'Djurvälfärdsreformer' är ineffektiva och sändet budskapet att visst sorts djurslaveri är etiskt riktigt

Hej Marcus,
"Vi vet att det är fel att orsaka djur onödigt lidande som du säger, död också för den delen. "
Vad bra att vi är eniga! Om du också studerar nedanstående argument kommer du förstå varför det enda sättet att effektivt propagera för detta är genom att inspirera våra vänner, de vi möter och alla andra att bli veganer.
Jag är pragmatisk. Idén om att kämpa för djurväldsreform är inte pragmatisk och sänder ett kontraproduktivt budskap, att viss sorts djurslaveri är moraliskt riktigt.

Detta citat visar tydligt på problemet med att kämpa för vissa "djurvälfärds"-reformer:
""If we stop promoting welfare reform and just promote veganism, then the reforms will not happen and animals will be deprived of the benefits that they can receive now as we move towards veganism. What is your reply?"

My reply:

"First of all, you are obviously completely unfamiliar with my work, which addresses these and related questions. If you are interested in these issues, perhaps you should read some of that work and you can start with the essays and materials available on my website: www.abolitionistapproach.com. There are no "donate" buttons on the site so you might be confused at first and think it's not an animal site but do read on!

Second, you are assuming that animal welfare reforms provide significant welfare benefits. They don't for the most part. And most are phased in over a period of years anyway.

Third, most of these "reforms" actually increase production efficiency--they lower the costs of producing animal products--and would be adopted eventually by industry anyway in the ordinary course.

Fourth, you assume that welfare reforms will lead us toward veganism. Wrong. Welfare reforms make people more comfortable about continuing to consume animals. Consider the "happy" exploitation movement that is fast becoming the new "animal movement."

Fourth, if we had a significant vegan movement that promoted veganism as a moral baseline and did not promote welfare reforms, single-issue campaigns, "happy" exploitation, etc., industry would, as a matter of economic necessity, respond with welfare reforms and all sorts of measures that were designed to make the public continue to consume animal products.

That is, if we had a clear, strong, unequivocal vegan movement, industry would respond by making welfare reforms that would probably be more significant than than the welfare reforms now promoted by these large animal groups.

The most important difference would be that we would have a movement that stood for a clear and coherent moral message: if animals matter morally, we cannot eat, wear, or use them. Period.

That is, we would have an animal rights movement and not the pathetic partnership between "animal people" and institutional exploiters we have now.

To the extent that there are benefits from welfare reforms, they would not be lost; they would actually be increased as a reaction to a strong vegan movement that was no longer in complicity with industry and that actively, but nonviolently, promoted a vision of animal personhood.

Gary L. Francione
Professor, Rutgers University""

Du kan också läsa en mängd artiklar och böcker här som kommer hjälpa dig till att både pragmatiskt och på ett etiskt riktigt sätt kämpa för djurens rättigheter:
http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/

Vi kan transformera vår kultur och den hjärntvätt som den har på människor:
http://bloganders.blogspot.no/2013/04/vi-forlorar-var-karlek-och-empati-till.html