Trigger Warning: This post contains talk of violence and cruelty against animals, and ableism.
—
As human beings we are constantly evolving. Society changes over time, and as we grow, so does our social conscience, for the most part. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, and it is all too easy to look back at the past and see injustices clearly. It is also easy to celebrate past activist movements and the part they played in dismantling these injustices. However, hiding under the umbrella of ‘activism’ or ‘justice’ does not excuse any and all actions taken, and it is possible for activism to go too far-particularly when it comes to animal rights.
The Inuit Seal Hunt
Think of the cow, the average bovine chewing on cud, and how integral it is to the Western world. The cow provides meat, milk, leather, medicine, marshmallows and a whole range of by-products-not to mention money and livelihood to those who farm them. To the Inuit community, seals are their cows. They hunt them for food and other by-products both to feed their families and to sell on to support themselves.
That was until the campaign against seal hunting destroyed their way of life.
The concept of the barbaric seal hunt is something that grew out of the 1970s Greenpeace Canada movement, in which stars like Brigitte Bardot cuddled the cute, white harp seal cubs. Videos of the animals being hacked to death by hunters circulated, and together this sparked global outrage and a perception of Inuit culture that still persists today.
“Campaigners and organisations like Greenpeace played a significant role in the destruction of Inuit culture.”
Although the Inuit do not hunt harp seal cubs (they rarely even hunt harp seals at all, since they aren’t local to their locale), the campaign against seal hunting did nothing to clarify this, and as a result many Inuit people were labelled cruel and barbaric.
What’s more, the ban on seal fur (which reached Canada in 1987, and Europe in 2009) and the subsequent shunning of seal by-products by the modern world, had a severe impact on Inuit society. Inuit hunters went from making $54,000 to $1,000, and their livelihoods and culture were all but destroyed.
Given that Inuit society was already under a great strain, this was devastating, as Alethea Arnaquq-Baril, the creator of the documentary Angry Inuk, explains:
“People were already under so much pressure, under assault from the government basically—colonization was happening to us much later than the rest of the indigenous Canadian population, and we were right in the middle of that complete upheaval of people being sent away to schools or forced into federal day schools in the communities.”
By campaigning relentless against seal hunting with little to no awareness of the impact on Inuit communities, campaigners and organisations like Greenpeace played a significant role in the destruction of Inuit culture.
Were animal rights activists right to campaign against seal hunting? Most probably. Were they right to do so without first considering the impact on Inuit societies; without putting measures in place help those cultures transition into a different way of life? Absolutely not.
A Touch Of Mink
The wearing of fur has been a controversial topic for the last century, with the majority agreeing that killing an animal for the sake of its fur alone is a deplorable act. Even in the fashion world, faux-fur is the preferred material for the socially conscious. There are those however, that still prefer to adorn themselves in animal fur.
It is this group that are so often targeted by the fur fighters. The usual means of attack is to pour paint or some other substance on the fur item in order to destroy it. But this in itself does not help the cause and as a matter of fact will probably do more harm than good. When one fur coat is destroyed, the owner purchases another one, thereby perpetuating the fur trade instead of stopping it.
“Releasing animals who have been raised in captivity into the wild can be an incredibly traumatic experience.”
The other thing that animal rights activists campaign for is animal liberation. They-understandably-believe that no animal should be kept in captivity (particularly when it is only being bred for slaughter), and often work to free farmed and caged. But releasing animals who have been raised in captivity into the wild can be an incredibly traumatic experience, since the animals do not have the necessary skills to survive.
In other instances, the release of animals can be devastating to the ecological validity of an area.
All over Ireland there are animal trusts that protect endangered species and promote natural wildlife. Ireland is also a huge farming community, with 42% of the populous living rurally. There are oyster farms, dairy farms and yes, even mink farms.
In an act that has been labelled animal terrorism, 5,000 minks were ‘liberated’ from a farm in Donegal, wreaking ecological havoc across the area. Although most of the animals were quickly caught, those that weren’t either perished or caused havoc. Areas of conservation were in great danger as native wildlife was attacked, salmon and poultry farmers almost lost their business, and even pets were murdered by the mink.
Sure, releasing minks from cruel captivity can be seen as a good thing. But why were their lives considered more worthwhile than those they destroyed?
Give Me Veganism, or Give me Death
For some people, being vegan is a necessity. For others, it is very much a choice. And for others still, it is their duty to be vegan for the benefit of the world. It is the latter group that often falls into the ‘Vegan or Die’ brigade that is prominent on social media.
“Promoting ethical living is great; willing others to die is not.”
When a person truly believes in a cause it can be difficult, nigh impossible, for them to see other points of view. This has certainly been the case for the militant vegan offshoot. Although most vegans are understanding when it comes to dietary restrictions imposed by health and well-being, others are not so.
There are a range of people who cannot, for valid reasons, cannot go vegan. These include:
- Diabetics who require insulin, which is a bovine by-product
- OCD and ED sufferers who could relapse with such dietary restrictions
- People with digestive disorders
- People with bone disorders
- People with severe allergies.
And yet militant vegans are often unwilling to accept this. All too often they act in an ableist manner. When individuals with conditions and disabilities try to explain that a vegan diet or lifestyle would literally kill them, they are often met with a staunch ‘well you deserve to die then’ response.
Promoting ethical living is great; willing others to die because they don’t or can’t live up to your ideals is not.
The Big Picture
Perspective is necessary in all aspects of life. While it is good to be focused in your endeavours, it’s best not to lose sight of the big picture. Activism is the way forward-it is how we change the world-but we have to be careful that we don’t destroy lives in the process.
