Paws 4 thought... is animal welfare campaigning in conflict with an abolitionist approach?

When thinking about veganism and vegans you might be tempted to think that their outlook and beliefs are the same - that they are all working towards the same goal...

I used to think that it was relatively simple - but the more I listen to and speak with other vegans I see that, in fact, it can be complex. People have different beliefs, different causes that they are more passionate about and, dare I say it, different agendas.

So what might it mean to YOU to be vegan?

I've read a couple of blog posts recently that got me to thinking - just what does this new way of life mean to me, and, why am I doing it? What do I want to achieve?

This post on 'Single Issue Campaigns' got me thinking and then another well written piece from The Thinking Vegan helped me to realise that I have now crystallised a clear opinion on my beliefs / personal vegan ethics.

You see there are some vegans who believe in what is called an 'abolitionist' (radical) approach - this is a hard line for total animal liberation - one which often believes that animal welfare reform (such as improving welfare standards on farms) is not acceptable. Abolitionists will argue that welfare campaigns etc do more harm than good because they perpetuate the farming of animals and detract from that ultimate goal of total animal liberation.

Proponents of a different view - animal 'welfarists' (reformists) usually believe that any improvement to the way in which we treat animals now is good and should be fought for. Animal welfarists often have certain causes that they promote / follow with a passion. They don't necessarily disagree with the ultimate goal that abolitionists have.

What the Thinking Vegan's post highlights is the regular dissonance between the two approaches which can often lead to online wars of words between vegans. He suggests that whilst debate is good, respect should be the order of the day and any 'infighting' is going to do vegans, as a collective, no favours in the eyes of the external (unenlightened) world.

He has a good point...

and I'm glad he's made the point.

I started out becoming vegetarian - mainly because of the dreadful suffering caused to animals by the way in which we intensively farm them for food..... but as I learnt more about the treatment of animals for the production of all manner of goods (including entertainment purposes) I started to lean towards an abolitionist approach. Reading several very powerful pieces on the matter then had me feeling that I shouldn't perhaps be supporting organisations such as Compassion In World Farming, because it would perpetuate the concept of it being OK to eat animals as food.

I also started to draw away a little from the multitude of online campaigns there are for very specific welfare issues / causes.

BUT then I also started to come across some of these 'wars of words' between vegans - mostly, I have to say, with strong criticism by those in the abolitionist 'camp' criticising welfarists.

I found this very unsettling.

And it made me see that welfarists are usually abolitionists too - it's just that they know they can't change the entire world overnight, so they focus on small victories that they can support and help win, one at a time.

And an answer started to emerge for me. I know absolutely 100% that I disagree with the use of animals for any product or service for human use. But this goes with a caveat that where people are living in a subsistence society - such as a remote island / desperately poor / barren part of our planet, where animals might be their only source of food - then they have no choice other than to kill them to survive. I understand this. But for a large part of the civilised world - we do not need to eat meat or use animals in any way to survive. Therefore it's morally wrong for us to do so, because all animals are sentient beings with a right to free life on this earth. Humans should live alongside them and protect them and nurture them.

*I include other humans in the word 'animals'.*

In short, I would want to see the mistreatment/use of animals abolished.

However, I'm a realist.
I know that to achieve this ultimate goal we need to overcome centuries of culture and habit. We need to fight big business, corporate greed, power and corruption.

It's no mean feat.

It's not likely to be successful in my lifetime.

So whilst I will shout (gently) about the need to respect other sentient beings and end ALL suffering permanently, I can, and will, do 3 things:

1. I can make a personal decision to follow what I believe is a moral obligation / imperative - by living the least damaging lifestyle that I can (saving animals, myself and the planet).

2. I can support and create campaigns to improve what is  happening on the ground here and NOW - because I see every day that they DO make a positive difference. 

3. I can pass on information, help and support to others (you, dear reader and yet to be reader) so that I can raise awareness and inspire others to become more caring custodians of this planet and all life upon it.

And now having read that back to myself and seeing it in black and white - I see clearly that those actions, bite size chunks of compassion, all contribute to the ultimate goal and, for me, are in harmony with it. They are a realistic way of working towards the abolition of all animal suffering. Because consider this small example - if a person who farmed pigs was forced to introduce better welfare standards that meant he was able to observe the sentience and intelligence of those animals in a way like never before - he might then be inspired to change / improve further and ultimately struggle with the day of slaughter arriving.

So dear fellow vegans lets not fight amongst ourselves, we're all on the same side. It's going to be a long tough ride, but taking it together could help us reach the destination more quickly.

Chantal xx

postscript

Just when I thought I had my thinking sorted on this - I have now done some more reading and have a clearer understanding of the abolitionist view point.
I would highly recommend reading Confronting Animal Liberation: Grassroots Essays. The first three essays alone are very interesting and pose a strong case for abolitionism.
My main problem though is that the theory surrounding it (particularly that of prof. Gary L Francione) offers no full solution to achieve the ultimate goal of animal liberation.
Whilst welfarists are often considered to be either speciesist or helping to perpetuate animal use/enslavement/cruelty - they are at least fighting one battle at a time...