DxE-Good or bad for veganism/or animals?

nobody said:
...

But also worth considering, what about the other people at the restaurant who do not suddenly switch? Could the experience of witnessing the demonstration put them off considering switching to a vegan diet in the future, which they may have otherwise considered a "normal" lifestyle choice had they not encountered those "radical" DxE members at the restaurant? I don't know.

And I know that DxE does more than those demonstrations at restaurants but I'm just using them as an example because I have seen some on YouTube.
Click to expand...

Well, there's this video, apparently taken earlier this year. If the negative ratings are any indication (and the comments disabled a reflection of those ratings)...

 
nobody said:
Maybe Roland Vincent is saying Francione wouldn't be able to get away with including dog and cat rescue in his boycott of single issue campaigns, because it is the main source of fundraising for the orgainzations, so he makes an exception for it (which is about more than just dogs and cats of course, there are lots of birds, lizards, rabbits, guinea pigs, and sometimes even farm animals seized in cruelty cases at shelters). It's a possibility that that is Francione's reason. I don't know.

As far as the OP title question, I'm not sure. Have people gone vegan as a result of the demonstrations they do? I would need to see evidence they have, and if they have, then I guess it's good for animals at least.

I went dietary vegan after listening to a Francione lecture on Youtube and the part of it that triggered me to go vegan was when he was talking about a guy in the 70s standing on a corner protesting the use of dogs in laboratory tests while wearing a leather jacket and eating hamburgers, while holding the protest sign. And he was talking about how inconsistent that is and about how "veganism is the most important form of animal rights activism".

And that idea of veganism being the most important form of animal rights activism made me take it seriously. It became something that actually counted for something to me. At the time I had been a lacto-ovo vegetarian for the prior 6 months and flexitarian for about 5 years, with long periods of dietary veganism broken up by exceptions like eating holiday meals with family that included meat, or buying my own animal products on occasion.

So I know that Francione giving that lecture made at least one person go dietary vegan. Are there any testimonies like "yeah, I was in this restaurant eating and DxE came in and did their demonstration and I was like 'well, I'm going to go vegan then'"? If there are then that's in DXE's favor.

But also worth considering, what about the other people at the restaurant who do not suddenly switch? Could the experience of witnessing the demonstration put them off considering switching to a vegan diet in the future, which they may have otherwise considered a "normal" lifestyle choice had they not encountered those "radical" DxE members at the restaurant? I don't know.

And I know that DxE does more than those demonstrations at restaurants but I'm just using them as an example because I have seen some on YouTube.
Click to expand...

1) Roland Vincent is quite simply saying Gary Francione is a hypocrite. He talks badly about or attempts to smear single issue campaigns unless they are about cats and dogs. He's not saying Gary profits from it, he's saying my isn't it convenient that he's a hypocrite about something largely already funded by meat eaters. Vincent is saying this says bad things about Gary, who as a vegan should be more likely to help species who get less help and funding. This alone makes GF look like a complete creep to most animal rights activists.

2) PETA turned Gary Francione vegan. Ingrid Newkirk poured his dairy milk down the kitchen sink. This also nauseates me when he tries to frame himself as being more vegan than the people who turned him vegan. PETA also has documented legal proof of freeing animals, shutting down testing labs or experiments, are largely responsible for shutting down roadside zoos, the Barnum and Bailey circus, and getting vegan options in major fast food chains. They fund student college groups with pamphlets, stickers, vegan food give aways and vegan movie nights. They've been at it since 1980, tirelessly. To say Gary Francione has helped more animals or created more vegans is completely laughable. No sane person would even debate this.

3) DXE has only been around since 2013. They have in that time rescued numerous individual farm animals as well as getting support in mainstream publications like the New York Times. They are the only group to take on Whole Foods ******** claims of humane farming repeatedly, on Whole Foods property and in Amazon corporate offices. I saw with my own eyes people join our march in Berkeley who weren't part of the conference. Their acceptance of imperfect vegetarians like Ezra Klein (who is about 99% plant based) has allowed Vox to popularize DXE and animal rights activism to Millennials. About 1/3 of Millennials identify as vegetarian or vegan in stark contrast to overall percentages in the US. DXE is working to close down factory farms, feed lots and expose market hypocrisy, something Gary Francione never even tries to do, since he's too pure to shut down a factory farm unless every farm is shut down, which is insanity.

4) Im glad Gary Francione made you understand the importance of veganism. Wayne Hsiung of DXE also credits him similarly. Unfortunately, Gary Francione discredits every single effective form of real world animal rights activism except for asking people to go vegan. That would be fine if he wasn't such a complete piece of garbage about it. If all Gary Francione did was try to quietly get people to go vegan via philosophy books, I would be like hey okay whatever it takes all kinds. Except that's not what GF does. He actively insults, degrades, denigrates, lies about and slanders every animal rights group in existence.
 
In fairness to him [I think] this is the correct position .
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Andy_T
Honestly I think Gary Francione is a blight to vegan activism, for numerous reasons already stated. So is Unnatural Vegan/Swayze from YouTube, as she is a ridiculously trollish apologist who attacks all things vegan, other vegans and quotes bad or outdated science when she never even studied science and just wants to look neutral to meat eaters.

To them I would add all the narcissistic, shallow, plant-based dieters on YouTube making money off of being "ex vegan" and this guy. He literally framed veganism as beastiality:


That anyone worries about DXE, PETA or Million Dollar Vegan while this other nonsense goes on tells me how much the average vegan doesn't research. Or how little they legitimately care about real world results.
 
Forest Nymph said:
... as she is a ridiculously trollish apologist who attacks all things vegan,...
Click to expand...

The word apologist never means someone who is apologetic. It only means someone who defends a position. "Vegan apologist" and "apologetic vegan" are not even close in meaning.

You calling her and other vegans "apologists" is no more of an insult than when someone describes C.S. Lewis as a Christian apologist. They don't mean he sat around saying "sorry everybody, sorry for my Christianity, I know it's annoying, sorry.... ".
 
I was watching Monday Night Football and listening simultaneously to the radio broadcast ( I can sync them by using the pause button my iPod nano). the radio guys talked a bit about a protesters who ran out on the field. but the TV cut away from the action.

Today my news feed went to an article in the local San Francisco Blog and I learned that the protesters were from Direct Action Everywhere.

If not for the SF Gate article I would not have had any idea these guys were animal rights activists. So I'm going to say this kind of protest is ineffective.

Plus I had already heard about the guys who on trial for liberating two piglets.
 
Wow. DAE is getting a lot of publicity off this.

"The protest sought to highlight a trial of two factory farm whistleblowers which began Monday," Direct Action Everywhere wrote in a statement. "DxE calls it a landmark trial for animal rights, food justice and free speech, and more broadly, on the entire animal agricultural industry, which DxE says is inherently abusive and exploitative."​
​
www.foxnews.com

Defendant highlighted in Rams-49ers demonstration swipes at Bobby Wagner over protester tackle

Paul Darwin Picklesimer, one of the defendants in the trial that was at the center of the demonstration at the Rams-49ers game on Monday, spoke out about Bobby Wagner's hit.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: PTree15 and Sax
Forest Nymph said:
Honestly I think Gary Francione is a blight to vegan activism, for numerous reasons already stated. So is Unnatural Vegan/Swayze from YouTube, as she is a ridiculously trollish apologist who attacks all things vegan, other vegans and quotes bad or outdated science when she never even studied science and just wants to look neutral to meat eaters.

To them I would add all the narcissistic, shallow, plant-based dieters on YouTube making money off of being "ex vegan" and this guy. He literally framed veganism as beastiality:


That anyone worries about DXE, PETA or Million Dollar Vegan while this other nonsense goes on tells me how much the average vegan doesn't research. Or how little they legitimately care about real world results.
Click to expand...
I don't know anything about Gary Francione but I disagree with you about Swayze. She is actually winning over omnivores precisely because she is in touch with humanity and not just her ideals, unlike many of the more extreme vegans online. If you want to see bad science, just look at Mic. The Vegan who is fond of pointing out "this study" and "one study shows" and there never seems to be any peer review or replication, just whichever study supports his position.

As far as DxE is concerned, you have convinced me they are basically a good and effective group and I see no reason why they shouldn't exist alongside other forms of activism.
 
The argument against animal personhood provided here only makes me support it more not less.
 
Sax said:
I really love the idea of open rescues. So much respect for people with this level of commitment.
Click to expand...
I guess I am not very clear about this approach. I *think* the argument is that by appearing in the courts, exposure of bad animal treatment is given wider visibility. But surely that would only translate to improved animal welfare in animal-using industries. It doesn't seem to place any particular limits on the extent of that use. In my rights-based take on things, we have a duty to protect animals from harm and suffering while they exist, but I think preventing them being used in the first place seems to be the greater duty.

How does Open Rescue help?
 
The courts ultimately decide what rights do and don't exist. There are plenty of examples of courts ruling in favor of rights that hadn't been previously recognized - gay marriage in the US being a good example. When someone thinks their rights are being violated they can file a lawsuit and the ensuing legal battle can set binding precedent granting legal protection of those rights.

But animals can't file lawsuits, and because they are legally considered property no one has standing to file a lawsuit on their behalf. Open rescue forces the legal system to engage with animal rights supporters' arguments, even when law enforcement and prosecutors refuse to act on evidence of criminal animal cruelty.

The Smithfield pig trial and Foster Farms trial both resulted in acquittal for the rescuers. These arguments can actually win in court. The recent Sonoma Rescue trial resulted in a guilty verdict after the judge severely restricted the evidence and arguments the defense could utilize but the defendant Wayne Hsiung will be out of jail in a few days and will be appealing the conviction - and it's in the higher courts where legal precedent is set.

In the run up to that most recent trial a Harvard Law professor filed an amicus brief with the court arguing in favor of animal personhood, which would be a massive victory for animal rights. Judges and legal scholars are putting serious thought into the rights of animals because Open Rescue is forcing the issue.

I think it lends a lot of legitimacy to our concerns too. When someone is putting their freedom on the line, telling law enforcement about what they did, urging them to act on behalf of the animals, and showing up in court to face potentially years in jail...you can't write that person off as virtue signalling. Taking on that level of risk and sacrifice garners attention and shows a principled commitment worthy of respect.

And of course it's the right thing to do. It helps individuals directly, in the here and now. The numbers are miniscule but for those few it changes literally everything.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: PTree15

Similar threads

deadknight
How do you deal with ex-vegans?
Replies
45
Views
2K
Support
VeganRachel
VeganRachel
C
US Why Should We Become Vegan?
Replies
29
Views
4K
Philosophy
blackeyesnail25
B
E
  • Poll
A fellow vegan and his animals-Your Thoughts Needed
Replies
16
Views
2K
General
Clairey
Clairey
Lou
Animal Lives Matter
Replies
32
Views
4K
Animals
JacobEdward
JacobEdward
Vegan Dogs
Pet Cat Dog Ferret Foods-Legal set by AAFCO
Replies
7
Views
3K
Animals
Jeremy Delvarr
J
Top Bottom
Back