Colonialism, Imperialism and Animal Liberation
Shared from http://www.shoresofanarres.org/colonialism-imperialism-and-animal-liberation/
Colonialism is not a thinking machine, nor a body
endowed with reasoning faculties. It is violence in its natural state,
and it will only yield when confronted with greater violence. – Frantz Fanon
It is, in theory, not necessary to point out the
brutality and violence permeating the colonial and imperialist projects
of various societies as they have come and gone throughout history. The
arcs on which these events are documented are, as Marx said of
capitalism, dripping from head to foot, from every pore, with blood and dirt. But in practice, the only danger lies in not retelling this story enough rather than in telling it too often.
Whether we are talking about Africans, enslaved and
brought to the Americas as a tool for imperialist interests, native
Americans robbed of their land, their freedom and ultimately their
lives, the utter misery in Kongo under Belgian rule, or British
imperialism in India, the underlying themes share a striking similarity.
The bodies of the conquered were objectified as machines to do the work
of their new masters, the land and riches were confiscated while the
cultures and societies, in many cases, torn apart and destroyed. To
accomplish this, an entire philosophy of domination was applied through a
brutal and multilayered web of racism, sexism, religious persecution
and cultural universalism strictly from the perspective of the
conquerors. The cultures and practices of the natives were vilified and
demonized (sometimes literally, as in the form of witch hunts), while
atrocious behavior on the part of the invading empires – both at home
and in their new colonies – was often explained as justified or even
necessary.
It is no wonder, then, that anarchism is by very
definition opposed to these practices of domination and that anarchists
are among the foremost critics of this process and its lingering
effects. This is very much the case also for anarchists engaged in the
animal liberation struggle, as several parallels can be drawn in the way
that the highly diminished status of non-human animals could be used as
a platform to dehumanize and delegitimize the conquered populations and
their cultures. With animals already neatly fit into the narrative of
being mere tools and objects for human exploitation, labeling the
colonized populations as animals immediately brought to life the desired
associations.
Despite this, some would like to fit the animal
liberation struggle into the imperialist project, as a form of cultural
imperialism, turning such anarchists or other animal liberation
activists into proponents of one of the things they abhor the most. It
is often the strong advocacy for total abstention from animal
exploitation – veganism – that results in accusations of racism and
imperialism. How dare we force western values upon indigenous cultures
and societies?
This is a serious accusation, and one understandably
perceived as insulting for many engaged in the anti-speciesist struggle.
But ultimately it is one worth dealing with, because doing so sheds
some light on some of the implicit assumptions within the accusation
itself. To start with, imperialism, and all its destructive tools, was a
means of dominating others, and asserting one culture above another.
Veganism, in this sense, is acultural. It doesn’t apply double
standards by letting something slide in one place but not the other, it
doesn’t try to establish cultural hierarchies and it is not looking to
establish domination. On the contrary, it is the dismantling of
domination, in all its forms, that vegan anarchists seek. We wouldn’t
accept cultural expressions involving slavery, patriarchy or economic
exploitation – no matter what culture we are talking about – so why
should we accept any additional forms of domination in one place but not
the other? Gary L. Francione, an animal liberation proponent, answers
this accusation succinctly:
Those in this group beg the question and
assume that speciesism is justified. That is, their position amounts to
the view that it is racist or culturally insensitive to seek to protect
the interests of another marginalized and particularly vulnerable group,
nonhuman animals. I would imagine that most of those who have this view
would not object if the marginalized beings were other humans. But this
is just another way of asserting human supremacy and exceptionalism. I
find that as objectionable as asserting racial supremacy.
If anything, vegan anarchists espouse values that are
strongly in conflict with contemporary western culture, and most
efforts are rightly aimed at western societies because this is where a
significant part of the severe exploitation of non-human animals takes
place. Not only that, it is in many cases western influence that
increases – or at least exerts a cultural and economical pressure to do
so – levels of animal exploitation in societies that peruse no or
relatively small amounts of animal products, such as is the case in
India and among Jainists in particular. No vegan anarchists want to take
away people’s means of subsistence. The claim is rather that whoever
has the practical prerequisites – economic, environmental, social –
ought to choose not to harm sentient beings for nearly arbitrary reasons
such as old habits and taste preferences.
In fact, by trying to apply imperialist connotations
to proponents of veganism, one unwittingly positions western cultures as
the subject, and indigenous cultures as the object. As if the western
culture is dynamic, always changing and open to questioning, while the
indigenous cultures are static and confined to the state in which
colonial powers found them hundreds of years ago, unable to evolve and
unable to challenge their own norms and thus develop. Indeed, as
Margaret Robinson, a vegan of indigenous background, points out:
When veganism is constructed as white, First
Nations people who choose a meatless diet are portrayed as sacrificing
cultural authenticity. This presents a challenge for those of us who see
our vegan diets as ethically, spiritually and culturally compatible
with our indigenous traditions.
The push against speciesist thinking should transcend
cultural boundaries, as should any global struggle against oppression,
thus uniting the participants across such divides. Questioning part of
cultures on grounds of oppression – from within or without – is only
hypocritical when done in the traditional guise of ignoring the same
issues at home. But here vegans and anarchists are adamant, and
emphasize the injustice in western culture as one of the large causes
for the problem in the first place. In many of the indigenous legends,
the use of animals was seen as a sacrifice, which was done out of
necessity, not out of the ability to dominate. Many of these cultures
have been pushed beyond such a relationship with nature, and as such can
within their own spiritual and cultural heritage find arguments for
moving beyond the objectified relationship with animals often imposed by
imperialist conquest. In other words, when the material conditions no
longer necessitate the exploitation of non-human animals for survival,
the indigenous traditions can in many cases be seen as an argument for veganism, and not against it.
When people single out veganism for this type of
critique, typically also calling it a form of consumerism, they mistake
it for being promoted as the one and only solution to a problem.
But I don’t have to think that abstaining from buying slaves, by itself,
would stop the slave trade, to think that it would be unethical for me
to participate in trading slaves. Consequently, activism and veganism
are two components to reach one goal – the end of human domination of
non-human animals.
While the activist component of animal liberation
promotes agitation, direct action and similar activities, veganism is a
way of already living in the now without being complicit in the
perpetuation of the exploitation, which, besides showing that our ends
can be our means, also shows that it is a viable alternative, and as
such paves the way for others to follow suit. The burden of proof should
be on the participants in the animal exploitation cycle to show that
despite their participation, their choices have no negative net effect
whatsoever on the well-being of sentient creatures. Because if their
choices do have such consequences, and there is a practical alternative
that doesn’t, then clearly that alternative is a better choice. This is
especially true if said alternative synergizes with the wider struggle
against domination.
There is a difference here between on the one hand
anti-capitalist struggle and on the other hand anti-speciesist struggle.
While capitalism permeates our entire society, and can be very hard or
even counter-productive to fully distance oneself from, our domination
of other animals is literally advertising its own presence wherever we
face it and is often readily avoidable, so we don’t have to marginalize
ourselves in society or act in highly impractical ways in order to
withdraw from its perpetuation. Instead, a sharp critique of capitalist
practices such as industrialized animal farming can be used as a
launching point for a wholesale attack on capitalism as a system. There
are synergies abound, comrades, and we should all support each other in
building a strong, multi-faceted and vibrant movement that challenges
the dominant ideologies of present society on all fronts on which they
conflict with freedom and well-being.
Veganism, as an ethical choice, is thus a consistent
complement to activism in the quest to end human domination over and
exploitation of non-human animals. It transcends cultures, in the same
way that other forms of oppression should be resisted no matter where
they persist. All cultures are living and constantly evolving, and can
from within their own cultural understanding find the tools and means
through which speciesism, racism, sexism, capitalism or any other form
of domination can be opposed. Everyone who opposes domination should
find it within their interest to engage in or at least support the
anti-speciesist struggle, for what more severe form of domination could
we imagine than the notion that it is acceptable to harm and kill
sentient beings because one likes their taste?
