Visitor:
About ALF
Mission Statement


WARNING: Contains Graphic Images
Liberation: A Tribute to the ALF
download as an .flv file

The ALF Mission Statement:
To effectively allocate resources (time and money) to end the "property" status of nonhuman animals.

The Objective of the Mission:
To abolish institutionalized animal exploitation because it assumes that animals are property.


 

Note: Perhaps the easiest method of accomplishing the mission is to help the world's masses emotionally connect the animals they abuse for food, clothing, and product safety to the domestic companions they love. Many of today's animal rights activists have made this connection after seeing AR protests, reading about direct actions, and almost every other way that our message has been delivered. Sometimes their epiphany comes months after ignoring the AR rhetoric or noise while they are quietly watching a pigeon in the street.

Please plant the seed of thought in someone else's brain that animals have feelings. It doesn't matter if you stand on your head and make hysterical noises. More and more, as time passes, our message will be realized.

We don't need to convince everyone that animals are not property (the masses don't agree on anything). After a critical mass accepts the concept, and after the concept is around a few decades, it will become an accepted idea. Most people's morality is simply that of the current laws/thinking.

Index
Your Mission -- A Real-Life ALF case with questions.
 Diversity in AR -- Diversity in the AR Movement, by Dietrich.
 Diversity 2 -- The Toronto Humane Society: an example of the enemy's tactics, AR vs. AW.

Examples of ineffectively allocating resources -- usually the result of emotions overpowering logic:

I spent two weeks of vacation time and $1000 protesting and getting support to save a whale trapped in a bay, ignoring the fact that a week spent at the animal shelter (where I volunteer) likely would have saved 10 lives (finding homes, finding financial donors to the shelter, etc).

My actions were possibly more reprehensible than a person who eats beef while believing that cows live a happy life before they die and that eating beef gives life to a cow who otherwise would have never existed.

I knew what I was doing. Knowledge should be more than power--it should be obligation.

Ironically, I sometimes find it frustrating that the public is not aware of the animal abuse that goes on behind closed doors. Yet, I sometimes spend time saving one animal at the expense of many due to my laser focus on events in front of me. Not all actions are equal. I am frequently faced with the choice of ?Do I save animal A or animal B?? Here are some suggested things to consider when evaluating a potential AR activity (beware of ?paralysis of analysis?):

1. Cost. Time, money, and emotional energy spent (one of my mistakes: rescuing an animal that was near-death and spending large amounts of money on medical bills, then running out of money for an operation that would have saved an otherwise healthy animal).

2. Danger to other sentient beings. Take into account humans as well as rodents you can't see. Realize that 'change' may upset a miniature ecosystem on which some beings may rely. Fires or bombs can kill mice and birds you didn't see.

3. Improvement in the quality of life of the 'to-be saved' animals (there should be a good home or safe environment for them).

4. Public opinion. (one of my mistakes: rescuing an animal and then, in frustration, spray-painting an obscenity on the wall). The obscenity made the news (nowadays there is no news without pictures) and the slant of the news-story was anti-AR. Poor result: More folks think AR activists are out of control.

5. Effect on the business losing the animal. (one of my mistakes: liberating an animal from an experiment that was subsequently replaced with a 'brand new' test subject. Although the liberation forced the company to buy a new security system, the company did not reduce the amount of testing. The only effect of causing economic damage was to stockholders -- NOT a good reason).

Other activities:

1. Internet opinion polls--Expense: 5 minutes to read and vote. Gain: Our follow-up on the opinion polls that we thought were meaningful revealed the websites considered them 'for fun' to 'attract web traffic' and 'not deemed scientific'. No course of action was changed. Your time is better spent with e-mail campaigns (below).

2. Letter writing / e-mail campaigns--Expense: 10 minutes to cut, paste, hopefully modify (if you have time), print, and mail. Gain: Our follow-up shows that many industry leaders, judges, and politicians count each letter, frequently respond to the individual who sent the letter, and many of them change their course of action. Many admit to being unaware of the AR Activists' perspective. Time is well spent if the issue is important to you.

3. Answering questions from people who are seeking AR information. This is tricky. My first answer should be brief to evaluate the intent of the person and not to to overwhelm them. I have inadvertently overwhelmed people in my enthusiasm to share my knowledge. After I have answered their first question, what next? Now I judge whether they want info, or they want to argue (see 4, below). If they want to argue, I nod politely and save my breath for cooling my soup. And few people can make a lot of changes to their lives. When I have seen long-term change in folks, here is how the discussions started:

a. Vegetarian/Vegan health--many people have a positive reaction to the facts in books like 'Diet for a New America.'

b. Hunting/Fishing--if you tell someone about the evils of factory farming and they still eat meat, logically it is hypocritical to be concerned about someone who hunts. At least hunters aren't having someone else do their killing. Wait for them to ask.

c. Entertainment--Zoos, circuses, rodeos, etc. Save this for when you learn they are attending such an event.

d. Factory farming--share some info about beef, pork, and chicken. It might help them stick to their new veggie diet.

e. Animal testing--it is surprising difficult to get folks to change their shopping habits, which include grabbing the same old products without examining the box. It sometimes helps to tell people they can save money and help animals by buying 'generic' brands. These are usually copies of the same product the major companies make.

4. Debating with opponents of AR--This will frequently begin with someone asking for information (see 3, above). You might as well spend your time talking to yourself. In 15 years the only folks who approached me with an attitude and then actually listened and discussed issues, were folks who calmed down immediately when presented with a cool response. If they remain argumentative and don't care about your first several answers, they won't change. Even if one did, it is not a statistically reasonable way to allocate your time. Your knowledge of AR is a valuable resource. Don't waste it.

5. Demonstrations--In this age of the media sound byte, demonstrations that get news coverage further the awareness of the masses, who, for the most part, are not evil--just uninformed.

6. Donations to AR organizations--There is clout in numbers. Support them, but be aware of organizations that consider animal welfare to mean protecting animals for hunters. Stay with the big orgs unless you've done your homework.


Fair Use Notice and Disclaimer
Send questions or comments about this web site to Ann Berlin, annxtberlin@gmail.com