My photo
Portland, OR, United States


There are animal welfare vegans and animal only-fight-against-other-vegans abolitionist vegans. V-EGANISM is neither. Just as there are positive things and negative things about conservatives and liberals, there are positive things and negative things about welfarists and abolitionists. V-EGANISM avoids all 4 "political parties", and remains as an independent in thoughts and actions, only choosing what is right and just for animals, humans, and the environment. V-EGANISM however does have a mission statement which is how the founder of veganism, Donald Watson, originally coined the word's definition. It was a perfect definition then and it still is a perfect definition now! So the following paragraph is V-EGANISM's official Mission Statement--and nothing more, nothing less, we are simply called, "Vegan Activists", with no additives:

"V-EGANISM educates people and helps people and animals regarding the political and social justice cause, Veganism, which is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude--as far as is possible and practical--all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing, cosmetics, household products, entertainment, service or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals, and the environment."

Healthy Body, Mind & Spirit Maneki Neko Cat

Healthy Body, Mind & Spirit Maneki Neko Cat

Love & Peace Maneki Neko Cat

Love & Peace Maneki Neko Cat

Monday, June 3, 2013

Animal Abolition v/s Animal Welfare--Who's Right? Neither!

Recently, I have been talking to animal abolition and animal welfare people. In case you may not know the difference I'll describe the two in their basic belief system.

Animal abolitionists (the many I have spoken to) are anti-animal law. They do not believe in the legal system at all for animals. For example, they would not rejoice if hunting was abolished on this planet. They believe save all animals now or allow them to all suffer. They DO have an all or nothing mentality, regardless of what they may say, when it comes to saving animals in the legal way. They believe the ONLY solution to saving animals is by education and education alone. Nothing else matters whatsoever.

Animal welfarists definitely believes in animal law. But so much to the point of being just as irrational as not believing in animal law at all. For instance, they rejoice in hearing it become law when over-crowded chicks are allowed an inch more space in factory farming. They believe in working moreso on causing less animal suffering than totally ending animal suffering.

Both views are ignorant, misinformed and just plain assinine.

I talked with one animal abolitionist and asked if there was a petition to sign into law where ALL animals in the world would be legally protected from any kind of suffering, using, etc. and could have their freedom except flies and you signing it would make that law, would you sign it. The person said no. (In fairness, I answered my own question by saying I definitely would sign and then work my hardest to prevent suffering to flies. I believe all animals should be free unless basically their sole purpose in life is to cause misery, pain, desease, and maybe even death to another being, like for instance fleas. Flies have been known to be quite postive-productive in the world!)

There are other ways to help animals. Education is just one way. Animal laws are just as important in the animal rights movment to save all animals as education. But by spending so much time making law, for example, one inch more space for chicks is ridiculous. The way to effectively work in animal law is to totally end something--like hunting (which Costa Rica did recently--Bravo!), or even shutting down cruel places of businesses. That's ending cruelty.

Animal Abolitionists care nothing about the individual animal. Actually, I'm not sure if they really even care about animals at all, going by their mentality. They seem to be on this hellbent "all or nothing" way that they loose sight on saving any and all animal suffering. I don't know who started this animal abolitionist crap but those that bought into it--if the animal abolitionists I've talked to are correct in their definition as stated above--are deluded.

At least animal welfarists believe in animal activism multi-tasking. They believe we should educate, petition and vote. This is excellent. We need to do all we can for animals, and not just educate.

I don't believe in animal abolition or animal welfare. But I do believe in animal rights. And the way that animals get rights is by doing sensible, intelligent actions.


  1. You know, I think that a lot of big organized groups are filled with people who really just want something to belong to, and they jump on the easiest band wagon. Almost a mob mentality. I find this to be true with most organized religions, too. None of them have it 100% right, but you can't make them see that.

    I don't know about saving flies... or rats. Flies carry diseases, as do rats and mice, etc. Then there are the nutria that are causing such havoc in Oregon and Louisianna... they are taking over and causing damage. And as much as I like squirrels, when they start ruining people's vegetable/fruit gardens (that they need for survival) or they get into your car engine and eat the wiring... (it happens here a lot!) then you kind of have to do something about it. It's not like you can catch them and re-locate them. So I don't know the answer to pest control when it involves animals, but if they are destroying your home, car or food sources, what can you do? I am definitely for animal rights, but I think you have to draw a line somewhere.

    1. Regarding "pests", I don't have all the answers, but I think troublesome beings can be handled in a safe way. If we can send a man to the moon surely we can solve this issue. To me, it's like people who can be trouble to society. We try to create ways to help them; we don't eliminate these people. To treat other beings different from us humans is being speciest to me.

      Plus, there are different types of flies. I haven't done a lot of research on flies, but I think some are a lot less dangerous than others. We should then take it on as a case-by-case situation. People can carry life-threatening diseases too toward other people but we don't kill these people. Maybe there's a way to make certain animals less diseased-threatening as we do when we help cure diseases for people.

      As I said, I don't have all the answers but I don't think we shouldn't just write animals off as we don't treat humans that way.

  2. Animal rights and the well treatment of animals are important aspects of being a responsible animal owner. Some laws have been put in place to help protect animals and regulate breeding industries; equine law is the best example that I can think of. I am all for any laws that protect animals, within reason of course.

  3. As noted above, I too don't have all the answers but I expressed myself on this issue as follows: http://animal-voices.webnode.com/news/welfare-and-not-or-rights/