonviolence is a huge problem. One girl who is a member of the group Direct Action Everywhere(no ACTION anywhere, as I like to call them), told me that rapists and child molesters don’t deserve prison, that they deserve outpatient care. I could go on forever about the absurdities of nonviolence, but I’ll leave you with the thought that if these pacifists ruled the world, a man could rape your baby, and these idiots wouldn’t lock him up. They would counsel him. (blood boils as I’m reminded of this idiocy).

And to make matters worse, the pacifists have a new ally: the intersectional activists. In past human related struggles, intersectional activists were a GOOD thing. But there is a difference. The struggles of the past that these intersectionists were taking part in were ALL human rights issues. They saw the connections of class struggle and systemic racism, etc etc. Basically, they just fought against all forms of human on human oppression. The new breed of intersectional activists are cut from a completely different cloth. The old guard was often pro-violence. The new breed is just another form of pacifism: hold signs, blog, and accuse anyone and everyone of some sort of “ism”. Their most common assertion is that ALL white people are inherently racist, simply for being born white. It’s
absurd. But here’s where my biggest issue with them comes in. You can’t be an intersectional activist when it comes to animal liberation. The reason is simple. How can you fight for both the slave, and the slave holder? How do you fight effectively for both? Humans victimize animals to such a degree, and the victimization is so widespread that you cannot be both a human rights activist and an animal rights or liberation activist. There will always be that conflict of interest. The new breed often excuse any atrocity committed by a person of color, and write it off as a result of their oppression by whites. So… a black fur farmer is breeding mink, killing them and profiting off of their furbecause….white privilege? Shaq, who has millions of dollars, far more money than the average white person, trophy hunts because…white privilege? While there are similarities in the oppression of both people of color and animals, the fact remains that even most oppressed humans still oppress animals. Being oppressed is not a license to oppress others. In fact, I’d argue that people that know what it is to be oppressed have an obligation to make sure
they do not treat others in that way. No human deserves to be discriminated against for anything that is beyond their control, but making the choice to oppress others when you can easily live without doing so, means that you are no longer a victim, you are an oppressor. So we are supposed to fight for the oppressor and the oppressed? Any clear thinking individual can see how nonsensical that is. You can still be against systemic racism and discrimination while holding people accountable for their actions. But the new breed doesn’t hold anyone but whites accountable. They forgive people of color for any atrocity against animals because “white privilege”. I’ve seen it time and time again. There are many people of color who stand against this new breed of intersectionist idiocy, and the intersectionists
accuse them of “white supremacy”. But the truth is, these anti-intersectionist people of color see things for what they are:  that you are not a victim when you are oppressing others.

Furthermore, these new breed cowards are now taking it upon themselves to declare people “not Vegan” if they don’t follow the fucktarded idiocy that is new breed intersectional activism. And by people I mean they are slandering activists that have ACTUALLY liberated animals, and that have educated millions about Veganism. Anyone not bowing down to their idiocy is attacked and or marginalized. The new breed intersectionist scum are human rights activists parading as animal rights activists. It’s basically them saying “hey, I know this guy just slit a goats throat, but if you don’t fight for his freedom from oppression, you’re racist”. No, I don’t fight for the rights of ANY scum that exploits animals. Race and etc, are not issues.

And let’s be clear. Veganism does NOT mean nonviolence, or intersectionality, or peace or any of that. It means you live without exploiting NON-HUMAN animals. Period. If you’re living without exploiting animals, you can be pacifist, violent, intersectionist, anti-intersectionist etc etc. The only thing that matters is that you don’t exploit non-human animals. That is really all there is to Veganism. Stop turning it into things that it is not.

It is my sincerest hope that ACTION becomes the norm in this movement. And by ACTION I mean ACTION. Protests, potlucks, die-ins, and petitions are not ACTION. If we are to throw a wrench in this horror show, we have to fight this as a guerilla war. That means that CEO’s of Big AG, vivisectionists, hunters, trappers, circus employees, breeders, and even the purveyors of the products of animal suffering should be first warned to cease their activities, then they should have their property damaged, if that doesn’t work: exterminate them. If their living means that animals will suffer, they need to disappear. How else can you deal with them? Not every person can or will be educated. And people that make money on animal suffering are least likely to stop. It happens, but it’s extremely rare. And before you say “there’s a chance they’ll change”, so how long do we sit by and let them enslave, torture, and kill? When will enough be enough? If they’ve been warned AND had their property destroyed, what else is there? Would you let Jeffrey Dahmer continue murdering people because he might change some day?

See, the problem with most activists is that they still view animals as less than, and not worth fighting for. Some people aren’t pacifist when it comes to dealing with other humans for their own problems, but they’re pacifist when it comes to animals. And this is because they either don’t see animals as worth it, or they view animals lives as less than humans. It’s one of the two or both. In fact, an idiot who writes for the Vegan Feminist Network(puke) told me that she’d use violence to protect her son, but not to protect animals. And that is the mindset of most activists that
I have come across.

And then there are the Animal “Rights” activists. Those that say we should take virtually no action other than nonviolent “action” because we can somehow legislate our way to Animal Liberation. I’m not against pushing
legislation to free animals, but we can’t rely on that alone. How long will that take? 1000 years? And you can’t legislate speciesism anymore than you can legislate racism or anything else. People will always try to exploit
animals, and we need to be there to either defend and protect, or exact vengeance in their name. You can be any kind of activist you want to be, but to be a true Animal Liberation activist, you need to support any and all means for Animal Liberation, no exceptions. The reason I make the disctinction between ARA and ALA is because ALA means by any means necessary. ARAs often seek to use exclusively legal means to Liberate animals. So there is a distinction there.

In closing, I support any means to help animals, and ALL who care about animals need to do the same. You can be a pacifist yourself, but do not condemn others who push the envelope for animals. If you went Vegan and now you want to be an Animal Liberation activist, remember that this is ALL about NON-HUMANS. Who gives a shit where ANIMAL Liberation Activists stand on HUMAN issues? Especially issues concerning animal exploiting scum.
Intersectional Animal Liberation activism is a non-starter. You can not fight for both opposing sides. Don’t be scared to hop off the fence and land firmly on the animals, the VICTIMS side.

In closing, I will leave you with another quote from the Liberators:

“Complacent people like this, who constitute the majority of people in this society, are too lazy and unthreatened in their own lives to engage in any real struggle for the animals. The civil rights movements in India and in this country were all by the people for the people. Indians fought for independence from the British, women fought for equality to men, blacks fought for the enforcement of their constitutional rights, gays fought for equality among straights, retired citizens fought to retain their power in society. And these struggles continue. They are struggles of people wanting
power in society. They are self-serving enterprises. And they only occur when a group of people feels threatened and oppressed enough to rise up against their oppressors.

The animal liberation movement is entirely different, say the liberators. It takes courage and conviction to fight for someone else’s freedom when you are free yourself. Most people don’t have what it takes. So they hide their lack of courage and commitment behind a trust in God, or vows of non-violence.”-The Liberators.

NOTE: Any “supposed” Animal Liberation activists that are condemning other Animal Liberation activists about their views on human rights issues are full of shit. No one cares what you think. If you are in fact liberating animals, then by all means keep doing so, but keep your fucking mouth shut. No one cares about your human rights bullshit.