Carnivorous Anarchists?

[bodkin]

I know that a lot of anarchist are Vegitarian, or even better Vegan.
Yet I understand there to be a large number of meat-eaters that claim to be anarchistic.

Is it possible to be both an anarchist and a carnivore?

Shouldn't the ideas of a non-hierarchical system be extended and applied to all living beings?

Aren't the industries manufacturing meat, dairy, animal testing, animal products (clothes, shoes, lipsticks, glues etc) some of the major players in any capatilist regime?

I suppose this is a loaded question, but would like to hear the feedback.

[post]

I eat meat. In fact, since I don't know how to cook I eat everything that requires little or no cooking. I considered trying some raw vegan recipes, but all those require either equipment which I don't have or ingredients which I don't know where to find. By the way, no, I don't eat raw meat.

[Insecuritykiller]

You're going into the realm of animal rights. Anarchism is about people, humans. As it is school of thought within politics, which is devoted to men and more recently to all working peoples. EDIT: err, this was stupid. All people have been in the work place from the beginning.

What you see anarchism or politics as is ofcourse your own personal preference. I'm of the view that if it isn't to do with the work place then it isn't anarchism.

If feminism is women establishing their identity then anarchism is workers establishing their identity.

Animal rights is an ethical choice of the individual. Since animals have no means which to fight for their rights. It's a human decision.

Prehaps i am wrong about anarchism being a workers movement, because anarchism does seem to be an ethical thing. I think so because the workers movement has always been the engine of the anarchist movement alot more then ethics or philosophy. The belief that all people should be free. Even if so, i still think animal rights should be left as a seperate moral question.

[post]

Isn't socialism the workers' movement? If anarchy means only not having a boss, then no wonder there some weird types of anarchism, like Christian anarchism and anarcho-nationalism.

[trueness]

Yes. I eat meat all the time.

If we're going to get rid of hierarchy with animals then logically we'd also have to eliminate hierarchy between animals. So, lions couldn't be allowed to eat other animals. It would become a moral duty to stop a lion who is attacking an antelope.

There are arguments that humans don't need to eat meat so we shouldn't. While I respect that opinion if vegan anarchists decide animals are just as worthy of protection as humans then we could have a civil war over animal rights. Vegans would see slaughtering animals as an illegitimate act of force and would intervene with defensive force to stop it, but since other people would see slaughtering animals as legitimate they'd see the vegans defensive force as illegitimate force and act in order to stop their force. See what a mess that could make. It's fine if you want to treat animals equally but in the interests of peace please don't use force in order to protect animal rights.

Someday we'll be able to grow meat from DNA. They're working on that right now. Then, people will stop killing animals for meat because it's unnecessary.

[bodkin]

I don't think veganism and vegetarianism are simply for animal rights issues (consider the energy issues, health issues and environmental issues)

check this essay by Bookchin

http://books.google.com/books?id=GCxPs9EIYZkC&dq=Ecology+and+Revolutionary+Thought&pg=PA19&ots=I50yHNPSx6&sig=krlJhRm7BFhTLdo-vvGftqY1fak&prev=http://www.google.com/search?q=Ecology+and+Revolutionary+Thought&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGLR&sa=X&oi=print&ct=result&cd=1&cad=legacy&hl=en

Some may hold the idea that anarchism is simply a workers movement (which I respect). I believe that anarchism is an ideal used to give the framework and inspiration to people in order to rebel against and ultimately reform, or better yet, extinguish state system of power whether it be Marxism, Fascism, Stalinism, Capitalism, Socialism etc etc.

I personally believe that the capitalist system that I am living under has been corrupted and abused to the point where I would prefer an anarchist system (however that would look) until something better came along.

What I feel my part should be is to play an active roll in bringing that system down, by the very least, non-participation and non-support.

Some of the major players in coporate culture are the state subsidized meat and dairy industries. Massive lobby groups influence government to spend millions if not billions of tax payers dollars on these huge corporations. The amount of money it costs to pay for the energy to put a steak on someone's plate requires state subsidies otherwise it would be far too expensive for the average person's pallate.

I also believe humans disregard for animal life stems from the Judeo Christian belief that the good ole G-O-D put them (along with everything else) on this planet for us to use as we need. I have the same disdain toward the church as I do the state therefore obviously I can't believe this.

As for the topic of hierarchy between animals and humans vs animals and animals in the natural world, I believe that the realtionship between humans and animals have (in the western world especially) nothing related to the food chain in nature. I have been a vegan for a decade and if for some reason I was caught in nature and had to hunt, kill and eat a deer in order to survive, I would do it in an instant. That woud be playing a role in the hierarchical food chain as a lion does. However, going to the grocery store and buying a state subsidized, manufactured, heavily advertised piece of meat is the futhest thing from nature and anarchism in my opinion.

So I guess I just answered my own question - an anarchsit / carnivore under natural circumstances is not an oxymoron.

If we're going to get rid of hierarchy with animals then logically we'd also have to eliminate hierarchy between animals. So, lions couldn't be allowed to eat other animals. It would become a moral duty to stop a lion who is attacking an antelope.

using that logic - animals in nature do lots of things we as humans find unexceptable within our species and amongst other species. It is a well known fact that mating rituals amongst animals can be very hierarchical and often extremely violent. That is all part of a natural hierarchical system, and although I don't believe it is morally correct for humans to be involved in the same violence or mating rituals amongst each other, that doesn't mean I need to hold any moral obligation to stop it amongst other species. These are two seperate issues, just as the issue of complete domination of a species by another and a heirarchical system between two or more species are serperate. Therefore we can put to an end one without necessarily having to the other.

[trueness]

You gotta remember though that the state also subsidizes many vegetables, especially corn.

And then they ask why are people starving in Africa? It's because they can't compete with our subsidized crops. And they turn around and say "we care about Africa so we'll give them charity." They wouldn't even need charity or at least not as much if we'd get rid of crop subsidies.

It's like robbing someone and then saying "I heard you were robbed. I'm terribly sorry for your misfortune, and then giving them a small portion of what you stole."

[bodkin]

I mainly eat locally produced organic food mostly for energy and health reasons, but now I have another reason for doing it.

[Insecuritykiller]

Isn't socialism the workers' movement? If anarchy means only not having a boss, then no wonder there some weird types of anarchism, like Christian anarchism and anarcho-nationalism.

Urr, yeah i guess i flip floped a bit.

[blueyedbum]

You gotta remember though that the state also subsidizes many vegetables, especially corn.

And then they ask why are people starving in Africa? It's because they can't compete with our subsidized crops. And they turn around and say "we care about Africa so we'll give them charity." They wouldn't even need charity or at least not as much if we'd get rid of crop subsidies.

It's like robbing someone and then saying "I heard you were robbed. I'm terribly sorry for your misfortune, and then giving them a small portion of what you stole."

did you know.....


55% of crops for the world are sold by 10 corporations 5 of the biggest (dont have the names in front of me) came about not my seeding and growning like youd expect but by selling chemicals for wars and farming

[Francois Tremblay]

The idea that veganism inscribes itself within the Anarchist movement is in fact a lie. Like all other diets, veganism is a consumer activity. And in an Anarchist society, veganism would not be less environmentally damaging: it is only so right now because of capitalist mass-production.

[birthday pony]

Veganism is associated with Anarchism just because a lot of Anarchists hold the same view as you. Now, that doesn't mean said view is inherently Anarchist or not, but a good number of Anarchists have it, so veganism pops up in Anarchist circles. It's not like there's a famous Anarchist book about veganism or anything, like "What is Meat?" or something like that, but for some reason or another, people who are into Anarchist shit go veggie. So it's intertwined with Anarchism in an associative sort of way.

[ambi]

i've noticed that some people who are survivors of child abuse often are drawn to anarchism and animal rights, perhaps because they identify with the defenseless. (and no, i'm not saying that all anarchists or animal rights activists are so motived, just some...) this might explain why there is a lot of confluence between the two movements.

as for myself, it was and is a health issue. but what's right for me isnt right for everyone. vitamin B drinks make me sick and drip coffee puts me to sleep, YMMV.

[busab]

Veganism is not a consumerist thing, it much like any concept can be made into one. Take my personal situation for instance. I'm lucky enough to have half an acre to grow my own food on, because of this I'm able to grow about 80% of my own food for about 5 months a year. With canning, and pickling I'm able to save a good amount of this for the rest of the year. The only thing I can't really grow for myself is grains, because they tend to need larger areas for a smaller return. I've also learned how to save seeds from year to year. Net result is vegan diet + growing my own food = a limited amount of autonomy. So much like any other idea, how radical and liberating it truly is amounts to how much work you put behind it in the real world.

Also you might want to take note that the rant you pointed to about vegan being ONLY a consumerist thing, is pretty much an excuse for eating stuff you pull out of a dumpster. Dumpstered food is simply living on the systems waste, which is a by product of consumerism. So it really is no less consumerist, because it depends on the consumer to be there and generate excess in the first place. Where as having a vegan diet in a situation you can grow much of your own food, helps break down a dependency on the state. You could raise your own animals for meat/milk/eggs, but the amount of land it requires coupled with more work to yield less food makes it very impractical if not impossible in many places in the world. Plus if you had that extra land available you could expand farming operations and help feed other people.

[Francois Tremblay]

Yes, if you grow your own food you are not being a consumer. I fully support that.