Envisioning the Zoopolitical Revolution (2016)

Societies, 2017

Often stereotyped as being apathetic to the human suffering, the American vegan movement has historically failed to build alliances with other social justice movements. As intersectional feminism gains a foothold in the movement and external political crises challenge the movement's frame of reference, the role that identity plays in movement progress has become a serious concern. Using the 2016 election as a flashpoint, this article considers if the identity backlash characterized by the Trump campaign finds parallels in the American vegan movement. A survey of 287 American vegans finds limited evidence of Trump veganism, defined here as a single-issue focus on speciesism that rejects the relevance of human-experienced systems of oppression. However, respondents do find that movement diversity efforts are insufficient, especially when controlling for race and gender. Most respondents were ethically-motivated vegans, liberal voters, and intersectionally-oriented activists who reported multiple engagements with various leftist movements. Only four percent of respondents voted Trump, while 14% agreed with or were neutral about Trump's campaign promise to put " America first ". Those who were vegan for reasons of self-interest and had been vegan for less than a year were significantly more likely to support Trump's conservative agenda and were slightly less likely to participate in other social movements.

Society & Animals, 2013

Jasper and Poulsen (1995) have long argued that moral shocks are critical for recruitment in the nonhuman animal rights movement. Building on this, Decoux (2009) argues that the abolitionist faction of the nonhuman animal rights movement fails to recruit members because it does not effectively utilize descriptions of suffering. However, the effectiveness of moral shocks and subsequent emotional reactions has been questioned. This article reviews the literature surrounding the use of moral shocks in social movements. Based on this review, it is suggested that the exploitation of emotional reactions to depictions of suffering can sometimes prove beneficial to recruitment, but successful use is contextually rooted in preexisting frameworks, ideology, and identity. It is concluded that a reliance on images and narratives might be misconstrued in a society dominated by nonhuman animal welfare ideology.

Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 2011

Globalization has exacerbated speciesism both socially and economically. Veganism and its subsequent labeling schemes have arisen as an important political site of resistance to growing non-human animal inequality. This paper explores globalization‘s impact on non-human animals, veganism and vegan labeling, as well as important divides within the modern non-human animal rights movement in regards to utopian and pragmatic approaches to alleviating growing speciesism.

This article examines and analyzes the credibility and utility of the critique of veganism as a privileged lifestyle, both by those inside and by those outside the vegan community. Using the theory of intersectionality, I explain that the concept of vegan privilege is vague and lacks contextualization. I propose that veganism itself is not a privilege, but rather the ability to make food choices is ultimately the privilege. In addition, I argue that allegations of ''vegan privilege'' conceal and reinforce the cultural invisibility of speciesism and carnism. Although the ultimate mission of veganism is to eradicate animal exploitation, vegans must understand the animals are not the only ones that suffer. The structural and interactional process of ''mindless eating'' exploits both consumers and workers. I conclude by encouraging vegans and carnists alike to expand the circle of compassion and to understand the human costs of the capitalist industrial food complex.

This paper draws upon the principles of critical discourse analysis in order to examine the production of capitalist and consumerist discourses within contemporary nonhuman animal rights activism. The analysis presents evidence to suggest that the discourses being produced via the websites of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and The Vegan Society are consistently being constructed through market-centric ideologies that treat activists mainly as middle-class consumers. This paper argues that the consistent presence of neoliberal discourse signals an instructive entanglement with broader sociopolitical issues. Specifically, there are concerns as to how this discourse relates to what is thought to constitute and qualify as nonhuman animal rights activism. As shown in the analysis, activism portrayed primarily as an economic activity suggests only those who are capable of contributing financially to the movement’s efforts can participate in advocating nonhuman animal rights. I argue that this model of advocacy is indicative of a mediating role both organizations are putting forth that suggests their supporters need only buy “cruelty-free” products and not worry about exercising any sort of meaningful political commitment. Overall, this paper shows how the reproduction of consumerist discourses reproduces gender and social inequalities, and reinforces a capitalist system that contributes to and profits off of nonhuman animal and human exploitation. I argue that drawing attention to the discourse practices through which ideologies within mainstream nonhuman animal rights groups are constructed can be helpful in evaluating normative perceptions of and ideological hegemony within contemporary social justice activism.