Brighton Animal Action are holding the first World Day for Incarcerated Animals on Sat 30th Sept (note change of date from the originally planned 23rd).
Meeting in Preston Park, (which is right on the A23 as you enter Brighton, with plenty of free parking),at 1pm - those wishing to set up stalls should arrive at 12 noon. Stalls are free but large groups/organisations could maybe give a teensie weensie donation to help cover our costs for the day. We won't spend it on booze, honest! There will be a rally with well known speakers from across the Animal Rights movement, then a march through the town with the chance to leaflet as we go in 2 busy shopping areas and the seafront, ending at the Palace Pier. From there it's a 10 minute walk to the Unemployed Centre where there will be cheap vegan food and some videos. Feel free to wear fancy dress or animal masks. All we need to make this a great day is dry weather and lots of people to get our message across that animals are suffering incarceration by humans around the world, in laboratories, farms, pet shops, zoos, circuses etc.
So come down to Brighton, meet lots of AR people, enjoy vegan food - and get to see the sea too!
Please spread this far and wide as there are still some people out there who think it's on 23rd Sept and we don't want anyone making a wasted trip to the south coast on the wrong day.
So come down to Brighton, meet lots of AR people, enjoy vegan food - and get to see the sea too!
Please spread this far and wide as there are still some people out there who think it's on 23rd Sept and we don't want anyone making a wasted trip to the south coast on the wrong day.
Comments
Hide the following 33 comments
Animal rights not serious politics
03.09.2006 10:11
Sai ko Jo
sai ko jo is a humanist
03.09.2006 10:33
snake
Indymedia posters not serious political thinkers
03.09.2006 11:27
Animal rights not serious politics? What planet are you on mate. Ever bother to read the papers?
Roger
But whether that is true or not IS "serious politics"
03.09.2006 16:02
Understand me now -- I am NOT arguing in favor of "animal rights" here. I am arguing in favor of the concept that we all get to decide what WE consider to be most important for ourselves. WE get to decide where we will devote OUR efforts -- it isn't even a matter for voting.
Like I said, I'm not an "animal rights" person but I am an "environmental". That doesn't mean that I am totally unconcerned about social justice issues. But it does mean that I might not necessarily give solving those a higher priority than saving the environment. You really want to argue "people are more important that the environment: please start by answering these questions (essay, not yes or no)
1) Explain what you mean by social equality on a dead planet (besides the equality of the grave).
2) Explain WHY you think that a society which has eliminated injustice between humans would NECESSARILY be in balance with nature ( saying that in a capitalist society the destruction of the enviornment has capitalist causes begs the question --- it's what you mean by saying that a society is capitalist. In a feudal society whatever happens will have feudal causes. What you need to answer is not that you don't know WHAT in a socialist society would cause humans to (while sharing the spoils equally among themsleves) continue to rape and destroy their environment but that they COULDN'T act in this way.
Mike Novack
e-mail:
stepbystpefarm mtdata.com
serious political work
03.09.2006 19:49
Roger
animal rights not serious politics
04.09.2006 09:53
i can see environmentalist is important, but not animal rights as humans and animals do not share equality. this does not mean that we should not 'care' for animals or inflict cruelty on animals, only it is politically not important. furthermore, what animals do we mean? are you saying that we should not kill disease carrying rats because they have equal rights to our crappy bedsit? or mosquitoes when we go on holiday to thailand? gimmie a break. animal rights seems so contradictory that it is not worth the bother. it seems entirely based on rich boy emotionalism ' aah, look at that cute animal over there, aah...."
as for iran, i do not say they are arabs, but it is the "islamic republic of iran" and the country in fact has many nationalities, such as Kurds, Farsi, Arabs, Balochi etc. fso, do not lecture me on nonsense just because you have no arguments to back yr point. my point about iran is only that this is the serious political issue, or racism in britain, not veganism or vegetarianism. furthermore, animal rights is not itself left wing, and is often ( tho not always) fascistic. (remember green anarchist magazine anyone ???). i notice that many animal rights types are incapable of argueing, and have to resort to name calling.... why? because you have no politics to speak of, it is only emotionalism. that is why you have no reply and have to resort to things like " he is bored student' etc. animal rights is a bourgeious ideology and its politics are entirely bourgeious. it is not serious politics, and a waste of time. you should join a serious marxist group like the .... (eat meat!)
sai ko jo
animals rights cultish
04.09.2006 10:02
jo the ex veggie
don't make me laugh
04.09.2006 13:23
You expect me to take you seriously when your post can be summed up as: "animal rights aren't important, it's not politics, it's for the middle class, it's stupid." You haven't made a point - You've just told us that we're all wrong!
Listen kid, once you leave university and gain some life experience you will realise it's better to keep an open mind and try to learn from different others, rather than criticise a culture you clearly know very little about.
"are you saying that we should not kill disease carrying rats..."
Yeah, totally.
Roger
wan' ka' jo'
04.09.2006 21:48
Bye.
X_H8
sai-ko-jak
04.09.2006 21:59
Who loves you baby
...
no response because you are confused
05.09.2006 12:55
i wish i was still in uni, but i was in uni 20 years ago..... but why the hostility?? i need to know why you are supporting what you are supporting, what is the worth of it. You cannot answer me because you yourself do not know. that is basically correct, right???
Sai ko jo
lala land
05.09.2006 15:14
If you need to know why people support or believe in animal rights then you should ask activists, instead of having a pop at them. There are plenty of books written on the arguments for animal rights, how about you read one of them instead of trying to debate with people you claim are purely emotional and have no arguments. You expose your own agenda!
I understand that you have no interest in understanding, learning about and debating animal rights you just want to prove how what a clever clogs you are by arguing with those who are incapable of doing it coherantly and those you believe are below you. That's why I won't play your game - I don't need too. I have a big enough cock so don't have to make up for hanging around on the internet.
Marxism? Don't make me laugh - can't you get a decent hobby, like Subuteo. When you grow up a little you'll understand that hanging onto the class struggle is not about active politics but having something that makes you a little different and edgy and fills your time. Really, it's as pathetic as fat bald men hanging on to the love of England.
"that is basically correct, right???"
Urrrr, no. I have loads of reason, explanations and justifications for animal rights. But I only share them with people willing to listen.
Roger
Homepage:
http://roger.rbgi.net
im willing to listen but you are not saying anything
05.09.2006 15:51
the reason i am attacking animal rights is because i believe it is confused and a waste of time. i have read much of the literature, and i find it weak and emotional and unrealistic as regards most of the world outside of cultish animal rights groups. all the activists i have met, and believe it or not i was actually an animal rights activist once, are totally confused and think that drinking or not drinking milk is a political issue. as for the literature, i have read some of it, like Peter singer, but it is totally unconvincing tho logical. Singer is the best you guys have got, and he is not great. Animal rights is confused about whether it is left or right wing, and in fact most 'animal rights' activists themselves do not know. ( and believe me i have asked and asked...) also, since we are talking about contemporary events, what is this neo pagan mysticism that also seems to accompany animal rights? this is religion and not politics. Green politics has been both leftist and rightist (nazi) in its past, and it may be so again, especially if it is linked to this neo pagan wicca bollocks. answer me then! furthermore, there has been an issue in the past as regards animal rights and minorities such as muslims and jews. why? because of Halal and kosher ways of killing the animal. (hanging an animal by its legs and cutting its throat and letting it bleed to death) this is an issue to which you morons have no answer or have even thought about. i think you cannot answer me because you have no answers. you have been totally exposed and do not know what to do apart from 'ad hominem' attack "you wanker, you student ( i wish i still was!!), you this, you that etc etc" you have no arguments because there are no arguments. animal rights is a not serious politics.
sai ko jo
hahahah
05.09.2006 16:43
So why are you still asking questions?
If you had paid attention while reading Singer you would have learnt that his position is radical animal welfare, not animal rights.
Roger
Why didn't your reply to my posting Sai ko?
05.09.2006 17:06
Badger
Sai Ko Jo has no eyes!
06.09.2006 08:13
So your right Sai Ko Jo,what you call "animal rights",isn't about "politics" as this involves endless, deferring, debate of agreed or disagreed legislation without any practical execution of it-- by the people who drafted it and voted for it.
Tim
reply to badger + roger (Badger and Bodger)
06.09.2006 08:21
i couldn't find the other thread as the indymedia page changed. Sorry!
Roger,
OK, if Singer is animal welfare, despite what he says, then what is animal rights? i actually agree with Animal welfare, that is i think humans should not mistreat animals, but i do not see any argument for equality between cats and humans, say, nor how rights exist outside of some kind of statist framework. (i.e. rights of property, rights of tenants etc rights are fundamentally legal and statist).
sai ko jo
re reply to badger
06.09.2006 08:29
i went back and reread yr thread. compassion towards animals. good idea, no disagreement. but what to eat? What to wear? what if animals carry diseases? (compassion for plague ridden rats??) As for Buddhism or Hinduism, i have nothing against those religions, only i do not believe in them, not do i think that they are particularly 'animal friendly' as is made out. but i see no reason to think more or less highly of buddhism than of christianity. i also do not believe Jesus is the son of God etc. i think the way of eating in the far east tho, is far more logical than we in the west. Why? because they eat (some groups of people eat tho not all) cats dogs snakes etc. this is better than us who only eat beef and other grain fed animals. i would be happy to eat cats or dogs if it were available, as it is totally logical. if cows, why not cats???
sai ko jo
tim the anarchist
06.09.2006 08:38
Thank you for yr lucid elucidation. animal liberation vs animal rights vs animal welfare....hmmm
What is the individual will of an animal? do you know it? do you know even yr own will. ( i doubt it as you sound confused) a query tho: if anarchist believes in the freedom of people or groups to do as they will, without intrvention from the state or police, does that not also follow that you need to respect those people that eat or experiment on animals. or do 'anarchists' secretly hate the police because they are only the rivals of the police, that is you would set up a far more dictatorial regime if your anarchism ever became successful as you would presumably... stop people eating meat or risk violence!! Libertarianism???? Gimmie a break. Tim, anarchism is the kids version of Marxism.
Roger and Bodger: do you also consider yrselves anarchists, or are there different ideologies in the 'animal welfare/liberation/rights camp??? Are there Marxists who practice animal rights/welfare/ liberation or whatever???
jo the ex veggie
The Fallen Ex Veggie (With an anthpropocentric bitterness)
06.09.2006 13:27
You don't know either what an "independant will" is "Ex Veggie"? Everyone has one,the individual elephant enslaved in chains in a circus,has one,but it is beaten out through behind the scenes "training" with weopens.It's the "independant will" to be physically and mentally FREE to walk,run,migrate; to furfill practical interests of social and instinctal survival.It's very easy to intuitively understand,only the black clouds of an anthpropocentric perspective prevent you from doing so--"Ex Veggie."
I hope their is some "Ex Veggie" shelters for "battered" carnivores who were tricked into being veggie and being brainwashed into the "Veggie Cult."
Tim
please leave us alone!
06.09.2006 14:20
please go away and leave us alone!! End of conversation. if you dont want to come to this event then dont come.
snake
Animal welfare is not malthusian
06.09.2006 17:13
As I mentioned Stalin, the hunter and meat eater, killed 22 million people in gulags and the Bolsheviks caused environmental degredation in the Soviet Union on an unprecedented scale. Look at the Aral Sea for example, as well as atom bomb tests, mining and logging, and the extinction of the Siberian buffalo and the near extinction of the Amur tiger.
Harry Trueman authorised the infamous atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, even when the Japanese were on their knees and (contrary to mainstream belief) were sueing for peace, yet he was ardently pro vivisection.
Charles Darwin, devotee of Malthus, on which he formed his theories of natural selection and evolution (which has been used to justify genocide and other human rights abuses), was a vivisectionist.
Aristocratic foxhunters once ran and controlled the slave trade, many estates of aristocratic bigots in Britain today were built on profits of the slave trade.
Animal welfare issues are not left wing or right wing, they are 'party issues' (see Max Weber's sociology for further explanations). They can cut across class issues, working class people can be just as cruel to animals (eg. badger baiting, dog fighting) as can bourgeoisie (fox hunting, grouse shooting) and mere unrestrained capitalism (factory intensive farming). people who like animals cannot be tied to a class as easily as you seem to suggest.
I'd like your comments on the above.
Have all the wars this last century been started by animal rights activists?
Do I prove a love of humanity (by your logic), by hating animals?
Badger
blah
06.09.2006 19:26
You ask this after writing four or five post criticising animal rights. This is a perfect example of why I have no interest in debating animal rights with you.
Please stop asking me questions and get it into your thick skull that I have no wish debating animal rights with you.
The reason for this is simple, you have no interest in listening as demonstrated by your iniatial post. When I debate I do so for two reasons: to learn and to educate. I do not debate for the sake of my ego.
"i actually agree with Animal welfare, that is i think humans should not mistreat animals, but i do not see any argument for equality between cats and humans, say, nor how rights exist outside of some kind of statist framework. (i.e. rights of property, rights of tenants etc rights are fundamentally legal and statist)."
I don't really care what you think. To be honest, I don't think anyone does, which is why you come on the internet expressing extreme opinions. Do you address people in public the way you address them on the internet? I doubt it. Why is your anti-social behaviour anymore exceptable on the internet?
Jo the ex veggie - I have no interest in conventional politics. I have a very limited knowledge of anarchism, perhaps the fact that I have no interest in conventional politics makes me an anarchist. I don't know. Anarchism, I understand, is a wide church so your question is too vague to answer.
I believe in the concept of animal rights, and that society should grant and respect rights of non-human animals in a similiar way as it does to human animals. Given Tim's post, can I therefor be an anarchist?
Roger
Deja Vu?
06.09.2006 20:17
Haven't I read most of this before? On another posting? Same people, same arguments?
Can't someone just post an event without a string of the same stuff?
Agree with the earlier poster. If you want to come, come. If you don't, don't. Then shut up unless you've got something new to say :0(
Gregor Samsa
various replies
07.09.2006 08:46
if you are not interested then dont join in. take yr own advice. is not everything on indymedia just a boring repitition?? israel vs palestine, anarchism vs marxism, defendants on trial, police vs protestors. so it is, so it is. But why should we not ask questions on things which do not make complete sense to us??? yr advice of just shut up and do yr thing is nonsense.
Tim;
i do not believe that hunting or dog fighting or cock fighting or whatever, however cruel these may or may not be are serious political issues. you are confused about malthus. it remains as fact that earth first had a slogan: malthus was right - to refer to the fact that faimines in africa do not matter because there are too many people on earth. i am only asking if you held a similar view? evidently not. i do not care whether Stalin went hunting or not.
Bodger and Badger: you are confused and have nothing to say. you are the one who is anti social - ie you say i am a 'wanker' student' bald'. yr question back to you. is this how you educate people in animal rights? by insult and using emotional language. no wonder then you are not taken seriously.
as everyone seems bored with this discussion, then let us finish on disagreement.
sai ko jo
Lala land once again
07.09.2006 13:54
You're a strange representative of the working class, what with holidaying in Thailand and going to university in Thatcher's Britain.
I agree - let's end this silly tirade of abuse, and I suggest that next time you want to blow off some steam you go and find a nice woman or man to do it with, and leave the animal rights dicussion to those who are actually interested in discussing it it a mature and constructive way.
Sod off.
Roger
A rational challenge to which you have not replied sai ko
07.09.2006 17:04
I gave a rational challenge to your (daft) ideas, and raised points which you have chosen to ignore. I have had a lot to say to you, which as yet remains unanswered. Why?
I cannot help but think that your name 'Sai Ko' is actually a pseudonym, and that you are in fact a rich white boy, one of the very people that you seemingly despise. Perhaps from now on, seeing that you are given to confabulations, you should change your name to 'Psycho Joe'.
Badger
dear oh dear
08.09.2006 09:30
you are the one who constantly insults me with 'wanker' , bald' rich white boy' etc etc. i am not convinced by anything you say, but the converse is also true. hopefully this mutual abuse tho, will have made some people think about animal rights and seen it for the stupidity it is... why are you obsessed with sex, and talk about big dicks etc. it is you and people like you who lower the tone on indymedia. what about sex with sheep?
Bodger:
i have replied that humans and animals are different categories of beings due to language and thought. also that human civilisation is built on use of animals for farming agriculture hunting etc. this is human civilisation as such. i do not see how this can be undone, nor can a movement like yours stop people eating meat. i am not convinced by buddhism or compassion.... good luck and prove me wrong in practice.
tim:
what is it you want??? do you stop friends or family eating meat by threats of violence??? you think that a centuries old traditions of christmas dinner is going to be stopped by confused 'anarchists', this is a lot more like 'hippy fascist'. people enjoy eating meat, it tastes good, and if you really love animals, then you also would eat them.
sai ko jo
OK
08.09.2006 09:46
guys, i will come to yr event and see for myself..... see if you can spot me!!!
jo the ex veggie
tits
08.09.2006 10:45
I have never called you a wanker, bald, rich or a white boy. I have no interest in your race as race is unimportant to me and you're the one who brought wealth into this thread! Once again with the lies.
You wanna talk about insulting - lets have a look at some of the comments you've been posting, and funnily enough, unlike the things you claim I've been saying - you actually have said these things:
"...moral craze of some rich western kids. do not waste yr time on this and do serious political work." - from your initial post!!!
"it seems entirely based on rich boy emotionalism"
"do not lecture me on nonsense"
"neo pagan wicca bollocks."
"you morons"
and calling us fascist - I'd smack you for that in real life kid.
I take real offence in being lectured on working class politics from some middle class fantasist. We are not sheep, you are not our better, we do not need saving.
And you have the cheek to criticise me for insulting people!
Anyway, back to your protesting: "i am not convinced by anything you say" - well duh! That is the very thesis of my point - you will never be convinced by anything I say unless I agree with your fundamentalist clap trap. That is how your kind work: "Either you agree with what I say or you are wrong. I am an authority on everything and anyone who disagrees with me will be open to a torrent of name calling."
"will have made some people think about animal rights and seen it for the stupidity it is"
Don't be stupid, do you think anyone other than your own kind take you seriously?
"why are you obsessed with sex, and talk about big dicks etc."
Because I have one, and you don't, and your jealous of that which is why you have such low self estem. When women say it's not the size that matters they are lying. Just remember that the next time you last 20 seconds.
"it is you and people like you who lower the tone on indymedia"
Good, because it's full of tossers like you.
If I lower a the tone then what about tossers like you who talk about the borgousies? CLOUD CUCKOO LAND.
Now sod off and do some real politics.
Roger
sai ko jo kicks the ass of animal rights activists
09.09.2006 12:30
sai ko jo
Whats the prize for the winner?
09.09.2006 12:46
Tim
For Psycho Joe.
11.09.2006 16:55
Well the World Health Organisation stipulates that a low fat vegetarian diet is the best one, so if you keep on eating burgers and other meats then you could go down with a coronary.
Vegetarianism is growing more and more.
"i am not convinced by buddhism or compassion.... good luck and prove me wrong in practice"
That's a shame, they are both noble ideas as old as time and help human civilisation as well as animals. Your loss, not mine matey boy. If you think like this this is one of the reasons why the world is an ever increasing shit pit.
You say you've kicked ass, I think you've disappeared up yours looking for the sunshine.
Badger