Animal activists attacking scientists’ homes

[xdarthveganx]

Ok, I just thought about it. Hmm... 20-30 years in the bing for animal activism... would that make me like Leonard Peltier? Mumia Abu Jamal? Or maybe even someone like Gary Webb or Danny Casolaro, murdered for spreading information? Oh wait, no it wouldn't; It would just make me another nameless faceless person locked in a cage with no one giving a fuck about what I had to say about anything because I was arrested for violent animal activism... not because I had any information or any ability to mobilize people.

I think it would be nice if you would reread what xdarthveganx wrote and think about it for a while. Like xdarthveganx, I found it quite upsetting that you would put down animal rights prisoners like that. The truth is it makes me think that you are an idiot, but I would really like it if you would prove me wrong .

 

You just asked me to cite examples of change, you made no specification if the change was supposed to be good or bad. Bad labor conditions are certainly better than having napalm dumped on your villages daily. The market often changes things for worse, often for the better. The internet was by and large a creation of the free market, in my opinion that's a good thing.

What is your point?

Certainly wasnt the market that made the US stop dumpin napalm on viatnamese villages, it was armed resistance from the vietnamese people. .

 

 

 

Not only that, U.S. troops resisted the war in Vietnam and in a lot of cases even shot their own commanding officers.

[DaN]

Blimey this thread has gone on since I posted yesterday.

 

Darth im sorry you have friends that dont come on here because of the ignorance on the forum.I havnt been a member here long enough to know if thats true or not.

 

All I was saying is that social change does come about by peaceful & violent means, so both extremes of opinion on here have some truth in them.Perhaps historically violence has been the main factor in change, but thats not to say it should always be that way.What is happening at the moment cannot be studied in any book & nor can the future.I think Jaleels belief is that moving forward we should not support groups who are using force to get their opinions across although Jaleel I would say that while that is certainly a noble dream, unfortunately I fear it is a 'dream' by its very definition.

 

I have nothing else to say in this topic because for me it has gone past the point of being educational & to the point where its just a slagging match.

 

For the record - my personal opinion is that force should not be supported or encouraged unless it is really neccesary as a last resort.I feel that ALF & groups like them have probably tried every avenue peacefully & now as a last resort are becoming more militant so fair play to them.I have nothing but respect for them because they are risking imprisonment for their beliefs.If I was a single man with no responsibility I would join them in a flash but the reality for me is a partner & family that need me here with them, not in a jail cell.

[bronco]

I think it would be nice if you would reread what xdarthveganx wrote and think about it for a while. Like xdarthveganx, I found it quite upsetting that you would put down animal rights prisoners like that. The truth is it makes me think that you are an idiot, but I would really like it if you would prove me wrong .

I regret the idiot-part here, it is not a nice thing to say. Jaleel, your opinons on this does not make me think you are an idiot. I'd like to apologize and will try to express myself better in the future.

[_raVen_]

I regret the idiot-part here, it is not a nice thing to say. Jaleel, your opinons on this does not make me think you are an idiot. I'd like to apologize and will try to express myself better in the future.

 

Hey, Wolfy

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a247/Raven_PZ/smitten_hearts.gif

[Tarz]

By the way, try reading something other than (or in addition to) Chomsky and the sharpened rhetoric of activist literature before you blindly accuse me of not reading enough, dipshit. And while we're on the topic of reading I'd also like to point out something else that has obviously evaded you (coming from someone who has probably done more reading than you or anyone you know) reading doesn't make you smart: it just makes you well read, and maybe gives you a broader perspective of the world.

Well put jaleel.

 

The walking encyclopaedia and fountain of all knowledge, Mr Know It All darth has this habit of accusing people who don’t agree with him of not being well read and takes it upon himself to tell others what they should or shouldn’t be reading. You can only participate in a discussion if darth deems you learned and educated enough and you read the same books that he does.

The capitalist system cares only for profit, it is the very reason that animals are exploited for the sake of humans.

That’s a new one on me. Didn’t realise that the pre-capitalist society’s and communists didn’t eat or use animals in any way.

You tell someone poor woman feeding a family of 4 on the 8 cents a day she gets from making Nike's for your privileged white friends that she is much "better off".

I’d tell her that if she was earning half of that amount either out on the land or working in a factory for a non-Western corporation. Why do lefties always have trouble comprehending exchange rates and local cost of living, and always seem to forget too that pay in the third world actually goes - a lot - further than the same amount would in the US.

[xjohanx]

damn i thought this thread was going to die.

[DaN]

damn i thought this thread was going to die.

 

 

Lol

[veginator]

The capitalist system cares only for profit, it is the very reason that animals are exploited for the sake of humans.

That’s a new one on me. Didn’t realise that the pre-capitalist society’s and communists didn’t eat or use animals in any way.

It's true that capitalism isn't the only economic system under which exploitation of nonhuman animals for the sake of humans occurs, and I doubt that he meant to imply that. But I would hope we can all agree that the degree of suffering of animals in the US livestock and dairy industries is largely because of the competitive and nearly unregulated nature of the business. Animals raised for food suffer in every society, at the very least because of their lives being cut short.

 

But there aren't that many places where tens of thousands of animals are crammed into a very small and dark place for their entire lives, where animals are stuffed full of hormones and antibiotics, where they're selectively bred to naturally become morbidly obese, where they're fed dead animals from their own species or things that aren't even food, or various other things that we all read about when we decided to become vegans. This happens because there are almost no restrictions on what factory farms can do to animals in order to cut their costs or generate more income.

 

And it doesn't happen in most European countries from what I understand, not because they're not capitalist (of course they are), but because they're many years ahead of the US in terms of public consciousness of animal suffering, and the public has successfully demanded government regulations that outlaw practices such as confinement in small cages or stalls that are still the norm in the US.

 

You tell someone poor woman feeding a family of 4 on the 8 cents a day she gets from making Nike's for your privileged white friends that she is much "better off".

I’d tell her that if she was earning half of that amount either out on the land or working in a factory for a non-Western corporation. Why do lefties always have trouble comprehending exchange rates and local cost of living, and always seem to forget too that pay in the third world actually goes - a lot - further than the same amount would in the US.

It's true that certain things that are necessities or nearly so in most parts of the US--cars and a means to heat one's home in the winter, for example--are not needed in many places in the world. But let's not get carried away with the "the cost of living is cheaper there" arguments. Although the official poverty rate in the US of about 13% is probably a considerable underestimate, hardly anybody in the US dies of malnutrition, but huge numbers of people do in the parts of the world you're talking about. About 1/3 of the world's children suffer from malnutrition at some point during their first 5 years. There are dozens of countries where more than 5% of children die before their first birthday, as well as dozens of countries where life expectancy is below 60. And according to Jean Ziegler, a former UN specialist on food issues, more than half of all the deaths in the world are due to malnutrition-related causes: "In the world, approximately 62 million people, all causes of death combined, die each year. In 2006, more than 36 million died of hunger or diseases due to deficiencies in micronutrients."

 

Do you really think millions of people from poorer parts of the world would immigrate to the US each year if they were doing just fine working the land (a huge number of people in developing countries don't own any!) or working in some low-wage factory? All of us on this board have compassion for other animals and an understanding of how much suffering humans subject them to. Let's try to have similar compassion and understanding for the billions of humans in the world who are also exploited to an extreme degree by a world political/economic order in which profits come first and meeting human needs is way down the list.

 

Some time I'd like for us to get back to discussing the original topic of this thread. We all have lots of different opinions and that results in discussion getting heated at times, but it's an important topic to think about. Not that this one isn't, but it belongs in a different thread.

 

Jeff

[Tarz]

Take a look at Chinese animal welfare practices. There’s really not that much difference between US and European animal production, despite greater awareness and campaigning.

 

Someone is better off if they are earning more by no longer having to work in the fields or by working for a local company that pays less than a multinational. I never said that they could not be better off still. I was just acknowledging that they used to be worse off – if not so many people would not chose to be employed in such a manner and they would continue to sow the land and work for local companies.

 

The cost of living is very important, as the equivalent of 8 cents pay in country x purchases a lot more than it does in the US. I’m not American, but guess you can buy a bubble gum for that amount in the US, but would be able to purchase a meal for that amount in the third world. You have to factor in exchange rates and local costs – what a Westerner would consider a paltry amount could actually be a lot for someone in the third world.

[xdarthveganx]

Take a look at Chinese animal welfare practices. There’s really not that much difference between US and European animal production, despite greater awareness and campaigning.

 

Someone is better off if they are earning more by no longer having to work in the fields or by working for a local company that pays less than a multinational. I never said that they could not be better off still. I was just acknowledging that they used to be worse off – if not so many people would not chose to be employed in such a manner and they would continue to sow the land and work for local companies.

 

The cost of living is very important, as the equivalent of 8 cents pay in country x purchases a lot more than it does in the US. I’m not American, but guess you can buy a bubble gum for that amount in the US, but would be able to purchase a meal for that amount in the third world. You have to factor in exchange rates and local costs – what a Westerner would consider a paltry amount could actually be a lot for someone in the third world.

 

 

 

Watch this, then come back and talk to me....

 

 

http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=5600443

 

 

Oh and while I am at it, It is easy for you to sit here, on your privileged Canadian ass, and make judgments about what it might be like trying to survive on practically nothing. It makes it easier for you, anything to make your consumer addicted, money grubbing society seem ok.

 

I would hardly say these people are in better conditions, but for the sake of the argument I will submit to you that maybe, just maybe they are in better conditions for the short term. However there is a much larger picture here. They have essentially secured that for the foreseeable future these are the best conditions they will have. Instead of being able to revolutionize and develop from the inside, they will be held captive. Because of the way the system is designed, very few people inside these countries will ever be able to make enough capital to develop their own ideas, and their own companies. You see when all the wealth is being accumulated by companies and persons based outside of the country, it means none of that wealth gets returned to that population and that country.

 

Id also like to add, you have got a history of suggesting its ok to exploit people to get the things you want. You also have a history of excusing things in such a way that it isn't exploitation, it isn't sexism because they CHOSE to do it. Tarz, I wonder if you have any idea how full of shit you really are. Not to mention if you think you can buy bubble gum for 8 cents youve got another thing coming.

Edited July 15, 2008 by xdarthveganx

[Tarz]

Telling people what to watch now as well as read...

 

I'm not watching it - you should be able to argue a case without it.

[xdarthveganx]

Telling people what to watch now as well as read...

 

I'm not watching it - you should be able to argue a case without it.

 

 

 

It shows Nike factory and living conditions for what they are. But you're the know it all, you should know all about it right?

[xjohanx]

this thread is out of bounds dudes. how did Nike come in to this?

[Tarz]

It shows Nike factory and living conditions for what they are. But you're the know it all, you should know all about it right?

It's funny that if these multinationals are oh so evil, people only name-check the same old companies. What about all the other multinationals that employ workers in the third world - are you suggesting that they all share the same practices as Nike?

 

My point is that working for Nike and it's living conditions may still be better - not in all cases though, there will be exceptions - than toiling in the fields or working for a local manufacturer where conditions and pay are actually worse.

[Tarz]

Oh and while I am at it, It is easy for you to sit here, on your privileged Canadian ass, and make judgments about what it might be like trying to survive on practically nothing. It makes it easier for you, anything to make your consumer addicted, money grubbing society seem ok.

 

I would hardly say these people are in better conditions, but for the sake of the argument I will submit to you that maybe, just maybe they are in better conditions for the short term. However there is a much larger picture here. They have essentially secured that for the foreseeable future these are the best conditions they will have. Instead of being able to revolutionize and develop from the inside, they will be held captive. Because of the way the system is designed, very few people inside these countries will ever be able to make enough capital to develop their own ideas, and their own companies. You see when all the wealth is being accumulated by companies and persons based outside of the country, it means none of that wealth gets returned to that population and that country.

 

Id also like to add, you have got a history of suggesting its ok to exploit people to get the things you want. You also have a history of excusing things in such a way that it isn't exploitation, it isn't sexism because they CHOSE to do it. Tarz, I wonder if you have any idea how full of shit you really are. Not to mention if you think you can buy bubble gum for 8 cents youve got another thing coming.

What you fail to understand though what you consider to be practically nothing can in real terms be a substantial amount in another economy.

 

They are not captives – they are employees enjoying better conditions and pay than if they continued to work in the rural economy or for local manufacturers. You would deny them that opportunity though.

 

Of course, the Third World has no local companies to speak of whatsoever, the only companies present there are multinationals… Are you seriously suggesting that before multinationals started investing there was no local manufacturing base whatsoever, there where no companies? That from here on in the only companies to start up will be multinationals?

 

Add what you like, it will be the usual nonsense you come out with. I’m making the point that contrary to what you spout, people are actually better off. I am in favour of letting people do what they want free from the attention of interfering naunces who stick their noses in where it isn’t wanted and who mistakenly thinking they know best and have the solutions to all the world’s problems and who take it upon themselves to tell people how they can and can’t behave. Well on the shit scale I know I don’t even begin to come close to you. In fact you’re off the scale.

 

I’m not American – nor am I Canadian – so I have fuck all interest how much gum costs in the states. For the record I was referring to a single piece of gum - maybe you have to buy a pack in the US, either way I don't care.

[xdarthveganx]

seriously, what fucking planet are you living on?

 

I wasn't suggesting that there was absolutely "no local manufacturing base" in these countries. However since you clearly are uninformed here I will lay it out for you. These countries were primarily rural, and actually still are primarily rural. Even China, now one of the largest, if not the largest manufacturing economy in the world. You have no idea if the living conditions of these workers are better or worse because you refused to watch the video I posted for you. As far as your question related to Nike, no in all actuality they are far from the worst. However they are still involved in murdering labor organizers, and paying there workers wages that they should be ashamed of. Since you seem to know it all, I guess I don't have to tell you that with wages they make they can barely afford to buy 2-3 meals a day, and barely cover their rent. Never mind education for their kids, they sleep on barren mats on concrete floors for christs sake. SOme of these workers are as young as or younger than 13 years old. Yes Tarz you're right they are much better off.

 

But since you brought it up, lets talk about some other multinationals. Take your pick, Shell, Coca Cola, Monsanto, Nestle. How about the World Bank, the WTO, we can talk about any of these institutions you'd like. They are all guilty of exploiting the people,the animals, and the environment of these "third world" countries. Countries like the U.S. in conjunction with the WTO, and the Word Bank, and the IMF were in conjunction to promote and enforce policies that are sure to hold these countries, and their people captive.

 

Oh for the record, one piece of gum costs 25 cents, sometimes more. May still seem like only a small amount, however its 3 times more than you had thought. I would say that is a considerable difference.

[xdarthveganx]

let me just add, I apologize for this getting so off topic. I will no longer respond to unrelated posts in this thread, I am happy to continue this particular discussion but create a separate thread if you want to do that.

[Tarz]

Earth. What’s it like over on Cloud Cuckoo Land?

 

Yes, precisely because these economies are primarily rural, workers migrate to urban areas for an increased salary.

 

You have no idea of working conditions in non-multinational organisations or in rural areas.

 

Their wages may - in some cases - still be low, but the fact remains that they are still higher than they were beforehand, so how can they not – financially at least – be better off?

 

They are investing in countries and creating jobs.

 

Are you really that bothered that I do not know the precise cost of chewing gum in the US?

[xdarthveganx]

MODS, please move the unrelated posts to a new thread so we can continue this...

 

Maybe titled, Tarz thinks sweatshops are a good thing, and multinationals try to help people.

[Tarz]

Companies are not charities. They do help people if they provide them with employment. Or perhaps you'd rather the workers continue to work the land and for local corporations for less pay and in inferior conditions?

 

Multinationals are a good thing if in working for one you have improved your situation.

[robert]

Maybe we can start a new thread with a new title?

 

Or we can try to split this up. I don't know much about that aspect of moderating it, moving things around, but we'll sort it out for easy reading.

 

-RC

[phillipeb]

I think in the never ending debate on whether direct action is justifiable we loose site of the actuality of the situation. Innocent lives are being lost, innocent beings are being stripped of their rights and tortured to effect a desirable endpoint. I am not an xyz coordinate and neither is an animal.

 

While you may disagree with the method and tout the potential loss of people switching to veganism you cannot discount the lives that are saved based on this methodology of direct action. Your argument would be valid if we were discussing the issuance of parking tickets rather than the loss of innocent lives;It is a good thing than that we are speaking of veganism instead.

 

"When a person places the proper value on freedom, there is nothing under the sun that she will not do to acquire that freedom. Whenever you hear a person saying he wants freedom, but in the next breath she is going to tell you what she won't do to get it, or what he doesn't believe in doing in order to get it, he doesn't believe in freedom.

 

A person who believes in freedom will do

anything under the sun to acquire....or preserve his freedom."

-- Malcolm X

 

It may not entice future vegans but it helps to alleviate the pain and potential suffering that would be in its place. The next time you see mink or marsupials in line to die i want you to tell them them that I am sorry but we are not saving you in hopes that some 13 year old in Essex might switch to a live of veganism and i want you to hold his hand as he is violently rapped pillaged and murdered in the name of advancement and tell me my theory on animal activism is wrong.

[phillipeb]

The notion that a multination corporation can move in and rape a third world countries resources and explain it by saying that at least they are making more money seems ludicrous. I wonder as i often do why if in America or Brittan we do not allow certain working policies why we would allow our countries buisnesses to work within another countries system in order to turn a profit. If we as americans or candians or even people of the UK deem it morally irreprehensible to employ child labor or not meet the standards set of basic safety and toxicology than why would we then allow the newest multi nationals to move to another country that does and say well than as long as it is in line with a countries ethics or economics than we should agree to it.

 

All companies should be held accountable to their parent companies nations and should not be given a hall pass in human rights violations just to serve the corporation in which they are profiteering from, There is no excuse economic or otherwise to allow capitol gain from home soil in third world countries if it involves he subjugation of people and property.

 

It is a captiolist view point when we claim that another country due to our interference and tertiary rules are better off for it. Each country has something to offer and it should not be the duty of the 'ruling nations' to judge what that is and how we should exploit it.

 

 

Earth. What’s it like over on Cloud Cuckoo Land?

 

Yes, precisely because these economies are primarily rural, workers migrate to urban areas for an increased salary.

 

You have no idea of working conditions in non-multinational organisations or in rural areas.

 

Their wages may - in some cases - still be low, but the fact remains that they are still higher than they were beforehand, so how can they not – financially at least – be better off?

 

They are investing in countries and creating jobs.

 

Are you really that bothered that I do not know the precise cost of chewing gum in the US?

[CollegeB]

Did anyone point out that HSUS gave $25K to the $30K fund trying to apprehend the suspects. I find that interesting.

[Tarz]

People mean well but do not realise that the result of their interfering would actually have a negative impact.

 

Remove multinationals from the equation and their workforces would be in most instances worse off.

 

Tell worker x that he can't earn an increased wage at multinational y and that he can only work for local employer z.

 

Due to the media scrutiny multinationals face, the conditions their are usually better than for local employers which don't get the same attention.