click to enlarge
Selected articles from Arkangel No.5
Spring 1991
Contents:
Some Lessons From Our Loss
by Ronnie Lee
With the recent deaths of Mike Hill, Sue Merrikin and Davy
Barr the movement has lost three important and committed
activists and the animals three of their dearest friends. It
is indeed a tragedy for the struggle against animal
persecution that these three good people should all have died
within such a short space of time and that sadness is
redoubled for those of us who knew personally one or more of
them. Their lives were not in vain however, as each of them
made a significant contribution to the battle for animal
liberation and if we can learn something from their deaths
then neither will those have been in vain.
At Their Peril
The killing of Mike Hill should cause us to think
immediately as to the reasons why that tragic event took
place. What was it that caused the huntsman to speed away so
rapidly, so putting the lives of the hunt saboteurs in such
danger? Without doubt it was because he felt confident that he
would get away with it. To my mind Mike's tragic death is yet
another example of where the widespread philosophy of
"non-violence" is putting the lives of animal rights activists
in danger. One only needs to have a brief understanding of the
psychology of animal abusers to see how this is the case. A
person who abuses defenceless animals (whether that person be
a hunter, a vivisector, a circus thug or whatever) is
obviously a bully {and therefore also a coward). The
non-violence of the animals does not prevent such people
carrying out attacks on them and indeed their violence is
encouraged by the defencelessness of the victim, just as a
school bully will tend to pick on the weakest member of the
class. Therefore if members and supporters of the hunt believe
that hunt saboteurs are "non-violent" and unable to stand up
for themselves they will actually feel encouraged to carry out
attacks against the sabs or to put their lives in danger.
The best way for us all in the movement to prevent a
repetition of what happened to Mike Hill and to reduce the
escalating number of attacks carried out against hunt
saboteurs and other animal rights campaigners is for us to
scrap the non-violence nonsense and to create a situation
where all animal abusers know that if they attack us it will
be at their peril. Just a couple of days after Mike's death a
group of A/R activists attacked and badly damaged the house of
the huntsman who ran over him. This obviously would act as a
deterrent to any other hunter wishing to behave violently
towards hunt saboteurs, but what I am advocating in this
article is a perfectly legal solution.
One has the right in law to defend oneself and others,
using reasonable force, from any act of aggression and
therefore I am urging that all A/R campaigners (especially
hunt saboteurs) take up self defence training. In most areas
one can find evening classes which teach self-defence and I
would urge that all local A/R and hunt sab groups attend them
as a group of in order to learn the knowledge, skills and
attitude of mind required. One can also get books on
self-defence techniques which would form a useful addition to
such classes. This would all probably demand a couple of hours
of one's time each week, but it would be time well spent if it
leads to people being able to defend themselves properly from
animal-abuser aggression and to bring about a change of image
in the movement which would deter such aggression from
occurring in the first place.
The intention is not for A/R campaigners to violently
attack animal abusers, but for the animal abusers to know that
if they violently attack any of us they will rapidly get their
come-uppance. Thus with hunt thugs etc. being too frightened
to attack, the amount of violence on hunts (and at such things
as anti-circus demonstrations) will be considerably reduced.
I'm well aware this is the philosophy of deterrent but when
you are dealing with bullies and cowards it is the only thing
that works. A knowledge of self-defence would not have
prevented Mike from being tragically run over, but a knowledge
that the A/R movement could and would stand up for itself may
well have prevented the huntsman from behaving dangerously in
the first place. It's time to change the image of "wimps in
sandals" to "people you don't mess with or you get what
for!"
Fit for the Fight
The tragedy of Sue's death was that she was only 45 with so
much more living to enjoy and battles to fight for the
animals. But for many years she had been a heavy smoker and
drinker and there is really no doubt that this is what led to
her early death. From this we can all draw a lesson, however,
for having known Sue as a good friend I know she would wish no
other animal liberationist to go down the same road to an
early grave. It horrifies me how many A/R campaigners smoke,
drink to excess and even take harmful drugs and how many of
them get little or no exercise to keep themselves fit. Quite
apart from how concerned I am for those people in a personal
level it is obvious to me that as the movement is a collection
of individuals, so the fitness of those individuals for the
struggle IS of vital importance to our success. If someone
makes them self ill through abusing their body or by
neglecting their fitness, the contribution they can make to
the movement becomes considerably reduced and there is nothing
worse than an unhealthy, unfit vegan or vegetarian for
persuading people to carry on eating meat.
To be aware of the terrible suffering of the animals can be
very stressful and depressing and Some A/R people might argue
that they smoke and/or drink to deal with that depression and
stress. That is a nonsense argument however, as there are
other healthy ways of dealing with such negative feelings.
Take exercise for instance. A good bout of exercise produces
chemical changes in the body which actually create a feeling
of well-being and so helps not only the body but also the
mind. One of the ways I have staved off stress and depression
in prison is by taking the best part of an hours vigorous
exercise almost every day and it is something I intend to
continue when I get out, as the time taken up by the exercise
is more than made up for by the strength and fitness it gives
me (both physically and mentally) to carry on with and to
increase my work. To claim one is "too busy" to take exercise
is a very false economy indeed. If we can be fitter and
healthier than the animal abusers we have yet another
advantage over them. so let's make sure we are all of us fit
for the fight !
Lives Worth Living
Of the three deaths perhaps Davy Barr's was the most tragic
as he took his own life. We will all of us have great empathy
with him as I would wager there is not one among us who has
not at one time or another contemplated suicide as an escape
from a world made almost unbearable by the suffering inflicted
upon the animals for whom we care so much. But of course the
very worst thing we could do for the animals would be to kill
ourselves and so deprive them of those who could fight for
their liberation. The persecution of animals can drive us into
the depths of unhappiness, but the fight for their freedom can
give us back at least some happiness and an important reason
for living.
Despite the sadness it brings, to be aware of the evil of
animal persecution and to be involved in the battle against it
is truly a reason to be alive. What reason for living do
ordinary unenlightened people have dragging out their tiny
meaningless lives, changing nothing, achieving nothing merely
taking up space in an already grossly overcrowded world? As I
look out of the window of a train gazing down on a town or
city, and see all the rows and rows of houses stretching to
the distance my mind recoils in horror with the thought "how
can they stand to live?" "How can there be enough within their
lives to make it worth the effort?" Ashes to ashes. Dust to
dust.
But for us it is different. To be involved in the most
fundamental liberation movement the world has ever known to be
part of a struggle which will end aeons of tyranny and usher
in a Golden Age when the jackboot of human imperialism will no
longer stamp on all the other animals that is indeed a reason
for living. To fight and to triumph and to triumph in a
victory like no other victory, a victory which liberates all
the other creatures of the Earth. There can be no better
reason. Davy Barr's short life was dedicated to the animals.
He worked for them, fought for them, went to prison for them
and he is and will be a part of that great victory. But so
much more would he be so were he still alive.
Animal Rights Tunnel Vision
by Paul Gravett
I was quite frankly appalled by a lot of what I read in
Arkangel #4.To me it typified what I've come to know as animal
rights tunnel vision, the inability of animal rights
campaigners to understand the world outside their immediate
sphere of interest.
The worst aspect of this is Arkangel's defence of giving a
platform to fascists. Simon Russell's argument that this
allows them to "damn themselves with their own pens" is simply
facile because, as the letter from Patrick Harrington
demonstrated, they are now extremely cautious about the way
they word their statements. Harrington calls himself a
"Nationalist" and says he does not believe one race is
superior to another, but how many people read the Third Way's
magazine and know they stand for repatriation. That means
forcibly removing anyone who does not conform to their ideal
of the mythical white Anglo Saxon race. What about racially
mixed relationships and marriages? Of course. Hitler and the
Nazis originally believed In repatriaton for the Jews until
they found out that it was much cheaper to send them to
concentration camps and gas chambers - and you can recycle the
fat into the soap and make lampshades out of the skin.
I'm afraid if anyone's guilty of putting his boot in his
mouth it's Simon Russell, especially when he compares Arkangel
to Searchlight. While I'm no real fan of the latter, it
doesn't give platforms to fascists to espouse their despicable
ideas, it exposes them. I know Simon that fascists won't go
away by ignoring them, but no-one's saying Arkangel should be
doing that, you should be exposing and fighting them.
In case anyone is saying "What has all this got to do with
animal rights anyway?" I'll explain. Does anyone seriously
believe that a tiny bunch of crackpot, flag-waving neo-Nazis
will do anything to bring animal liberation closer. All they
will do is cause untold damage to the movement because they
will alienate from us precisely the sort of people we need on
our side. Animal Liberation will not occur unless society is
radically transformed, so we should be appealing to the most
deprived and dispossessed sections in it, because they are the
only ones who have an interest in bringing about real change.
That means the poor, ethnic minorities who suffer from racism,
gays who suffer from homophobia, etc. Now, I ask you, what
would any black or gay person think of the animal rights
movement if they read Arkangel #4 and saw articles by people
from organisations that questioned their right to even
exist?
It's time that some people in the animal rights movement
realised what the world outside is really like. Life for many
black and gay people in this country isn't much better than
that of oppressed animals. The number of racial crimes has
risen dramatically in recent years, and many black and Asian
people are now virtual prisoners in their homes, too afraid of
going out in case they are attacked. In the last four years at
least 15 gay men have been murdered because of their
sexuality, victims of "queerbashers". None of their attackers
have ever been caught since the police are too busy harassing
gay men and lesbians for consenting and victimless behaviour.
Poverty and homelessness have increased dramatically in recent
years too. This unfortunately is the state of the society we
live in.
Sometimes animal rights campaigners tend to forget that
there is a great deal of human oppression in our society. If
the movement never forges links with the truly oppressed
people who share a common cause with the animals - then how
can we bring about animal liberation? I do not believe it will
come through writing letters to MPs; parliament doesn't exist
to represent the wishes of ordinary people but to protect the
power and profits of the ruling class. It also won't happen
because we all start using cruelty-free products, because that
underestimates the flexibility of capitalism in adapting to
new trends whilst remaining essentially exploitative (eg. the
new vegetarian wonder food Quorn, which is produced by a
subsidiary of ICI and underwent animal testing for years).
There is a huge potential for building bridges with other
oppressed sections of society. Recently my local group
organised a meeting entitled "Animal Rights and Gay Politics"
one of the best attended we've held. The speaker was Peter
Tatchell, a leading gay rights activist, who has written
articles in the gay press condemning the use of animals in
AIDS experiments. Another encouraging development is the
recent formation of a group called the Black Environmental
Network, which tries to combat the all-too prevalent racism in
the green movement. Above all we have to understand that the
working class has nothing to gain from the exploitation of
animals, it is only those who control and profit from the vast
animal abuse industries that we should be fighting.
Unfortunately one often finds an undercurrent of
misanthropy in the movement, the idea that all people are evil
and if only they could be done away with in some way
everything would be all right. This is implicit in Ronnie
Lee's opinion that the human population of this planet has to
be reduced to 50 million (how?) or in the "Leave out the
political comment" article by Paul in Arkangel #4. Anyone who
like Paul believes that fascists should be welcome in the
movement has to ask themselves one question: could I work
alongside someone who I knew was attacking black or gay
people? Could any compassionate person really do that?
Sylvia Noble's attack on ritual slaughter contains a fatal
flaw which people like her often make, she assumes that
"humane killing" is really humane. Anyone who has examined
factory farming and the slaughtering of animals for even a
short time will see that in fact "humane slaughter" is a myth
designed to assuage the consciences of the vast British meat
eating public. It has been estimated that about one third of
the animals killed in the so-called "humane" way are not
adequately pre-stunned at all. That adds up to 250-300 million
animals per year. Ritual slaughter should be criticised, yes,
but not on the basis of it being more cruel than "humane"
methods (which don't work). It should be condemned because to
kill animals to eat however they are slaughtered is wrong.
Phrases that Sylvia Noble uses such as "powerful Jewish
lobby", "powerful Muslim and Jewish lobbies and their
vociferous supporters" and above all, "I am proud that people
of my own race cared sufficiently to introduce a method of
rendering animals unconscious before they are bled to death
and am disgusted that British Governments give Jews and
Muslims living in Britain the right to disregard the law and
slaughter animals by stone-age customs" strongly suggest that
she has racist motives.
|
