However, the original article appeared to have been pubished by a troll attempting to discredit the AR movement, (hence why it is no longer on the Newswire), so I thought it appropriate to reopen the debate by providing a proper incite into fascism and the AR movement, as well as introducing the "Animal Liberation Hallmarks" project which was created in attempt to resist fascist infiltration of our movement and to allow groups to make a clear statement about their emancipatory status:--
http://www.al-hallmarks.net/
The vast majority of ARAs believe in a philosophy of "Total Liberation", opposing domination and discrimination based on any arbitrary value, [including species], which is the only difference between the philsophy of Animal Liberation and other anarchic philosophies, (in essence it is simply an extention of those principles and not an abstraction). Animal Rights declares, by virtue, that all sentient beings have equal value; be they a goldfish or a human (of whatever race, gender, sexuality, ability etc etc etc). AR philosophy dictates that all beings have the right to live and express their nature according to their biology and their needs, without unnatural interference which could cause unnecessary suffering [of course this extends to living beings in "the nature", as well as those dominated by mankind in our habited regions, and therefore AR philosophy naturally extends to include "Environmental" issues as well].
Animal Rights is the direct antithesis of fascism, yet perversely it does attract more fascists than overtly "Leftist" or "Anarchist" based movements although this is only through a lack of articulation by ARAs about what Animal Liberation really means. Fascists seem to have made their first forays into the Animal Liberation movement through the "Straight-Edge" scene of hardcore music, where veganism [or at least dietary veganism] is also common. This has served to create a "common ground" as AR groups end up doing information stalls at these nights, (often unaware of the true nature of the bands playing at the gigs), and those fascists who have been "enlightened" to the suffering of animals then continue to carry the message in their fascist circles. Of course some groups are more cynical, and less discerning in where they'll seek support, however my personal experience is that fascism is neither welcomed nor encouraged amongst ARAs.
However, the Animal Rights message has long been circulating within Fascist circles and has long since taken root, with many Far-Right affinity groups active in the Animal Rights struggle in large parts of Europe. In most groups, those types of ideologies simply aren't welcome and those fascists who participate are quickly ousted for their repugnant views...however, this often causes a lot of friction between those who care more about "the animals" than "personal politics" and those who downright refuse to work with nazis. The core supporters generally kick up enough fuss that the fascists are ousted but this has led to a number of overtly fascist campaign groups being set-up, predominately in Germany and Denmark but they are slowly taking hold in the Netherlands, France, Italy and Eastern Europe.
Unsurprisingly these groups with a core of fascist supporters seem to focus their campaigns on Circuses, [a good way to target "Gypsies"], religious slaughter, [because it's so much more cruel than "normal" slaughter], the dreaded "China", [a hell for animals and a fascists wet dream!], or other contorted angles such as protesting against Hungarian foie gras in France, [number 1 producer and consumer of foie gras pate], because it is more "cruel" than the French produced version of the putrid diseased liver "delicacy"....yet these groups are expanding on the back of the low-level racsim in the societies they are active, [thankfully Britain is still a haven from the worst kinds of fascism].
Many European AR groups are faced with the difficult decision of whether to work with these groups on campigns, or whether to openly oppose them and risk dividing the movement in the country down political lines [the classic way to create a paralysed and ineffective movement riddled with infighting]. Two good examples of this are the Bridget Bardot Foundation in France, [Bridget Bardot is an outspoken racist with very close links to Jean Marie le Penn's National Front], who are the biggest and richest AR group in France and a small, [happily now defunct], fascist campaign group set-up in the Netherlands.
French Activists have little choice but to act in unison with the Bridget Bardot Foundation, there is simply no way they can compete with them except to work together and repeatedly remind everyone that their Associations are completely emancipatory. Still, they avoid the BBF wherever possible but as last weekend's National Anti-Fur March showed the support of the BBF is vital to grass-roots French campaigning. The March was organised in unison with 30 Associations, however the BBF provided the core of the funding and their involvement [despite alienating many other Associations which refused to participate in protest] ensured a turn-out of over 400 activists, (most of whom oppose Bardot's vile opinions on race and religion).
The Netherlands has been much more effective in resisting fascism in their movement, mainly down to the good work of the activists on the ground. Last year a small group of fascists decided to set-up a campaign group to target animal circuses, naturally their motives for targetting circuses were racist although there is little doubt their intentions towards the animals were also entirely genuine. This caused a lot of debate in the Dutch movement; Animal Circuses are a big problem in Holland and they're usually violent, so why not let scum deal with scum?
Many Dutch ARAs felt it was important to deal with this issue before it took hold, but how do you shame someone for being a racist whilst they're protesting for the animals, without giving passers-by the impression you're shaming them for protestng for animals or in some way protesting on behalf of the animal abusers?
The decision was taken, [by some activists but by no means all as many favoured leaving them unopposed], to form a counter-demo with a mixture of anti-fascist and animal-rights placards. The counter-demo was set-up first to occupy the space and not let the fascists protest when they arrived, although this went "wrong" when the fascists inadvertently joined the counter-demo [thinking some supporters had arrived early] and the whole thing immediately exploded.
More through luck than judgement, the performance was severely affected as people rapidly ushered their children away from the chaos and the circus goons raced to join the melee. I dread to imagine what passers-by made of the situation, but the fascist group imploded after that because every attempt to organise a protest was met with plans for counter-demos, which come demo time opposed the Circuses alone until the fascists stopped trying to organise.
The tactics applied in Holland simply cannot be applied against the BBF in France, however the need for a clear and coherent message about what we actually stand for desperately needs to be given by the Animal Rights movement. The fact that fascists feel an affinity towards the Animal Liberation cause can only mean that the message being transmitted is completely wrong. The same fact that Anarchists and ARAs seem to find themselves in such conflict, or the fact that ARAs are perceived as fascists is something that needs to be urgently addressed.
The Animal Rights movement is polluted with so many pseudo-philosophers and "Ethicists" that the message has become entirely convoluted, Veganism is a "lifestyle choice" that all "Environmentalists" and "Anarchists" should be pursuing as a matter of course through their desire to limit the amount of eviromental damage and reliance on subservience that a lifestyle based on animal exploitation creates....yet this is so misunderstood outside of AR circles due to the Francione type psychobabble about "person-hood", "welfare", "new-welfarism", "reform" and "abolitionism" which alienates the average person and provides a confused message due to everyone having a different interpretation and a flat refusal to rely on any subject which might directly interest those people, (such as the ecological reasons for veganism)!
ARAs tend to be the most progressive, forward thinking and politically aware activists I have encountered, yet they seem to still carry some kind of stigma for being "Animal Rights". One of the reasons for this is the constant need to express that non-human animals also suffer in a given situation, for example an AR block on an Anti-War march protesting the suffering of non-human animals in the war. This is completely valid as many non-human animals suffer in war, and without the AR block they would receive no mention at all, but the ARAs have a tendency to forget that the human victims of the war are animals too. This kind of ambiguity about the true sentiments of ARAs is often misinterpreted externally, inviting undesirables who bring a perverse affinity [such as fascists] and alienating potential allies [anarchists, environmentalists etc] and whilst also breeding an internal culture of "the animals" [i.e. non-human animals] first.
In 2007 a group of Swiss Animal Liberation activists realised the need to express the true values of Animal Rights philosophy in order to provide a platform to defend the European AR movement from the insidious rise of fascism. What followed was a year of collective discussions and grass-roots decision making, the result being the Animal Liberation Hallmarks. The idea was that if a group subscribed to the basic emancipatory philosophy of Animal Liberation, as described by the constitution of the ALH project, they could collectively decide to bear the Animal Liberation Hallmark to deter "undesirables" and faciltate ejecting those who do not subscribe to true AR philosophy.
The 3 tennets of the ALH constitution are:--
1) Unequivocal rejection of all speciesism and exploitation of non-human animals, including but not limited to the use (breeding, detention and killing), for food, human entertainment, experimentation and clothing.
2) Unequivocal rejection of all forms of domination, exploitation and discrimination against humans based on arbitrary distinctions such as gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation and religious belief.
3) Mutual recognition of the various forms of activism and resistance.
I still have no idea how fascists have come to identify with the philosophy of Animal Liberation, as so succinctly defined here, or why so many Anti-Capitalist activists view ARAs with such suspicion and lack of comprehension...yet big-Pharma is one of the worst industries out there and the ARAs are kicking down the door on their own!
What could be achieved if the Anti-Capitalist movement threw their weight behind SHAC right now???
The Military is testing the worst kinds of chemicals and biological agents on animals, where are the Anti-Militarists???
Whether it's to save animals, hammer big business, or demilitarise the planet, ARAs really need to be reaching out to other movements more. But that simply isn't going to happen whilst there's questions over fascism and single issue campaiging, (above all not caring about humans). ARAs are already active in many other campaigns, but how we shake off the negative image and become more open to other campaign groups really needs to be opened to debate.
Until we're all free,
Comments
Hide the following 26 comments
Not sure
28.10.2009 11:40
And being straight edge I am a little confused about how that is an entry point for fascists, obviously there will be some sxe fascists, in the same way there are many non sxe fascists but you seem to be insinuating there is some obvious overt link between self respect and nazism?
Surely this debate is only worth having if an instance arrises in which an openly fascists individual is courted by an otherwise respected AR group, or if a fascist wants to raise the issue of why they have been cut off by the AR movement?
If you don't believe in the rights of animals (humans or otherwise) you are not an animal rights activist and therefore have no place in the AR movement - if no one disagrees with that sentiment then there is no debate to be had.
Pierre
Not just an AR issue
28.10.2009 12:17
France isn't a special case. Brigitte Jean-Marie Bardot is a racist fascist-fucker and shouldn't be permitted to keep animals let alone participate in any progressive movement. Whenever she speaks, the only topic of discussion should be her racism and she should be sprayed with human blood wherever she goes - I'd donate a pint for that. It is the equivalent of having Hitler as a figurehead for vegetarianism.
Danny
history lesson
28.10.2009 13:36
Many of the anti-fash were hunt-sabs. In the 80's a lot of vegan AR people fought alongside Class War activists. The point in most who "do things" respect and support other comrades who "do things".
old timer
Not relevant in the UK movement
28.10.2009 14:05
I'm mixed race (Asian and White) and have never met any fascists in AR, AR is anti-fascist.
Animal rights activists tend to be active in other movements and show a huge amount of (non-reciprocated) solidarity with other causes. The main problem is we don't talk about the other issues we care about.
We have a human rights page on our local group's website:
http://animalrightscambridge.webs.com/humanrights.htm
http://animalrightscambridge.webs.com/racism.htm
ARC
My experience in AR
28.10.2009 14:47
I am not straight edge myself but I have met and now know quite a number of people who are, through going to the International Gatherings, and none of them have been fascists - completely the opposite. I don't really understand the link between that, as there are probably more fascists who aren't straight edge.
Also I would say many activists are not single issue. Most of the activists I know campaign on a wide range of issues, they attend climate camp, anti-war / arms protests, poverty, antifa protests, smash edo etc etc. I would say out of everyone I know more people who do campaign on other issues than those who just do AR campaigning. Whilst some people may devote more of their time to AR, than other issues - I am sure there are some people who may devote more of their time to environmental issues, but also help other campaigns. Also if you are actually running your own full time campaign, you probably don't have the time for much else but this is the same in any movement.
Sarah
Fascists infiltrated the anti-capitalist movement
28.10.2009 15:08
anti-capitalist
History of British Fascism in Animal Rights
28.10.2009 15:35
I write this as a history student, I am not involved in animal rights, fascism or anti-fascism.
During the 1930's, the small animal rights movement was heavily populated by followers of Oswald Mosley's BUF female supporters. Prominent among them was Mary Allen who held a long-term membership of the Council of the London and Provincial Anti-Vivisection Society. Mary Allen was a prominent anti-vivisection campaigner and member of the BUF.
After WWII, the BUF rebranded as the Union Movement, one of their influential figures was Mrs Dudley Ward, who as well as donating huge sums of money to Oswald Mosley's Union Movement, also helped to found the Animal Defence League and she was and active member and donator to the RSPCA.
The following are direct quotes from Oswald Mosley about animals:
"all exploitation of animals that involves cruelty. All animals are at the mercy of humans one way or another and it is our duty to respect and protect other species. Whether domestic or in the wild, we must accord the same respect to animals as we should accord our fellow men and women. We say this because we recognise that all life is God-given and very precious with the entire natural world intrinsically linked to the great order of things. Anyone with a healthy awareness of and regard for our environment will recognise this."
and
"We oppose all blood sports. Animals have suffered horrific cruelty over the ages in order to amuse the lowest instincts of mankind. Ironically, it evolved into the sport of “noblemen”, who bred selected species in order that these creatures could be chased terrified and then either ripped apart or suffer the agony of an arrow or spear. The gun came later. All the paraphernalia of human warfare has been directed against the innocent and defenceless species of the natural world. It should end now."
Another animal rights campaigner and supporter of the British Union of Fascists was Dr Margaret Vivien who was organiser of the British Union Against Vivisection (B.U.A.V.) and who spoke regularly on behalf of the BUAV.
The BUAV is still active to this day, however I do not intend to imply that they currently have any links with British fascism.
However, Norah Elam, one of the founders of the BUAV was an active supporter of Oswald Mosley and the County Organiser for West Sussex British Union of Fascists. After the outbreak of war in 1939, Norah Elam was detained under Regulation 18B and, curiously, the HQ of the BUAV was raided by the Special Branch because they were convinced it was a front for the BUF, largely because the names of both organisations began with “British Union”. The BUAV survived and continues, as I previously mentioned, to the present day.
Sir George Drummond, was also a major donor to the BUAV as well as a NHQ member of the British Union of Fascists. He was active as a speaker for the BUAV and wrote articles for its journal ‘The Abolitionist’.
@ARC - you say it is not relevant in the UK movement, it is and always has been, and has a long historical basis, an uncomfortable historical truth is that the animal rights movement in Britain has more in common with the fascists than the left-wing.
There is a historical thread of right-wing involvement in animal rights in Britain from the 1930's, through the 50's, 60, and 70's up to the present day, with financial support - uncomfortable but true.
Modern day, the Duke and Duchess of Hamilton are at the forefront of the campaign against foie-gras.
Accuratist
@ Accuratist
28.10.2009 16:06
Today however the animal rights movement is totally anti-fascist in the UK, hence your inability to provide contemporary examples. Most of the animal rights movement is now from anarchist, left or non-politicly traditions. Being against Foie Gras is an issue taken up by animal rights but also animal welfare group (CIWF for example) the camp I suspect the Duke and Duchess fall into.
ARC
Good article :)
28.10.2009 16:27
It's a really good debate although yes, it does seem like at the moment things are in check (at least in the UK) - but it is something we mustn't forget and let get out of control. Fascists will always be trying to hijack other movements, especially ones that appear successful. They will try anything to spread their poison ideologies.
I don't really need to go on about this as it's been reiterated by everyone else here, but I have never in many years of AR campaigning met ANYONE who would ever accept fascism or racism in any form whatsoever. Most of my friends, fellow campaigners, etc have all been involved in some way in anti-fascist campaigning and would always throw a racist from groups.
I think the prospect of AR branching out into other campaigns is definitely important. It can be difficult though as single issue campaigning is really effective but also can be restrictive in a way (although - everything is very interlinked, but sometimes this link needs to be pointed out to groups as they often like it to be very clear).
Ultimately we are all fighting for one and the same - and fascists are simply not welcome in this struggle, they fight for their own warped and twisted opinions which have no place in our world.
Anti fascist
@ARC
28.10.2009 16:35
Accuratist
@Accuratist
28.10.2009 16:49
Fascism and Nazism in particular had links to mystical cults like ancient Nordic religion and nature-worship, which is probably why some of them like to try to infiltrate animal rights or environmental movements.
I didn't realise the Duke and Duchess of Hamilton were fascists (other than being wealthy toffs of course). Do you have more information on this - I could find anything from a brief internet search.
vegan
@vegan and ARC
28.10.2009 17:12
Accuratist
@ Accuratist
28.10.2009 17:18
ARC
The Hamiltons, Hess and the Dog House
28.10.2009 17:24
I think you are getting a bit confused for understandable reasons.
The Duke of Hamilton, aka le Duc de Châtellerault, has the palatial hereditary home called Châtellerault east of the town of Hamilton. It is locally refered to as The Kennels or Dog House because it was built as a hunting lodge for his ancestors pampered hunting hounds and horses in the grounds of the now demolished Hamilton Palace.
It was where deputy fuehrer Hess flew to meet with Hamiltons dad, the then Duke, to try to buy peace with Britain. That is a helluva strong link to Nazism, but shrouded in mystery partly because Hess seems to be have been clinically insane at the time.
The local impression is these aristocrats should be viewed as typically in-bred aristocrats, as irrelevant to either animal rights or fascism as any other befuddled toff. Although if I am wrong about any of that then lot's of locals will be very interested in further information.
"When deputy fuehrer Hess came down with his aeroplane in Scotland on the 10th of May, he gave a false name and asked to see the Duke of Hamilton. The Duke being apprised by the authorities, visited the German prisoner in hospital. Hess then revealed for the first time his true identity, saying that he had seen the Duke when he was at the Olympic games at Berlin in 1936. The Duke did not recognise the Deputy Fuehrer. He had however, visited Germany for the Olympic games in 1936, and during that time had attended more than one large public function, at which German ministers were present. It is, therefore, quite possible that the deputy Fuehrer may have seen him on one such occasion. As soon as the interview was over, Wing Commander the Duke of Hamilton flew to England and gave a full report of what had passed to the Prime Minister, who sent for him. Contrary to reports which have appeared in some newspapers, the Duke has never been in correspondence with the Deputy Fuehrer. None of the Duke's three brothers, who are, like him, serving in the Royal Air Force has either met Hess or has had correspondence with him. It will be seen that the conduct of the Duke of Hamilton has been in every respect honourable and proper."
Danny
Responses
28.10.2009 17:31
2) This isn't a commentary on the UK movement, as an International I'm not qualified to say but I've heard stories of racists being told to leave in unceremonious fashion from British ARAs so I'm sure in a multi-cultural society like the UK it wouldn't be tolerated...but what if the BPP declared themselves AR and started demoing Circuses, how would people react?
3) As Accuratist points out, AR philosophy seems to attract the far-right; my speculation is that this is due to the fascist's mindless obsession with the Occult, (which in turn falls back on ancient druidism at it's base), which teaches a bizzare combination of respect for nature coupled with spiteful animosity and vile acts...which is my best explanation for their perverse interest in AR, however I'm sure most ARAs will agree with Oswalds words on the issue of animals. As a precision, Oswald could never actually be considered an ARA due to his discrimination and abuse of human animals even if he was an advocate.
4) As numerous posters point out; ARAs are often active on the widest range of campaigns and are shining examples of cross-movement solidarity, however I suspect the negative image other campaigners have of AR [which in reality is all due to a wrong impression] is limiting the successes of a movement which is already having a MASSIVE impact....but as I asked before, what impact if the Anti-Capitalist movement now rallied behind SHAC for the final push against HLS?
5) The question is not about the dangers, (or not), of fascist infltration but instead how ARAs counter the negative image that other campaign groups have of them. Public image isn't too important, but reaching out to people who are already active and aware is more important. For some reason the big AR demos only tend to draw ARAs, whereas other movements seem to draw a wider cross-section of the activist community, we should analyse this and try to change it. This is the real subject of debate, although fist it is vital we understand how the wider community views AR.
6) Whilst nobody has pointed this out yet, the article has been written using the terms Animal Liberation and Animal Rights interchangably. Whilst it is arguable that there are differences in the philosophies, for the sake of this analysis they refer to the same subject as an evolutionary movement.
7) Please no Straw man arguments: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
The Author
Misunderstanding the point?
28.10.2009 17:37
I believe that those who are saying "not a problem at present" are correct. However that does not preclude the problem arising. What precisely do you do with "fascists" who are GENUINELY "animal rights"? What do you do with "letists" who are aligned with you against fascism but totally anthropentric and not the least interested in the welfare of other animals.
So yes, perhaps not a problem today, but might be a very real problem tomorrow. Talking about it not, coming up with strategies, etc. not out of order.
MDN
some points on movement crossover and straight-edgers
28.10.2009 18:11
> what impact if the Anti-Capitalist movement now rallied behind SHAC for the final push against HLS?
Although it is important to us as animal rights activists, HLS is just a pissy little company in the grand scheme of things anti-capitalist, so I can easily understand why it isn't a valid concern for anti-capitalists.
> this is Nazis adopting a Straight Edge lifestyle, not Straight-Edgers becoming Nazis!
There is a subculture of straightedge called Hardline StraightEdge:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardline_(subculture)
It is very anti-abortion, anti-contraception and anti- recreational sex (e.g. gay sex), which tends to associate it more with the far right than the left. I think this was a case of straight-edgers becoming Nazis rather than the other way round. Indeed some of the main people involved eventually got into radical Islam with its authoritarianism and regressive sexual politics.
I'm not sure how much of a following it has any more though, all the straight-edgers I know aren't like this.
vegan
@ MDN
28.10.2009 18:13
I know from looking at old copies of the now defunct but very brilliant Arkangel Magazine there was a big debate about fascism many many years ago. There was fascists forming there own AR groups but nowadays we are all anti-fashin the UK. If anyone in the UK AR movement thinks fash should be allowed now then yes we need a debate. But I very much doubt it.
ARC
This debate is stupid because...
28.10.2009 19:01
Are speciesists welcome in the UK AR movement? The question pretty much answers itself.
Steve Discombe
is it possible to believe in animal rights/liberation and be a fascist?
28.10.2009 22:59
Is this definitely true? I may be wrong but I don't think fascism necessarily means racism, sexism or homophobia. It just means a hierarchical and authoritarian way of structuring human society. So it is certainly classist and wouldn't be a society I'd like to be part of, but I'm not sure strictly speaking it is incompatible with an animal rights ideology.
Maybe if you say one of the animal rights is the right (for all animals, human and non-human) to live free of any authority then it is incompatible. But that would imply that animal rights implies a belief in pure anarchy for human society. That's something I personally would like, but I don't think it is a universal belief in the animal rights movement.
I guess fascists see a difference between humans and non-humans (which there is) and have a different set of morals for treating each group.
vegan anti-fascist
Incompatible
29.10.2009 08:34
Steve Discombe
Responses
29.10.2009 08:34
It's true that a fascist can genuinely believe in the liberation of non-human animals, just like a peadophile can believe in child protection, but that doesn't mean they're an ARA anymore than a peadophile could be a child protectionist. The whole point of this article is to highlight the fact that Animal Liberation means the liberation of ALL species [including humans] so I'm heartened to see how enlightened and progressive the UK movement is on this issue, and how quick British activists are to make exactly the same point!
I still believe that we need to work on the image we're presenting of ourselves to other movements, but I hope this article [and subsequent debate] has presented an opportunity for ARAs to convey the message that AR is [by virtue of its own core philosophy] an emancipatory, inclusive and Anti-Fascist movement. We still have a long way to go to convince people that the struggle for liberation must cross the species barrier if it is ever to be truly realised, of course this easier said than done but it is something which needs serious consideration.
The main philosophical tennets of AR [as I understand them] seem to be based in Francione type "personhood" arguments, so these are the cut and paste soundbite arguments we use in debates, but what relevance do we place on our struggle in terms of the greater picture of resisting oppressive corporations and corrupt governments, the class war, human rights and above all environmentalism?
These are all AR issues and many of us are active against them for entirely that reason, what I'm suggesting is that we shoud be conveying our reasons for being their as being Anti-Speciesist and explaining the true meaning and motivation of Anti-Specieism. I'm sure when people understand it is an extention of their own views, it will become a far better understood and accepted philosophy which can only further the AR cause.
Anarchists and Leftists in South America have strongly embraced the Anti-Speciesist cause, yet in Europe the AR and Anti-Speciesist struggles are still largely marginalised by the wider activist community. In my opinion it's logical that Anarchists would affiliate with the Anti-Speciesist movement, therefore the question needs to be how do we effectively reach out to the Anarchist movements in Europe with the Anti-Speciesist message?
Finally, on the subject of Nazis and Straight-Edge; it's not just so called "Hardline" Straight-Edgers but genuine neo-nazis who have some perverse interest in being Straight-Edge, as I've said before my suspicion would be that it's so they can feel superior as they nonce around pretending to be rambo in their machoistic fantasy land. However, as that's a digression from the subject I propose that anyone who's interested do a quick search and you'll find plenty of information on the subject.
The Author
@ The Author
29.10.2009 16:54
I have spent 15 months researching the politics of this era, which is very intersting both pre-war and post WWII
As far as "Animal Rights" goes, when you get into the detail, it is clear that during this era the only radical political movement that could be considered to be ARA's were the far-right followers of Mosley and his BUF. and I am talking about animal rights, not just welfare.
I cannot find any source of information that the left-wing was in any way involved with or supportive of animal rights. (at that particular period of time)
I can fully understand why modern day Animal Rights people would be alarmed about the prospects of fascists supporting and even becoming involved with their cause, but in the 1930's the British fascist supporters of the BUF were the only political poeple that supported Animal Rights campaigners,
It appears that the far-right, of that era, cared more about animals than some of their fellow humans, Although from the research that I have done the BUF seems to be less racist that the far-right groups of today, perhaps due to coming from a more innocent era, Mosley often spoke about the Jamaicans with very high regard, speaking of other races as being equal but different, my guess is that he was talking about different cultures. Before anyone says it,I am not an apologist for them I simply look into history and record what I find.
An uncomfortable truth is that most animal rights campaigns, as opposed to (but also including) animal welfare campaigns have their origins and political history that stems from the BUF (British Union of Fascists) and their supporters. This is a very interesting topic, the more that I look into it, and it appears to any historian that has detailed knowledge of the period that the anti-vivisection campaigns, (which often go unreported, but were active and highly vocal at the time) were heavily populated by BUF members, especially the BUF's female supporters.
Why would Animal Rights in the UK attract fascist supporters ? - this is an interesting question. I am not an expert on modern day facism, however, I would speculate that the purists from that movement would identify with it as one of their campaigns, and the philosophy links in with nature and mankinds natural superiority and with that comes a duty to respect animal and the natural world.
The last paragraph is just speculation on my part and my own opinion, as far as the previous paragraphs go I have spent alot of my time researching the politics of that era.
Accuratist
On the incompatibility of animal rights and anarchism
29.10.2009 21:59
vegan anti-fascist said: "Is this definitely true? I may be wrong but I don't think fascism necessarily means racism, sexism or homophobia. It just means a hierarchical and authoritarian way of structuring human society. So it is certainly classist and wouldn't be a society I'd like to be part of, but I'm not sure strictly speaking it is incompatible with an animal rights ideology."
This is how I best understand fascism. Others may say it is too broad and ambiguous, whereas I believe it is clarity on a usually vague and deeply argued definition.
"Maybe if you say one of the animal rights is the right (for all animals, human and non-human) to live free of any authority then it is incompatible. But that would imply that animal rights implies a belief in pure anarchy for human society. That's something I personally would like, but I don't think it is a universal belief in the animal rights movement."
Here is where a common oxymoronic philosophy is crafted without recognition. To imply that animals (human and non-human) live free of any authority, as stated, implies that these individuals must live in an anarchistic society. However, without a government there are no laws and consequently no rights. Quite simply, AR and anarchism are polar opposites.
Furthermore many people (specifically within the animal liberation movement infact) see animal liberation and animal rights as being the philosophically identical beliefs, without realising this broad difference: the former is reformist, the latter is radical and revolutionary.
Why self-proclaimed (a term accurately used for a change) 'AR anarchists' do not understand this is beyond me. I know after around 3 years of animal rights activism I worked this one out, and it was mentally difficult to accept, but it's something that needs to be recognised! I know I've talked a lot about our species' biological identity crisis as a form of logical schizophrenia, which is usually typified by narrow-minded anarchists, but 'anarchist ARAs' are also guilty of such an illness that is ripping apart an effective social movement.
@
AR and anarchism are polar opposites?
30.10.2009 17:53
In an anarchist society rights, are just enforced by the society as a whole rather than by a central authority.
You could equally well say "human rights and anarchism are polar opposites", by the same logic.
If someone is killing others or exerting their authority over them in some other way, then by definition the society ceases to be anarchist. It is up to the member of the society to make sure that doesn't happen.
You could argue that anarchism isn't achievable, but that is a different argument. Anarchism is a utopian vision that I think most people would agree would be nice if is is possible. But most people think it isn't possible to do in practice. I disagree, and think we should always strive towards it as much as possible in every aspect of life, though, even if we never get all the way there. Any step closer to it will only benefit us.
I'm a big fan of both animal rights/liberation and anarchism, but I don't necessarily think they imply each other. I think you can consistently believe one without the other.
Animal rights philosophy doesn't demand that all animals are treated identically, only that they are accorded equal consideration. For example we wouldn't give mice the right to an education, but we might for humans. So someone could easily say that animals should have the right to live free of interference from any human authority, but humans don't. The degree of cultural and social interaction between humans is on a much more complex level than between non-humans, so different rules may apply.
vagn anti-fascist
@Accuratist - your information looks suspciously like it is all from one place
30.10.2009 18:08
The information you present looks suspiciously similar to that which I found in 2 minutes on this page, which appears to be written by a supporter or sympathiser of Mosley: http://www.oswaldmosley.net/animal-rights.php
They are obviously going to present themselves in a positive light and overstate their involvement with causes such as anti-vivisection which make them look good to the general public.
So I am curious, are you the author of the above website? You state that you are a completely impartial observer but I am wondering if you are either a fascist trying to link fascism and animal rights to benefit your own cause, or else an anti-animal rights sock puppet seeking to discredit animal rights with some dubious smears. Why would someone with no interest in either animal rights or fascism suddenly jump into this thread?
vegan