Early Animal Advocacy & The Power Of Learning From Our Past : On N... http://www.nonhumanslavery.com/early-animal-advocacy-the-power-of-l...

Early Animal Advocacy & The Power Of

Learning From Our Past

The following is excerpted from an interview with Diane Beers conducted by Colleen Patrick-Goudreau for
Satya Magazine.

You use the phrase “historical amnesia” to refer to the fact that contemporary animal activists—and
society as a whole—know nothing of the legacy of animal activism in the U.S. What are some of the
effects of having “historical amnesia”? Why is it so important to know our legacy?

Animal advocacy has an amazing history, yet it is essentially an untold story. African American activists will
often say, “A people without a history is like a tree without roots.” Indeed, if activists don’t know the history
of their cause, they can have no sense of their movement’s struggles, long-term strategies, achievements and
heroes. In addition, they can’t promote their long impressive movement to the public, and their
opponents—the meat industry, medical research industry and the government—will fill the void. They have
been the ones most aggressively and successfully constructing negative images and outright myths of animal
advocacy that the public often believes.

For example, by promoting our history, animal activists could smash the myth that we are misanthropes—that
we don’t care about humans and are weirdly obsessed with animals. History shows this to be patently false as
most animal advocates were involved in multiple social justice movements. This myth comes from our
opponents who have done a better job of controlling the story, the history and the perceptions of animal
advocacy. If animal advocates made it part of their mission to get our true history out to the public, I firmly
believe it would benefit the movement overall.

The link between animal rights and other social justice movements is clear in the fact that so many
early advocates were involved in many social causes, particularly the abolition and suffrage
movements. However, it seems animal advocacy has become more isolated from the causes with which
its early founders were linked. Why do you think that is? How can bridges be created?

This is a crucial issue. I think it is changing slowly, but [our isolation] can still divide rather than unite
different causes. Awareness of the linkages between different forms of oppression and injustice seems to be
key. To paraphrase ecofeminist thinking, “oppression is a circular affair.”

We need to educate ourselves more on the connections between various social justice causes and take the

1 of 3 8/1/2010 8:09 PM
Early Animal Advocacy & The Power Of Learning From Our Past : On N... http://www.nonhumanslavery.com/early-animal-advocacy-the-power-of-l...

We need to educate ourselves more on the connections between various social justice causes and take the
lead in educating fellow activists. A good way to do so is through coalition building. Work with other
movements and make them aware of the ties that bind their cause. I believe once caring people become
aware of an injustice, they want to do something.

In terms of the deeper root cause of “why,” I think animal advocates have done a better job of confronting
the issue of speciesism. By the very essence of their movement, animal advocates must examine humans’
roles in relation to nonhumans and that, in turn, often leads them to question the entire ideology of human
superiority. Movements that focus more exclusively on human issues are, I think, much less likely to even
consider the concept of speciesism; thus, there emerges a kind of social justice blind spot that prevents them
from bridging their human cause with that of nonhumans.

I think our use of language reveals so much about our perceptions and values. I appreciate your very
thoughtful use of language to refer to animal advocates and wonder if you could talk about why you use
the word “humanitarian” to refer to early activists?

I use the word humanitarian because it reflects how early activists saw themselves and referred to
themselves, at least in part. We must remember the entire historical context. These were folks who certainly
challenged the very bedrock of human superiority, but one of their goals was also to change humans morally.
They wanted to make human society more moral and humane, thus they were humanitarians in the sense that
stopping cruelty was also about bettering humanity. Ending animal cruelty was directly connected to human
welfare. In addition, “humanitarian” could be applied to someone involved generally in social reform. But
they also referred to themselves using many other terms including protectionists, humane agents, zoophilists,
rightists and welfarists.

In my work, I’ve found that people respond well to the truth about animal suffering and the fact we
have the power to stop it.

I agree truth is a powerful force and people often respond to it. I see it with my students all the time. Once the
door of awareness is opened, it is really hard to shut it again. However, I do think animal advocates confront
another entrenched and powerful societal force that also shapes human complacency: speciesism. I think
activists need to understand, confront and deconstruct speciesism which is like racism, sexism, ageism, etc.

Speciesism is the idea of human superiority that defines animals as inferior “others” and thus rationalizes their
oppression. Humans need to see our supposed superiority is a social construction made to justify exploitive
and cruel treatment of nonhumans. This is why the conservative perspective sometimes wins because it does
not really challenge the essence of the problem: speciesism. Until we get people to deconstruct this ideology
that condones such behavior, piecemeal reforms will be the norm. But I am an optimist and, although I do
think confronting speciesism is hard given where the public mindset currently is, we have taken great steps
toward the dismantling of such ideas. If we can go from a time where beating a workhorse to death was okay
to a time when the term “animal rights” is familiar to most people, I feel the optimism of an activist and an
educator.

Related to that last question, many welfarists advocate small reforms that they believe reflect public
sentiment and ultimately help animals more in terms of reducing the most egregious forms of cruelty.
This has been the welfarist’s line for over a century now, and yet more animals are killed and harmed
on behalf of human pleasure than ever before. Do you think welfare reforms have had a significant
impact on the big picture?

I think we cannot deny the foundation that all forms of activism have built for us. Yes, undoubtedly some
welfarist reforms have been woefully inadequate and leave major aspects of exploitation or cruelty intact.
But let’s look at this historically. They began their efforts in a time where there was literally no context for
public acceptance for their cause. The way I see the history of this movement is that it has slowly but surely
chipped away at cruelty, often against overwhelming odds. And each time even a small victory was secured it

2 of 3 8/1/2010 8:09 PM
Early Animal Advocacy & The Power Of Learning From Our Past : On N... http://www.nonhumanslavery.com/early-animal-advocacy-the-power-of-l...

chipped away at cruelty, often against overwhelming odds. And each time even a small victory was secured it
represented a bigger victory in terms of establishing a precedent for greater change and influencing public
attitudes.

Sometimes the victories achieved were piecemeal, but those small victories then inspired new activism for
even better laws based on the precedent of the weaker law. Equally important, in my view, animal advocacy
is really a vibrant dynamic between conservative and more radical activists. At some points, conservatives
may have held more sway with the public, but radicals were always there pushing the movement to demand
more, which over the years it did.

In addition, in an interesting way, conservative activists created a climate increasingly conducive for more
radical demands and organizations. As the weaknesses of conservative reforms became more evident, radicals
began to hold more influence with the movement and the public. The inadequacies of laws led to more
defiant forms of activism, which we particularly see after 1975 when “animal rights” really emerged as the
driving force of animal advocacy.

How has writing this book changed you?

I believe knowledge is power and empowering, and conversely ignorance disempowers and creates apathy.
Writing this book took me on a journey to other times and places I did not know existed. I spent many a day
looking at the photographs taken by humane agents in their cruelty investigations. In those images, I saw
examples of our alleged “superiority” that would make the most callous person catch their breath, and I often
went home with vicious headaches. Some images I will never forget and there were times I considered giving
up on the whole process—it was just so hard. But in my journey to the past I also got to know and spend time
with some of the most amazing, committed activists I have ever encountered. They changed who we are and
how we interact with nonhumans. In other words, they changed history. As someone who teaches the history
of social justice, I take that kind of inspiration into my classroom each and every day. I remind my students,
and myself, that one person or a group of people can change the world for the better. And we all need to hear
that message more often. Inspiration, hope, action.

3 of 3 8/1/2010 8:09 PM