youtube is being veganized slowly but surely. the number of effective vegan channels seems to be growing steadily.
this thread brings you the good and the not-so good primarily focusing on the ethics of the movement rather than environment and health (which is why it is in this category on 30bad, though we have made a few exceptions with certain individuals).
below are two lists (contents presented in no particular order).
those we think are doing a great job pushing the envelope and changing the world. their work is substantiated factually and they deliver their message with understandable enthusiasm.
those who keep commenting about vegan, but don't seem be doing proper justice to the concept. they may claim to be vegan, but their arguments tend to make one question which side they are actually on. they actually come across almost as industry shills. of course, in this section, we will also include the rather obvious anti-vegans who desperately cling to "their way" with the most remarkable rationalizations.
please note that we are providing general impressions here. we certainly haven't watched every video that has been made by the individuals listed below. we have however seen enough to classify them into the two lists.
please feel free to post in this thread if you want me to update this one to include other worthy possibilities ... to either list.
we hope this thread will serve as a guide for people wanting to find intelligent vegan commentary on youtube ... as well as, enjoying the not-so-intelligent contributions which invariably enhance the former experiences.
just remember that we are here on 30bad because this wonderful individual made this forum. she creates a wonderful mixture, merging health and animal rights. her work keeps getting better and better. it is rare to come across a more determined and dedicated person who continuously seeks to improve herself and the world she inhabits!
he tells things straight and doesn't mess around! dr, like freelee, continuously strives to make this world what it should be, rather than giving in to what it presently is.
emily has put together some excellent videos that encapsulate the important ideas about veganism. her work is sensible, well-researched and efficient! you'll find her stuff right here on 30bad too!
an inspiration to many, this guy has been a formidable force in the movement. he doesn't mess around and tells the story of animal abuse just as it is!
5. vegan gains
richard doesn't hold back on yelling the truth. he provides research articles on this statements as he tears down "the worst of the fitness industry". we also thank him for several recommendations on good vegan channels to watch.
charles' precise and exuberant argumentation enables the swift destruction of the absurdities some non-vegans try to uphold.
thoughtful, well-constructed and effectively spoken work makes these videos easy to understand and highly informative.
jacob (a 30bader) writes superb articles and provides excellent commentary on youtube.
this guy makes some very amusing videos through which he exposes the absurdities that anti-vegan have to resort to in order to rationalize their despicable eating habits.
sylvie, another 30bader who is also a professional photographer, produces some of the best quality videos on youtube! i've found her work to be right on target and delightfully humorous!
some of the most cohesively intelligent arguments come from this 30bader!
though not directly arguing ethics, ryan and hunter are an energetic vegan couple who, by example, encourage others to be energetic and vegan and may be even couple.
shelly has been creating excellent videos utilizing logical arguments and exposing logical fallacies for several years now.
14. Simone Reyes
simone is a very experience activist who has fought in the trenches for many years. she provides a thorough perspective on the movement with power and eloquence.
15. Mic. the Vegan
mic puts together excellent arguments through a fine blend of science and ethics. his presentations are particularly well-expressed in terms of their lucid content, rational thought and even poetic expression!
while i personally have some trouble deciphering what abdullah is saying sometimes (i think he may hold the record for injecting the fewest non-swear words of any on this list), this guy is direct and straight-forward - comes across as an honest and strong vegan.
Anji and Ryan are two very cool and knowledgeable vegans (and 30baders) who present their points rationally. They cover a wide variety of topics and are a pleasure to watch.
this is mr universe barny du plessis 100% warrior vegan (and friends). they bring not only body-building to you, but also the vegan message in an uncompromising way!
19. Sorsha Morava
sorsha (yet another 30bader) presents very effectively with her natural sense of humor and scathing critiques which do not equivocate! her videos are very well created with research from multiple sources. in her 30bad profile, she writes that she wants to "spread the vegan message & help people find the truth". she is certainly doing that in a most delightful way!
speaking in a direct but laidback style, matthew provides good health content coupled vegan matters. he is also very good at exposing those who express their ideas improperly either grammatically or logically.
well-put-together videos emphasize vegan solutions by this knowledgeable youtuber. he tears up the typical rationalizations made by corpse-eaters using science, logic and established data.
again we have another 30bader starting to get the vegan message out there honestly and without compromise. DatVegan's videos are short and to the point!
yep! that's the amazing www.nutritionfacts.org site's dr. michael greger! he presents veganism's health realities through the actual science, but in a way that anyone can understand it! this is a thorough, knowledgeable professional ... and you really don't want to get into a debate against him!
24. John St Julien
once again we have a 30bader, not only making excellent videos on a wide range of subjects including veganism (his varied work is nicely organized on his page into subject categories), but also doing wonderful things through his NGO projects. he is an dynamic example for the vegan movement.
25. John Sakars
this guy presents the vegan message in what i find to be a rather unique and somewhat unusual way.
this is Tim "Livewire" Shieff an amazing parkour champ and ninja warrior. he also is a vegan activist and humbly says that the real warriors are those who defend the helpless!
27. Jon Venus
jon is a fitness model who provides online training and vegan meal plans as well as the right reasons for following his ideas.
kim and jameth sheridan have their own entertaining way of spreading enlightenment. this is only one of their outlets through which they spread the vegan message.
29. Jayme Joy
Jayme is yet another 30bader who has a lot of good videos on being vegan. she also encourages donations to ACRES (animal concerns research and education society) a group dedicated to ending animal cruelty in asia.
very clever and funny, onison has videos on a huge variety of topics including excellent ones on veganism (as well as commentary on those who try to justify their stance against it).
31. Vegetable Police
sensible, entertaining and amusing videos make this channel one to watch on a variety of vegan topics.
immy (a 30bader) produces some strikingly thoughtful work interlaced sometimes with humor, sometimes with poignancy.
33. Gary High-Fruit
also a 30bader, gary's presentations can provoke deeper thought and there is no doubt of his commitment to and knowledge of veganism and health.
a clear and thoughtful presenter, dareios (again a 30bader) has many videos on veganism and animal rights uploaded every 48hrs!
35. Cory McCarthy
Cory is a great advocate for veganism due to his physical prowess and intellectual insights! he not only presents and argues well he backs his efforts with thorough research and a good understanding of logical fallacy.
nicole (a 30bader) makes quality videos promoting the vegan message which have interesting variety with hard-hitting reality. she challenges people not only to improve their fitness, but come to grips with their conscience.
37. Kerry McCarpet
another 30bader, kerry's presentations are exceptionally intelligent and lucid. her clarity cuts through reasoning that is fallacious and exposes deliberate ignorance.
38. Bend It Raw
30bader Karri has rather imaginative ways to interest an audience about vegan eating and being pro-animal.
39. Plant Positive
this channel provides well-argued, scientifically based presentations on plant-based diets including specific responses to anti-vegan culprits and the nonsense these keep regurgitating.
40. Vegan Smythe
an exceptionally imaginative and creative individual who produces excellent music videos on a large variety of vegan issues even addressing fallacies that corpse eaters like to rationalize their indefensible position with. the works are of high professional quality.
41. Jack Green
a highly animated 30bader who speaks honestly and accurately about vegan issues.
42. Erin Janus
a passionate vegan, activist, writer, journalist, video producer and musician who produces informative videos.
despite some actual science in some of her videos, swayze (she used to be on 30bad some years ago), runs extraordinarily anthropocentric arguments which have no validity. she doesn't seem to understand the implications of her human supremacist position, possibly because she let herself be aynrandized many years ago and hasn't managed to outgrow this disability.
rachel puts forth remarkably racist comments which are, not surprisingly, equaled by her speciesist comments as well. her efforts seem to be directed against effective animal rights activists ... probably because they are effective.
"she let herself be aynrandized"
Would you mind elaborating upon this? I'm not exactly sure what this means even though I already know that I wouldn't like Ayn Rand because she is beloved by anti-egalitarian Capitalists. I'm subscribed to UV but I'm going to unsubscribe right now because all she does is bitch about other vegans over the slightest hints of aggression towards carnists. She calls it compassion but I call it carnist apologism.
Edit: Watch Unnatural Vegan's video about meat supposedly not being murder for the most pointless semantics debate in vegan history.
greetings steven! and a fellow borg welcome to 30bad too!
ayn rand wrote some stuff way back when. there were 3 novels, i recall, because we were forced to read some of them in high school: "the fountainpen", "we the laughing" (possibly written in anticipation of her ripping off medicare for some lung operation after railing against social support), and "altas bugged" (it was a very fat looking book). she also developed a so-called philosophy objectivism even though gottlob frege actually did a more sensible version about a hundred years before ayn rand was born. :D
now, randian objectivism is very appealing to mental adolescents because it appears heroic simultaneously preaching selfishness. for example, here's how bruce levine describes it:
“When I was a kid,” AlterNet contribuer Bruce Levine writes, “my reading included comic books and Rand’s The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. There wasn’t much difference between the comic books and Rand’s novels in terms of the simplicity of the heroes. What was different was that unlike Superman or Batman, Rand made selfishness heroic, and she made caring about others weakness.”
this me first appeal was taken to what many would consider horrendous lengths when ayn rand 'worshipped' the work of serial killer william edward hickman (who murdered marion parker) to the extent of creating one of her hero characters danny renahan:
In 1928, the writer Ayn Rand began planning a novel called The Little Street, whose protagonist, Danny Renahan, was to be based on "what Hickman suggested to [her]." The novel was never finished, but Rand wrote notes for it which were published after her death in the book Journals of Ayn Rand. In these notes Rand writes that the public fascination with Hickman is not due to the heinousness of his crimes, but to his defiant attitude and his refusal to accept conventional morals. She describes him as "a brilliant, unusual, exceptional boy"
One reason most countries don’t find the time to embrace Ayn Rand’s thinking is that she is a textbook sociopath. In her notebooks Ayn Rand worshiped a notorious serial murderer-dismemberer, and used this killer as an early model for the type of “ideal man” she promoted in her more famous books. These ideas were later picked up on and put into play by major right-wing figures of the past half decade, including the key architects of America’s most recent economic catastrophe — former Fed Chair Alan Greenspan and SEC Commissioner Chris Cox — along with other notable right-wing Republicans such as Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Rush Limbaugh and South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford.
most people when they pass puberty dump ayn rand, but as you can see, some haven't because selfishness requires considerable character and foresight to overcome. those who are selfish often whitewash their true nature with anthropocentric paint, but a closer look reveals that they don't really care about people - they only give a damn about themselves:
... the above four ideas use aspects of anthropocentrism against itself in an aikido-like fashion. this last one exposes the real intent behind such statements: specifically, the very unanthropocentricness of anthropocentrism. it's quite tilirious!
what some people try to do is link anthropocentrism to the idea of a 'people first' movement - they even try to make it sound like a great humanitarian mission. however, a closer examination shows this is just nonsense. the actual, practical application of has nothing to do with humanity and everything to do with "what's in it for me".
therefore, i eat meat at the expense of other sentient beings because i want to; i wear fur at the expense of other sentient beings because i want to; i wore nike shoes at the expense of other sentient beings (sweat shops) because i want to; i shop at walmart at the expense of other sentient beings (unfair employee treatment) because i want to; i eat chocolate at the expense of other sentient beings (child slavery) because i want to.
this is really what anthropocentrism is in most forum discussions: hiding the small weeds by appealing to the big forest. it is not people first at all, it is me first.
when it comes to animal rights, ayn randian objectivism is utilized to its fullest against the most helpless:
"Humans are the only organisms that are capable of volitional rationality and, as such, are the only organisms capable of morality."
"Many believe that animals have the right to be free from harm by people. In particular, they believe that animals should not be harmed in food production, clothing production, or medical research. This belief is the product of a misunderstanding of the nature of rights. Philosophers like Peter Singer argue that rights are derived from the capacity to experience pain, and since animals can experience pain just as people can, animals also have the right to be free from harm. However, rights are derived from the capacity to reason, and thus people have rights and animals do not."
Animals do not have rights. The concept of "rights" only applies to volitional beings. Animals do not survive by rational thought (nor by sign languages allegedly taught to them by psychologists). They survive through sensory-perceptual association and the pleasure-pain mechanism. They cannot reason. They cannot learn a code of ethics.
We must wage a principled, intellectual war against the very notion of “animal rights”; we must condemn it as logically false and morally repugnant.
Copyright (c) 2004 Ayn Rand(r) Institute. All rights reserved.
SHAC and their allies reveal the man-hatred contained in the notion of animal “rights.” Our lives depend on rejecting this evil idea.
[Yaron Brook is the executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute (ARI) in Irvine, CA. Alex Epstein is a writer for the Ayn Rand Institute.]
The animal “rights” terrorists are like the Unabomber and Oklahoma City bombers. They are not idealists seeking justice, but nihilists seeking destruction for the sake of destruction. They do not want to uplift mankind, to help him progress from the swamp to the stars. They want mankind’s destruction; they want him not just to stay in the swamp but to disappear into its muck.
There is only one proper answer to such people: to declare proudly and defiantly, in the name of morality, a man’s right to his life, his liberty, and the pursuit of his own happiness.
so the legacy continues to support animal abuse (and incidentally human abuse) blatantly as the above shows, or a little more subtly as swayze does it.
here's her position clearly stated by jacob in this video:
"you entire reasoning is based on nothing but your own selfishness"
it's a great video where jacob shreds swayze.
so i hope this post has put proper perspective on both ayn rand and swayze. the latter may mean well, but it's going to be tough whenever one has ayn rand at the helm.
I found Ayn Rand's books really helpful to built an autonomous mental position. What I mean is that I completely stopped being mentally and emotionally dependant on other people and started to follow my inner compass. I believe that her books are awesome, the characters are so rafinated maybe because she believed in an ideal person and brought all the qualities of a person to the maximum point. She taught me to give my best to everything I do and to be the best version of myself. She put a lot of my thoughts and feelings into words, speaking about being spiritually whole and unappologetically who you are. All consequences of your actions are then just dependant on who you are as a human being. This is how evil may arise.
Of course we should filter the message she presents, I can't say that I agree with everything she says but she helped me to create the inner force and to build a strong character. Maybe I focus on what I am chosing to focus on and get only that but Atlas Shrugged is one of the best books I've ever read. There is also an extremist speaking in me.
I agree that some people may get a completely different outlook from her books, your arguments are completely valid but it's only the one side of a coin. I believe that she speaks a lot about anarchism but the things turned ugly in the end, maonlt because to a lot af people think that being an egoist means taking from others or acting in prejudice of other beings. They can't imagine that following your desires don't necessarily mean that or require that. It means that you follow your own path without looking aroung, minding what others would say. You just leave others to themselves with no intervention to their lives. Why would you need to harm anyone to realize your life? Egoism doesn't mean suprimacy, it means minding your own business. She speaks about it in The Virtue of Egoism.
MAybe I just saw the information I needed for my personal evolution, leaving all the rest to critics. Nevertheless, I benefited a lot from reading her books, I got inspired.
greetings kate! and welcome to 30bad!
i'm certain there are some things in ayn rand's writing that can be interpreted as being worthwhile.
however, there is no need to be an egotist or follow your desires as you write above. and certainly, there are plenty of people who should be apologetic for who they are because their selfishness impinges on the wellness of others.
one can accomplish independence through selfless work and making sure that one's desires are proper. here's an example of a couple of 30baders who are doing just that:
then there is little need for apology.
we don't all have to do what john and jacob are doing, but it is wise to remember that "minding your own business" is a most unfortunate, selfish syndrome leading to the situation that martin niemoller speaks of:
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
it is a convenient way to feign equanimous neutrality and thus support oppressors as elie wiesel wrote:
We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere.
i'm glad your personal evolution got a boost from reading her books despite what her philosophy is. inspiration can be a good thing.
Having been somewhat disturbed by the recent growth in vegans who clearly don't get veganism on youtube I did a google search and this thread popped up.
I strongly suspect that both current entries on the not list are paid shills attempting to undermine veganism. If they aren't being paid to say such outrageous and downright stupid things, they really should be! I can think of no other reason why people would take it upon themselves to dedicate their time to such damaging pursuits.
Thanks for putting me on the hot list BTW ;-D
I strongly suspect that both current entries on the not list are paid shills attempting to undermine veganism. If they aren't being paid to say such outrageous and downright stupid things, they really should be!
ya, someone should encourage them to seek benefits too! :D
when a social justice movement gets large, two things usually happen:
1) diversity develops. this is not a bad thing necessarily unless the attitude is "my way or no way". multipronged attacks can be very effective. for instance, we have HEE (health, environment, ethics) as a powerful combo because different people relate better to different angles. however, it does the movement no good if the nutritionists say you shouldn't bring ethics into it, while the ethicists blast the environmentalists for being morally corrupt etc, etc, etc.
2) the bad guys get worried. when you are doing something bad, you really can't convince yourself that it is good even with selfish motivations. so if you can't convince yourself, you likely figure out that you aren't going to be able to fool everyone else either, especially when you see their numbers grow. so what to do? well, you try to create dissension in the ranks of the growing opposition anyway you can. one of the best ways is to develop 5th columns. kel does an excellent job exposing this through various essays that are well-researched, this being his initial one:
but he has more:
kel's works are useful to read, because when you start wondering just whose side that animal rights activists is on, it becomes very clear. ;)
that people like swayze and rachel deliberately utilize past bigotries is incriminating enough. that they try to pass it off as though their views are of equal value to people who do the good work like you and other members of the HOT list, suggests a certain desperation animal abuse advocates are going to have to face up to.
That articles main argument is that exploiters of the past have sentiments similar to Francione. That doesn't seem like a logical argument. Many of the statements Francine makes the author is in agreement.
I think we should show people their 'moral schizophrenia'. Show them that veganism in the moral baseline. Too many vegans promoting veganism as too hard, or not the moral baseline.
Too many vegans promoting veganism as too hard,
yes this is rather absurd considering veganism is really easy.
veganism as the moral baseline is a good idea, but i think we should raise the standards somewhat beyond just being vegan and get at least a bit active in the cause too. being vegan and dissing legitimate activists simply because you don't like stuff like "single-issue campaigns" or because you think ar activists must all do things in a peacey-weacey fashion is really a bit limiting given the reality of social justice movements.
so imho, kel's arguments appear to be quite logical.
I havent been monitoring youtube but I wouldnt be surprised if there were a few or many shills trying to spread misinformation or make advocates look bad.
Case in point, today I heard DxE activists disrupted a speech by presidential candidate Chris Christie. They asked him why he supported torturing animals and before he could answer they stormed the stage and unfurled a banner. Why didnt they wait a minute so he could answer? By not allowing him to answer, the news story generated becomes about the disruption, not the animals. Accidental? I think not. I have seen disturbing behavior from DxE especially in its official articles where it accuses activists of racism and misusing money (Sea Shepherd, PETA).
I was able to get some information in front of journalist Will Potter so at least he is aware of the suspicions.
BTW it is funny to see Rand mentioned because it was thanks to her that I developed the human supremacy myth argument. There was a psychology professor who visited a Canadian university at the invitation of Rand disciples and he preached the "animals have no rights and it would be immoral to give an animal a pain killer" kind of thing so I was determined to dismantle the beliefs--(someone I knew became a total convert).
I can believe she was a sociopath.
BTW it is funny to see Rand mentioned because it was thanks to her that I developed the human supremacy myth argument.
well it's a relief to see that something good has come through her efforts!
after all, in this philosophy forum the joke thread contains this item from eski:
My favorite joke so far "Ayn Rand." I couldn't stop laughing for a good five minutes.
(btw, there are some other good philosophy jokes in that thread too)
for those of you interested in kel's supermacy myth (highly recommended reading, imho), just take a look here:
Despite their flaws, I do have to give DxE credit for drawing more people into public activism, and more than that, connecting activists effectively so that they can start doing their own spin-off work and forming their own local groups. That's why I participate with them.
DxE doesnt have flaws--it has an anti-animal agenda.
If you read the articles by Wayne Hsiung a disturbing pattern emerges.
“The Japanese activist Tetsuhiko Endo writes that “the international whaling industry makes no more than $31 million a year while major anti-whaling NGOs spend around $25 million. What have whales gotten out of all this anti-whaling money? Hunting rates that are twice as high as they were in 1990…The Nonhuman Animal rights movement was founded as a project of white supremacy.” http://directactioneverywhere.com/theliberationist/2014/11/4/is-the...
Wayne Hsiung is basically telling his audience via the source that Sea Shepherd is a fraud--that it is counter productive and is essentially pocketing donations. This is the same accusation that pro whalers have made for decades. And Wayne Hsiung claims to be a vegan and animal rights activist?
2) Wayne Hsiung:
“A recent pro-vivisection rally in Southern California had far more diversity than the typical animal rights protest....And the largest corporations in the world trumpet their diversity efforts, e.g. Coca Cola, McDonald’s, and Exxon. Corporations such as Exxon take racial diversity and cultural awareness more seriously than the animal rights movement.” http://directactioneverywhere.com/theliberationist/2014/11/4/is-the...
Wayne Hsiung is saying that big corrupt corporations are less racist than animal rights groups. Exxon and McDonalds are more progressive than animal rights groups.
3) Wayne Hsiung on Peta Asia's dog meat video: “Yet the video ignores the fact that, as a product of PETA-Asia, Chinese activists almost certainly played a role in this investigation. Or the fact that recent grassroots mobilizations have inspired countless Chinese to travel great distances to block trucks delivering dogs to meat factories — at great personal risk in a nation where civil disobedience is often met with violent oppression. The movement has saved thousands of dogs from slaughter through these courageous acts of nonviolent direct action. When did we last see any similar action taken in the United States for the millions of dogs killed in experiments or “shelters” including, distressingly, many thousands killed by PETA itself? Those Chinese, it seems, could attack “barbaric Americans” (and “barbaric animal activists”) for their heartlessness, cruelty, and cowardice toward dogs.” http://directactioneverywhere.com/theliberationist/2014/12/18/oixwe...
Wayne Hsiung is saying that there is an equivalency between what vivisectors do in labs, and what Peta does in shelters. He is saying that US activists ought to follow the lead of Chinese citizens and block animals from being brought to Peta. Thus he, claiming to be an animal activist, is agreeing with vivisectors, who have defended their animal torture by saying: "what about Peta shelter actions?"
4) Wayne Hsiung comments on the New York Times front page story on a taxpayer funded vivisection lab for the meat industry that carries out horrendous experiments on nonhuman animals. “So why did I — as someone who has spent the better part of 15 years fighting for the animals we use for food often at the very places where they are being held captive or killed — find myself shaking my head, **laughing**,.. while reading the piece?”
Wayne Hsiung found an article on animal torture a laughing matter? Wayne Pacelle also commented on the same story, http://blog.humanesociety.org/wayne/2015/01/us-meat-animal-research... but did not find it amusing like Wayne Hsiung did. Pacelle: “Indeed, factory farms every day inflict cruelties on animals about as shocking as the cruelties inflicted on the animals at the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, and they don’t want to have to modify their production methods one bit or give the animals even a few inches of extra space or a quick death.”
Wayne Pacelle attacks exploiters. Wayne Hsiung attacks activists and journalism that supports that effort against industry.
5) Wayne Hsiung: “We have to empower critical voices with less bias and more knowledge, such as James McWilliams.”
James McWilliams, the vegan who supported animal cloning http://grist.org/article/food-2010-12-08-james-mcwilliams-meat-indu... and has regarded factory farms as only slightly worse than traditional farms. "Niche support for humane meat, however, will do very little to challenge the overall allure of cheap protein churned out by agribusiness." http://theamericanscholar.org/loving-animals-to-death/#.UydONPldUoS
6) DxE claims to be focused on direct action everywhere and yet their primary focus has been loud protests inside Whole Foods, Chipotles, and Trader Joes--three businesses that have promoted "animal concerns" to their customers. In a video sent to the New York Times on a claim that Whole Foods was lying about its humane certified farms, DxE said that Whole Foods seeks to create a "terrifying new world"--presumably of humane certified farms. As vegans we would rather have no such farms, But the question that needs to be asked is, since Whole Foods has 400 stores (vs Walmart's 3000), Chipotles has 1600 (vs McDonalds 30 000, KFC's 18000 and Burger King's 12000), then what would DxE consider the old world of factory farms and Tyson/Smithfield? 1000 times as terrifying as Whole Food's vision?
7) DxE paraded a chicken they claimed was rescued from slaughter they called Paprika. Why did they name a chicken after a seasoning or recipe for a chicken corpse? Did they consider that funny? Did they consider that would make their nonvegan audience respect chickens? If DxE rescues a calf, can we expect them to name him Beef Stu?
I tried asking DxE reps about these things and they answer with "huh? I dont understand the question" or they ignore it completely.
Someone is financing DxE to go out and do disruptions and also recruit sincere advocates and participate in joint protests. The question is--why?
Some of their articles only mention "animal" once, the rest of the time they focus on racism or being abused by police. One recent article suggested animal activists move to Berkley California.
My concern is that just as Francione will appear in the major media and waste the space for real advocates, DxE's true purpose is to damage animal advocacy--since they focus primarily on Whole Foods, Trader Joe's and Chipotles, the aim might be to discredit welfare reforms by using an animal advocate cover. it doesnt look good.