Surprise! Pastured Beef Not So Green

Pastures are supposed to be, according to all the Michael Pollan wannabes and Polyface jockers, the greener alternative to feedlots. According to an article at physorg.com, it seems this is another bullshit claim – like the claim that pastured or “free-range” slave-animals harbor less E. coli – used to portray a bucolic and eco-friendly image of exploitation. The Sustainability Assessment Program at the UNSW Water Research Center in South Wales has found that factory farms are contributing to greenhouse gas emissions less per head than the small “family” farmers that purport to be so sustainable. If this study is accurate, and isn’t just industry misinformation, it further solidifies the argument that confining and torturing animals is the only way to produce enough animal-flesh and secretions to meet demand in an economically or ecologically viable way. Keeping slave-animals in captivity for the purpose of exploiting them for food is an inherently inefficient and wasteful process. Pasturing wastes vast spaces of arable land and tons of [hypothetical] food that could be grown in place of grazing, factory farms waste monstrous amounts of [real, but mostly GM] food, both waste copious amounts of water, both produce enormous amounts of waste contaminated with deadly pathogens, and both destroy the environment – air, water, and land. But most importantly both reduce living beings to mere things.  Either way, animals suffer enslavement. Either way, animals are killed unnecessarily. If we are to consider ourselves even remotely moral beings, mustn’t we avoid causing or contributing to suffering or death if and when we can?  There is no sacrifice in avoiding causing or contributing to suffering, even if it prevents us from attaining pleasure; or, there is as much sacrifice as a pedophile must make when avoiding molesting children. If factory farming -confining and torturing animals- is the only way we can get close to sustainable animal agriculture, doesn’t it make sense to quit the practice of exploitation altogether? Maybe the fact that no matter the method, treatment, or design, the inefficiency of animal agriculture is Nature’s way of saying, “Animals are not property!”

Go vegan. Because we don’t need to torture or kill animals or destroy the environment to accomplish any of our worthwhile goals. Because even the “greenest” animal slavery is far from green; it is destroying our HOME – faster than anything else we do.

Because you don’t shit where you live.

Advertisements

Assholes, Violence, and… Oh yeah, The World Is Vegan

Food Fight in Portland, one of the most awesome places in all of creation, sells a cleverly confrontational “What Kind Of Asshole Eats A Lamb?” shirt. So we ran with that and assembled a whole line of images to put on stickers, shirts, etc.

And of course…

Thanks Food Fight and Kurt Halsey.

Louis Vuitton sells a ton of animal skins, like most other “fashion” designer companies. Plant-based textiles had been invented  before recorded history. Since we are no longer neanderthals or cro-magnons, abstaining from using animal products as clothing is simply utilizing pre-historic technology to join the rest of homo-sapiens here in the modern world.  Leather is Violence.

For some reason, the indigenous cultures of where-ever have always been called savages throughout history to justify exploitation, enslavement, torture, genocide, etc. Rarely is the mirror turned back on the “civilized”.

And, as we all know, The World Is Vegan – If You Want It.

The Liberator: Remix – Issue 5 – To-Day

From The Liberator: Remix

January 28, 2010

To-day

Another New Year is born, and, after the similitude of farm animals’ inevitable fate, in a little space must die. Brief as it will prove, how serious and important will be its history—to individuals, as well as to nations! How many thrones may it not shake, or fetters sever, or revolutions witness! The crisis of the world has not yet come: scarcely the preface of its eventful history is writ. Empires are to be re-fashioned, and a large portion of the earth reclaimed from superstition and barbarism, from oppression and idolatry. We talk of the march of the mind; we marvel at the age of creation;—but does knowledge keep pace with ignorance, or virtue with vice, or benevolence with suffering, or liberty with tyranny, among mankind? Most evidently not. How long will it take to regenerate and disenthral benighted animals? how long to veganize Asia? how long to reform carni-centric America? how long to redeem the world? Surely time is in its infancy. Strange that men predict a millennium at so early a day.

The past has been an eventful year; the present will probably be yet more troublous. The exploitation industry has just begun to feel the upheavings of the earthquake which is to overthrow its strong towers, and the heat of a fire which is to melt every cage. There are signs in the political firmament of industry which portend sudden and disastrous convulsions; but known only to fate are the hidden things of time.

In this country, of those who hailed the opening of the past year, there have died at least 100 billion animals. More than a million vegans have “gone about the streets pamphleting.” How cruel is man! Who and how many must die the present year? Perhaps half a trillion. Of this number, how many shall we or our friends make? O Life! O Death! O Eternity!

In this free and “civilized” society, too, be it remembered, there were kidnapped during the past year, and violently slaughtered, more than 700,000 veal calves, the offspring of slave parents!!! A greater number, this year, is to meet a similar doom! Have we no reason to fear the judgments of conscientious folks upon our guilty land?

Original by William Lloyd Garrison

Remixed by Peace Is Coming For You

Got Milk? “Humane” Dairy Farmers Get Hoof In Mouth Disease From ABC

hoof-and-mouth disease

noun

a contagious viral disease of cattle and sheep, causing ulceration of the hoofs and around the mouth


to put your foot in your mouth

english idiom

to say something stupid or embarrassing

ABC ran an exposé about a slave plantation, Willet Dairy, in New York state on Jan. 26, 2010. The slaves in question were allegedly being horribly mistreated above and beyond what is considered “humane” slave treatment by the workers. If you haven’t seen it yet, the footage is here. The footage used was obtained by Mercy For Animals, and adds to the monstrous heap of undeniable evidence that cruelty is the norm in slavery operations such as these. Now that ABC has finally caught up with and examined decades old wisdom, farmers are (once again) coming out in droves to claim that this is “just a few bad apples” – that what was represented was one-sided, is not a an accurate representation of the dairy industry as a whole, and is just one example. Which is funny (paradoxically) because no one buys it when animal “terrorists” use that defense. The fact that many sources estimate that 99% of farmed animals are raised using factory-style methods eludes them. The $350 million in stimulus funds does not soothe their troubles. And if, as they claim, that money went to factory-farms, this does nothing to incite their opposition. The slave-owners who insist that they exploit their slaves “humanely” and that inhumane treatment is intolerable, consistently rally against animal-rights proponents and opponents of factory farms on blogs, news sites, etc., and through the lack of support of and prevention of legislation. What the fuck is their deal?

Peace Is Coming For You has decided to unleash (with an extra dose of catharsis, and profanity to drill that shit in) a volatile and furiously reactive one-sided view of our own – diagnosing these dairy farmers that don’t really matter of contracting a viral disease around the mouth that causes them to say stupid or embarrassing things. Hoof-in-mouth disease.

Some examples from the comments made by “humane” dairy farmers on ABCnews.com:

Posted by:

DAIRY-FARMER

I live on a family dairy farm. We treat our animals as well as people treat their children. maybe even better! Dogs that people treat as children are exactly like our cows. I call my favorite cow my baby, they have a personality too!

Yeah, because people force inseminate and milk their children and dogs all the time!

I am seriously hurt that people have no respect for dairy farmers. where do you think your food comes from?

Well, according to Farmforward.com, “Factory farming now accounts for more than 99 percent of all farmed animals raised. and slaughtered in the United States.” So if it comes from an animal, we’re guessing it comes from a farm like this.  Why should we respect these dairy farmers?

The day that everyone fends for themselves will be amazing, there are kids who live in the city that have NO idea where food comes from and that is crushing.

“Fends for themselves” would mean not relying on animals for food, no? And there are many “kids from the city” – recent famous ones being John Foer and Rob Kenner – who have tried to find out where most of the food is produced. The ones who produce it won’t allow it…Hmmm.

I though school was to learn? We aren’t learning much because unless your school has an agriculture department no classes are available.

Most agriculture departments at universities teach “Better Living Through Chemistry” – they teach how to factory farm. Ask Howard Lyman, 4th Generation rancher and farmer turned vegan.

if you have a problem, try buying land which is high priced, seed, a tractor, a planter, fertilizer. then buy a cow, a chicken a pig, and see if it eats what you try to feed it. And see if you can butcher it yourself.

Is this a defense of the practices ABC showed? Does this mean that there is no problem? And does this state that people who slaughter and butcher animals are some sort of elite group, accomplishing what no mere mortal could accomplish? Or that these killers are specially trained in a lost and forbidden art of assassination to which the general public is not privy?

PEOPLE: stop overlooking who provides you with your food! stop disrespecting how we do our jobs.

So, showing videos of who produces the food is overlooking who produces the food? Consumers should just shut up and go about there business? “Nothing to see here, move along…”

if a hidden camera went into your offices, there might be some light shone on you that isn’t exactly impressive.

Not to say anyone isn’t mutilating anyone else on a regular basis at any office, but it seems highly unlikely. It is definitely not the standard office practice. There don’t seem to be too many videos of sick, dying, and dead people at every single large office building, either. If all the large corporations did abuse their “employees”, though, the small-business owners would probably would not rally in support of “offices in general”.

family farms have a hard time surviving because we DO NOT get enough money for our products.

Thanks to factory farms. Tell us why, again, you are not explicitly against factory farming and this type of treatment?

ABC NEWS: How about a story about the POSITIVE side of dairy farming or all farming!

YouTube would be a good start to try and educate the public about the wonders and joys of animal exploitation. There’s a lot of competition, though. For every one happy farm video, there will always be hundreds of factory farm cruelty videos to compete with. They are the industry. “Happy” farmers are fucking clownshoes. Maybe ABC wants to report on what’s happening on farms that are actually responsible for a great deal of the products available. No one wants to watch you fisting cows.

dairy farmers are suffering enough with pay losses and debt, making us look like horrible people does not help.

Who the fuck isn’t suffering? The dairy industry – the large businesses that matter financially – just received $24 billion in TARP funds. All the small-potatoes farmers got fucked royally by the same industry they purport to be a part of.

As i said before if we went into your office and made a video, you might be treating a co worker negatively. maybe only on occasion. well this is one instance. i feel the same way. one instance of mistreatment.

One instance? It seems most dairy farmers who accuse “city folks” of never having been to a farm, have never been to a factory farm and do not have any significant clue about their (small farmers) role, or the role of factory farms in industry. Torture. Is. Standard. Industry. Practice. Most animals exist (they ain’t livin’) in concentration camps. An “eternal Treblinka”. (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation, Concentration Camp – Get it? Got it? Good.)

I love our cows and they are our children. please shine some light on positivity already!!! thank you.

How many farmers sodomize their own children? (Now that we think about it, that may be a question that would provide an unwanted answer.) How many steal child’s their breast milk? How many farmers send their grandsons to be slaughtered? And what, exactly, is the positive side of slavery, even if the torture is minimized?

This is just one of hundreds more comments like this. Here is another:

Posted by:

udderworldly

It is disgraceful that ABC has decided to air this story of abuse and promotes it as ‘the norm’ in the dairy industry. The procedures performed in this segment are not typical. Dehorning and tail docking are performed in many instances, but not in the fashion shown in this video footage.

So, other “fashions” such as rubber banding aren’t painful, and neither is just scooping the horn out with a horn-spoon. Did we mention the rape-rack? “Humane” farms still consistently mutilate animals for the farmer’s benefit. This footage was G-rated compared to most of the footage available.

However, we cannot really blame ABC. They are showing what ‘the people, the consumers’ want to see. They (consumers) are not interested in the numerous stories of farmers, producers and veterinarians that show the actual majority of farms: animals being handled and treated humanely.

Really? The people want to see people abusing animals? Really? Consumers want to see animals suffering? Is this why Earthlings is the #1 movie? Is this why people have such a horrible time visiting farm sanctuaries?  As for veterinarians, from AVMA,org: “The AVMA opposes routine tail docking of cattle. Current scientific literature indicates that routine tail docking provides no benefit to the animal, and that tail docking can lead to distress during fly seasons. When medically necessary, amputation of tails must be performed by a licensed veterinarian.”

Oh, these stories exist, numerous accounts of them…

Farm Sanctuary (also in NY) has many positive stories about animals being treated humanely, but they actually treat them humanely – they don’t exploit the animals they care for. Their stories don’t end in the animals being killed and eaten. There is even a documentary about them.

…but they will never be aired on the news because that simply does not sell to the general public, and that is the job of companies such as ABC—selling air time to advertisers, which requires ratings.

The day Farm Sanctuary is featured on Nightline is the day that the coverage won’t be one-sided. For now, not farming animals is never presented as a possible solution by any mainstream outlet. It’s not small-farm vs. big farm as it is usually reported. It’s abolitionists vs animal exploiters with a spectrum of different views in between. Abolitionists get zero exposure. Small farmers benefit from billions in advertising indirectly promoting their products. Quit complaining. The day that small farmers are handing out pamphlets at colleges to spread their humane message is the day they can invoke the “grass roots” mentality. Further, there couldn’t possibly be any advertisers from the dairy industry that might be instrumental in preventing the majority of stories like this from being aired, could there? Posilac…anyone? There couldn’t be any advertisers preventing the abolitionist message from being considered in the mainstream, could there?

The average consumer wants to be horrified, mortified and generally disgusted, which is why news coverage is what it is (murder, child molestation/kidnapping, violence, etc).

What is farming if not child kidnapping, violence, murder, slavery, or torture? When farmers stick their entire arm in a cow’s rectum is that not anal rape – sodomy? When calves are dragged away from their mothers, is that not kidnapping? When animals’ horns or tails are mutilated is that not violence and torture? Is slaughter different than murder? When herds of animals are culled is this not genocide? One need not stray any further than a local “humane” farm to see brutal injustice and inhumanity.

I am not defending the actions seen in the video footage, they are not appropriate. However, do not be fooled into thinking that scenarios such as these are commonplace in the dairy industry. Before you jump to conclusions, take it upon yourselves to become educated in a topic and not blindly believing any media propaganda that you come across.

To be able to give such good advice but be unable to take it, while a profound curse, amounts to no more than willful ignorance.

These arguments are repeated hundreds of times by slave owners who think they actually represent even a small portion of what happens to animals on a daily basis. Like this one:

Seriously! Cows in filthy conditions! Have any of you (editors and producers) ever walked through a cow barn? It’s by nature filthy!

Maybe that’s how most of our zoonotic diseases in humans were spread from animals, from you dirty fucks!

Pastures aren’t much better and tend to be more dangerous for both cows and man.

Pastures aren’t better? Really? For who? Well, when one predator wants to keep his prey away from other predators, he usually hides them like a sneaky little bitch. But which is more dangerous to the cow? Possibly being eaten by a wolf or definitely being eaten by a human?

Dairy farmers are constantly cleaning pens, and barns. However, they are barns, that’s the point. Animals create and lay in their own filth. That is what they do.

How many wild animals lay in their own filth? Maybe farm animals do this because their trapped in a fucking barn!

As far as abuse, yes abuse is intolerable. However, what is your definition of abuse? Dehorning is not abuse. It would be abuse to leave those horns on. Think about it.

I guess it does depend on one’s definition of abuse. Oxford American Dictionary defines it as “use or treat in such a way as to cause damage or harm” I think dehorning would fit this definition. Wait, wha? It would be abuse to leave the horns on the cow? Wow. Obviously “God” or whatever fucked up when making cows because apparently farmers have decided that they are extraneous. So farmers have their own language and own rules about how animals are supposed to have evolved.

How many cows and calves would be injured due to the horns being left on?

How many cows need to be crammed together so tightly that this might be a problem? This doesn’t happen in the wild, or with ample space to move.

Cows have a pecking order and it is constantly changing. Horns would be extremely dangerous for the cows and for the people tending them.

Horns aren’t dangerous to people who aren’t trying to steal the cow’s baby or milk.

Tail docking if done properly is fairly painless and should be done when the animal is a calf.

How the fuck would anyone know what is fairly painless to a cow? How could anyone assume that getting your fucking tail cut off is not painful? And of course it should done be when their calves, otherwise a 2000 lb. animal is going to kick you in the naughty-bits once you get behind them and try to cut their tail off!

There are different methods in tail docking, so it is a dairy farmers choice of when it should be done. Tail docking does help with the cleanliness of the animal and it helps prevent the spread of mastitis

The tail is docked because the environment is filthy, not because cow’s tails give them mastitis.  It is banned the U.K. You know what else prevents the spread of mastitis? Not farming animals!

Not to mention, if you ever have milked cows getting hit in the face with a frozen, manure tail is not much fun.

I’m sure it’s better than being born into slavery.

Doesn’t taste good either.

You eat shit! Ha ha.

Before you condemn dairy farmers maybe you should get to know one and spend a day in their shoes. Farming is hard. Go try it sometime.

Why would anyone want to spend a day in a farmers shoes? No one wants to cut the tails off animals or eat shit. Animal farms are not fun places. Huge companies exploit animals to make money, and people give them money so they don’t have to do it. Small-farmers are just that – small. As in infinitesimal. You know what’s not as hard or cruel and provides more food than any animal farm? Vegetable farms! Before you condemn vegans, try it sometime.

These small dairy farmers, who average less than 100 cows, are not feeding the world as they claim. They have little to no impact on the supply side of things, yet they are under the impression that they are responsible for the majority of production. It makes absolutely no sense for small-time dairy farmers to argue with the videos and ABC. If anything, you’d think they would take these events as an opportunity to distance themselves from large-scale production and drive clientele to their farms, but as they continue to demonstrate, they’re all infected with the hoof in mouth.

The replies weren’t all defensive farmers. Some people are outright done with milk:

Wow! I can’t believe they do these things to animals! I am never drinking milk again!

Posted by:

Allen Sneed

Maybe if there were a strong go vegan message on ABC’s video like in the video on MFA’s website, it wouldn’t be just milk.

Some are confused, but may be put on the right track with vegan education:

I will only buy SOY MILK from this point forward, and I will start the transition to exclusive Goat Cheese products. Good-by ice-cream. I regret that I did not make these changes in 1989 when I stopped eating beef and pork.

Posted by:

verdiway

Just go vegan already!

Of course the cosmically-tuned vegans were there:

This mistreatment happens all over the slaughter industry. Animals are just a cash producing product. The collective Karma for this is going to be terrible. One of many reasons I’ve been a vege for over 30 years.

Posted by:

Jiva Soul

And the welfarists:

if you are a dairy farmer doing the right thing and treating your animals humanely, you should applaud this ABC report, because it encourages people do buy milk from the humane farms who are treating their animals well.i abhor the farm factories that treat animals like nothing more than a product without feelings or a right to be treated kindly. Enjoy a pasture, free space, sunshine and without torture. BRAVO ABC!!! Come on America!!! Buy only food you know has come from people with a conscience! Let these other idiots go out of business!!

Posted by:

njwillams123

Many comments were just ignorant or hateful. (On the Interwebs? No, it can’t be!):

Cows are milk production machines. They are also hamburgers, steaks, belts, coats, chairs, etc. Do you think there would even be cows without all these benefits for HUMANS. They would have become extinct hundreds of years ago. Treating them cruel is not acceptable, but there is a thing called a food chain and luckily we are at the top. Yum!

Posted by:

Kickin or reading

Descartes, anyone?

But mostly it was farmers defending themselves. One, very…creatively. By lumping themselves in with boy-fuckers.

In the same way that priests, teachers, and individuals in other professions do things to make others in their profession look bad, those of us in the agricultural industry have the same problem. And, just like priests, teachers, etc. there are far more good dairy producers out there than bad.

Posted by:

WisFarmWife

Priests? Really? Stay classy, Wisconsin!

We have cleverly formulated our own fictional response acting as mouthpiece for the real dairy industry – the factory farms:

Dear Small Farmers,

Increases in population and demand for animal products requires the use of modern farming methods, such as those seen on ABC. Confined operations such as ours maximize efficiency while minimizing inputs. High-density and controlled chemical applications for antibiotics in feed, pesticides and hormones deliver maximum results resulting in maximum profits for farmers. Shortage of land, water, and fossil fuels requires food production to be highly centralized and production maximized if producers are to meet demand. The methods used before the advent of CAFOs are costly, inefficient, and will never meet the high demand put on industry by consumers. And in the end, you guys are doing the same inhumane shit.

Signed, The Big Boys

P.S.- Thanks for defending us every chance you get, it really helps! Now STFU and get out of the way.

Of course, this is a sterile version of what would actually be said. We’ve all seen how they talk to their animals.

Also, a response to consumers:

Dear dairy consumers,

The only way to meet the increasingly high demand for animal products is through the application of Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) to animal agriculture. Demand for low prices forces us to cut costs wherever possible, often resulting in what might look like abuse. It is surely not. Regardless of what you or any scientists or veterinarians say, it is simply not abuse. Honest. Unless consumers are willing to pay $35 for a pound of beef, or $20 for a gallon of milk, tail-docking, de-horning, etc. are part of the true cost of production. The choice is clear. Factory farms are the only way to meet the demand you the evil consumer puts on us the benevolent producer. We wouldn’t do these things if we were not forced to by the American People. We also wouldn’t do these things if we weren’t paid by the American people. Thanks for the $24 billion, go fuck yourselves.

Signed, The Big Boys

P.S. – Anyone who disagrees with us is a terrorist.

The Humane Challenge

One of the sharper knives commenting challenged farmers:

Kittyweese1 commented:

“Okay, so you all say that YOU don’t know any farmers who do this, YOU have never encountered this kind of cruelty. Well, do you join with the animal rights people to push for legislation to outlaw this kind of cruelty? Do you support them in banning gestation crates for pregnant pigs, or cramming chickens in cages stacked on top of one another, or confining calves to crates where they can’t even turn around? If as you all say, this is not industry standard and if no one YOU know does this, and most farmers “love” their animals, then you would all be supporting outlawing these kinds of practices. But my guess is no. Not one of you will stand side by side with animal rights people to outlaw these practices. Animal rightists wouldn’t have a leg to stand on if in fact, this type of stuff was rare. It isn’t rare and that is the problem. It is all too common. 90% of animals we use for food are raised on factory farms in these conditions and I bet not a one of you apologists have EVER come out on the side of animal rights people who are trying to expose this cruelty. Look at the posts here. Excuses, excuses, excuses. Put you money where your mouth is — it this is so rare, if this is such an isolated case, then I would love to see a bunch of “family” farmers come out and stand side by side with animal rights people when they try to get the NY bill to ban tail docking because, you know, THEY never do anything like that. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.”

Good point. But. These “humane” farmers claim that these are isolated incidents. Does it make sense for them to support legislation banning something they don’t see as a significant or widespread problem? They claim that this is a one-sided argument – meaning that if given the chance, the farmers depicted would be able to justify what they are doing. Does it make sense for them to rally against people who they think are justified in what they are doing? They claim that “humane” farmers are responsible for the majority of the production of animal products. With delusions of grandeur such as these, are these slave-owners mentally competent enough to be engaging in any type of relevant political discourse?

The challenge to farmers to step-up and support welfarists in passing the NY ban is kind of a teensy cupcake.

The demand for animal products creates and sustains the industry producing them, not the other way around. Those who should be ashamed are not just the exploiters that side with worse exploiters, but also those who support these industries three times every day in ignorance. To their credit, consumers are purposefully misinformed by industry. But ignorance is not a good excuse in the information age. If you don’t know about factory farms you are living under a fucking rock.

Superficially, “humane” farmers and ARAs joining together to campaign against factory-farming seems like a good idea for welfarists and abolitionists – strategy-wise. If enough welfare laws are passed that farming becomes uneconomical, abolitionists gain more ground in the eyes of the public. This does not seem realistic, though, considering the amount of influence the Big Boys already have over government, compounded by new politi-corporate finance legislation. (Michael Taylor…Anyone?) Unfortunately the cliche join-together-to-fight-a-common-enemy “temporary He-Man/Skeletor alliance” isn’t an option. Last time we checked, public opinion (voting) doesn’t really matter. (Bush…Twice?) Now we vote with our dollars.

But to vote wisely, even with our dollars, we need to be educated. If the general public learns one thing from this type of exposure, hopefully it’s that they know fuck-all about their food. And hopefully they start to do something about it besides placing the blame elsewhere. The tiniest bit of effort put into researching our food yields myriad profound and unexpected results. Every time exposure like this is presented outside the tiny AR world and gets projected in the mainstream (and not by PeTA), millions get challenged to think about their choices. Are they up for it?

Here’s the real challenge for “humane” exploiters:

On this, the 28th day of January, Twenty-Ten

Peace Is Coming For You

Officially Declares

A Challenge To All So-Called “Humane” Farmers

to demonstrate how you treat animals. Do the undercover investigator’s job for them. Don’t tell us, show us. Videotape the “humane” tail-docking, and the “happy” de-horning. Show us the nicest way to castrate a pig. Show us how you inseminate the cows. Show us what happens to your male calves. Show us the “humane” slaughter process. Explain why it’s done, and why it’s necessary. Be honest with us, show us how you treat animals when no one is looking. Show us how you are different than factory farms. Let us decide what we think is humane and what we want to support. The ones who keep you in business, who pay your bills will decide if they want to continue doing that. If you want us to see your side of the story, show us – don’t wait for someone to show up with a camera sewn inside their jacket.

Also, to explain how it is possible to meet increasing demand without concentrated/confined operations.  With 80% of current land used by humans dedicated to animal slavery, translating to 30% of total global land area – most of those animals existing in concentration camps – how do you plan to feed the world with 50 cows?

Which begs the question, is it possible to be a humane farmer?

And an equal challenge to consumers:

On this, the 28th day of January, Twenty-Ten

Peace Is Coming For You

Officially Declares

A Challenge To All consumers Of Animal Products

to watch Earthlings, to learn more about the animals you eat or support the exploitation of, and to research the ways in which 99% of animals are treated on factory farms. Then research even the 1% exploited on small “humane” farms, and ask yourself: Is any of this necessary? Do I want to be a part of this?

For the most part, it seems people have forgotten the most important moral guide – the golden rule. Treat others as you would want to be treated. When considering animals – who feel pain, fear, and loss just like us – the best (and easiest) way to decide is to ask yourself: would I want this done to me? If this is the question we ask, the answer – when it comes to animal exploitation – is always “fuck no”.

Go vegan. Now. It’s easier than you think, and it’s never going to be a better time.

Peace Is Coming For You.

Video – “Sizzla” (iMovie)

The Liberator: Remix – Issue 4 – The Salutation

From The Liberator: Remix

January 22, 2010

The Salutation

To date my being from the opening year,
I come, a stranger to this busy sphere,
Where some I meet perchance may pause and ask,
What is my name, my purpose, or my task?

My name is “LIBERATOR”! I propose
To hurl my shafts at freedom’s deadliest foes!
My task is hard—for I am charged to save
Animal from Man!—to redeem the slave!

Ye who may hear, and yet condemn my cause,
Say, shall the best of Nature’s holy laws
Be trodden down? and shall her open veins
Flow but for cement to her offspring’s chains?

Art thou a parent? shall thy children be
Rent from thy breast, like branches from the tree,
And doom’d to servitude, in helplessness
On “happy” farms, and thou ask no redress?

Thou, in whose bosom glows the sacred flame
Of filial love, say, if the tyrant came,
To force thy parent shrieking from thy sight,
Would thy heart bleed—because thy species is right?

Art thou a brother? shall thy sister twine
Her feeble arm in agony on thine,
And thou not lift the heel, nor aim the blow,
At him who bears her off to life-long wo?

Art thou a sister? will no desp’rate cry
Awake thy sleeping brother, while thine eye
Beholds the fences locking him in
Stretched out in rest, which hence, must end, for him?

Art thou a lover?—no! nought e’er was found
In lover’s breast, save cords of love, that bound
Man to animal kind! then, thy profession save!
Forswear affection or release thy slave!

Thou who art kneeling at thy butchers’s shrine,
Ask if peace takes such offerings as thine!
If in thy bonds the farm animal sighs,
Far higher than thy cholesterol his groans will rise!

Man can show mercy, and would see
The prison doors unbarr’d—the bonded free!
Man can seek truth, with purer eyes
Than to behold the oppresor’s sacrifice!

Avarice, thy cry and thine insatiable thirst
Make men consent to see their dinner cursed!
Tears, sweat and blood pus thou drinks’t, but, in their turn,
They shall cry “no more!” while E. coli bids men burn.

We hath said it!—who shall gainsay?
We say, “the wicked they shall go away,”——
Who are the wicked?——Wicked as cannibals,
They are the oppressors of their fellow animals!

Aid me, good people! ’tis my hope in you
Which gives me strength my purpose to pursue!
Do you not hear your sisters and brothers resound
With Nature’s sights to have her sons unbound?

Original by Anonymous/William Lloyd Garrison

Remixed by Peace Is Coming For You

Food Rules For Eating Animals

There are many rules for eating, most of them surrounding the consumption of the flesh or reproductive secretions of non-human animals. The psychology of carnism is a very interesting topic with many puzzling and often discomforting nuances concerning food, clothing, “pets”, and all of our other exploitation of non-human animals. Humans, in general, seem to be very confused about their relationship to non-human animals, and in being so, construct all types of arbitrary rules and guidelines of what to avoid and what to ingest based on the morality and cultural acceptance of certain “foods” made from dismembered non-human animal parts and secretions. Many grey areas emerge. This is the enigmatic psychology of carnism. Defined narrowly, carnism is the ideology behind our decisions to eat, wear, or love some animals, and not others.  Broadly defined, and how the word will be used throughout this examination, is that carnism is the ideology that it is morally acceptable to exploit non-human animals as resources for humans. Basically, carnism is the opposite of veganism. This examination will concentrate on the subject of food in the western world and the ethics and culturogenic speciesism surrounding the choices stereotypical groups of eaters make, the rules they formulate concerning their diet, and the moral and logical inconsistency within those choices.

Carnists

Carnists eat foods that contradict their values to avoid unnecessary suffering. For this reason they mostly base their food choices on arbitrary species or cultural distinctions, though some try unsuccessfully to align their values with their diet, and some don’t have values pertaining to diet at all.

The Foodie Carnist- The foodie carnist is the least selective of those who hold the carnist ideology.  They are pretty much willing to try anything – any part of any plant or non-human animal, sex organs, brains, tongue, placenta, stomach lining, eyes, ears, nose, rectum, etc. They are like the garbage disposals of eaters. Only bacteria outmatch foodies in their desire for diversified gluttony; their insatiable appetite for rotting carcasses, fermented placenta and embryotic fluid – just a few of the “delicacies” ingested by these strange folk. No matter the extent of suffering inflicted to the meal – foie gras, veal, live sashimi – it is the duty of the foodie to disregard the violent past of their foods, and to only experience the present – no matter how unpalatable. There is no species too taboo for this scavenger-group. Cannibals are the only group that eats with less discernment than foodies.  Most of them, while they wouldn’t eat their dog, would eat dog. The Anthony Bourdains of the world (who very well could be closet cannibals) are only interested in the pursuit of individual pleasure, a totally self-centered world view that demonstrates the height of conceit present in modern human society.

Foodie Rules

  • (None. Maybe don’t eat humans or pets. Maybe.)

The Standard Carnist – The standard carnists’ diet consists mainly of edibles that are acceptable to the general population. While standards vary greatly from region to region, the carnists who follow them don’t. If mainstream society has deemed something or someone edible, they will eat it. If mainstream society has deemed it or him or her inedible, they will not. They leave it up to culture and tradition to decide their diet. For americans, this usually entails eating mostly the muscle tissue of a select few species of dead and dismembered non-human animals, the reproductive secretions of a few mammals and birds, and a somewhat diverse amount of non-animal matter.  For many standard eaters, leaving a non-human animal carcass physically intact, i.e. with the head attached, is unacceptable and the internal organs, facial organs, marrow, connective tissue, or cartilage are not consumed, but mainly for disgust reasons. However, the disgust is likely a reaction related to the ethical aspects of identifying with certain parts of the carcasses being similar to human parts, the empathy that is a natural biological response to the thought of the once living animal now butchered on the plate for the eater’s pleasure, evidencing in the form of cognitive moral dissonance that requires dismemberment of non-human animal carcasses to facilitate the enjoyment of the flesh consumed. Western standard eaters usually only find it morally acceptable to eat only a few species of animals – pigs, cows, sheep, chickens, turkeys, fish – maybe the occasional deer, rabbit, elk, or limited bird species; and most species are morally off-limits – dogs, cats, horses, all apes, dolphins, whales, zebras, manatees, etc. However, different parts of the world have completely different ethical rules about eating species that most standard westerners would find worthy of not-eating. The rules have become very complicated when deciding which animals are “okay” to eat and which are “not” for standard eaters of different regions, religions, or cultural backgrounds thanks to our global travel capabilities, but in every different culture, there are the standard eaters that consume whatever everyone else does, with very little thought about why they do or whether they should. Of all the ideologies of eating, the standard eater is the lemming. They let other people choose what they will eat. Sheep. Baa. (No offense, sheep.)

Standard Rules

Morally/Culturally Acceptable to Eat:

  • Plants
  • Fungi
  • The muscle tissue of pigs, cows, buffalo, chickens, sheep, goats, turkeys, a few species of fish, a few species of shellfish, a few species of crustaceans, a few species of mollusks, and maybe some  “game animals” like deer, elk, rabbits, pheasants, quail, etc.
  • Reproductive secretions of chickens, cows, goats, and sheep.
  • Secretions of bees
  • Processed bones, connective tissues, organs and intestines of chickens, turkeys, ducks, cows, pigs, sheep, goats, and horses. (gelatin/hotdogs, etc.)

The Grey Area:

  • Veal
  • Foie gras
  • Snakes
  • Alligators
  • Frogs
  • Snails
  • Gizzards of chickens, turkeys, and ducks
  • Unprocessed livers of chickens, turkeys, ducks, pigs, and cows
  • Unprocessed hearts of chickens, turkeys, ducks, pigs and cows
  • Unprocessed hooves of pigs
  • Brain
  • Bull or buffalo testicles (Rocky Mountain oysters)

Not Morally (either superficially, or due to a physical disgust/empathy response) or Culturally (due to culturogenic disgust) Acceptable to Eat:

  • Pets
  • Muscle tissue of any mammal, bird, reptile or amphibian not mentioned above
  • Reproductive secretions of any mammal or bird not mentioned above
  • Reproductive secretions of reptiles and amphibians.
  • Testicles of any animal not mentioned above
  • Secretions of insects other than bees
  • Insects
  • Eyes
  • Ears
  • Noses
  • Lungs
  • Rectum
  • Penis
  • Vagina
  • Anus
  • Spleen
  • Pancreas
  • Tongue
  • Entrails

The “Conscientious” Carnist– “Conscientious” carnists have themselves convinced that torture and killing are conscientious, but excessive torture and the prolonged agony resulting in death are not. They are a little bit more involved with their food than standard carnists, but still rely heavily on cultural influence to dictate what is or is not edible for the most part. Baa. These extremely confused carnists have all the same cultural rules of eating as standard carnists, with the exception that they prefer the non-human animals that are exploited for their flesh and secretions be treated slightly less-torturous than the absolute maximum torture. This group coined the concept of and term “humane slaughter”, as if this is not as oxymoronic as “friendly fire” or “civil war”, and as if anyone with an iota of critical thinking ability could not see the flaws in. This group of carnists includes religious carnists who base their rules of slaughter on some notion of supernatural laws of “sacrifice” (as if the animal in question is a willing participant) or “respect” (Respect means killing in a certain way to these people) such as kosher or halal – which actually just turns out to be barbaric ritual slaughter in the tradition of the inhumane practices that took place in the horrific temples of bloody sacrifice called churches the members of Judeo-Christian religions have demonstrated throughout their history. Some eschew some species because they are “unclean”. Some religions eschew the flesh of non-human animals they consider sacred, while finding it morally acceptable to exploit those sacred animals for their reproductive excretions, but take no ethical issue with consuming the flesh of non-sacred non-human animals. While the non-human animals exploited “humanely” (it is unclear how one accomplishes this) might have a slightly better – though equally and disturbingly short – life than others, cows exploited for their secretions are still fisted in the rectum, their vaginas entered forcefully, their newborn babies stolen from them after a day or so. Turkeys still can’t reproduce through natural methods, forcing “humane” farmers to rely on force-insemination. Breeding is the lifeblood of farming, and every female farm animal’s reproductive cycle is manipulated against their will. For some reason these “conscientious” carnists think that a cow’s vagina is less important to the cow, than a human female’s vagina is to the human female, insofar as both animals want to be free from forceful reproductive violation. Why female carnists exist is a mystery in itself. Male chicks are still ground up alive, suffocated, or “disposed of” in another way. Male calves still get sent to veal farms. Pigs are still castrated. Regardless of what happens during life, they all meet the same deadly fate in the slaughterhouse, and this is the issue “conscientious” carnists avoid. No matter what the adjective is describing the farming method, all farm animals are born slaves and will die slaves. There is nothing “conscientious” about that. Many of the proponents of “conscientious” carnism who advocate “humane” slaughter, if asked to describe the “humane” slaughter of a dog, cat, or dolphin for food, come up short for replies, relying on an arbitrary species difference.  Never questioning our use of non-human animals – our exploitation of them for their flesh and secretions – the “concientious” carnivore is only worried about treatment – and only enough to prevent themselves from experiencing the suffering empathy causes them.

Mark Twain said it best:

“I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that we can stand the pain of another creature straight along, without discomfort, until it’s pain gives us pain. Then we become immediately and creditably merciful. I suppose it is a pity that we have no higher motive for sparing pain to a fellow creature, still it is the cold truth – we have no higher one. We have no vestige of pity, not a single shred of it, for any creature’s misery until it reaches the point where the contemplation of it inflicts misery upon ourselves. This remark describes every human being who ever lived.”

“Conscientious” Rules

Morally/Culturally Acceptable to Eat:

  • Plants
  • Fungi
  • Muscle tissue of pigs, cows, buffalo, chickens, sheep, goats, turkeys, a few species of fish, a few species of shellfish, a few species of crustaceans, a few species of mollusks, and maybe some  “game animals” like buffalo deer, elk, rabbits, pheasants, quail, etc., labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”, “pastured”, “pasture-fed”, “grass-fed”, “free-range”, “cage-free”, meaning the animals were subjected to only slightly less torturous conditions before being decapitated, shot, clubbed, electrocuted, slit at the throat, gassed, or suffocated.
  • Reproductive secretions of chickens, cows, goats, and sheep labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…
  • Secretions of bees
  • Processed bones, connective tissues, organs and intestines of chickens, turkeys, ducks, cows, pigs, sheep, goats, and horses. (gelatin)

The Grey Area:

  • Foie Gras labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…
  • Veal labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…
  • Gizzards of chickens, turkeys, and ducks labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…
  • Unprocessed livers of chickens, turkeys, ducks, pigs, and cows labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…
  • Unprocessed hearts of chickens, turkeys, ducks, pigs and cows labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…
  • Unprocessed hooves of pigs labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…
  • Brain labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…
  • Bull or buffalo testicles (Rocky Mountain oysters) labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…
  • Snakes labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…
  • Alligators labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…
  • Frogs labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…
  • Snails labeled “humanely raised”, “humanely slaughtered”…

Not Morally/Culturally Acceptable to Eat:

  • Pets
  • Muscle Tissue of any mammal, bird, fish, crustacean, shellfish, mollusk, reptile or amphibian mentioned above who was subjected to gratuitously inhumane treatment before being decapitated, shot, clubbed, electrocuted, slit at the throat, gassed, or suffocated.
  • Reproductive secretions of any mammal, bird, fish, reptile or amphibian mentioned above who was subjected to gratuitously inhumane treatment before being decapitated, shot, clubbed, electrocuted, slit at the throat, gassed, or suffocated.
  • Muscle tissue of any mammal, bird, reptile or amphibian not mentioned above
  • Reproductive secretions of reptiles and amphibians.
  • Reproductive secretions of any mammal or bird not mentioned above
  • Testicles of any animal not mentioned above
  • Secretions of insects other than bees
  • Insects
  • Eyes
  • Ears
  • Noses
  • Lungs
  • Rectum
  • Penis
  • Vagina
  • Anus
  • Spleen
  • Pancreas
  • Tongue
  • Entrails

The (Lacto-Ovo) Pescetarian – This group of carnists’ rules are generally the same as the standard carnists’, except with a more limited view of which non-human animals are acceptable to exploit. Curious is the allowance of one, and only one type of flesh, flesh from the sea. It is likely the ethical reasoning behind this dietary choice is based on the misinformation that fish do not feel pain. There is no evidence to believe this is true. Fish, crustaceans, mollusks, and shellfish have all the necessary parts for feeling pain and suffering that humans that other animals do. They feel pain and it makes absolutely no sense to believe otherwise. While they usually include shellfish, crustaceans, mollusks, and other “fish-like” species, pescoes don’t eat all of the sea flesh available – they usually refrain from consuming animals such as dolphins, whales, manatee, etc. on moral grounds. Maybe because these species are mammals, and under the assumption that fish don’t feel pain and mammals do, they refrain from consuming them? Do these people even know that dolphins are mammals, or is the choice another arbitrary species distinction? It is somewhat understandable for an uneducated person to draw a moral distinction between flesh and secretions, under the assumption that exploiting non-human animals for their secretions does not result in the death of those animals, but to single out an entire class of animal…wow. In any case, of all the sects of the cult(ure) of carnism, these profoundly speciesist members are the most perplexing.

Pescetarian Rules

Morally/Culturally Acceptable to Eat:

  • Plants
  • Fungi
  • Muscle tissue of a few species of fish, a few species of shellfish, a few species of crustaceans,  and a few species of mollusks.
  • Reproductive secretions of chickens, cows, goats, and sheep who, after years of reproductive exploitation, all end up decapitated, shot, clubbed, electrocuted, slit at the throat, gassed, or suffocated.
  • Secretions of bees

The Grey Area:

  • Cheese made with sheep’s rennet
  • Processed bones, connective tissues, organs and intestines of chickens, turkeys, ducks, cows, pigs, sheep, goats, and horses. (gelatin)
  • Muscle tissue of amphibians

Not Morally/Culturally Acceptable to Eat:

  • Pets
  • Muscle Tissue of any mammal, bird, or reptile
  • Reproductive secretions of any mammal, bird, reptile or amphibian not mentioned above
  • Secretions of insects other than bees
  • Insects
  • Eyes
  • Offal

The Lacto-Ovo (Secretionist)– This group of carnists’, the secretionists, adds one more rule to the list of no-no’s present in the different sects of dietary speceisism. No flesh. Assumedly under the false notion that exploiting non-human animals for their secretions does not result in the death of those animals, lacto-ovo carnists eschew flesh of any kind. What secretionists seem to fail to realize is that all the animals they support the exploitation of end up in the same slaughterhouse as the animals they don’t support the exploitation of. Further, the consumption of cow’s milk, or rape juice, is directly responsible for the veal industry. Steer’s genitals are often sexually mutilated or removed to provide farmers with testers for the breeding readiness of cows. When cow’s milk prices go down, entire herds get “culled” to drive production down, and therefor prices up. These are just a few examples of the atrocities these self-proclaimed, and so-called “vegetarians” support. There is no moral distinction between flesh and secretions, and no vegetarian would eat a secretion from an animal. Vegetarians eat vegetables.

Secretionist Rules

Morally/Culturally Acceptable to Eat:

  • Plants
  • Fungi
  • Reproductive secretions of chickens, cows, goats, and sheep who, after years of reproductive exploitation, all end up decapitated, shot, clubbed, electrocuted, slit at the throat, gassed, or suffocated.
  • Secretions of bees

The Grey Area:

  • [Cheese made with] sheep’s rennet
  • Processed bones, connective tissues, organs and intestines of chickens, turkeys, ducks, cows, pigs, sheep, goats, and horses. (gelatin)

Not Morally/Culturally Acceptable to Eat:

  • Pets
  • Muscle tissue of any animal
  • Reproductive secretions of any mammal or bird not mentioned above
  • Reproductive secretions of reptiles and amphibians.
  • Secretions of insects other than bees
  • Insects
  • Eyes
  • Offal

The Traveller– Travellers have a hard time knowing what the rules are. When in Korea, eating dog is acceptable. In Japan, whale meat is still consumed. From 100-year eggs to Rocky Mountain oysters, seals to insects, the rules are always changing. For some the rule is “when in Rome”, similar to a foodie carnist. For others, the rule is “go with what you know” similar to a standard carnist.  Because of the cognitive dissonance in every day carnism, it is especially hard to determine what’s edible on the road.

Of course there are other groups, such as the “conscientious foodie”, or the “Non-Lacto-pesce-sometimes-steak-itarian”, but they’re retarded.  Or more retarded, rather.

None of the ways in which humans exploit non-human animals are necessary in any meaningful sense of the word, including for food. The majority of members of these groups share the same universal moral value that animals should not be killed, or made to suffer unnecessarily.  All of these groups contradict that universal value by exploiting non-human animals for the taste of their flesh or secretions.  Many of the members of these groups have non-human animal companions they consider members of the family, who refuse to eat some non-human animals like dogs, cats, or dolphins on moral grounds, but eat the flesh and secretions of other equally sentient non-human animals, purely on the arbitrary basis of species membership. The decisions to eat some animals and not others, to include some as members of the family and eat others, to consume the reproductive fluids of mammals into adulthood, shows how ridiculous and arbitrary cultural and moral decisions about carnists’ diets are. Foodies, are the least confused about their moral and cultural rules for eating in that they have none; they treat most non-human animals equally by consuming any non-human animal, or any part or secretion of any non-human animal, they don’t personally know. Pescetarians have to be the most confused and illogical – choosing habitat, species membership and cultural inclinations to guide their choices. And then there is another, less confused group:

Vegetarians

Vegetarians eat foods that correspond with their values to avoid causing unnecessary suffering. For this reason, they eat only plant-based foods.

Vegetarian Rules

Morally/Culturally Acceptable to Eat:

  • Plants
  • Fungi

The Grey Area:

  • None

Not Morally Acceptable to Eat:

  • Any parts of any animals or any of their secretions.

Many people think it is hard to be vegan. According to these lists, it seems as though carnists are the ones who make it hard for themselves. It is easy to live a compassionate, healthy life where the only rule is to boycott suffering. ‘Nuff Said.