On Suffering and “Unnecessary Harm”

As long as vegans base activism on suffering, I don’t think other animals will see liberation.  The suffering of other animals, as I understand it, is only the effect of a bigger problem—humans wielding power over other animals—and is not the problem itself.  Focusing on suffering takes activists with good intentions away from the issues that can really effect change, the issues upon which nonhuman animal oppression is really based.

Here is an example I recently came across online:  Gene Baur of Farm Sanctuary appeared on Larry King Live in 1991 to discuss factory farming.  Many vegans currently focus on factory farming in their advocacy materials.  However, if the specific “cruelties” of these facilities—instead of general human supremacy and dominance—is the focus, then endless reforms are a natural result, delaying and challenging deeper change.  Here is a transcription of one exchange between Baur and King (video interview here):

Larry King:  “Are you opposed to the eating of animals?”

Gene Baur:  “Personally, I’m a vegetarian. But that’s a decision each of us has to make for ourselves.”

Larry King:  “So those who want to be able to eat it [meat] should be able to eat it. You’re just saying there’s a more humane way of treating them and killing them.”

Gene Baur:  “Absolutely.”

This is from the president and co-founder of a so-called “vegan” organization—one that “has never and will never support so-called ‘humane’ meat”—one that “maintain[s] that the words ‘humane’ and ‘slaughter’ are mutually exclusive” (from their website).

My point is not to criticize a single organization or individual.  My point is to direct vegans away from the idea that “humane” is what we want—that “suffering” is what we’re against.  These are popular views in animal activism today, even among “vegan” groups.

Another “vegan” group, Vegan Outreach, claims the following: “[I]t is naïve, at best, to believe that any system will really take good care of the animals we pay them to slaughter.  If you say an individual is just meat, they will be treated as such” (from their website).  I think this rhetoric lures in many vegans because it seems to staunchly oppose all meat, and it seems to suggest a consideration of other animals as individuals, not just the products taken from their bodies.

But notice that the complaints VO makes are only about how other animals are “treated” on farms—not the fact that they are forced to stay on those farms in the first place.  VO does not complain about human supremacy; they only complain about particularly cruel instances of human supremacy.  They are O.K. with the master-slave relationship—just against specific, “cruel” manifestations of it.

I haven’t read as much from Francione, and I would be unfounded in any sweeping claims about his work.  But from what I have read, I’ve seen a similar trend in focusing on “harm,” specifically “unnecessary harm.”  I realize that some L.O.V.E. members currently espouse Francione’s beliefs.   In critiquing these ideas I want to emphasize that I am not personally attacking anyone or their work.  I only want to start a discussion about these issues because I consider them vital to our achieving liberation in the long run.

I recently wrote the following about an abolitionist definition of “vegan” on our mailing list:

E mentioned something that has been on my mind lately:

“[W]e ought to unequivocally draw the issue back to veganism (as the expression of one’s belief that it’s wrong to unnecessarily harm any animal, not just this one or that).”

I noticed this definition a couple of days ago at veganpamphlet.com, too, but I don’t feel like that’s what veganism means to me.  (This is, of course, no offense to E or anyone else who currently understands veganism this way–only an observation and something to discuss.)  I feel like avoiding harm is only one aspect (or result) of vegan living, but veganism as a whole suggests a larger respect, beyond “‘harm’ versus ‘no harm.’”  I think veganism is more like one’s belief that it’s wrong to impose on the life of any animal–that it’s wrong to force, control, or otherwise disrespect any animal.  This is, I think, largely why and how L.O.V.E. distinguishes ourselves from other animal rights groups (in our website’s F.A.Q.); our understanding of veganism includes an understanding of power.  We consider control over another’s life/body problematic in itself, regardless of pain.

I think “harm” is often a result of imposing on other animals’ lives, but not always.  For example, I would be opposed to sterilizing free-living bears (Dani has discussed this, too–I probably first understood this concept from Dani’s writings), because sterilizing them means we are in control of their bodies and their lives.  Because we choose for them whether they can have children; we impose on their natural life.  But sterilization doesn’t necessarily cause “harm” (at least not pain, suffering).  Many claim such sterilization even prevents harm in the long run, because fewer bears will be hurt and killed for “getting in the way” of humans.  I would be concerned about vegans supporting this sterilization based on ‘avoiding unnecessary harm.’

[Dani at The Vegan Ideal also wrote that this sterilization couldn’t be seen as a manifestation of “animals as property” (another Francione concept).  So far in my own understanding, I feel like “animals as property” seems to hint at a bigger problem with power and control, but again I just don’t see it getting at the root.  That is, power abuse also exists between people who are not each other’s “property,” so I don’t think “property” status itself is the problem.]

Notice that when we focus on suffering (or “harm”), we are not focusing on the underlying issue of power (control, force, oppression).  I don’t think the massive animal suffering in our world is faceless and random; it exists in such quantities because we humans assume control over other animals’ lives.  We assume a position of power over other animals, instead of living side-by-side with them respectfully.  A vegan world is not just a world with less pain; it is a world in which we live side-by-side with other animals respectfully.