Logo

ARCO's Abolitionists - A Vegan Forum

Vegans exploring the abolitionist approach to Animal Rights

Follow ARCO's Abolitionists on Twitter Become a fan of ARCO's Abolitionists on Facebook

Tom Regan critiques welfarism

Constructive animal rights debate; visible to all users and guests.
All abolitionists may post here.

Tom Regan critiques welfarism

Postby AnimalFriendly » Mon Oct 01, 2007 3:16 am

Copy/Paste from an email I received over a list. One of the more explicitly abolitionist pieces of writing I've seen from Tom:
HOW TO PROLONG INJUSTICE - by Tom Regan

As an Animal Rights Advocate, I look forward to the day when all the cages are empty. Still, every ARA knows that that day will not dawn anytime soon. All of us understand that it will take the dedicated efforts of ARAs, working collaboratively over time--the dedicated efforts of many hands, on many oars--to make our ideal a reality.

In the particular case of farmed animal agriculture, ARAs want to see it ended. Our ideal world is a vegan world. The challenge we face is how to get there from where we are today.

This question has no easy answer; in fact, some answers divide more than they unite.

One divisive answer (I'll call it U) goes like this. The best way to realize our ideal is to work for reforms in farmed animal agricultural practices based on animal interests. For example, if decreasing density in battery cages is implicitly to count the hens' interest in having more space, this is a reform we should support.

The same is true of reforms in transportation and slaughter techniques. Any time we can increase the number of farmed animal interests that are taken into account, and any time we can have their interests counted equitably, U calls upon us to press for these reforms.

Suppose these reforms, each and every one of them, are implemented. What would be the result?

Well, arguably, things would have changed quite a lot. In place of the factory farms that scar the rural countryside today, we can imagine a plethora of farms modeled after Old McDonald's. In this gentle new word, it is true, there are many fewer farmed animals than there are today, but the quality of their life is much better. Who can be dissatisfied with so idyllic a world?

Well, Animal Rights Advocates, for one. Thousands of Old McDonald's farms inhabited by millions of happy animals is not the end we seek. The end we seek is the end of raising animals for their flesh and other products--a vegan world. Why, then, should ARAs work for the sorts of reforms I have described?

Considered superficially, the answer seems obvious. Since the animals are much better off because of the reforms, and since ARAs genuinely care about how animals are treated, surely ARAs should support and help implement the reforms.

Things are not this simple. From an ARA's perspective, farmed animal
agriculture violates the rights of farmed animals; it treats them as our resources--indeed, as our renewable resources. The injustice of this practice cannot be eliminated by giving farmed animals a better quality of life while still continuing to treat them as our (renewable) resources. And this is how they will be treated if the system of their exploitation has been reformed in the ways we have imagined. No, to reform injustice is to prolong injustice.

Proponents of U might reply by saying that, over time, as first one, then another reform is implemented, the quality of farmed animal life is improved and people begin to change how they think about these animals. Once the general public understands that these animals have interests, and once they have supported the call to have their interests counted fairly, people will move away from their meat-eating ways. On this view, a day will dawn when, because of the reforms made, as well as the general public's support of making them, we awake to a vegan world.

This is a lovely story, but hardly credible. Why would human beings forego a leg of lamb or a brisket of beef if all the relevant reforms have been implemented? After all, with the reforms implemented, farmed animals could not have a better quality of life than the one they enjoy. In fact, this is precisely why (we are assuming) the public has supported implementing the reforms in the first place: to afford farmed animals with the best quality
of life.

Why, then, having achieved the very purpose the reforms have sought, would these same people now turn around and say, "We were mistaken. Affording farmed animals the best quality of life is not enough." Proponents of U may think what they will but the real world in which we live is not a place where abracadabra rules.

Moreover (and this is hardly unimportant) surely the general public,
accustomed to and supportive of the reforms, will be well disposed to making this same high quality life available to the next generation of cows and pigs, chickens and ducks. And the next generation after that one, a demand that, in the nature of the case, can only be met if the members of one generation are "humanely" slaughtered, to be replaced by another of their kind, and so on. Happy farmed animals. Happy consumers. Happiness all around.

The hard truth is, it is wishful thinking to believe that the successful implementation of reforms will give birth to a vegan world. It is far more likely that great numbers of people will continue to eat animal flesh, even after supporting reforms, only now with a clear conscience, a gift, paradoxically, given to them by well-intentioned reformers.

So let us ask again: Should ARAs work for all the reforms favored by U, given that the world U would bring into existence, wishful thinking aside, is not a vegan world? Why work to bring a world into existence that we don't want? Why, indeed?

Of course, ARAs who agree with me are not obliged to spend their time
viscously attacking those who are working for reforms. Our more important work lies in crafting strategies and campaigns that move our culture towards acceptance of animal rights.

We take an important step down this path when we voice the ideal that even now many of us dare not speak: veganism. And though there are many ways to awaken the conscience of the general public, the three most important are now, always have been, and always will be: Educate. Educate. Educate.

Educate about nutrition. Educate about the moral rights of animals. Educate about the injustice of farmed animal agriculture. Educate. Educate. Educate.

Granted, this is not the end-all of animal rights activism, but it most certainly can be the begin-all.

Tom Regan is emeritus professor of philosophy, North Carolina State
University. He serves as president of the Culture and Animals Foundation. Among his books are The Case for Animal Rights, Defending Animal Rights, and Empty Cages: Facing the Challenge of Animal Rights. For additional information, visit tomregan-animalrights.com.
[/QUOTE]
Exploiting animals isn't friendly...
An Animal-Friendly Life
The Boston Vegan Association
AnimalFriendly
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Tom Regan critiques welfarism

Postby James » Mon Oct 01, 2007 3:29 am

animalfriendly: do you know when Tom Regan wrote this?
James
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:21 pm

Re: Tom Regan critiques welfarism

Postby panthera » Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:52 pm

I was wondering as well. He's been a pretty moderate voice in AR hasn't he, although certainly he was the "rights" and "empty cages" guy.

I also wonder about the conference at his institute - this week? next week? Beforewisdom will be able to tell us.
panthera
Site Admin
 
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:59 pm

Re: Tom Regan critiques welfarism

Postby AnimalFriendly » Wed Oct 10, 2007 6:53 pm

Others that have seen this have raised concern that he might actually have written it. It came over a listserv, and with no links, so I have not been able to verify that Regan actually wrote this.
Exploiting animals isn't friendly...
An Animal-Friendly Life
The Boston Vegan Association
AnimalFriendly
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Tom Regan critiques welfarism

Postby THX-1138 » Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:57 pm

I've read a lot of Regan's work, and the style that this is written in sounds very much like Regan. Either its him or someone who made the effort to sound just like him.
THX-1138
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 4:01 am
Location: Duluth, MN

Re: Tom Regan critiques welfarism

Postby James » Wed Oct 10, 2007 9:51 pm

I agree with THX-1138 that it sounds like Regan. I never got the impression that it wasn't Regan.
James
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:21 pm

Re: Tom Regan critiques welfarism

Postby panthera » Thu Oct 11, 2007 5:31 am

Things are not this simple. From an ARA's perspective, farmed animal agriculture violates the rights of farmed animals; it treats them as our resources--indeed, as our renewable resources. The injustice of this practice cannot be eliminated by giving farmed animals a better quality of life while still continuing to treat them as our (renewable) resources. And this is how they will be treated if the system of their exploitation has been reformed in the ways we have imagined. No, to reform injustice is to prolong injustice.
...
So let us ask again: Should ARAs work for all the reforms favored by U, given that the world U would bring into existence, wishful thinking aside, is not a vegan world? Why work to bring a world into existence that we don't want? Why, indeed?


I like that part the best. It's nice to hear the same ideas written in different voices. Thanks for posting, AnimalFriendly.
panthera
Site Admin
 
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:59 pm

Re: Tom Regan critiques welfarism

Postby James » Thu Oct 11, 2007 3:51 pm

panthera wrote:
Things are not this simple. From an ARA's perspective, farmed animal agriculture violates the rights of farmed animals; it treats them as our resources--indeed, as our renewable resources. The injustice of this practice cannot be eliminated by giving farmed animals a better quality of life while still continuing to treat them as our (renewable) resources. And this is how they will be treated if the system of their exploitation has been reformed in the ways we have imagined. No, to reform injustice is to prolong injustice.
...
So let us ask again: Should ARAs work for all the reforms favored by U, given that the world U would bring into existence, wishful thinking aside, is not a vegan world? Why work to bring a world into existence that we don't want? Why, indeed?


I like that part the best. It's nice to hear the same ideas written in different voices. Thanks for posting, AnimalFriendly.


Yes it is nice. I hope more academics start coming out on the side of abolition.
James
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:21 pm

Re: Tom Regan critiques welfarism

Postby sheepdog » Sat Oct 13, 2007 3:18 pm

The hard truth is, it is wishful thinking to believe that the successful implementation of reforms will give birth to a vegan world. It is far more likely that great numbers of people will continue to eat animal flesh, even after supporting reforms, only now with a clear conscience, a gift, paradoxically, given to them by well-intentioned reformers.

Listen carefully to what is being said here. James has said this many times, too. Not only will reforms not free the animals, but reforms will further entrench their slavery. It is that they suffer at all that they have any chance of freedom because the human psyche can respond to suffering with compassion. However, if they are all made to appear happy, well, we can only be happy for them then.

I assert sharply here that it is not in the interest of the animals to remove their suffering from them without removing their slavery with it. Pets are the perfect example of this. No one is up in arms about the ownership of pets as they are about the ownership of factory farmed animals. Why? Because the pets appear happy and it is not in us to feel compassion in that case. Yet they are as enslaved as are the factory farmed animal. They are as much in need of liberation as the others.

We must not attack the suffering of the animals. Their suffering is how they speak to us. The cause of the suffering must be attacked, realizing that it is the cause of apparent happiness too. That cause is ownership of animals, in every form and for any reason. It is not our purpose to make them happy. It is our purpose to make them free.
"Him that I love, I wish to be free--even from me." -- Anne Spencer Morrow Lindbergh
sheepdog
 
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 5:21 pm

Re: Tom Regan critiques welfarism

Postby James » Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:33 pm

sheepdog wrote:Listen carefully to what is being said here. James has said this many times, too. Not only will reforms not free the animals, but reforms will further entrench their slavery.


If you are prepared to reform animal exploitation, then you are -- necessarily -- also committed to perpetuating it. You cannot do the former without also doing the latter. As I have said before, it is the existence of a movement that is prepared to reform animal exploitation that to a lagre extent accounts for why we cannot abolish it. One cannot campaign to reform animal use without thereby conditioning unresponsiveness to the idea that it should be abolished now, immediately. And this idea -- that animal use should not be abolished immediately -- is as bad as the idea that it shouldn't be abolished at all. For it inexorably entails a welfarist movement which perpetuates animal exploitation by conditioning unresponsiveness to its abolition. Among other things, people are unresponsive to abolition because the welfarist movement promotes cage-free eggs, "happy" meat, reforms short of abolition, etc. I find it astonishing that the new welfarist movement looks around for reasons why people are unresponsive to abolition independently of the fact that it campaigns for everything but immediate and total abolition. Abolition can never follow from this. As sheepdog has said before, we have to create the conditions from which abolition can follow.
James
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:21 pm

Next

Return to Animal Rights Talk



 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
cron