Generally speaking the human race does not acknowledge the pain and suffering of animals in factory farms or laboratories. It is fair to say that most claim to have a sense compassion for animals but are caught up in what Gary Francione and others call “moral schizophrenia”. What this refers to is the concept of claiming to care about animals but failing to make the connection between the pet dog in the backyard and the hamburger on one’s plate. There are many forms of activism within the Animal Rights Movement, simple measures such as shifting to a Vegan diet and leafleting are thought to be effective, but some feel the need to see a more direct impact on the well being of animals. The void this desire causes has been deflected by the creation of the Animal Liberation Front, a leaderless revolution whose goal is to rescue animals and cause economic damage to the industries who do not respect animals as sentinel beings. Even in the Animal Rights Movement, there is a great deal of controversy surrounding these efforts. The underlying concern from skeptics within the movement is whether these liberations are progressive or just meaningless efforts that ultimately cause damage to the movement.

Before I begin to discuss criticisms of ALF, it is important to understand the over all goals it represents. According to AnimalLiberationFront.com

The ALF’s short-term aim is to save as many animals as possible and directly disrupt the practice of animal abuse. Their long term aim is to end all animal suffering by forcing animal abuse companies out of business.

Below are the guidelines also listed on the website:

• To inflict economic damage on those who profit from the misery and exploitation of animals.
• To liberate animals from places of abuse, i.e. laboratories, factory farms, fur farms etc., and place them in good homes where they may live out their natural lives, free from suffering.
• To reveal the horror and atrocities committed against animals behind locked doors, by performing nonviolent direct actions and liberations
• To take all necessary precautions against harming any animal, human and non-human.
• Any group of people who are vegetarians or vegans and who carry out actions according to ALF guidelines have the right to regard themselves as part of the ALF.

One of the main criticisms is that there are several vegetarians who participate in ALF efforts. Although vegetarians reduce the suffering of animals, they are also part of the moral schizophrenia. The poultry and dairy industry are both responsible for a significant amount of harm and death of animals. Male chickens are seen as non profitable and are killed, and male calves are used in the veal industry. More simply put, it just doesn’t make sense to contribute to the suffering of so many animals then turn around and go through drastic risk to free these animals or cause economic damage to the industries that exploit them.

Others argue, although the ALF has good intentions it actually causes the reputation of the movement to suffer. Any one who has ever heard of the term “Eco-Terrorism” know exactly why this point of view is conveyed by so many. ALF is actually listed by the Department of Homeland Security as a domestic terrorist organization. According to an article published on CNN, top officials from both the FBI and ATF told a Senate panel

Violent animal rights extremists and eco-terrorists now pose one of the most serious terrorism threats to the nation.

The article also states that the officials mentioned that the Animal Liberation Front was a particular concern. This is troublesome for even those inside of the Animal Rights Movement because it furthers the misconceptions that all Vegans are extremist. Vegans are commonly misperceived as elitist, freaks, and ALF adds terrorist to the list. It can be argued that seeing us extremist will turn people away from Veganism.

Others argue that even though some animals are saved, because they are just seen as product they will just be marked down as shrink and quickly replaced. This offsets the efforts that the ALF made because while they might have saved X amount of animals, they also caused the same amount to enter into the system, therefore balancing the whole equation back to zero.

As far as my personal beliefs on the matter, even if it does paint a picture of extremism on our movement for the animals saved it is worth it. As put by several of my fellow Vegan Freaks, I do not think any human rights organizations would be complaining if a group banded together to save an oppressed population. More specifically it wouldn’t have been fair to tell Harriet Tubman that her efforts in the Underground Railroad were worthless because the slaves she saved would just be replaced by others. On the contrary it would have been fair to tell any slave owners trying to help in the Underground Railroad that they are not welcomed (aka Vegetarians). Sadly even if the guidelines for ALF were changed, the movement is far too established for it take any serious effect.

From a political stand point I do agree that , because ALF is often conveyed with Terrorism, it is damaging to the Animal Rights Movement, but only in the sense that it paints an inaccurate picture of our culture. What I do not believe is that the damage to the movement surpasses the value of the lives of animals saved.

Categories: Articles
Tags: Activism, ALF, animal liberation front, animal rights, vegetarians