Mending The Heartland: A Call Out

MENDING THE HEARTLAND: Building a Unified Midwestern Animal Liberation Movement


A call out for organizers, workshop proposals and attendees.

This summer, Animal Defense League Chicago, in conjunction with the Activist Alliance at Roosevelt University, will be hosting MENDING THE HEARTLAND: Building A Unified Midwestern Animal Liberation Movement. We are calling for all interested animal rights organizers and activists to come to Chicago, July 25th through 27th, 2008 to come together and brainstorm, learn, discuss, and create.


What do we need in order for this to happen?

We need you!

The first open planning meeting for the conference will be announced soon. We invite all individuals and groups interested in organizing for the conference to attend this open meeting to help with the every day details of the conference, along with approving workshops, getting sponsors, etc. While we at ADL Chicago hope the conference will be a melding of organizations and individuals, we are organizing this conference along 4 main principles, outlined and explained below in our mission statement.

Additionally, we are looking for workshop presenters! Proposal submissions will be due in June, more information will be posted soon.


Website and mailing list coming soon!


Mending the Heartland Mission Statement:

The purpose of Mending the Heartland: Building a Unified Midwestern Animal Liberation Movement is to attempt to build bridges between grassroots activist groups around the Midwest so that we can begin to work together more closely on animal rights issues. We in Chicago have noticed that on the coasts there seems to be much more interaction between groups from various cities to combine their efforts, help support each others' actions and generally offer more support to one and other as animal rights activists. While this is harder to do in the Midwest, due to the distances between cities, we feel it is both possible and necessary for activists in this region to come together and network so that we can learn from each other and become more effective in our activism, both as individual activists and as a more united animal rights movement.

The hope is that by building more solidarity amongst the various groups scattered across the Midwest, we will be able to help strengthen our movement and more effectively fight for animal liberation. Be that by refining our own regular events to be more effective, or by coming together more often for large scale, multi-group sponsored events.

We at ADL Chicago wanted this conference to be shaped and organized by a variety of organizations and people around the Midwest so as to include voices other then our own. However, we also don't want the organizational process to be crippled by infighting. For that reason and in an attempt to avoid infighting in the organization of this conference, we at ADL Chicago have written up a mission statement to outline the ethics and tactics this conference supports and what issues will be discussed at the event. It is not mandatory that everyone organizing for this conference be in lock step agreement on every issue raised, but it is necessary that all organizing groups, workshop presenters, sponsors or whoever else are aware that these issues will be being discussed at the conference and at the very least are willing and comfortable to be a part of the conference knowing that the following issues will be raised over the course of the weekend:


* A dedication to liberation, not welfarism:

This conference stands for complete animal liberation, not "bigger cages, longer chains" and the workshops, sponsors and presenters must reflect that ethic. We feel that many of the national animal rights organizations have started down a road that only reinforces the property status of animals and does nothing to challenge the industries we are opposing or the mindsets we are attempting to change. Topics such as these and critiques of the larger animal rights movement will be present at this conference as we feel that combating tactics that we feel are harmful to the furtherance of animal rights is just as important as implementing the tactics we feel are effective.


* A commitment to ending all forms of oppressions:

While this may be first and foremost an animal rights conference, we believe all forms of oppression to be interlinked. Many people believe that other issues (such as racism, sexism, homophobia, etc) should be put aside when fighting for the rights of animals. We believe that far too often issues such as these are ignored by our movement in an attempt to appear more "unified" and that this single-mindedness is not only unethical and short sighted, but also corrosive to our movement. We are specifically inviting and preparing for populations that are not often included (or assimilated and therefore, in a way, silenced) in the larger animal rights movements, especially in the Midwest: women; people of color; transgender and gender variant people; queer people/people of varying sexual preferences and orientation; and parents and other guardians of children. As such, we seek to have workshops highlighting the connections between all forms of oppression and putting our movements shortcomings on these issues under the magnifying glass. We believe that criticism and reflection on oppressive behaviors within our movement is essential in order to combat those problems. In keeping with this ethic, oppressive behavior will not be tolerated at the conference. Any conference attendees who behave in oppressive manners towards others will be asked to leave.


* An Open Support For Direct Action And The Animal Liberation Front:

This conference will stand up openly in support of the Animal Liberation Front. It is our belief that the actions of the ALF are essential elements of the fight for animal liberation and this conference will feature workshops and presenters that reflect that belief.


* Law Enforcement/Government Officials Are Not Welcome/Implementing Security Culture:

We understand this is a hard one to enforce, but felt it necessary to point out that we want to do everything we can to implement security culture at this event. As such, no police officers, FBI agents or any other such government official is welcome at the event. Please note however, that this is nearly impossible to enforce and with the scrutiny placed on the animal rights movement by the government, they are almost certain to be there. Keep this in mind and remember that loose lips sink ships.

Hi Emelda, I'm always gratified by seeing Meetup members create events and share them with the rest of us. Will you also allow for criticism of people and groups who call themselves liberationists at your conference? If so, I'd love to speak at your conference. My focus will be more on the virtues of uniting animal protection advocates (as opposed to perpetuating the false welfare/liberation distinction) rather than a forceful critique of any specific activists.

We want a movement that unites veg*ns, activates them, and helps persuade both animal lovers and people indifferent to animals to support steps to reduce animal suffering and ultimately, to become veg*n. To that end, what does dividing our movement between "welfarists" and "liberationists" accomplish? Also, it is certainly a good thing to advocate for a society and world where all animals (including people) have a chance to lead fulfilling lives regardless of their race, gender, sexual orientation, and country of birth. What good does it do to unite with other movements if their members go to McDonald's and wear fur coats immediately after meeting with us? I thought we were for animal "liberation" (I use quotes because I wonder if there is a unified definition of what animal liberation is) after all.

I wish that you were sponsoring a unified animal protection movement rather than an animal liberation movement where welfarists need not apply. Many of our members proudly support PETA, HSUS, Farm Sanctuary, and Mercy-for-Animals and I am one of them. I think their accomplishments on passing statewide laws banning gestation crates in FL, OR, AZ, a mourning dove shooting ban in MI, and have now gathered over 800,000 signatures to put the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act in CA on the ballot statewide in 2008 are major advancements for non-human animals, though there's a long, long way to go. I think it's great that your meeting attempts to create accomplishments and build organizations as strong as the aforementioned, but I still object to dismissing people who are supportive of PETA, HSUS, etc as "welfarists."

Though, I'm not Emelda, ADL is taking the point on organizing this conference and I know that Emelda doesn't check message boards that often, so I figured I would just go ahead and respond.

I'm always gratified by seeing Meetup members create events and share them with the rest of us. Will you also allow for criticism of people and groups who call themselves liberationists at your conference? If so, I'd love to speak at your conference. My focus will be more on the virtues of uniting animal protection advocates (as opposed to perpetuating the false welfare/liberation distinction) rather than a forceful critique of any specific activists.

I think that one of the places we are actually in agreement is that there certainly is a distinction between liberationists and welfarists within the animal rights movement. Past debates have led me to believe you are just as critical of my views and tactics (and the views and tactics of ADL Chicago) as I am of yours and PETA and HSUS'. So I simply don't believe that the distinction between liberation and welfare is false. While I do agree that one can make small gains towards liberation, I don't think that is often what is done by larger animal welfare groups. But that is not the main point right now. As to your question, the conference is open to all and if you want to attend and raise your issues during the question period of any of the workshops, by all means feel free to come out and raise them. I don't have final say on any workshops that are presented so I can't say one way or the other if your workshop on supporting welfare reforms in the name of unity will be accepted or not, but once we get to the point where we are formally accepting workshop proposals (should be this coming weekend when the website is launched *fingers crossed*), you can certainly submit a proposal if you want. I will say that with limited slots and with the focus of the conference, I think it is unlikely your workshop jumping to the defense of HSUS and PETA will make the cut, but you never know.

We want a movement that unites veg*ns, activates them, and helps persuade both animal lovers and people indifferent to animals to support steps to reduce animal suffering and ultimately, to become veg*n. To that end, what does dividing our movement between "welfarists" and "liberationists" accomplish?

I agree we want unity as much as possible in our movement, but not at the expense of what our movement stands for. We have had this debate to death and I am sure you can recite what I am going to say just as I can recite your response, so in the interest of saving time, I'll just simply say that whether or not you agree, there are many people who feel that the nationals are far too short sighted in their campaigns and are going down a dangerous road, not to mention behaving in ways that are antithetical to the idea of animal rights by actively killing animals and giving a platform for animal murderers to promote meat (veal no less) at their national conferences as happened with Niman Ranch at Taking Action For Animals last year. We organizing this conference see this as unacceptable and something that needs to be confronted, unity be damned. Which fits somewhat with your next point.

Also, it is certainly a good thing to advocate for a society and world where all animals (including people) have a chance to lead fulfilling lives regardless of their race, gender, sexual orientation, and country of birth. What good does it do to unite with other movements if their members go to McDonald's and wear fur coats immediately after meeting with us? I thought we were for animal "liberation" (I use quotes because I wonder if there is a unified definition of what animal liberation is) after all.

Why align ourselves with movements that don't support animal rights. I would say that is exactly the question we are asking of the animal rights movement. Why align ourselves with AR groups that don't hold up the ethic of animal liberation in their actions? I honestly don't know exactly where that critique came from. I assume the section in our mission statement about highlighting the connections between all forms of oppression? Going on that assumption, I don't see what in that section of the mission statement led you to believe that we are advocating simply accepting the abuse of animals by other social justice movements for the sake of unity. By highlighting the connections between all forms of oppression our goal isn't simply to put out movements shortcomings in the forefront (and our movement has many shortcomings when it comes to sexism, racism, homophobia and so on and not simply within the big nationals), but to highlight the shortcomings of those other movements as well. While I may not support the actions of a meat eating feminist or labor organizer or anti-war activist, I do support feminism, organized labor and anti-war activism. So our goal isn't to build unity at the cost of our movements aims, but to highlight the links between oppression in the hopes that our movements can learn from each other and hopefully AR activists can become more in tune with other social justice movements while those other social justice movements become more in tune with what we are fighting for. Granted, that is a big hope and one that will be very hard to achieve, but ignoring the issue because it is hard to build bridges is a poor argument to justify continuing oppressive behavior within our movement in my opinion.

I wish that you were sponsoring a unified animal protection movement rather than an animal liberation movement where welfarists need not apply. Many of our members proudly support PETA, HSUS, Farm Sanctuary, and Mercy-for-Animals and I am one of them. I think their accomplishments on passing statewide laws banning gestation crates in FL, OR, AZ, a mourning dove shooting ban in MI, and have now gathered over 800,000 signatures to put the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act in CA on the ballot statewide in 2008 are major advancements for non-human animals, though there's a long, long way to go. I think it's great that your meeting attempts to create accomplishments and build organizations as strong as the aforementioned, but I still object to dismissing people who are supportive of PETA, HSUS, etc as "welfarists."

As for your wish that we would sponsor a conference that gives a voice to animal welfare organizations such as PETA, HSUS and MFA (actually I don't think anyone organizing would have a problem if MFA wanted to present a workshop and I actually hope they will do a workshop on "undercover investigations 101") in an attempt to maintain unity, I would say that the voice of animal welfarists is heard loud and clear at basically every conference. The voice of liberationists is almost entirely silenced by the large nationals at their conferences. HSUS goes so far as to thank the FBI for locking up ALF activists while standing side by side with "humane" animal murderers. PETA is a little better in this regard, but still silence or belittle those who don't toe Ingrid's line.

We are looking to give those activists a voice, not bring them into yet another conference where their views will be marginalized and ignored for the sake of unity. Again, I want unity as much as the next activist, but not unity at the expense of what I see as the core issue of our movement.

All that said, no where has anyone said that people attending the conference must agree with all of our ideas. We aren't going to make anyone swear off support of PETA or HSUS to get in the door. Even some of the presenters very well might not be nearly as anti-PETA or HSUS as I personally am. One of the people asked to speak was personally against the ALF (they declined to speak as they didn't want to take part in a conference that would have other speakers who openly support the ALF). We aren't calling for everyone in attendance or everyone presenting to be in lockstep agreement (although we refuse to provide a forum for anyone to talk about happy meat as a road to animal rights), we are simply seeking to raise concerns and issues that we feel are far too often pushed aside, ignored or even vilified in the quest for movement unity at any cost.

If that makes you feel unwelcome or marginalized, sorry. That isn't the intent. But while you may not agree with the aim of this conference, there are many activists out there who do and whose voice isn't being heard by the larger nationals. Hopefully by bringing those activists together, we can build a grassroots movement who can begin implementing the tactics we feel are appropriate to fight for animal liberation. For those who are interested in helping form that grassroots resistance to animal oppression, look forward to seeing you in July (whether you like PETA or not).

Thanks J, my talk would essentially be on something we can all agree upon: "How do we improve the condition of non-human animals dramatically in the shortest amount of time possible?"

Unless you can think of anything else, the following are necessary conditions:

1) Dramatically change consumer demand with activist tactics (unlikely unless you measure tactics over decades or even centuries) or with substitutes (such as in vitro meat)
2) Negotiate/Pressure a company to change its practices though the underlying demand for the exploited animal still exists. Hence, you get the incremental steps you call welfarism.

My assertion is that you can't get to liberation (however you define it) without incremental steps. Condemning those steps as "welfarism" without offering any reasonable path to liberation is irresponsible at best, counterproductive at worst. I think the methods you seem to favor will delay better lives for non-human animals many, many years (if not make a vegan world impossible) further than following approaches that are actually showing dramatic results. That to me is unacceptable.

Imagine a presentation with a slide of PETA, HSUS, and Farm Sanctuary's accomplishments against one of "liberation"'s. No contest there. Imagine a slide with a definition of liberation and then a few slides with a road map of how to get there complete with very powerful tactics. Now you've got something real to talk about, instead of only offering an empty call to "liberation."

I can't argue about this with you again. I said all I need to say and you can call my work "hardcore posturing" all you want. You can edit it later to say " an empty call to liberation" or whatever else you want. If you feel my work and views on the movement are so meaningless then I don't see why you have any interest in taking part in the conference and I would encourage you to put your time and energy into working on what you think is important. Frankly, we put the mission statement together to avoid exactly this kind of fighting. It is a waste of my time and yours.

I will do what I think is right, you should do the same and seemingly our paths will never have to cross. I just don't have the time or energy to fight you on this stuff anymore. It is totally pointless. I really just don't care anymore. I said all I need to say about why I feel the way I do. I have said many times before that I am not against incremental change, just against incremental change that doesn't have the backbone to actually stand up and say eating animals is wrong. Despite your claim that I offer nothing more than an empty call to liberation, I have 10 years of strategy, experience and hard work behind me that brought me to this point of view. I have the history of past social justice movements to learn from and I have the opinions and ideas gained from conversations with many other activists from various countries (look at the success of the grassroots in Sweden against the fur industry and you can see the fruits of my meaningless call to liberation) that have all worked to form my opinions. I am willing to wager that though both of us are simply guessing at what we think will be effective, my guess is much more educated than your own.

I am not surprised you see no contest between my views and your own as I don't think you know anything about the animal liberation movement as you have never been a part of it. I simply don't have the energy to fight with you to try and change your mind. Feel free to submit a workshop proposal once we get to that point (though I don't know why you would with the low opinion you seem to hold of the aim of the conference). I am done with this message board at this point as I don't feel like you and I are even close to a part of the same movement. You can go to TAFA and do what you think is right and I will organize this conference and do what I think is right. But frankly, with the actions you took this winter in spying on ADL demos to cut down our work and now calling the conference we are working this hard on "hardcore posturing" and then a meaningless call to liberation, I just don't have the ability to continue these conversations and remain civil. IN all honesty, this response took me a long time to write out while staying above the belt. I know that if I continue, the fighter in me will simply come after you with both guns blazing if I stay on this board. In the end, that isn't going to be good for anyone. So feel free to have the last word if you so desire. I won't be responding again.

So long.

I think your idea of putting on a conference for the Midwest is great and perhaps I overreacted in my response to the idea of your conference.

Thus, I'd like to suggest that the mission of your conference be changed to "Strategic Activism" or "Advanced Activism," building on the "Activism 101" conference that you did last year. The conference could focus on a single AR issue, for example:
1. How can we end the practice of battery cages (or forced molting) for chickens entirely without promoting larger cages?
2. How can we solve the problem of stray animals being "put down?"
3. How can we end the sale of fur on clothing?

By focusing on a single issue, we could have a discussion about a variety of tactics that involve changing public opinion, the opinions of government and business leaders, and activating our base of veg*ns without compromising our core beliefs. We could then ask speakers from within our ranks to create presentations or bring experts in on dealing with the media (TV, radio, news, internet) and with business and government leaders. We could also have a session called "Campaign 101" on designing plans on the model of Henry Spira (Peter Singer's "Ethics Into Action") or of any other social cause (MADD raising the drinking age to 21, gun control advocates getting the Brady Bill into law, gay advocates on expanding gay rights in law, etc.).

Or we could choose multiple issues where animals are suffering today and have speakers propose entire plans and timeframes to end that suffering.

The point of this conference is then that the grassroots would have expanded skills to cause change and HAVE RESULTS without having to rely on PETA or HSUS, and with tools beyond the demo's and leafleting that the grassroots have used for years. Having only those two tools in our tool kit limits our ability to get anything meaningful done.

I respect you as a leader and you've certainly had results in creating activists, creating vegans, increasing activist intensity, etc. Do you really think, however, that spending a day criticizing PETA will help us in the grassroots accomplish BIG THINGS or do you think it would be better to expand our skillsets and practice planning campaigns from start to finish? Criticism is easy. Success is difficult. Let's go for success.